РефератыИностранный языкThThe Responses Essay Research Paper

The Responses Essay Research Paper

The Responses Essay, Research Paper


?


From late 3rd


century main concern ? securitas reiplubcicae ? security of state ? defence


territory, population and fabric from internal and external attack ? concern


for distribution of resources needed to support military effort. ?


Persia: lack of


resources both financial, skilled manpower, middle fourth century vulnerability


northern frontier ?


Diocletianic notion of


securitas differentiate territory integral to Roman state and territory that


was not. Governments 4th and 5th centuries priorities,


exp. Julian 363 and Constantine 336-7, defence what was conceived as Roman


Territory.? Norm in 4th and 5th,


and despite publicists potential for expansion by direct military expansion abandoned.? Never gave up on abandoned or lost borders ?


did not cease to be active beyond borders.?


By withholding military resources compelled by traditions of imperialism


and achieving security to develop other means of pursuing objectives. ?


Dev. 4th


century political and politicised activity to replace military imperialism took


a number of forms ? use of regular subsidies guaranteeing stable relationships,


Christian missionaries, establishment of familial connections, exercise of


degrees of suzerainty.? Clear by 5th


century more flexible instruments than military ones ? constraint by lack of


resources and technological limitations of transportation and communication. ?


Yes cross border


attacks (Con II and Celer into Arzanene 342 and 504but mainly military extensions


of the defence of the limes ? Even Julian?s attempt can be seen as objective of


compelling adherence to treaty of 299. ?


Paying subsides even


to differing groups cheaper than war, and attempts by Attila to extort with


increasing demands rare. ?


Political cost 3 main


dangers: 1.


attempt recipient to


increase amount received 2.


use of tribute as


proof of subordination 3.


internal support for


regime cowardly and against tradition ?


Persians and Attila


only effective in the short-term, but Caucasus and Arab federates V effective. ?


Damage control ?


avoidance of paying subsides to avoid subordination, esp. in marginal areas


like Mesopotamia ? or third parties trying to woo ?


Publicists given role


of explaining to people that Persia surrendered, philanthropic, civilising virtues


etc. ? panegyrics and panegyricists ?


Similar things in


Persia ? no geographical conception of Borders but rather duty to look after


Kings etc. ? direct military force only in threatening kings or exceptional


circumstances.? Central authority and


individual city or association done through embassies. ?


Personal ruler to


ruler experience useful ad against Romans ? getting 4/5 Armenia identified with


Persians more than Romans – longer confederacies than Roman ones. ?


Even in Northern


Mesopotamia more ready to recognise sensibilities and cultivate loyalties with


Syriac speaking peoples ? even encouraging Nestorian church ?


Ddiocletian attempts


to pslit hierarchy to allow war on two fronts ? 166 Danube and Samritans, 3rd


century Sasanians + Germans ? expansion military power. ?


BUT Augustus still


lacked capacity to wage war on two fronts.?


Division of aempire made recombination of armies impossible.? Avoidance of war on two fronts during 4th


century and afterwards almost military doctrine.? East Romans Balkans, Perisa, Arfica, occasionally WE and


sometimes internal.? Priscus and Joshua


the Stylite make references to this. ?


Many examples of this


? Theo II facing Attila and Gaiseric at same time, Justinian unable to properly


fight Persians and Ostrogoths at same time. ?


Similar in Persia ?


King needed as figurehead, examples being 350 and 359 ? disengagement of Shapur


II when conditions were favourable. And failure of Peroz to follow up military


demands on Leo in 460 ? 467. ?


Increase importance of


on-military relations ?


When enemy was


perceived as stable, unlike BaBa and Huns more emphasis placed on political


relationships? – not just effectiveness


but achievement of specific objectives.?


Treaty of 363 allowed political action to be carried out with


expectation of some success. ? diplomacy could begin to work out own ground


rules. ?


Seen shifting military


resources to Balkans and allowing material defences of the East to decay. ?


Presentation other


state, such as Ammianus Marcellinius,, praising certain aspects of life,


present Persia as comprehensible and accessible, not just military target.? Domestication of image creates necessary


bridge. ?


Terminology of


relationships ? lamps, brothers or even unequal father son relationships in


special cases. ?


Familial relationships


both encourage and reflect real political advances ? Yezdegerd relationship


with Thosdious? father. ? not many marriages though. ?


Armenians naturally


toward Persians, still related, but from 3rd century to


Christianisation a lot were Roman looking.?


Important strategically as threatened interior and exterior both


countries.? Substantial military


resources of had been utilised properly but chronic disunity.? Political settlement 387 ? one bought on


themselves. ?


Armenia may have


caused some skirmishes ? 296-8 and 337 but pushed together two countries.? Shapur III and Theodosius I 387settlement


over Armenia ? no likely to be broken often.?


Evidence that Iberia and Lazica as well as Armenia drew Persian and


Roman together in discussion ?


Mesopotamia always


carved up ? had own identity language of Aramaic and culture through distinct


Christianity ? distinct from orthodoxy of C ? acceptable to Persian Kings in 5th


and 6th centuries ?Nestorianism became prevailing form of


Mesopotamian Christianity ? continue to communicate across the border? – Greeks at Antioch and C ? Nesotrian


theological school at Edessa ? Christians freedom of movement between borders,


although private travel happened, Empires not keen. ?


Syriac population keen


interest in relations between the two ? as battles fought in their city.? Late Antiquity Persians treat them better,


bur Shapur II persecution of Christians by Persians in 344 precluded any


activity on other side of border.? Leaders


on both sides tried to smooth the relationship.? 400 Marutha ? bishop of Sophanene, visiting Ctesiphon with a


Roman embassy healed Yezdegerd I ? exploited for Christian church in Persia.

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: The Responses Essay Research Paper

Слов:1078
Символов:7957
Размер:15.54 Кб.