Decline and Christian Reinvention in Western Roman Cities from the Period of 200 AD to 600 AD - Assignment Example

Decline and Christian Reinvention in Western Roman Cities from the Period of 200AD to 600 AD Describing the physical changes in Roman cities from the period of 200 AD to circa 600 AD is an incredibly difficult one. Firstly, there is a paucity of written evidence – many of the written sources composed during the period of Late Antiquity perished at some point in the centuries separating it from the modern period. Archaeological evidence is likewise difficult to collect, because many of the cities from this period simply evolved into medieval then modern cities, obscuring or confusing archeological evidence. Further complicating matters is the fact that the two halves of the Roman Empire, the East and the West, were continuing down opposite trajectories for much of this period, with population and construction declining throughout the West and accelerating throughout the East. Since it would be difficult to cover both of these processes in appropriate depth in a concise essay, this paper will limit itself to describing changes in the physical appearance of Western Roman cities, the extent of these changes, and the reasons for them. Throughout this period there are two trends that rendered significant change to the physical appearance of Roman cities: ‘ruinification’ caused by, amongst other things, declining populations, warfare and the loss of technology, and Christianization caused by the explosion of the Christian faith from a relatively minor Jewish sect to an official religion of the Roman Empire during this period. One of the most obvious physical changes that occurred in Roman cities during the period discussed – from about 200 AD to 600 AD, was the ‘ruinification’ of buildings and monuments. Over this period, some aspects of Roman cities turned from thriving, living structures into ruins of the ancient past. This process would obviously continue in the centuries following the end of this period, but there were certainly some ways in which Roman structures were already being ruined during the heart of this period. One of the most obvious ways the ruin-formation occurred was through warfare: Rome was in warfare nearly constantly during this period, both against the so called ‘barbarian kingdoms’ such as the Visigoths, Goths and Vandals, and even between halves of the Empire once “barbarian” kings had conquered the western half. Rome itself was even sacked several times during this period, in 410, 455 and 546 (Bowersock, Brown and Grabar ,1999, 134). These attacks and sieges were incredibly violent, and involved significant damage to both the fortifications and the buildings within cities. Procopius of Caesarea, writing in 550, describes some of the damage done during Alaric’s sack of Rome in 410: barbarians, he claimed “set fire” to many of the houses in the city of Rome, along with the looting and pillaging they did (Procopius). His account describes significant damage done to the city, that Alaric and his barbarians “plundered the whole city and moved on” (Procopius, 550). It also shows that much of the damage done in these kinds of attacks remained unrepaired for great periods of time. Procopius indicates that “the house of Sallust, who in ancient times wrote the history of the Romans” was amongst those first burned by Alaric, because it was one of the houses in closest proximity to the gate the barbarians gained access to, and that even in his time, some one hundred and forty years later, that “the greater part of this house [still] stood half-burned” (Procopius, c. 550). The frequent warfare in the late antique period infected significant amounts of damage on Roman cities, and probably led to them having an already ruined appearance even before the Middle Ages began. Violent conflict was not, however, the only reason Roman cities fell in to disrepair. Another reason, which will be discussed below, is the drastic population shift that occurred during this time period, and people simply do not upkeep unused areas, which there were many of due to a lack of population. Furthermore, many of the structures such as roads, aqueducts and large public buildings that were constructed during the heart of the Roman Empire relied on large, centralized administration to maintain, the kind of which simply did not exist as the Empire began to shrink in its power and influence (Jones, 1964, 18). Finally, many of the arts of construction that ancient Romans had were lost during this time period, so even if someone wanted to make repairs it would have been impossible. Obviously it is very difficult to set dates on exactly when a technology or process has been forgotten by a society (no one could possibly document when they stopped being able to do something), but at some point during this time period the technique behind important technologies such as Roman concrete were lost, meaning that even if people wanted to make large-scale repairs it would have been impossible (Devries, 1992, 181). This loss of technology even went so far that “The Wanderers” an Old English poem that might have been composed as early as 597, referred to Roman buildings as “eald enta gewworc,” or, “the skilful (or old) works of giants” – Roman structures were built on such a scale that they were not even attributed to human design (Fulk and Cain, 2005, 183). So a variety of factors combined to ensure that the physical appearance of Roman cities would have become more and more “ruinous” as time progressed, simply because repairs were impossible or there was little or no reason to undertake them. By far the most significant changes in the appearance of cities during the period from 200 AD to circa 600 AD would have been the precipitous drop in population across vast swathes of the Empire, especially the Western region. Exact population numbers are impossible to pin down, but the city of Rome itself, for example, probably had a population of approximately 800,000 to 1 million people at the beginning of this period, but had likely fallen to the range of around 30,000 by the end of it (Ward-Perkins, 2005, 139). Population drops in other regions were not necessarily as drastic, and it is important to remember that this period did not constitute a steady “decline” – rather it was a population shift or transition that occurred over many hundreds of years, with many distinct times that population growth and resurgence actually occurred. Furthermore, the decline in urban population as not uniform – as with any population shift there were winners and losers, with some cities like Rome drastically reducing population, while others such as Marseille were actually able to grow despite this general decline in population. The overall decline in population was matched by a more significant decline in urban population – as the trade networks and infrastructure systems of the Roman state broke down during this time period, more and more people had to leave urban trades and return to agriculture merely to meet the demands of sustenance (Ward-Perkins, 2005, 348). So the significant drop in urban populations across the Roman Empire was one of the most prominent causes of a shift in the physical appearance of Roman cities from circa 200 to 600 AD. Obviously a drastically shrinking urban population would have a significant impact on the physical appearance of Roman cities, but exactly what kinds of effects were these? The first and most obvious is a significant amount of disrepair. Occupied spaces are the only spaces that are well kept, so when a cities population shrinks this would lead to more and more spaces being kept in disrepair. This would be especially noticeable in large and formerly prosperous cities that experienced large population declines - the central part of the Roman Empire like Rome and the major cities in southern Gaul. In the more far-flung regions, such as England or northern Gaul, much of the housing would have been relatively impermanent, and the more permanent ones remained heavily occupied, so the cities shrank rather than appearing run-down. But in some areas the drastic drop in population caused significant ‘ruinification,’ making the people who lived their very aware that they were experiencing a declining society, living as they were in the shadows of the works of ancient Rome. Another important, and probably more wide-spread, phenomenon associated with decreased populations in later Roman cities was a breakdown in traditional boundaries between spaces. Roman cities were some of the most densely packed, highly urbanized cities in the history of humanity, and not until the industrial revolution did cities begin to rival them again. This meant that each thing necessarily had its place – a forum here, a large thoroughfare there, housing in other places and so on. And, like nearly every urban environment throughout history, a significant divide between the place of the dead and the place of the living, either through extramural burial or through segregated burial sections of cities. As urban population declined, however, these stringent divisions began to break down, leading to businesses and people occupying places they never would have otherwise. In Sbeitla, Tunisia, for instance, a stone olive press from late antiquity was placed in the centre of what a few hundred years earlier would have been a significant thoroughfare (Cameron, 1993, 161) – with large tracks of open space in cities, people began placing buildings and structures within them without a plan and without many outside pressures, leading to blurring or complete destruction of district boundaries within cities. Likewise, burials began being carried out in urban areas, both because of the above-described process where traditional pressures to create distinct urban boundaries were absent, but also possibly because of the growth of Christianity and religious connections to the dead, especially saintly people (Cameron, 1993, 345). Finally, the very boundaries between the urban and the rural fell throughout the time period being discussed. As populations decreased, there became more and more open areas that could be exploited for small-scale agricultural production within cities, both benefiting the local economy and meaning that urban people did not have to trade with rural people to gain their produce. In sediment excavations from the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries in England, for instance, archeologists have found distinct layers or “black earth” in urban areas, indicating that gardening was taking place there and that agriculture was encroaching from outside of a cities walls to within it (Sawyer, 1978, 118). So, when examining a Roman city circa 200 AD and circa 600 AD, one would find consistently emptier, more run down, cities without clearly defined districts in 600 AD, whereas one would generally have found well kept, full, cities with well defined districts a mere 400 years earlier. It is extremely important to note that while all of these trends might generally describe the process of change in Roman cities from the year 200 to the year 600, the process was far from absolute and continual. Urban populations generally declined, but in some cases, cities were able to bolster their populations and grow (Loseby, 1992a, 167). Many buildings fell into disrepair, but many also remained relatively pristine. Some places experience fierce warfare during this period, while others were spared it. So while a poll of Roman cities may show these general trends as holding true, there would certainly be many individual counter-examples of different trends taking place. Though the ‘barbarian invasions’ and general decline in population were probably two of the most potent causes of change in the appearance of Roman cities, the advent of Christianity, the subsequent de-paganization of the Roman empire, and the new forms of art and architecture that those changes brought were doubtless also of extreme importance. During the period in question, from 200 AD to circa 600 AD, Christianity grew from a mystery religion that was officially banned by the Roman government, largely due to its views that countered the syncretistic nature of Roman religious practice, through to a tolerated religion, briefly back to being outlawed, until it eventually became the dominant religion, then eventually the state religion of the Roman Empire. The effects of Christianization on the physical appearance of cities would have been relatively small-scale for the most part, centered around the construction of new churches in somewhat distinct styles and at times novel architecture. As Christianity really did not hit its stride until the end of the period discussed, much of this new architecture would only have been built near the end of it. It is also important to note that these structures and the Christian influence they created were not in any way evenly distributed among the Roman Empire – some regions became heavily Christianized quite quickly. The Levant, for instance, had Christian architecture on small scales (often only indoors in the form of shrines, catacombs or baptismal fonts) from the earliest part of the period under discussion (Harries, 1992, 59), and Constantinople was in some ways conceived of as a Christian city from its origin, while Athens remained dominated by pagan structures until the very end of this period, and is indeed still dominated by them to no small extent. So, understanding that the effect of Christianity on the appearance of Roman cities would have varied widely depending on a number of situations, what were some ways Christianity would actually have changed the appearance of Roman cities? One way was a new form of monumental architecture, church building, significantly changed the physical appearance of some cities. Hagia Sophia, for instance, dominated Constantinople’s public space, while a much smaller but perhaps more architecturally significant church, the San Vitae Basilica in Ravenna likewise was a major architectural feature of the city (Bowersock, 1986, 301). Both of these churches were completed in the sixth century, and represented a major part of the first wave of monumental Christian architecture. These two churches are important to study in some detail because they were the forebears of the Romanesque churches that would so heavily populate Europe a few centuries after their construction, and also because they represent one of the greatest shifts of architecture in the late Roman Empire, of Byzantine architectural elements being imported into the remnants of the Western Empire, reversing a trend of hundreds of years of architectural features moving the other direction. Classical Roman architecture from the western empire had been one of the most influential forms of architecture for hundreds of years in the middle of the third century (Sear, 1983, 18). This architecture featured heavy colonnades, emphasis on geometric shapes such as triangles and rectangles, and massive sculpture. In examining Hagia Sofia and San Vitae Basilica, neither church shares many of these features. San Vitae Basilica, like many earlier Roman buildings was constructed primarily using brick architecture, possibly originally featuring a more refined facade (much like Roman pillars were constructed), as well as prominently featuring domes, but this is where the similarities end. The church featured more prominent byzantine elements such as the heavily geometric apses, many rounded walls and Byzantine capitals, making it look like no other Roman building would have (Kleinbower, White, and Matthews, 2004). The Hagia Sophia, likewise was remarkable for having a dome in a place of religious worship – these structures would rarely have been used on temples (excepting the Pantheon), so a dome’s use on Hagia Sophia would have been interesting and novel. The explosion of Christianity throughout this period, and the new forms of architecture that it brought with it, would have both an immediate and a long lasting impact on the appearance of Roman cities at the end of the era of Antiquity, and would play a large part in shaping the early medieval city. The very close of the Antique era, and the ways Christianity shifted and morphed during those years, also brought about another kind of change to the physical formations of cities. This was a fundamental shift in ascetic lifestyles that, while not gaining enormous prominence in the period discussed, did set the stages for some important aspects of urban growth in the centuries to come. Asceticism has existed since the earliest stages of Christianity, borrowing heavily from a variety of ascetic traditions that had a long history in Syria and Palestine (Lloyd-Moffit 2010, p. 269). These early ascetics usually concentrated on separating themselves from society in some kind of drastic, lonely way, with the two main examples being anchorites, people who would chain themselves to rocks or other immovable objects, or enclose themselves in a small room to segregate themselves and stylites, people who lived on platforms on top of ancient Roman pillars, especially in Syria where the weather could accommodate such a lifestyle (Lloyd-Moffit 2010 p. 273). These early ascetics in and of themselves changed the experience of Roman cities because, though they nominally lived separate from other people, they usually actually congregated around cities and actually had a great deal of interaction with people entering and leaving them. One, Simeon Stylites, became so famous that he was sainted (Stang, 2010, pp. 449). He often would be used as an alternate judicial system, giving advice and settling disputes (Stang, 2010, pp. 454). So early Christian ascetics somewhat shifted the physical layout of Roman cities, especially stylites by co-opting Roman monumental architecture for a new religious purpose. These early ascetics were not, however, the only way Christian asceticism impacted the physical nature of Roman cities in the period of circa 250 AD to circa 600 AD. Around the year 500, a man named Benedictus created a new kind of asceticism that allowed its adherent to live a thoroughly ascetic lifestyle while still living in contact with other people. Though this was not truly the first ascetic rule of this kind, (the Rule of St. Basil proceeded it significantly) it was, by far the most influential and probably deserves the most focus (St. Basil 273). This new rule, called the Rule of St. Benedict advocated a combination of work and prayer in order to create self-sustaining communities of ascetics (St. Benedict, 500). Though his initial settlement was outside of cities, in the hinterlands of Italy, Benedict’s Rule created a kind of ascetic lifestyle that could take place in urban and semi-urban places as well as in purely agricultural areas, and by the end of the period discussed these settlements began getting placed in cities, subtly affecting their physical layout and creating early centers of learning, and sometimes commerce (Fraser 2007, pp. 316). These communities also served to be the hearts of new urban developments, especially in the hinterlands of the Roman Empire, such as Derry founded by St. Columba in Ireland (Fraser, 2007, pp. 319). These new settlements helped to counter the general trend away from urbanization and create an entirely new model of urban development that had little to do with the Roman one that preceded it, with the needs of the monastery as the central concern and the rest of life in the village or city orienting around serving those needs. Both old forms of asceticism, such as anchorites and stylites, as well as new monastic forms of asceticism involving the founding of monasteries played an important role in changing the physical layout of Roman cities, and orienting them more towards Christian religious ideals. Western Roman cities underwent drastic changes during the late antique period. These changes to the physical appearance of cities all rested in significant cultural and demographic shifts that also occurred – possibly the largest population shift of the pre-industrial era, new religions gaining prominence, loss of technologies and ability to build on such a massive scale and so on. Though individual cities may have experienced marked difference in the way their physical appearance changed over this four hundred year period, the general trends remain the same – growth of ruins and destroyed architecture, and growth of new Christian styles of building in monumental spaces. Works Cited Bowersock, G. W. (1986) ‘From Emperor to Bishop: The Self-Conscious Transformation of Political Power in the Fourth Century AD’, Classical Philology vol. 81, iss. 1, pp. 298-307. Bowersock, G. W., Brown, P., and Grabar O. eds. (1999) Late Antiquity: a guide to the postclassical world. Cambridge, Mass. Cameron, A. (1993), The Later Roman Empire: AD 284-430. Harvard, UP. Caseau, B. (1999), ‘Sacred Landscapes’, in G. W. Bowersock, P. Brown, and O. Grabar (eds.), Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Postclassical World. Cambridge, MA. 21-59. Devries, K (1992), Medieval Military Technology. Toronto, Ontario. Fulk, R.D. and Cain, C.M (2005), “The Wanderer” A History of Old English Literature. Malden, New York. Fraser, J (2007), “St. St Columba and the convention at Druimm Cete: peace and politics at seventh-century Iona” Early Medieval Europe, vol. 15, iss. 3, pp. 315-334. Harries, J. (1992), ‘Death and the dead in the late Roman West’, in S. Bassett (ed.) Death in Towns: Urban Responses to the Dying and the Dead, 100-1600. Leicester. 56-67 Jones, A. H. M. (1964) The Later Roman Empire 284-602: A Social, Economic, and Administrative Survey. Oxford, Oxford UP Kleinbauer, W.E., White, A. And Matthews, H. (2004) Hagia Sophia. New York: Skala Publishers. Lloyd-Moffit, S (2010), “The ‘Anchorite Within’: Basil of Caesarea’s Erotapokrisis 7 and the Ascetic Challenge to Christian Identity. Religion and Theology, vol. 17, iss. 3, pp 268-288. Loseby, S. T. (1992), ‘Marseilles: A Late Antique Success Story?’, Journal of Roman Studies vol. 82, iss. 3: 165-8 Procopius of Caesarea (550), “Alaric’s Sack of Rome, 410 CE” Fordham University Ancient History Sourcebook < http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/410alaric.asp> Sawyer, H.P. (1978) From Roman Britain to Norman England. Routledge: New York. Seaer, F (1983) Roman Architecture. Cornell: Cornell UP. Stang, C (2010), “Digging Holes and Building Pillars: Simeon Stylites and the “Geometry” of Ascetic Practice. Harvard Theological Review, vol. 104, iss. 4, pp. 447-460. St. Benedict (Circa 500). James Welson, Trans. The Rule of St. Benedict. New York: Penguin. Rule of St. Basil (Circa 300). Anthony Smith, Trans. The Rule of St. Basil. New York: Penguin. Ward-Perkins, B. (2005), The Fall of Rome and The End of Civilization. Oxford: Oxford UP. Read More