The reign of Anastasius I, 491-518
﻿ Anastasius' long rule at the turn of the sixth century has tended to be neglected, yet it was a critical time in the history of the Later Roman Empire. On his accession, there were many problems facing the state: conflicts, both internal and external, religious disputes, and financial and administrative chaos. It is the aim of this thesis to assess the significance of Anastasius' reign, with a systematic survey of the key areas of imperial government. After an introductory chapter examining the primary sources, the second and third chapters consider revolts and wars. Chapter Two looks at two internal uprisings, that of the Isaurians (491-498) and that of Vitalian (514-516). The third chapter concentrates on external conflicts and political relations. The first section considers the Persian offensive (502-506) and the role of the Arabs, while the second part examines the ambiguous position of Theoderic in Italy, and explores how Anastasius sought to stabilize the balance of power with counter-alliances with the Franks and Burgundians. Chapter Four deals with the doctrinal schism dividing the orthodox from the monophysite. It outlines the background to this crisis and investigates the vicissitudes of Anastasius' policy as he sought to reconcile increasing eastern monophysitism with the west's intransigent orthodoxy. Chapter Five examines Anastasius' financial rehabilitation of the state and concludes that his success lay in a much wider reorganisation of the empire's resources: he restructured the fisc and introduced changes to municipal administration, agrarian legislation and the organisation of the army. This chapter also considers measures to halt the escalating violence of the faction riots, and it closes with a survey of the emperor's building policy. The thesis concludes that Anastasius' reign resolved many of the problems facing the empire in the fifth century, paving the way for Justinian in the sixth.
Subsidies and Diplomacy: Rome and Persia in Late Antiquity
D URING LATE ANTIQUITY (4th-6th c. A.D.) it was a common practice of the Romans to pay subsidies to foreign peoples. The purposes of these subsidies and the circumstances under which they were paid varied, but they fell into two broad categories. They were either a genuine subsidy, such as a reward for good behaviour or payment for assistance (usually military), or they were a rental of good behaviour. In the former case the subsidy, which was paid from strength, could be terminated at will and was often an economic alternative to military action. In the latter case the subsidy was paid from weakness (since a credible military alternative did not exist), and so the payments tended to become regular and to increase.' These payments, too, might be justified economically,2 but the political costs could be very high since the regularised subsidy had, in effect, become a tribute which implied the subordination of the payer to the recipient.3 This danger, in various forms, was recognised and debated during the period. In the fourth century, Ammianus Marcellinus (24.3.4) makes the Emperor Julian, in an address to his troops, say that payments to the barbarians have reduced the Roman Empire to beggary. In the fifth, Priscus (Fr. 15.2) makes Attila claim that Theodosius II is his slave bound to the payment of tribute.4 But discussion was most intense in the second half of the sixth century over the systematic use of payments by Justinian in the later part of his reign. Although both Agathias (5.24.2-25.6) and Menander the Guardsman (Fr. 5.1/4) see a positive side to the use of payments in sowing dissension amongst the barbarians, the position of Procopius (Anecd. 11.3-12), that the payments, by confessing Roman
Redescription of two ghost shrimps (Decapoda: Axiidea: Callianassidae) from the Middle Miocene of the Central Paratethys: systematics, intraspecific variation, and in situ preservation
A redescription of two Middle Miocene burrowing ghost shrimps of the Central Paratethys, Callianassa brocchii L renthey, 1897 and Callianassa pseudorakosensis L renthey in L renthey & Beurlen, 1929, is provided. Material forming the basis of this study comes from the Studienka Formation (lower 'Sarmatian', Serravallian) of the Slovak part of the Vienna Basin and exhibits preservation allowing reassignment of the studied taxa to the genera Neocallichirus Sakai, 1988 and Eucalliax Manning & Felder, 1991 respectively. The major cheliped of both species exhibits two distinct morphotypes interpreted herein as possible sexual dimorpism. Several specimens of both taxa are preserved within the tube structures and are interpreted as in situ preservation within the burrows. Type material of both studied taxa and additional collections from the roughly coeval strata of Hungary and Austria were also studied.