Economy and Society in the Age of Justinian by Peter Sarris

206 PHOENIX activist ecclesiastical policy ofMarcian at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. Constantius' successors, ifwe follow Errington's account, largely kept aloof from religious disputes (210-211), despite the repeated attemptsby politically savvybishops likeAmbrose of Milan to draw them in, until the appointment of Theodosius on 19 January 379.1 Missing from Errington's bibliography, however, isT. D. Barnes, "The Collapse of theHomoeans intheEast," StudiaPatristica29 (1997) 1-16,which provesthata numberof theinitiatives to bolsterNicene orthodoxyascribed to the reignofTheodosius belong, in fact, to his predecessors. The crisis of Adrianople and the death of Valens provided the impetus to Gratian to make changes that would lead to the extinction of the homoean movement in the East. If Theodosius became, rather expectedly given his martial background, an energetic promoter of Nicene orthodoxy and was celebrated by posterity as such, itwas largely because a changed ecclesiastical landscape permitted him to be one. It is not clear, therefore, from the evidence that survives whether Theodosius shepherded the Council of Constantinople towards its decisions, or simply provided a safe venue wherein Nicene bishops could have free rein; the imperial edicts that accompanied the council may reflect less a sort of caesaropapism than the appropriate role of a dutiful Christian emperor. That said,Errington'sconcludingdiscussion on theBattle ofFrigidus (253-258) is a superb, critical treatment of the interaction between the secular and religious in the historiography of Theodosius' reign. On a final note, although it appeared after the publication of Errington's book, the masterly article of Alan Cameron (Harvard Studies in Classical Philology [2007] 341-384), while confirming the assertionthatZosimus erred in saying that Gratian declined the title pontifex maximus (201), casts serious doubt on the claim acceptedbyErringtonthat Theodosius andValentinian n did not adopt it (233). Queen's University George Bevan Economy and Society in the Age of Justinian. By Peter Sarris. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2006. Pp. xi, 258, 7 figs. This book places class struggle and a conception of history propelled by class interests dynamically back on the agenda for the study of the later empire. While focusing on the great estates of sixth-century Egypt, its overarching argument reaches from Diocletian to the Arab conquests, tracing the origin and rise of the great estates and implicating them in a new narrative of imperialpolitics and, ultimately, failure.No apology isofferedfor this approach to a field that has been preoccupied with questions of religion and culture. Religion isheremoved to theback seat: "empty pocketsmade forbad Christians" is the last sentence (234; cf. 221), and hagiographic evidence for economic life is dispatched as unreliable (it too was shaped by elite class sensitivities: 118-121). The core of the book offersa close readingof the papyrologicalevidence for the Oxyrhynchus estates of the Apion family in the mid- to late-sixth century, under the categories of estate accounts (Chapter Two), contracts (Chapter Three), the administrative structure of the household business (Chapter Four), and fiscal documents (Chapter Five). This is the one estate whose inner workings "on the ground" (9) we know about, and it Errington has 17 January 379 as the date of Theodosius' appointment (214), surely a partial conflation with the date of Theodosius' death, 17 January 395. For discussion of the former date and the circumstances ofTheodosius' accession, see J.Vanderspoel, Themistius and theImperial Court: Oratory, Civic Duty, and Paideia from Constantius toTheodosius (Ann Arbor 1995) 187-198. BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 207 stands in for others in the larger narrative developed later. It is only after he has offered his reading of the evidence that Sarris surveys past views of the estates (Chapter Eight). He persuasively refutes the view of J.Gascou that they were essentially extensions of the imperial fisc, presenting them instead as private businesses geared toward profit; in fact, under Justinian they were to conflict with imperial authority, from whose standpoint they appeared as "highly powerful and deeply insidious vested interests" (2). The book's cover is well chosen from among the mosaics of the Justinianic palace: an eagle ("representing the imperial office") striking a snake ("its rivals"). Pursuant to J. Banaji's studies of elite economic behavior and resources,1 Sarris likewise emphasizes the "highly sophisticated and monetised character of estate management

Ancient history · Archaeology · Bishops · Emperor · Historiography · Orthodoxy · Political science · Politics · Reign · Theology · Byzantine Studies and History · Classics · History · Law · Philosophy