Gone Medieval - Justinian: Greatest Byzantine Emperor?

Episode Date: February 8, 2024

The Eastern Roman Emperor from 527 to 565, Justinian was a ruler who infused even the most mundane tasks with spiritual and religious significance. The challenges he faced - climate change, battles over culture and identity, the first recorded global pandemic - and many of the solutions he found to address them still resonate with us today. His legacy remains all around us, in his massive building programme, in our legal systems, and in his fundamental contribution to both the formation of Christendom and the emergence of Islam.In this episode, Matt Lewis talks to Peter Sarris, author of Justinian: Emperor, Soldier, Saint, about a man who, from the humblest beginnings, rose to become ruler of much of the known world achieving an almost god-like status.This episode was produced by Rob Weinberg.Enjoy unlimited access to award-winning original documentaries that are released weekly and AD-FREE podcasts. Get a subscription for £1 per month for 3 months with code MEDIEVAL - sign up here.You can take part in our listener survey here. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From long-loss Viking ships and kings buried in unexpected places to tales of murder, power, faith, and the lives of ordinary people across medieval Europe and beyond. Join me, Matt Lewis, Dr. Eleanor Jarniger, and some of the world's leading historians as we bring history's most fascinating stories to life only on history hit. With your subscription, you'll unlock hundreds of hours of exclusive documentaries with a brand-new release every week exploring everything from the ancient world,

to World War II. Just visit historyhit.com forward slash subscribe. Welcome to this episode of Gone Medieval. I'm Matt Lewis. Is he an ancient figure or a medieval one or is he somewhere in between? Maybe you've heard of the Justinian plague. Perhaps you've heard Edward I of England referred to as the English Justinian. If you're anything like me though, that might have been the extent of your knowledge of this emperor. But one man is on a mission to correct that. Peter Saris is Professor of Late Antique Mediore and Byzantine Studies at Trinity College, Cambridge. His new book, Justinian, explores the life and legacy of this incredible man.

Welcome to God Medieval, Peter. Thanks for the invitation, lovely to be here. It's wonderful to have you on. Can you tell us a little bit about what we know of Justinian's background? Where does he come from? So Justinian is from the southern Balkans. His homeland is what's now in southern Serbia. And essentially, he's from what is the most war-torn and disrupted part of the Roman world.

in the middle of the 5th century. Over the course of the 5th century, the Western Roman Empire had fragmented and disappeared, but the Eastern Roman Empire ruled from Constantinople is holding on, but its Balkan territories, Justinian's homeland, have been subjected to repeated barbarian invasions and raids. So Justinian's family appears to have originated

in considerable poverty, and really his rise to power begins with his uncle, Justin, who, around the year 470, decides to try to create a better life for him, by heading to Constantinople with some friends to join the Imperial Army. Later in his career, Justin, who will be married but childless, will then write back to his sister back home in, as I say, what's now southern Serbia, suggesting that she send her son, Petrus, to Constantinople to join the uncle who will give him an education and a career. And that young man, Petrus,

is our future Justinian. I think he's probably sent to Constantinople when he's about eight years old. When he's there, as I say, his uncle ensures he gets a good education, ensures that he, like his uncle, ends up being enrolled in the palace guards. And ultimately, his uncle adopts him, which is why he's called Justinian, Eustinianus, taking his name from his uncle Justin. So although we remember him as Emperor Justinian, he was far from royalty when he started out. No, absolutely. And I think it's very important in terms of both his mindset and that of his broader kindred and family, that the family have been raised in considerable poverty

and then they come to Constantinople and forge careers for themselves very much as political outsiders. Essentially what's happened is his uncle Justin's come to Constantinople at a time when the palace guard is being reformed and he is very fortunate. He catches the eye of the recruiting sergeant who is impressed by his bearing and he's recruited into the palace guards

and then starts to forge a career for himself. And it's an extraordinary piece of fortune for Justin then ultimately for Justinian and the whole family, because it propels Justin from this background, as I say, in the most war-torn part of the empire, suddenly placing him in the centre of power in the greatest city in the known world, Constantinople. And whilst there, Justin will advance to the palace guards until by 518, he's head of the palace guards. We then have a disputed succession for the throne in Constantinople, with different aristocratic factions vying for control. No one of these factions manages to persuade enough of those present in the palace

upon the death of the Emperor Anastasius to back their chosen candidate. And so eventually Justin is agreed upon as a sort of compromise candidate. Justin at that point being a very old man, and I think the assumption is on the part of those aristocrats at court that Justin will die quite soon and then they'll be able to get their chosen candidates on the throne next time round. So a series of really of chance occurrences serve to raise Justinian's family from this obscure background to a position of great military and political significance, and that then sets the scene for Justinian's own a sense to power. So is there a sense in which these feuding, vying noble families may have picked Justinian, I guess partly because if he's in charge of the palace

guard, he has control of the military, but if they're concerned that he's old and he may well die soon, is this just about buying a little bit of time while they fight it out between them, thinking that eventually one of them will get the throne after him? Yes, in terms of Justin's accession to power in 518, I think that's very much the case. But what then happens with Justin now as Emperor, Justinian starts to take advantage of his uncle's newfound power, tries to harness his uncle's authority, and tries to build up his own political profile, both at court and then on the streets of Constantinople, so as to sideline those aristocratic factions and interest groups who still have an eye on the throne. And we see Justinian taking advantage of his appointment to,

a series of important positions. First of all, he's general. That allows him to start buying up support in the army. Then he's made consul, which gives him the opportunity to buy up support in the Senate and on the streets of the capital by distributing largesse, gold, silver to the urban population during imperial celebrations and games. He's then, as his uncle gets older and frailer, made deputy emperor in 525, starting to have a more direct impact on imperial policy, and also trying to buy up support amongst the church. And then finally, as his uncle really does start to fade, he's made co-emperor in April of 527 with his uncle dying four months later.

So at each stage, Justinian is very careful to buy up support, to forge new alliances and to seek to sideline those families who will always regard him and his uncle as really low-born opportunists with no real claim on imperial power. It sounds like he had perhaps a plan then. If he's ingratiating himself with the church, the political entity and the military, that puts him in an incredibly strong position, almost unassailable position for when his uncle dies?

Those are each of the key interest groups one needs to reach out to if you want to get control of the palace and then get control of the throne in 6th century Constantinople. And at no stage is Justinian's attempt to secure his rise to power unchallenged. Even his own uncle appears initially to be slightly suspicious of him. We see no evidence that Justin immediately starts lavishing his nephew. or adopted son with favours once he becomes emperor in 518, rather Justinian has to be constantly trying to build up his support base for himself and there are constantly groups trying to machinate against him.

And they will form the basis of really very concerted opposition to his regime once he becomes sole emperor in the August of 527. We're going to talk about some of the specific elements of Justinian's reign as emperor and you did allude to this a little bit earlier. But to what extent do we see his humble beginnings affecting his worldview, once he's sitting at the top and he's surveying all of this Eastern Roman Empire, how affected is his view of what he sees by his own background? First of all, his relatively humble background informs a really profound sense of hostility to

some of those more blue-blooded aristocratic families who are still eyeing the throne and who, as I say, view him and his uncle as Parvenus. I think it informs a very pronounced sense on his part that he needs to build up the legitimacy of his regime by essentially building up a sort of personality cult, advertising his name, advertising the vigour and ambition of the new regime. It informs, I think, a very interesting decision on his part to celebrate his Balkan homeland. He builds a city in the near vicinity of the village where he was probably born, the city of Eustiniana Prima, which is a great testimony to his commitment to both glorify and defend this troubled Balkan homeland. But also in particular, I think Justinian's background and

his family informs a much more aggressive stance with respect to the barbarian kingdoms that have emerged in the West amid the breakup of Roman power in the 5th century. As I say, the region they come from really bears the brunt of a great deal of the military dislocation of the 5th century. And I think this informs a very aggressive stance with respect to the Gothic regime that has emerged in Italy, in particular, and also a broader animosity towards those post-Roman successor regimes, which Justinian and his fellow Illyrians, as we call these individuals from the Balkans, this particular hostility which those Illyrians seem to feel towards those new barbarian rulers. A hostility which isn't shared to anything like the same degree, I think, by those members of the

Byzantine establishment whose interests lie primarily elsewhere in its more easterly provinces in Syria, Palestine or Egypt. Yeah, so he's perhaps just more aware of what it's like on the in those problematic areas of the empire than people who were ensconced in Constantinople might have been. Yes, or whose property portfolios amongst the aristocratic families are concentrated primarily in the East. As I say, Justinian's family have seen the brutality and fragmentation of the 5th century up close. And one of Justinians' projects as Emperor will be an attempt to rebuild that Western Roman Empire that has fallen apart. Why is that a concern to him? Is that to do with wanting to bring security to the Balkans or is it a larger project than that?

I think what we have is a regime which, for the cultural reasons I've just emphasized, was ideologically predisposed to intervene in the West, and particularly in the Mediterranean core of the old Western Roman Empire, should the opportunity arise. And the regime takes advantage of a series of internal political crises in the Vandal Kingdom of Africa, in the Austro-Gothic Kingdom, in Italy, and then ultimately even in the Visigothic Kingdom in Spain, to try to restore Roman rule. So there is an ideological dimension there. There's also a political

aspect to it in that the campaigns are launched after an attempted coup against Justinian in the year 532, which leads to widespread destruction and slaughter on the streets of Constantinople. And in the aftermath of that attempted coup, we see Justinian trying to reach out to conservative elements in the establishment and also to reach out to the church. And taking warfare to the barbarians in the West appeals to those more conservative political elements. And also those successive regimes have emerged in Africa and Italy, in particular, are regarded by the imperial church as being heretical. So there's a religious dimension to these Western campaigns as well. At the same time, I think it was a very strong economic incentive. The early 6th century had seen

the revival of warfare between the Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire and its great superpower arrival of Persia on a massive scale. Now that appears to be placing considerable pressure on state coffers at the time Justinian comes to the throne. And I think it's interesting that the areas he directs his armies to in North Africa, in Italy, in southern Spain are the wealthiest territories that have fallen out of direct Roman rule in the 5th century. So I think part of the motivation is also to try to regain that terrain to tax it as well as to rule over it and restore Roman authority there. And how important will major building projects during this period be? So Justinian is responsible for Hadja Sophia. Is that an attempt to project this old Roman,

huge building ideal? Yes, he's taking advantage there of the destruction wrought in the monumental heart of his capital by the attempted coup against him in 532, the so-called Nica riots. When anti-justing elements in the establishment of harness the growing alienation of the urban population of Constantinople to direct riots against Justinian and his chief ministers. In the course of that, most of the really important buildings of the heart of the capital have been destroyed. And Justinian then takes advantage of this opportunity to essentially rebuild the monumental heart of Constantinople to his own glory and in celebration of his regime. And in Hagia Sophia, in particular, what we see is the creation of the largest place of worship

in Christendom as an express refutation of the building project. of previous emperors, and in particular the building projects of those aristocratic families in Constantinople who have also been investing in lavish places of worship so as to make their political significance palpable on the streets of the imperial capital. So there's a competitive dimension there. As one architectural historian has put it, what we effectively see Justinian doing is turning the city of Constantine, Constantinople, into the city of Justinian. But also this building program, church building, defensive building, investment in infrastructure extends well beyond the capital, as I say, out of his Balkan homeland in Justiniana Prima, and also along the

empire's eastern frontier, where we see massive investment in the defensive infrastructure of the Roman Empire, the Eastern Roman Empire, so as to cow and face down the Persians. This is probably a really unfair question in that it's way too simplistic, but how successful is Justinian in those efforts to rebuild the Western Empire? I think in terms of what matters to him primarily militarily, in terms of restoring Roman control over much of the coastline of the Mediterranean, in terms of restoring direct imperial control over the sea lanes of the Mediterranean, he is extremely successful. And he destroys and conquers the two most politically sophisticated and the two most culturally confident of the barbarian successor kingdoms of the Austro-Grogy.

Kingdom in Italy, the Vandal Kingdom in Africa. The Vandal Kingdom falls very quickly. The Italian campaign, the destruction of the Austrogothic Kingdom will be a much more drawn out and debilitating war extending from the mid-530s down to the mid-550s. I think it's important that whilst I think Justinian is predisposed to taking advantage of emergent crises in the West to restore Roman rule, we have no evidence of there being a pre-prepared plan to restore the entirety of Roman rule over all of the territories that have been lost in the West from Britain and Gaul all the way down into the Mediterranean Corps. It's much more, I think, a Mediterranean focus with a view to regaining territory that is economically, strategically and ideologically the most significant.

So he's only really looking to get back useful places. Yes. And also places where the regimes are deemed to pose a religious or ideological challenge of particular significance. As I say, the Randall regime, the Austrogyzegothic regime, their rulers are a dear and a dearer. to a form of Christianity, which was regarded as heretical on the part of the imperial church. They are followers of so-called Aryan theology. We don't want to get too much into the details of that doctrinal dispute. But what matters, I think, is that as Peter Heather has recently emphasized, with the destruction of the two most powerful of the Aryan kingdoms, what Justinian is effectively helping to do is lay the foundations for a Catholic future, an imperial Christian future

for early medieval Europe more generally. And one of the other most interesting people in this story is Theodora, Justinian's wife. How does he come to be married to her? And how scandalous was that? Theodora's probably about 10 years younger than him, from what we can work out. They marry quite late. They marry when he's in middle age. They're cohabiting probably by about the year 521. They marry by about the year 522. Now, what's interesting with Theodora is that she is even in many ways even more low,

born than Justinian is. We are told that she had been raised in great poverty in Constantinople after her father who had worked for the hippodrome as their bearkeeper had died. And particularly lascivious source, the contemporary historian Procopius, tells us that Theodora and her siblings were obliged to become prostitutes when they forced into it when they were extremely young. She then becomes the concubine of an imperial governor in a region adjacent to Egypt. That governor abandoned her with an illegitimate child, and she then has to basically make her way back to Constantinople. There, her point of contact with Justinian seems to be that the hippodrome of Constantinople, which is a major political as well as sporting institution, is divided into so-called

circus factions, which play an important part in the political life of the city. And both Justinian and Theodora are associated with the blue circumfaction, one of the two most important ones. So I think that's the social context they're meeting. But he clearly, He really falls in love with her. There's a very strong romantic streak in this family, both he and his uncle, have clearly married for love rather than political design. And it's a sign of how sensitive this relationship is that we're told that Justinian has to wait until his adopted mother or aunt dies before he can marry Theodora. The aunt hates Theodora and doesn't regard her as a suitable match for handsome but unmarried, but increasingly middle-aged nephew or son.

Theodora's past as a prostitute is something which is emphasised in anti-regime literature, but it's also acknowledged by authors of sources who are very pro-theodora and quite pro-Justinian. So I think we have to take that accusation seriously. And it's interesting that the law has to be changed in order for Justinian to marry Theodora. By the point of their marriage, Justinian is already of senatorial rank, that he's not yet emperor, and the law has to be changed because men of senatorial rank can't marry women who are, have worked in disreputable professions. She's been an actress, she's been a dancer, as I say, lots of sources claim she's also been a prostitute. And I think what then becomes extremely

controversial beyond just her moral background, as some of the critics of the regime would see it, is that she's seen to exercise a much greater influence on imperial policy once Justinian is emperor than many conservative elements within conservative society in Constantinople would have regarded as acceptable. She has supporters as well as enemies to her supporters, she is a woman who despite the circumstances of her upbringing has found religion. I think one thing that draws Justinian and Theodore together is that by the time they meet, they both become extremely religious. And that I think is part of the building block of their relationship.

And how influential will she be over the next couple of decades of Justinian's rule? Do we see her influence over him? Can we regard them as some kind of political partnership? Or is that going a bit too far? Absolutely. It's very interesting. when we turn to Justinian's legislation that he issues once he becomes emperor, that he openly acknowledges that he consults Theodora on matters of policy, and we can see her inflecting his legislation and influencing it,

often in ways that we would think of as quite liberal or progressive. We see her, as we're trying to make life better, not just for herself, but also for women like her. We have legislation influenced, I think, by her experiences against people trafficking, against pimps, trying to stop young girls and being forced into prostitution, making it easier for women who are working on the stage to escape their theatrical careers and forge respectable marriage alliances. Across Justinian's social legislation, which in many ways is very persecutory and restrictive, there's an unprecedented degree of concern for vulnerable women, for the poor and for orphans,

where we may see Theodore's influence. We also see, and this really raises hackles on the part of opponents of the regime, Justinian will demand that imperial officials swear personal, oaths of loyalty, not just to him, but also to his wife. And he consistently represents his period of rule as effectively a period of joint rule with her. And this is really very significant. Incredible. It seems like quite a good advert for having lowborn rulers on the throne as opposed to those upper nobility who are just wobbling with each other without a real clue of what's going on in the empire. Well, I think one very important aspect with Justinia in general and his legislation in particular

is that there is an unprecedented degree of concern for Mars. marginalized groups, such as the poor orphans, the disabled appear as a feature of imperial legislation really for the first time. But this is also alongside an unprecedented degree of persecution of those groups who Justinian, with his highly Christianising agenda, regards as a source of moral corruption within the empire. So he's the first emperor, for example, to persecute men for having sex with other men, responding there to the demands of the church moralists. And we also see, as he attempts to bring to completion Constantine's Christianisation of Roman society that had begun with Constantine's conversion in the 4th century, we see an unprecedented degree of persecution being

initiated of religious minorities. Pagans are his initial target, but also Samaritans and increasingly his many Jewish subjects under whom we see growing hostility and persecution directed towards them at Justinian's instigation by church officials. He's let himself down big time there then. One thing I'm very keen to emphasise in the book is you have to appreciate both the light and the dark of Justinian and his regime. Another one of his key concerns and one that he's remembered for, I guess, is this big legal reform that you were talking about then. So it's incorporated in this corpus jurist civilis, which is still the foundation of a lot of civil laws across Europe. Why does he do this? Does he see it perhaps as laying a foundation for the rebuilding of the empire or is it something different to that?

There's a fundamental problem when Justinian comes to power that because there has been so much proliferation of legislation on the part of previous emperors and so much proliferation of legal literature which could be cited in court, that it's very difficult often to try to establish what the law on any given subject is. And Justinian is determined to restore order to Roman society. He regards this as a pressing moral as well as political imperative. He has a very strong sense that he has a very strong sense that. he's constantly operating under the eyes of God, as it were, and he needs to restore moral and political order to Roman society. And so what we see him doing with the codification project is to try to impose order on and condense the inherited legal materials. He condenses and imposes order on the inherited laws of previous emperors, the Codex. He massively condenses the inherited legal literature of the Roman legal scholars, producing the digest, which boils down

that literature by 95%. And he introduces a new textbook for the law, map of the new law, his institute. And as you say, this will form the basis of the legal systems will operate really in Europe until the age of Napoleon and really still underpins a great deal of civil law. It's very important that Roman law, as it is transmitted from antiquity to the Middle Ages, is as it leaves the hands of Justinian's law commissioners. But also bound up with this is a determination to Christianise that law. That Christianisation of the Roman legal culture is a very important aspect which is sometimes overlooked. He also uses this as an opportunity to emphasise his own authority. This is Roman law expressing a single unified vision and will represented as that of being Justinian himself.

It sounds very much from the things that you described earlier that he was genuinely interested in this law, both on the positive and the negative things that he did. Do you think this codification is born of a genuine interest in law, equity, the lot of the people living under this law, or is it about how it can bolster his power and authority? I think it's both. It's very striking is that when he becomes sole, a joint emperor with his uncle in the April of 527, we have this four-month period between him becoming joint emperor with Justin

and then sole emperor upon Justin's death. And when Justinian becomes joint emperor, the rate of legislation on the part of the imperial palace simply explodes. And I think there we see, as it were, Justinian's personal interest in and impetus behind lawmaking. He will then harness the skills of brilliant lawyers such as his chief legal officer Tribonian, but the way in which the pace and tone of legislation really alters as soon as he becomes a power alongside his uncle reveals that core fascination. with lawmaking and the Roman legal inheritance, which characterises Justinian. His other great, consistent interest is theology. And one thing that's really interesting is the way in which even before Justinian is

co-emperor, when he's really just a guards officer whose uncle has become emperor, we see him trying to engage in theological discussion with the papacy in Rome over disputes that are racking the church at that moment in time. and that interest, not just in religious policy, but in Christian doctrine, is something that will characterize Justinian as a man from, as I say, that period before his emperor, all the way through to the period running up to his death in the 560s. It's the one really uniting thread, an obsession with theology, doctrine, and trying to resolve the religious disputes at the heart of imperial society at this moment in time. And this is possibly an odd point in the conversation to ask this question, because we're not at the end yet. But should we think about this law code as Justinian's greatest legacy? As we've mentioned, it's kind of the basis for centuries of law across the entire continent of Europe, really.

He kind of gifts this basis that governs lives for centuries after his own. Yes, I think his greatest contributions will be in the field of law, but also in the field of theology and doctrine. That it's important that Roman law, as it is received in the Middle Ages, is as it leaves the hands of Justinian's law commissioners. Likewise, Christian Orthodoxy, as it will be understood both East and West in the Middle Ages, is as it leaves the hands of Justinian's court theologians under imperial direction. So Pope Gregory the Great, for example, the greatest the early medieval popes at the end of the 6th century and the beginning of the 7th,

is very devoted, very much a proponent of the theological position established by Justinian and his court theologians. And I think the religious legacy and the legal legacies really combine in the context of Justinian's Christianisation of Roman society and his attempt to create a more Christianised state. So I think that vision of a more Christianised state ruled over by a pious monarch determined to extirate what he regards as religious error, heresy and non-conformity will also help lay the psychological as well as the legal and religious foundations, not just for medieval Byzantium, but also the world of Latin Christendom in the centuries ahead much more fundamentally. I think as well Justinian lays the contours of the sort of confessional states,

which will characterize medieval and ultimately early modern Europe and beyond. When does the Justinian plague hit and how bad is it and how bad is it for Justinian that it gets his name? So the Justinianic plague arrives initially in Alexandria and Egypt around the year 541, first striking the port town of Pelusium. It seems to come up the Red Sea. Historians disagree about whether it's come initially from East Africa or from further afield. But what is very important is that this plague, which then rapidly reaches Constantinople and spreads across the empire more generally, is described in a whole range of contemporary sources as it spread. sources stretching from Ireland to Iraq as having had a devastating impact on both urban and rural communities. And it's not a one-hit wonder, this plague that comes to the Mediterranean world and spreads beyond it in the 540s. This will recur repeatedly down to the mid-eighth century.

By the mid-sixth century, it's already reaching parts of rural England. About half an hour's walk away from where I'm sitting at the moment. We have an Anglo-Saxon cemetery where they found victims of the Justinianic plague that seem to date from the 6th century. So our contemporary literary sources describe a plague that has utterly devastating impact, both in cities within the empire and well beyond. And that shouldn't surprise us because we now have firm genetic evidence in the form of ancient DNA from plague victims. And that ancient DNA enables us to establish that the strain of the bubonic plague that caused the Justinianic plague is very similar to that, which we would later associated with the Black Death. And we have no reason to assume that the Justinianic plague

was any less devastating than the later Black Death would be. And we should remind ourselves that really until the development of modern medicine and above all the development of modern antibiotics, bubonic plague was one of the deadliest diseases known to mankind. This is probably the first time this disease impacted on the Mediterranean world as reflected in our written sources. And we can imagine the terror and utter confusion which it is likely to have caused. How does Justinian try to deal with such a novel threat? What is striking, I think, is how carefully targeted and focused the government's response to the plague is once it starts to be able to establish what is happening.

There's a time lag between it striking Pelusium and some of the cities of Egypt and Palestine before it reaches Constantinople. And that gives the imperial authorities time to think and time to plan. Justinian's initial emphasis is on trying to limit and contain the economic and the fiscal impact of the plague. Obviously, in the context of an empire losing lots of its taxpayers, there's a real danger that sources of revenue for the state are going to dry up at a time when Justinians still engaged in extensive and very costly warfare, not just to the West, but also at this point with Persia to the east. So we have legislation introduced to try to impose price and wage control. We see efforts to try to ensure that landowners continue to pay their taxes,

even though many of the peasants working on their estates are dying. Ultimately, tax rates will rise very considerably. But there's also a very important religious response here. In the Justinian interprets the advent of the plague as a sign of divine displeasure and it thus intensifies, to his mind, the urgency of purifying Roman society morally and hence, we see a further crackdown on those groups he regards as morally corrupting. And we also see an attempt to raise the spirits of his subjects religiously, spiritually. For example, an important miracle working icon is sent on a sort of tour of the eastern provinces to try to raise morale.

It intensifies the urgency of his religious policies and also, I think, intensifies the very deep-rooted apocalyptic sensibilities that are an important feature of the time and are very much a feature. in the thinking of the Emperor Justinian himself. I always think it's interesting that when people view some of these things as divine displeasure and divine retribution, they never think that it's for some of the darker things that we've talked about that Justinian does and maybe should stop persecuting people. They always think they need to intensify the moral crusade that they're on. It's never maybe I should stop punishing other Christians who I judge heretics.

It's that I should punish them more. Yes, it's very interesting. One looks at broader cultural responses to the bubonic plague and disease. is from Ireland, eastwards, as it were, there clearly is a sense that many people blame their rulers for divine displeasure. And the contemporary historian Procopius regards Justinian to be a sort of demonic figure in certain respects who is helping to draw down wrath and misfortunes on mankind. And I think Justinian's own propaganda is in many ways responding to those sorts of accusations. There is clearly a lot of anti-regime propaganda and literature in circulation which Justinian is having

to respond to. I think this is a very interesting feature of the period, that actually a lot of these issues are being thrashed out and debated in public and the emperor feels a need to respond to some pretty stinging rebukes being issued at him by members of political society. And some of this feels incredibly current as well sometimes, doesn't it? The plague comes roughly in the middle of Justinian's rule. Do we see it changing his rule at all? Obviously, as you mentioned, it's not like a one-off brief flash in the pan, but does his reaction to the plague change his rule other than intensifying his need for religious reform, does it change him as a person as a ruler? He himself contracts the plague and survives it. And there is a moment after the initial wave

of crisis-driven measures we see in response to the plague, one gets the sense of a regime that has almost been knocked off kilter. Legislation suddenly diminishes quite rapidly. He loses his chief legal officer at this time, who possibly dies of the plague. And I think the sense of losing balance on the part of the regime is that intensified in the late 540s by the Empress Theodora herself. And there is a moment when Justinian's commanders in the West are clearly worried that post-round-one of the plague, and then after the death of Theodora, the Justinian is losing interest in some of his military ventures. I think it primarily has the effect, however, of increasingly focusing his mind on these religious aspects. I think his

commitment to finding a resolution to the theological disputes within the empire. and his sense of the urgency of the need to regain divine favour through moral and religious reform are really honed and sharpened by the experience of the plague. And Justinian comes across as someone who is interested in, perhaps preoccupied with identity, so his national identity, where he originally came from, individual identity, the rule of himself and Theodora, in a way that feels quite relatable today, but is normally at odds with what we think of as medieval ideals of not particularly, particularly pursuing that individualism. What do you think drove his fascination there?

I think here his policy agenda and his own mindset are informed by political disputes and debates that are very lively in Constantinople at that time when he is forging his career and his family is rising to power. This is a period where by virtue of divisions within the church, by virtue of the loss of direct Roman control over old heartlands of the Empire, such as Rome and Italy, where issues of culture and identity are very much at the forefront of contemporary political struggles, where people are really debating what it means to be Roman when core territories of the empire have been lost, where people are really debating the relationship between Roman identity and Christian faith, and are really debating the role and place of non-Christian,

in a Roman society that is now officially Christian and where emperors are determined to press ahead with a Christianising agenda. And all these issues are, I think, informing the politics are being fought out of the court, the politics that are being fought out on the ground often in the imperial capital and dominating the mind of Justinian during a great deal of his reign. And I guess just to finish on, Justinian, he lives through a pandemic at a time of a changing climate with lots of religious upheaval, wars, developing ideas of identity. As you were writing a biography of him, what do you think his story can offer to a modern audience?

One thing that most struck me was we often assume that we can't really write biographies of ancient figures or medieval figures often. And of course we can't write modern-style biographies, but one thing I was really struck by as a historian in terms of the historian's craft was actually how much of Justinian's personality came through from the sources if one read those sources together, and often if one read them in a strictly chronological way, reading his laws chronologically alongside the theological statements chronologically and so on. His sense of his sort of obsession with detail, his romantic streak, his workaholic characteristics, his constant impatience, his fascination with the divine, his keen sense of providential mission,

his prickly character, all these things really come together to a much of the moment. greater extent than I expected. So in terms of the historian's craft, I think I learned a great deal from this project. But then I think more generally what we sort of learn or perhaps are reminded of by reconsidering this reign is I think in a sense as Justinian and those around him confront climate change, plague, sudden unforeseen events, warfare on a massive scale. I think it alerts us to the frailty really and the recognizability of the human condition across the centuries. And also I came away with my mind very much preoccupied by a theme of the contemporary historian Procopius, who dwells ultimately when thinking about Justinian on the devastating

implications on mankind as a whole of the overwhelming ambitions and self-belief of the mighty. I was writing the last sections of the book at a time when the Russian invasion of Ukraine was underway. And one thing that Justinian and Vladimir Putin have in common is this this sense of extraordinary, overriding moral purpose or ideological purpose, which they think can justify almost any amounts of bloodshed. That's a very much of a Putin approach, and it's very much a Justinianic approach. And I think that alerts one of the extent to which Justinian really is in many ways the archetype of the modern autocrat. What he doesn't have are, of course, the coercive machinery and communication systems that facilitate modern autocracy. But there are recognisable

types there in terms of power politics and the sense of extraordinary providential mission of many of those who rule over human societies and the considerable cruelty that sense of providential mission can then inform. Fascinating. What would you say is either the most interesting or the most impressive aspects of Justinian's life and career? I think the most interesting aspect is the way in which his career confounds and challenges many of our assumptions about how ancient and medieval societies and empires work. In particular, Justinian has a very joined-up view of how this empire operates, of how fiscal resources from the fringes of Egypt can inform the defences of the troubled Balkans and so on. He has a much more ambitious sense of how law can really be used to

reframe and reshape society on the ground in this early medieval world than we normally assume rulers have. We often assume that law is simply of symbolic significance in ancient and medieval societies and that statements of imperial power are largely rhetorical. Often that may be the case, but that wasn't true in Justinian's mind, and that wasn't the way much Justinian tried to run this empire. He changes how we need to think about how imperial and royal power often works in pre-industrial societies. which can be much more modern than we sometimes suppose. Thank you so much, Peter, for joining us. It's been absolutely fascinating.

I genuinely feel like I could talk to you all day about Justinian. It's been absolutely wonderful to hear you explain more about him and his rule. Thank you. It's been great fun. Thanks for having me here. Thank you very much. If you'd like to find out more about the incredible Emperor Justinian, then Peter's superb new biography, Justinian, is available now. Grab yourself a copy and dive in. There are new episodes of Gone Medieval every Tuesday and Friday,

so please join us next time. for more from the greatest millennium in human history. Don't forget to also subscribe or follow us wherever you get your podcast from and to tell all of your friends and family that you've gone medieval. If you get a moment, please do drop us a review or rate us anywhere that you listen to podcasts.

It really does help new listeners to find us. Anyway, I'd better let you go. I've been Matt Lewis, and we've just gone medieval with history hits.