Stilicho: The Vandal Who Saved Rome

by Ian Hughes

The period of history in which Stilicho lived was one of the most turbulent in European history. The Western Empire was finally giving way under pressure from external threats, especially from Germanic tribes crossing the Rhine and Danube, as well as from seemingly ever-present internal revolts and rebellions.Ian Hughes explains how a Vandal (actually Stilicho had a Vandal father and Roman mother) came to be given almost total control of the Western Empire and describes his attempts to save both the Western Empire and even Rome itself from the attacks of Alaric the Goth and other barbarian invaders.Stilicho is one of the major figures in the history of the Late Roman Empire and his actions following the death of the emperor Theodosius the Great in 395 may have helped to permanently divide the Western and Eastern halves of the Roman Empire on a permanent basis. Yet he is also the individual who helped maintain the integrity of the West before the rebellion of Constantine I

Genres: History, Ancient History, Biography, Nonfiction, Roman History, Roman, Military History

288 pages, Hardcover

First published June 1, 2010

Reviews

[Ian · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was enjoyable. As the author himself points out, the difficulty with writing a biography of Stilicho lies with the reliability of the source material, almost all of which is derived from texts that are either panegyrics or character assassinations. Given these limitations, much of the author's conclusions are necessarily speculative and open to other interpretations, but I think Prof. Hughes has created a readable biography with well-argued conclusions.

Stilicho was the effective, though not official, ruler of the Western Roman Empire from about 395 to 408, a particularly tumultuous period. The Western Empire had been seriously weakened by a succession of rebellions and civil wars and was under significant pressure from barbarian invaders. The crisis culminated in the years 405-408 when the Empire suffered 3 major barbarian invasions (the last after the death of Stilicho) plus a rebellion in Britain on behalf of a usurper who took the entire field army of Britain across to Gaul, causing Britannia to be effectively abandoned as a Roman province. Prof. Hughes takes a broadly sympathetic view of Stilicho, arguing that his actions were motivated by his personal view of what was best for the Empire. He is extremely critical though of the Roman aristocracy. Changing economic conditions had led to the growth of large estates at the expense of the peasantry, most of whom were forced by circumstances into the status of "colonus", a sort of precursor to the medieval serf. The aristocracy were unwilling either to release coloni for service in the legions or to pay taxes to train and equip the army, but simultaneously complained that Stilicho hired barbarians to fill out the ranks rather than recruiting Romans. Essentially, the Roman elite were too selfish and short sighted to pay for an army capable of meeting the demands placed on it. Other factors, such as the scale of Germanic migration; and growing religious intolerance, also played a part, and Prof. Hughes sees Stilicho as someone who fought a losing struggle with these underlying factors.

Incidentally, despite the book's subtitle, the author is not really claiming that Stilicho "saved Rome". The phrase is derived from Gibbon's view of Stilicho.

[Rindis · Rating 3 out of 5]

The end of the Western Roman Empire is a hard subject to get a real grasp on. Ian Huges' book about one of the final magister militums of the western empire does a lot to explain conditions during the beginning of the 5th Century.

Stilicho has generally been a controversial figure, either vilified or celebrated by most histories (this book's subtitle, "The Vandal Who Saved Rome" is a direct reference to that latter tradition), and Huges' intent is to do a more evenhanded account (which I think ends up giving him more credit than is due in a few places).

The story starts with Theodosius defeating a western 'pretender', Eugenius, reuniting the Roman Empire, and then dying a few months later, leaving the Empire to his two children, who were both underage. Stilicho was one of Theodosius' generals, and was married to his (adopted) daughter, and claimed authority over the Empire as... legal guardian (parens principum) of both emperors. This was never accepted in the East, and led to a strained relationship between the two imperial courts for the duration of his rule. In the West, Stilicho followed the arc of so many regencies, starting with a good amount of power, then falling into political power struggles with the court and the maturing Emperor, and in this case executed.

The book provides a very good overall study of his thirteen years in power (which is a pretty impressive amount of time for someone at the top of Roman politics in an unstable reign), maintaining a mostly chronological account, but dividing things up into specific subjects which are each examined in turn (sometimes round-robin style; coming back to previous subjects in the next year, etc.). I would have much preferred that a few things were handled in greater detail (like his relationship with the Gothic general Alaric), but presumably there isn't enough in the sources to say more. At the same time, there are ideas introduced (like the attitude of the Senate in Rome) that I'd like a better idea of where he's pulling it from, of if it is all assumption.

The good news for the Kindle version of this book, is that there's a lot of maps scattered throughout the book, generally close to where they're needed; I could wish for better quality or focus on some, but they are there. The bad news is that it seems the formatting did not entirely make it into the Kindle version. All the section headers are presented in normal text, with no bolding, extra space around them, or anything else to set them apart from the text.

[Faustibooks · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a good biography of Stilicho, a very interesting and ambiguous character in the twilight of the Western Roman Empire. Coming from a Vandal father and a Roman mother, Stilicho joined the Roman army and would eventually increase in rank under the reign of Theodosius I. After the death of the emperor, Stilicho was appointed as the guardian of his underage sons. In the end, he only managed to rule in the Western Empire, where he had a huge amount of influence over the young Honorius. This made Stilicho one of many influential military leaders who would become the most powerful men in the West, preferring to influence the emperor, rather than overthrowing him. Stilicho defended the empire from several barbarians and helped to put down rebellions and usurpers. However, his political conflict with the Eastern court, barbarian leaders and the Senate would eventually lead to his fall.

The early fifth century was a chaotic and gloomy time for the Western Roman Empire, and Stilicho did not manage to prevent some events from happening. All of the politics, the court intrigue, the rivalries, marriages and the appeasement of barbarians make it an extremely interesting time to read about. Stilicho would eventually be executed and Rome itself would shortly afterwards be sacked by the Goth Alaric.

The sources for this period are scarce and confusing. It is therefore hard sometimes to make a good reconstruction of the events, especially when sources contradict each other. Ian Hughes however, does a very good job of trying to explain the events in a nuanced and rational manner, while also arguing why he chooses to interpret things in a certain way. It is difficult to write a biography of a man such as Stilicho, as the few sources we have either praise or loathe him, stating that he saved the Empire or that he fuelled its collapse. Hughes still finds a way to make it all readable and understandable, while still making it clear every time that it is his interpretation of the sources and that reality could still be different. He does not shy away from taking on accepted opinions, even criticising modern scholars, which I appreciate a lot.

As always, Hughes did a very good job on this one. Four stars!

[Hans Kerrinckx · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a decent study of the late Roman Empire focused on Stilicho, who was the highest military leader of the Western Empire from 395 – 408 AD under the Emperor Honorius (9 September 384 – 15 August 423). At the same time his brother Arcadius (377/378 – 1 May 408) was ruling the Eastern part of the Empire, strongly dominated by a series of powerful ministers and by his wife, Aelia Eudoxia.
The period in which Stilicho lived was one of the most turbulent in European history. The Western Empire was finally giving way under pressure from external threats, especially from Germanic tribes crossing the Rhine and Danube, as well as from seemingly ever-present internal revolts and rebellions.
For non-historians you definitely need to keep a print of the Theodosian dynasty by the hand as well as a good historical atlas and an overview of the organization of the later Roman army. Otherwise you might get lost in the complexity of family, geography, military campaigns etc.
Stilicho, half Vandal, was married to Serena, the niece and adopted daughter of Emperor Theodosius I (the Great) and considered himself as the protector of the legacy (including the children) of that Emperor. When Theodosius died (17 January 395), his two young sons were appointed as Emperors of the West (Honorius) and the East (Arcadius).
The book gives an exhaustive overview of the military problems the Empire was struggling with: the attacks of Alaric the Goth (which who Stilicho had a love/hate relationship), the rebellion of Constantine III in Britain and the crossing of the Rhine by a major force of Vandals, Sueves and Alans - both in AD 406 and with the looming threat of the Huns.
Also the difficult relationship between Stilicho and the Roman Senate, the sometimes aggressive strive between both parts of the Empire and the role of protagonists such as Galla Placidia (a major force in Roman politics for most of her life) and other protagonists – mostly military commanders - are well represented in the book.
One negative remark: the constant back and forth between topic areas breaks up the narrative flow, and also results in the reader losing his/her place because the subchapters tend to wander from the main topic.
My advice to (future) readers of the book, in order to get a good overview of the history of the Late Antiquity is to read the following books in order:
1. Lenski, Noel. Failure of Empire: Valens and the Roman State in the Fourth Century A.D. (Transformation of the Classical Heritage). University of California Press; 1 edition (March 3, 2003)
2. Freeman, Charles. AD 381: Heretics, Pagans and the Christian State. Vintage Digital (February 15, 2011)
3. Hughes, Ian. Stilicho: The Vandal Who Saved Rome. Pen & Sword (June 19, 2010).
4. Hughes, Ian. Aetius: Attila's Nemesis. Pen and Sword Military (July 19, 2012).
5. Kelly, Christopher. Theodosius II (Cambridge Classical Studies). Cambridge University Press; 1 edition (July 31, 2013)
6. Hughes, Ian. Patricians and Emperors: The Last Rulers of the Western Roman Empire. Pen and Sword Military (September 30, 2015).
For those who think that 6 books a little bit too much, there are also good works, summarizing the whole story in one book, such as:
1. Heather, Peter. The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians. Oxford University Press; 1 edition (December 1, 2005)
or
2. Ward-Perkins, Bryan. The Fall of Rome: And the End of Civilization. OUP Oxford (July 13, 2006)

[Mark · Rating 4 out of 5]

Stilicho was a late Roman general with a Vandal father, hence “Stilicho the Vandal”. He wielded power as regent for a young (and later weak) emperor. After he was assassinated in 408 the Visigoths would more or less immediately sack Rome; so the “Vandal who saved Rome” is true in only the narrowest of contexts, and the book reads like a tragedy as it heads towards disaster. (The subtitle does read like a publisher’s dictate: Hughes puts a question mark after the chapter with that title inside the book.)

Western Rome was facing possibly insoluble issues by the time Stilicho took power. It’s army had been soundly defeated in civil wars at least three times. In the days of Hannibal they raised army after army from the citizens of the Republic; in Stilicho’s time the Senate refused to allow recruitment of the Romans from their estates and looked askance at the recruitment of non-Romans. Any man Stilicho lost was possibly irreplaceable. The manpower problems were exacerbated because Stilicho was a non-aristocrat with no independent right to rule. He needed the legitimacy of the Senate and couldn’t cross them by recruiting directly, even as armies repeatedly crossed into Italy. Gibbon’s description of his behavior (“he sensed this was Rome’s last army and he had better be careful with it”) now makes a lot of sense.

In his 15 year reign Stilicho would guide the West through two civil wars and two barbarian invasions, one by the estimable Visigoth Alaric. He was a generally cautious but successful general, preferring maneuver but winning battles when he needed to. But the third invasion sparked the third civil war di him in; Stilicho ended up paralyzed by political rivalries at home when he needed freedom to act, and then ended up dead. Hughes rates him as a competent ruler who probably did postpone Rome’s end and I don’t doubt that, but the wheels were coming off in dramatic fashion by the time he was killed.

Hughes has an approach which I don’t think I’ve seen before: describe the uncertainties and contradictions in the historical record (and these are vast), and then deduce what he thinks is the most plausible version of events and narrate it as if it happened that way. To my surprise I really liked this approach—I never felt he was trying to abuse my trust but the sense of narrative running through the tale was pretty strong, more satisfying than “we’ll never know”. So overall this is high on the readability, with a minor complaint about a weird quirk of repeating key bits of context almost verbatim in every section—almost as if he expected chapters to be read independently by undergrads.

[Truls Ljungström · Rating 1 out of 5]

Det krävs en stor skicklighet för att lyckas ta ett spännande människoliv och en rik tidsålder och suga livsglädjen ur båda, utan att för den skull tumma på detaljer. Tyvärr är denna bok ett exempel på hur väl genomarbetade och väl belagda texter om spännande ämnen samtidigt kan vara rent själadödande tråkiga. OM man är fascinerad av romerska vapen, kan detta vara en rolig bok. Annars rekommenderar jag någon annan lektyr.

[Faith Justice · Rating 4 out of 5]

From the Foreword by Adrian Goldsworthy:

"It is a frustrating and intriguing challenge to write the history of this period. Ian Hughes sets himself an even more difficult task in writing a biography of Stilicho, where the central thread is the career of just one man. It is well worthwhile, for it is always good to remind ourselves that men like Stilicho, Honorius and Alaric were just human beings. Historians rightly concern themselves with wider social trends, where the successes and failures of individuals are seen principally as illustrations of broader patterns. Yet this is not how people actually live their lives, and it is very dangerous to remove this human element from history."

The lead up to and "fall" of the Western Roman Empire (the Eastern Roman Empire continued for another 1000 years as Byzantium) in the 4th and 5th Century is a time of turmoil. Primary sources are fragmented and sometimes contradictory, giving the novelist lots of leeway, but making the historian/biographer's job tough. Stilicho is one of the major figures of this time. Born of a Vandal father and high-born Roman mother, he married Theodosius the Great's niece (and adopted daughter) Serena and spent his life fighting for the empire. After Theodosius' death, he raised the emperor's son Honorius and daughter Galla Placidia. He effectively ruled the Western Empire during Honorius' minority, putting down usurpers and fighting barbarian incursions while balancing the politics of the Roman Senate. He eventually falls afoul of the "anti-barbarian" faction in Western Roman politics, not because of his own parentage, but because he incorporates barbarians into the Roman army. Stilicho faced enormous challenges both external and internal while trying to save the Empire. [SPOILER]His death, on the orders of the Emperor he dedicated his life to, was poor recompense for his years of dedicated service.[/SPOILER] In his final chapter, Hughes turns to his title and asks the question "Did Stilicho save Rome?" given its dissolution decades later.

I've read and reviewed several biographies in the past year (both for pleasure and research.) Those authors blessed with a plethora of primary sources can tell their subjects' story in their own words and those of contemporaries. Those without have addressed the challenge in different ways. Schiff in [I]Cleopatra: a Life[/I], speculated on emotions and even put thoughts in her subjects' heads. A choice that made the book highly readable, but was troubling to me. Hughes presents what is known, takes sides in the historical controversies, but is also not afraid to say "we don't know" when there is no evidence. This is a dense book, both in pages and information. The style is a bit dry, but a wonderful resource for anyone interested in this time period.

[Scott · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is absolutely amazing. By drawing on ancient sources of both Roman and Barbarian origin, Ian Hughes is able to piece together a history of an interesting character during a fascinating period of history. I learned a lot, not only about the beginning of the end of the western empire at the end of the fourth century, but about how to approach the texts that I have read and put together seeming contradictions to find a plausible series of events from seemingly contradictory sources. Five stars from me because I loved it.

[WarpDrive · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderful book. Very detailed, dense and interesting.
Highly recommended to everybody seriously interested in the history of this period.

[Nicolas Perrault · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a gripping narrative --- no light feat given how few and biased primary sources are. I also liked the author's tone. Many authors present opinion, or things that are merely likely, as fact, which makes for less enjoyable reads. I disagree with other reviewers who disliked the first few chapters. These provide background, among others, on the state of the Roman and barbarian armies at the time. These chapters put the rest of the work in historical context and I would not skip them.

Unfortunately, the maps presented in the book are hopelessly poor. My perhaps flawed understanding is that there seems to be two different nested or partially overlapping territories referred to as "Illyricum" (perhaps something like Illyricum the prefecture and Illyricum the diocese) and this I found deeply confusing. Nowhere is this clarified in the text and the maps are useless in resolving the confusion. We are told that the Diocese of Illyricum was returned to the West around 395-396. But then a whole chapter is devoted to the West's plans of 406-407 to conquer Illyricum from the East. Huh? There is a map that is captioned "12. The return of the Diocese of Illyricum [to the West in 395-396]", and then later another that is captioned "19. The invasion of Illyricum [by the West in 406-407]" What? The maps themselves are of no help whatever in understanding what exactly "Illyricum" means.

I am no specialist and cannot speak for the book's general accuracy, but a number of back-to-back material errors early in the book (where the author discusses things I am, as someone interested in Roman coinage, more familiar with) slightly tainted the rest of the work for me. The author makes the following claim: “Massive inflation had resulted in coins rapidly losing their value, partly as a product of debasement – the mixing of base metals with the gold or silver used to make the coins.” This is an important error regarding gold coins, which were never seriously debased. It is silver alone that was ruthlessly debased. He continues, “The result was that lower denomination coins became increasingly worthless and only when Constantine introduced the aureus, a relatively stable gold coin, did the problem of inflation ease slightly.” That the new gold coin was introduced by Diocletian is not really material, given that it did become widespread under Constantine. But that the coin introduced was the solidus, not the aureus (which was the standard gold coin of the Roman world since Julius Caesar), is certainly material. If the author ever reads this comment, he might find it unfair to judge a work of this magnitude on these inaccuracies, and I agree. Nevertheless, for a reader who has relatively few reference points to judge the accuracy of a work (apart from its internal consistency), these details make a difference.

Overall, this book is excellent. I am looking forward to reading the author's other books.

[Elliot Gates · Rating 3 out of 5]

A well written biography peppered with way too much auxiliary information.

Stilicho was a gifted politician and an competent general (for the time). His unique position in as Guardian of one Emperor and his claim of 'Parens' over the other Emperor was the first in the empires history and he juggled the responsibilities of state and military adeptly, at least initially.

Unfortunately in The West, the stodgy and out-of-touch Roman senate still held significant sway. Unwilling to provide to provide manpower, unwilling to raise taxes and unwilling to have 'barbarians' fighting in Roman legions the Senate would prove to be Stilicho's undoing.

It was interesting to learn Theodosius' bumbling, lack-wit sons were both a blessing and a curse to Stilicho's fortunes. If they were more headstrong and competent his influence would have never risen to such heights, but because of this reason they were putty in the hands of any advisor with a drop of charisma.

If event's had turned out differently and Stilicho's claim in the East was recognised than perhaps the Western Empire may have survived longer as part of the single entity of the Roman Empire.


The author does a great job amalgamating information based on the sources available but includes significant amount of 'fluff' relating to armor, weaponry and the origins of some tribes. While interesting in small doses, this makes up about one third of the book making many chapters tedious to get through.

Worth a read, but some chapters can be skipped without consequence.

[Andrew Dockrill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ian Hughes is a tremendous author who also recently came out with his biography of Attila the Hun. One thing that I appreciate about Hughes writing is that is often chooses to focus on topics that most historical writers tend to steer away from (at least they seem to) as there simply is not very much information on them to write a thorough narrative. What I enjoyed about Stilicho was that Hughes writing style was extremely easy to read and very engaging. I did find his book on Attila to be more engaging and certainly learned more from it, but I did gain tremendous insight into the Roman army and what the famous Alaric (sacker of Rome) got up to around the early 400's AD.

All in all I wouldn't say that Hughes book broke any new ground for me, but it was a very enjoyable read all the same. I would definitely recommend it to anyone interested in the later Roman years as little is typically written upon it, unless it is a text book for an undergrad or masters course.

[Mick Maye · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent account

Great book which gives a clear account of the beginning of the end for the western Roman Empire and the reasons for it.

[Mick Maye · Rating 4 out of 5]

difficult period and a very good treatment of it. The book goes a long way to explaining the difficulties and eventual demise of the western Empire.

[Reza Amiri Praramadhan · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting account of Stilicho, whom the (Western) Roman Empire owed few years of its survival on him, which is ironic, considering that Stilicho was a barbarian (half-Vandal, half-Roman to be precise). It was also the Roman's hatred of barbarian that became the cause of Stilicho's downfall. Not only about Stilicho, the book also discussed the life, politics and military organization and tactics during that time. Worth to read, because most books on this topic talked about Eastern Roman Empire.

[Jeroen Van de Crommenacker · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is actually a decent book and I enjoyed it. Mostly for the subject matter and the period which is fascinating.