From The Student Room
TSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > History > Conclusions
- Aggressive warfare was (Julian excepted) undertaken preclusively or reactively limited.- urge for stability new alternatives to military conflict.
- Political discourse both had similar external pressures, problem major threats at once, both see each other as stable and therefore expectation continuity and predictability.
- Period 299 and 363 – necessary conditions through failure militant Roman imperialism and territorial adjustment acceptable to both.
- Dialogue encouraged by dual pressure northern frontiers 0 medium of Armenia and meopotamia
- Internal problems with legitimacy of using diplomacy – fundamental part fighting wars – diplomacy took steps from being substitute rather than adjunct to war.
- Military upkeep still large, controlled traffic and Emperor still main locus – convergence of needs rather than Grand Strategy
- Yes military tool important but are others – Christianity medium of communication, individual C useful as intermediaries. Movement of population also exploited
- Treaty cumulative document - emndation, addition and renewal – taken most seriously. Significant force for stability – progressed where it could aid stability – never more than a provisional validity – only make a limit and comparatively short term contribution to conflict resolution.
THE EMPEROR MAURICE AND HIS HISTORIAN
- Julian’s death to 500 – conflict rare – partition of Armenia agreed by Tho I and Shapur III in 384 removed bone of contention.
- Common interest in northern tribes helped to promote acceptance of diplomatic vocabulary of mutual cooperation – each had duty to help each other in preservation of civilisation against threats of unruly tribes.
- Other bones removed on Arabian tribes and Caspian gates – stable enough for Arcadius to ask Yazdgard to look after Theoi II
- Start 6th century – mutual suspicion – minor grievances not diplomacy escalated into major grievances – cycle as both increased defences as Yemen and Caucus evtnms took shape.
- Kavadh’s invasion 502 initiated era of conflict – basis friendly relations undermined by Roman refusal to help military expenditure. – stopped as receiving revenues from Nisibis alleged had been ceded by Jovian for only 120 years.
- Invention to justify refusal to cooperate – ironic time when getting somewhere in Balkans – Kavadh’;s attack easy capture Theodosioplis, Martyroplis and Amida – defences neglected during peace
- Anastasius repaired defences including construction of fort at Dara
- Kavadh prepared to trust Justin I Khosro’s right to the throne, suspicion of extension of Roman influence in sub-Causcus where tensions raised. Justin refuses to accept Khosro
- 3rd war product of Persian suspicions – Khurso, fearing Justinian’s western conquests would lead him to overthrow Persia exploited a minor disagreement. Persian success immediately but Romans usually recovered with defences of cities.
- 50 year peace while looks like reinforces tradition of previous two centuries reveal deep suspicions – Persians want 30 year advance payment and agree to lump sum and annual payments. Detailed agreements over Saracens + private individuals, no fortification, no attacking tribes
ROMAN DEFENCES
- Conflict diplomatic tensions contributed to tensions – Justin II attack preceded by disagreements concerning Homerites
Comments
