Coded Polemic in Ammianus Book 31 and the Date and Place of its Composition

Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>The<jats:italic>Res Gestae</jats:italic>of Ammianus Marcellinus poses numerous structural puzzles for the historian, among them the anomalous final book, numbered 31 in the manuscript tradition. This book, which treats the Gothic rebellion of<jats:sc>a.d.</jats:sc>376–378 and the campaign of Adrianople, is loosely connected to the other extant books, which conclude with events of<jats:sc>a.d</jats:sc>. 375. The present article argues that Book 31 was in origin a separate monograph, drafted in Greek at Antioch in the aftermath of the Roman defeat at Adrianople. Perhaps modelled on the<jats:italic>Scythica</jats:italic>of Dexippus, its contents reflect the Antiochene and Constantinopolitan polemic of its moment. For reasons that must remain speculative, Ammianus later translated his work into Latin and appended it to a finished draft of the<jats:italic>Res Gestae</jats:italic>.</jats:p>

The Audience of Ammianus Marcellinus and the Circulation of Books in the Late Roman World

“…58 Bowersock (1990), 244-250;Fornara (1992), 328-344;Barnes (1993), 57-61;, 54-58. Fornara's arguments are accepted by Kulikowski (2012), 79-102. 59 Matthews (1994, 252-269.…”

Why We Need a New Edition of Ammianus Marcellinus

“…elatosque uertices cassili suggestu consurgunt priorum principum imitamenta portantes 58 See Zuckermann 1991;Kulikowski 2012, 96. Den Boeft et al 2018 Wendeltreppen' (i.e.…”

Creating the Enemy: Ammianus Marcellinus' Double Digression on Huns and Alans (Res Gestae 31.2)

“…A recent and much‐discussed proposition is that book 31 was separately composed, in the immediate aftermath of the battle of Hadrianople, and originally written in Greek (see Kulikowski ). For Ammianus' presentation of the Huns, the date of composition is not crucial, although the insertion of the digression suggests later rather than earlier composition in relation to the narrative context and train of described events.…”

“…the pertinent remarks on pp.463–4 about the lengths and number of digressions, which particularly figure in the Julianic part of the work, possibly in order ‘to elevate this part of his work to a still higher level’. Kulikowski states that the digressions on the Huns and Alans are dissimilar to the earlier ones, as part of his argument for separate composition of book 31 of the Res Gestae (, 84); while most scholars see a continuous line (in the tradition of Mommsen ) through the work of Ammianus, or explain the differences by the use of different source material (Feraco , 391). Vergin (ch.7) also sees the Roman excursus (14.6 and 28.4) in the same ethnographical tradition ( cf .…”