When And Why Does The ?ancient City? Come To An End Essay, Research Paper
The Ancient City was more than a
cluster of classical buildings.? If we
were to define an Ancient City we would undoubtedly mention the public
buildings, the civic monuments, the theatres, the temples and the colonnaded
streets.? However the term Ancient City
has a deeper meaning.? In our definition
we must also state that the classical cities were run by the curiale classes on
councils, and that ancient cities were essentially self-governed. Historians see
the Ancient City in its political and cultural context as well as its
aesthetic-architectural one.? As
Liebeschetz states, it was the political institutions, the entertainments, the
arts and the festivals that helped unite social groups within these cities.? So, when analysing the ending of Ancient
Cities we must look at the physical changes, but also the political, social and
cultural ones.There are a number of problems
that we encounter when dating the ending of the Ancient City.? Ancient Cities developed where the Roman
Empire developed and it would be overly simplistic to think that the Roman
cities in the Eastern Provinces and those in the Western provinces ended at the
same time.? More fundamentally we must
ask what we mean by the ending of an Ancient City. Different definitions will
certainly bring differing dates. The remains of Ancient Cities co-existed with
the new forms of cities for centuries.?
Indeed many buildings from the Ancient City were converted or simply
abandoned.? It is wiser therefore to
talk of the ending of the political and cultural characteristics.? Clearly no precise date will fit all cities,
but by the end of the 6th century, and certainly at the start of 7th
century, we can say that most Ancient Cities had ended.? By this point many cities in the Balkans,
such as Stobbi, Nicpolis and Phillioopopolis had few signs of urban life at
all.? A more common consequence seems to
be the fortification of a much contracted city area. This is seen to some
extent in Rome and Constantinople.? Most
importantly, and perhaps most consistently, we see that very few curiales, or
councils, survived into the 7th century.? There is evidence of curiale activity in 590, but this was by no
means the norm.? These dates are
necessarily vague.? The geographical
range of cities and the less than easy to measure criteria make it impossible
to give a more precise date, but we can say that by this period very few cities
could be labelled as ?Ancient?.Traditionally a large amount of
blame for the ending of the Ancient Cities has been apportioned on a series of
damaging events.? Many of these events
occurred in 6th century. Serious outbreaks of plague, invasions,
wars, swarms of locusts and earthquakes afflicted many Ancient Cities, but
especially those in the East.? According
to C. Mango the plague of 542 had severe demographic consequences.? He cites the facts that the plague mainly
affected the young and that it recurred roughly every fifteen years.??? Famine was also common in this
period.? A temporary food shortage was
bearable, but any prolonged shortage was disastrous.? Poor infrastructure meant that agricultural surpluses from
elsewhere could not be imported to alleviate the shortages.? At the peak of the famine in Edessa it is
thought that 180 people a day died of starvation.? Mango believes that the increased price of wheat and the ensuing
inflation that followed famines were a major reasons for urban to rural
migration.? The effect of sacking and
invasions seems even more pronounced.?
Sirmium, once an imperial capital never recovered after a Hunnic sack,
and was completely deserted after an Avar invasion in 582.? It would be overly simplistic to suggest
that these were primary reasons for the ending of ancient cities.? Yes, these factors may have hastened the
fall of the ancient cities, but as we shall see more structural changes had
been transforming cities well before the 6th century. The curial led
self-administration of ancient cities was a central Graeco-Roman
characteristic.? Curiales, or decursions,
were usually landowners who were given the responsibility of administering the
city.? In the first three centuries this
civic responsibility was seen as an honour.?
Curiales competed for status within the city by donating money for civic
buildings and decoration, and on a higher level a city?s status was highlighted
by the quantity and quality of its civil buildings.? However, the responsibilities of curiales became increasingly
burdensome.? As early as the 4th
century we see curiales bemoaning the pressures placed on them from the
imperial authorities.? The burden of
collecting tax was increased as the imperial government requested more and more
revenue for its enlarged bureaucracy and continued war campaigning.? The curiale classes were not only forced to
collect more revenue, but on a personal level it has been suggested that they
had to relinquish up to one third of their income.? For most the financial pressures became too much.? Many escaped into the increasingly large
imperial service.? The imperial service
had many advantageous perks including virtual tax immunity.? A large number joined the clergy as a way of
evading their duties.? Some even turned
to an ascetic life and renounced their property.? Curial positions were taken by the less well off. ?They lacked the resources to maintain
existing civic buildings let alone create new ones.? The weakening of the education system also damaged the curial
order.? The education system was
severely damaged by the imperial and local persecution of Pagans.? Mango suggests that by the end of the 6th
century higher education survived only in Constantinople, Alexandria and
Berytus.? Indeed by 726 a contemporary
source noted the ?extinction of schools?. This is hardly reflective of a
continuing literary tradition. Many of the landowning elite
moved away to the countryside.? The
ruralization of the powerful elites is often cited as a reason for the end of
the Ancient City.? A classical city
could hardly survive without its richest and most educated citizens.? Late Roman aristocrats certainly spent time
in their villas and by the 5th century landowners were able to
fortify their lands.? The case of
Ecdicius using his army to resist the Visogths in 471 is a case in point. The
decline in the literary tradition of the cities will have aided this move to
the countryside.? Similarly the
imposition of the collegia, or tax on craftsmen, may have caused a migration of
artisans from town to country.?
Archaeological evidence shows that villages themselves were becoming
increasingly fortified.? However it is
difficult to distinguish between the pull factors of the rural monasteries and
the push factors of the falling cities.?
There is little empirical evidence of a large increase in the rural
population and we can question the extent of this ruralization. The large-scale
church building in the 5th and 6th centuries was funded
by donations from benefactors, and it would seem highly unlikely that elites
living outside the city would fund such status giving monuments.? We cannot accurately judge the level of
ruralization in this period, but we can say that the dynamic between the
countryside and the urban centres had changed.?
Liebschuetz uses the decline in the Roman tax system and the fact that
the imperial army increasingly recruited from the peasantry as the basis for
suggesting that the integration of urban centre and surrounding territory had
ended.? He also suggests that this
relationship was ?the principle character? of the ancient city. This statement
is questionable and as we have seen previously we can also doubt the level of
breakdown between city and countryside, especially in the east where we
continue to see agricultural markets throughout the period.The Christianisation and
Islamicisation of the Roman Empire were major factors in the transformation of
Ancient Cities.? We see from the period
of church-building in late 5th and 6th centuries, notably
in Trier and Cologne, that urban cities had become dominantly Christian
especially in the West.? Indeed the 4th
and 5th centuries saw the closing of many pagan temples.? The cultural landscape had changed which in
turn changed the physical landscape.?
Rich benefactors were now cajoled into donating money for orphanages,
monasteries, old people?s homes and of course churches. In the ancient city
civic identity was expressed through the medium of building and decoration, but
in the Christian city civic identity was expressed through the cults of
saints.? For example the city of
Seleukia used the cult of St. Thelka to famines of c 500 to assert its identity
vociferously.? The change in emphasis
from secular to religious civil pride highlights the administrative role that
the church played.? The bishop, and his
clergy, took on the role of administering the towns after the demise of the
curiale classes.? In many cases the
church acted out a role as a social security system by redistributing wealth
from the elites to the poor. The Christianisation of urban life also led to a
decline in the activities that bonded urban Roman society.? The church viewed classic features of the
ancient city suspiciously.? It frowned
on the theatre and the hippodrome.? This
aversion to public entertainment can be viewed as a purely theological
phenomenon, or, more cynically, as an attempt to lure the masses into the
cities? increasingly large numbers of churches.? The impact of the growth of Islam
in the east was equally profound.?
Kennedy, whilst telling us of the significant architectural impact of
Islam in the east, also shows us the political and social effects.? The construction of mosques clearly changed
the physical landscape, but he points out that the Mosques took on a political
and social function too.? Mosques can be
seen as an equivalent to the hippodromes or theatres of the classic city.? The religious function of the mosque was
complemented by educational and legal functions.? We see other facets of Islam affecting the physical appearance of
eastern cities.? The home and the family
are fundamental to Islam and this was reflected in their usage of public
space.? Public space in the classical
city was dependent on the relevant civic authorities having the power to stop
encroachment, but the Islamic state was more minimalist than its Roman
counterpart.? Thus we see the erosion of
public space as families built their houses on or indeed in, public space.? The Muslim attitude to commerce also had an
effect on the appearance of eastern cities.?
The Roman attitude to commercial activity was neutral at best, but the
Muslims saw honest commercial activity as more meritorious than civil or
governmental work.? This change in
emphasis saw the development of suqs, or narrow alleys ideally suited for an
abundance of retail outlets, at the expense of the classic colonnaded
streets.? These cultural changes had direct
and profound physical effects, which were intertwined with political, social
and economic changes. It is worthwhile to note that,
while we see a change in urban cities away from Ancient models, it would be
wrong to suggest that we see a universal decline in cities.? Yes, many cities did decline in terms of
population and size.? As we have seen
many cities contracted and fortified around a much-reduced base, whilst others
disappeared all together.? Older
historians have suggested that the transformation of cities away from the
classic ideal has represented a decline.?
They cite a decline from the classical ideal to urban squalor in the
newly Islamicised cities.? These loaded
statements go beyond the scope of the historian by adding value arguments to an
already complex field.? Such arguments
gloss over more important aspects of urban change.? For example, the cities of Damascus and Aleppo were undoubtedly
transformed from classical cities into vibrant Islamic cities.? More old-fashioned historians would call
this a decline, but evidence suggests that urban vitality actually increased as
a result of the Islamicisation.? When
approaching this area we must be careful not to let value judgements cloud our
interpretation and analysis.We have seen that localised
events, socio-economic processes and cultural changes contributed to the demise
of the ancient cities.? By over
estimating the effect of the 6th century disasters we construct an
overly simplistic argument.? Some cities
did indeed succumb to invasion and maybe even plague, but the majority
survived.? However these cities were no
longer ancient.? The flight of the
curiales, the ruralization of the elites, the decline in education and the new
cultures of Christianity, and in the later period Islam, had been changing the
cities for centuries.? The
transformation of cities, not the decline, was long and slow.? Our study shows us that this transformation,
whilst ending a great classical tradition, was regenerative as well as
destructive.