Justiniano: Emperador, soldado, santo

by Peter Sarris, Pablo José Hermida Lazcano (translator), Raquel Marqués García (translator)

Lahistoriadefinitiva delemperadorromano quesentó las bases de lamodernidad.

*Galardonada con elLondonHellenicPrize*

«Sarris ha escrito la gran biografía del más grande de los emperadoresbizantinos, con una erudición sin esfuerzo, una escritura lúcida y una mirada aguda para los detalles reveladores».
Rory Stewart

Esta extraordinaria biografía nos ofrece una visión profunda de la Antigüedad tardía y de Justiniano, un hombre que, desde los comienzos más humildes, llegó a gobernar gran parte del mundo conocido y alcanzó una consideración casi divina. Un emperador que infundía un significado espiritual incluso a las tareas más mundanas. Un administrador excelente y obsesionado con los detalles. Un hombre, ya en la mediana edad, capaz de cambiar la ley para poder casarse con una bailarina de la que se enamoró, y que gobernó acompañado de la emperatriz Teodora durante más de veinte años. Un brillante estratega militar que nunca estuvo en primera línea.

Se enfrentó a retos como el cambio climático, las luchas culturales e identitarias o la primera pandemia mundial de la que se tiene constancia, y muchas de las soluciones que encontró siguen teniendo sentido en la actualidad. Su legado nos rodea y está patente en el mundo de hoy, desde un sinfín de monumentos entre los que cabe destacar la hermosa Santa Sofía, hasta nuestro sistema jurídico, a través de la codificación del Corpus Iuris Civilis, pasando por su contribución a la cultura, a la cristiandad y al islam. En esta obra maestra, Sarris nos muestra que, con toda su complejidad y contradicciones, Justiniano fue, en muchos sentidos, un emperador sorprendentemente moderno.

La crítica ha

«Un relato majestuoso y chispeante de uno de los gobernantes más importantes de la historia... esto es historia moderna escrita en su máxima expresión».

Peter Frankopan

«Soberbio y apasionante. Una biografía histórica épica que da vida al emperador... llena de nuevas ideas y revelaciones».

Simon Sebag Montefiore

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, Ancient History, Medieval, Religion, European History

593 pages, Kindle Edition

Published September 26, 2024

Reviews

[Tony · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is an excellent chronicle of Byzantium in Justinian's time.  However, I would not call it a true biography.  Sarris's focus is almost entirely on the empire's official acts and other major events of the period (bubonic plague, Nika revolt, etc.); he almost never discusses Justinian, the man.  Further, even when it comes to the empire's accomplishments, one does not get a sense of how much Justinian--as opposed to his selected deputy--was responsible for a given achievement.  For instance, how much was Justinian--as opposed to Tribonian--involved in the legal reforms?  How much was military policy guided by Justinian as opposed to Belisarius?  I learned a lot from this volume.  But, just as a work about a company is not a biography of its longtime CEO, this is not really a biography of Justinian. 

[Julian Worker · Rating 4 out of 5]

Justinian I, also known as Justinian the Great, was Byzantine Roman emperor from 527 to 565, the third-longest serving after Augustus and Theodosius II.

If you asked most people about Justinian, they'd probably indicate he had a plague named after him and that he married an ex-prostitute called Theodora.

While these facts are true, there's far more to him than that.

At the time of the Nika Riots in 532, Justinian's plight was so severe that he contemplated leaving Constantinople, but Theodora persuaded him to stay and fight his foes. He took her advice, as he often appears to have done, and rectified matters with the help of his retainers.

With the considerable help of the general Belisarius, Justinian restored direct Roman rule over much of the Mediterranean and increased Roman interests in The Caucasus. He codified Roman Law and overhauled the structures of government.

He rebuilt the heart of Constantinople including Haghia Sofia and the Basilica Cistern. He managed to see off natural disasters such as a fall in global temperatures due to volcanic activity that almost certainly caused the Great Plague to start. He caught the plague but survived. He also survived many assassination attempts.

Although Justinian humiliated Pope Vigilius and forced his theological will on Italy and Africa, it could also be said that Justinian made the Papacy important in Medieval times simply by making the Pope the main point of contact, replacing the Roman senate, between the city of Rome and the imperial authorities.

[Chris · Rating 3 out of 5]

Here is a complete and detailed biography of the controversial Roman emperor. Peter Sarris is an undisputed expert on Justinian and his Age, and a good writer. No quibble there.

But be aware: Sarris is a fanboy of the emperor in accepting his conservative crackdowns on non-Christians, non-believers, sexual "deviants", and other so-called "sinners". The human suffering caused by Justinian's beliefs and laws certainly is mentioned but receives a much shorter pro-forma treatment in order to be, or seem, objective.

Justinian has always been extremely polarizing along the religious divide. There is contention also on the value of his re-establishing the Roman empire at the cost of many thousands of lives, which was wastefully lost again only 100 years after his death.

More relevantly to us today, those religious issues and moral values regarding otherwise normal human behavior of which the emperor disapproved, were proscribed in his various legal codices, and became established permanently in European law to cause untold human suffering to this day.

Picking a side in certain hagiographies is expected, but it's unwelcome in modern histories which are usually more neutral. Sarris is certainly aware of this and issues a curious warning in the book's acknowledgements to other historians that they will not approve of the book: "Many of my colleagues will disagree with my analysis. But this book is not written for them. Rather, I present this study to the reading public..."

I admit to being insulted by this positioning. It’s as if I, a member of the public, would not be critical of the book like an academic would, and would simply accept it as received wisdom. What's likely happening is that Sarris wants to paint Justinian as an inestimable boon to European civilization and religion but is wary of progressive criticism. Since modern academia rightly prefers a neutral stance, and one cutting through centuries of religious bias, they likely would object if this were a peer-reviewed work.

I would have rather had a book more respectful of the intelligent "reading public."

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sarris is clearly one of today's pre-eminent authorities on Late Antiquity, and 'Justinian' presents the reader with a competent and well-informed biography.

I have some critiques of it, but first some praise: Sarris has a talent for bringing the reader back to the 6th century (his own personal anecdotes and experiences are sprinkled throughout the book, adding life to the story), but in a way that still feels authentic and respectful of the time. Some of the reviews I have read seem to forget this, criticizing Justinian for things that any Christian Emperor from his era would have done.

Another strength of the book is that it showcases the entirety of the man; too often discussions of Justinian focus on his fleeting military conquests with little regard for his far more lasting and significant religious and legal reforms. This book is holistic though not a hagiography-- again, many critics seem to misconstrue admiration for apologetics.

As for weaknesses of the book, there are a couple. The story tends to meander somewhat chronologically, which to an extent makes sense (for instance there is a chapter all about the Orthodox Church, or a chapter all about the Bubonic Plague). However, it becomes somewhat jarring when the author jumps around too much, and characters who were dead previously are suddenly alive again.

This leads to my other criticism: I would have liked to see more examination of Justinian the man, alongside Justinian the Emperor. To this end, the subtitle of the book seems a bit inappropriate, very little attention is paid to his feelings or personality (beyond his extremely loving devotion to his wife Theodora). Admittedly, this may be due to a dearth of source material and a reluctance on Sarris' part to speculate, but that should have been made more clear.

Overall, it is an excellent work of history: not only for a great man but also for the last true golden age of Roman history.

[Kaye · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic book. There's a lot of scholarship on the Age of Justinian, but they mostly tend to focus on the political and military events. This book only dedicates roughly two chapters to the Vandalic and Gothic war; instead, the focus here is on the social, cultural and economic dimensions. As the conclusion will tell, Justinian can be judged differently if you look beyond his renovatio imperii. There is so much more to the man himself, who despite all sources we have from his reign, remained a kind of enigmatic individual.

The setup is a mix between chronological and thematic. Justinian's reign is covered in four phases.

Part I introduces the reader to the world Justinian inherited from his uncle Justin I. It gives an overview of that state of the empire, and how it differs from the previous periods. It stresses the importance of the Christological debate, which will continue to play a key role in Justinian's reign. Furthermore, it gives us insight about the palace politics and how Justin could ascend as emperor, (despite being of humble background) to pave the way for his nephew.

Part II covers Justinian's early reign. Although it's common knowledge that Justinian is the mastermind behind the Corpus Juris Civilis, there's more to it. When you look at the way he oversaw its production (somewhat impatiently) and his rhetoric upon its first completion, you get a better idea what kind of ambitious man he was. That confidence is briefly shaken by the Nika riots, which can be viewed as a catastrophe triggered by social unrest, his rigorous tax policy and an opportunity seized by his political opponents. The emperor was sure to be a bit more cautious in the future. Despite that caution, his building projects basically reinvented the monumental landscape of Constantinople.

In Part III, we will see that Justinian wasn't even close to being idle while his armies fought in the west. Even before his wars of reconquest, Justinian showed himself to be extremely shrewd, with a penchant for meddling with foreign affairs and seizing any opportunity that arose ruthlessly. Simultaneously, Justinian was constantly concerned with his domestic policies, rooting out corruption and ensuring the loyalty of the provincial governments. Besides high politics, the emperor remained accessible to his subjects for petitioning (even though his new legislation was partially aimed at reducing these petitions, as people flocked to Constantinople). A curious case described by the Oxyrynchus papyri show Justinian's government in action.

'The Great Unravelling' is a fitting name for Part IV. The natural disaster of 536 made temperatures drop and left the people vulnerable and undernourished. The arrival of the Plague is covered extensively, and can't be underestimated as a factor for Justinian's later reign. The disasters combined had a profound demographic impact (less tax revenue, decimated armies etc.) on the empires resources and strategy. The concerned emperor tried to cope with these disasters both religiously and practically. After the death of his beloved Theodora, we see that Justinian turned more inward, and that the fading presence of the energetic emperor also tied in with political turmoil and intrigue.

When looking at the imperial legacy, despite all grand self-promotion, the memory of Justinian faded rather quickly; it was his monumental legacy that would be remembered.

What I especially liked about this book is the balance between thematic approaches. Sarris brilliantly uses a wide range of sources that sketch a more comprehensive profile of Justinian: who knew that the emperor's voice could be heard through his legislation itself? (breaking from the practice of hyperfocusing on Procopius’ writings) Furthermore, the portrayal of the emperor by other authors also give more away about his personally, when read against the grain. Justinian indeed was a deeply religious man, whose philosophy and worldview shaped his actions as a ruler, but he also was a mortal concerned with worldly affairs. In the late antiquity paradigm, it is a masterful mix between a ‘secular’ history with a fundamental religious undertone that characterised the period.

[Tom Wyer · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really vacillated between giving this a 4 or a 5, and would have ducked the question and given it a 4.5 if I could. What sealed it for me is that I devoured this book in just over a week - and so it would be disingenuous of me to pretend at anything other than serious enjoyment.

Justinian is not necessarily perfect: for much of the book, Sarris presents Procopius as an uncomplicated source and omits discussion of the many debates and controversies surrounding this author. Though there is a - quite general - discussion of this theme towards the end of the book, it is too late to alleviate what might be confusion at the multiple apparent inconsistencies in Procopius’ cited positions on the part of those unfamiliar with these debates. This is a fascinating aspect of Late Antique historiography, and I would have liked to have seen more detail on this topic. Further, and based on Sarris’ excellent appearance on William Dalrymple and Anita Anand’s ‘Empire’ podcast (which described the book as, at points, a biography of Theodora - which is certainly not the case), I was hoping to hear much more about the Empress than I was eventually allowed to. There is, of course, an argument that there simply isn’t space to go off on what might be viewed as a tangent in what is already a sizeable tome. Nevertheless, the book does find plenty of time to provide detail on Justin I (knowledge of which is logically prior to any understanding of Justinian - but who is certainly no more contextually necessary to the story than Theodora) - and Sarris’ assertion that “If we can speak of an ‘Age of Justinian’ then it was her ‘Age’ too” amounts to a recognition that this wouldn’t really be a tangent at all, which jarred with me in circumstances where there was such an obvious mismatch in treatment. Throughout, Theodora appears more like a shadow than a core character. To me, that seems a missed opportunity.

Indeed, the book’s relatively narrow interpretation of its brief is a wider quibble: unlike Empires of Faith, Sarris’ latest book is much more targeted in scope. This can by and large be ascribed to the fact that the biographical medium exchanges a high level of readability for a series of formal limitations such as this, but is harder to reconcile on those few occasions when Sarris tends towards the typical foible of Byzantinists by diving into multi-page digressions on the minute details of specific ecclesiastical buildings (any reader of Byzantine history tends to find that their tolerance for the word ‘narthex’ diminishes exponentially with each use). By and large, though, Sarris sidesteps this pitfall: his treatment of the Christological dispute is magnificent insofar as it dramatises and maintains interest in a topic that really is interminable.

Furthermore - this approach comes with a host of benefits. In allowing himself to be led by Procopius, Sarris presents a series of incredibly detailed (and even thrilling) accounts of several key episodes, which - given Procopius’ career - reaches its natural denouement with the campaigns of Belisarius. I can therefore only assume that Sarris took an editorial decision to delay academic discussion of Procopius in favour of narrative force, which I cannot criticise too harshly in circumstances where it clearly pays off. Justinian’s life also provides a natural narrative frame for the book, which therefore proceeds seamlessly from chapter to chapter. This allows an effortless situation of Justinian within his historical, cultural and social context, and in turn opens up the possibility of a far more thoughtful (and detailed) interrogation of the book’s subject than was possible in Empires of Faith. Perhaps because of that: Justinian is tremendously readable, almost to the point of fiction. Sarris therefore balances a book which offers much for more specialised readers with a mode of exposition that remains perfectly accessible to a popular audience coming to this area for the first time. That it does so whilst avoiding both banalities and obscurities is to its credit.

Ultimately, there is little more that can be asked of a historian. It would be churlish of me to give this anything less than 5 stars, and I recommend it to both newcomers and old hands alike.

[Simon Mee · Rating 4 out of 5]

As I am not well-versed in this era (or any era), my review of Justinian relies heavily on how this book relates to others I have read, particularly Rome Resurgent by Peter Heather. It slants my opinion in the sense that I tend towards comparisons, so be warned I may not be giving Sarris a proper fair shake. Sarris expressly considers his book different from Heather’s but credits Heather’s as one of the best of its kind in terms of Justinian’s expansionist policies – so my comparisons are not totally without merit.

Heather is focussed how and why wars were fought in the Age of Justinian, whereas Sarris is writing a straight biography. However, the cross-pollination of the two means there are some interesting results. Sarris handles elements of diplomacy, strategy and administration of the conquered territories more soundly than Heather. In contrast Heather is clearer with the creation of the Justinian Code and some of the dynastical manoeuvrings. Overall, it is probably a wash between the authors and their respective strengths cohere to their stated goals. It is just amusing to see unintended subversions of expectations.

The main structural difference is specificity, or more the types of specificity. Heather describes in detail the patronage system underpinning the financial system of the Eastern Roman Empire, and how it generally functioned since the Third Century Crisis to put armies in the field (apparently there was not too much else to spend on). Sarris agrees with the purpose, but explores specific experiences, such as a village in Egypt petitioning the Emperor to avoid rapacious regional collectors. Sarris also provides the backgrounds and actions of specific individuals within the empire, such as the maligned praetorian prefect John the Cappadocian.

I am not trying to set this up as Great Man vs Historical Determinism. Neither author does that deliberately or otherwise and my summary is an oversimplification. My point is that Sarris provides more granularity to the overview of Justinian’s empire both with his stories and use of sources, which is something I can find useful for understanding the mechanics in action.

One thing Sarris’ narrative gets across is that life in the Sixth century really really sucked. Aside from health measures that hardly even rise to the term “lacksadaiscal” and the mafia like situations with tax collection and administration, the state did an incredibly poor job at preventing regular incursions from enemy forces, even at the height of the Age of Justinian. It really was a weak body, hardly even able to chase down firebrand priests who fled to Alexandria. Sarris does get across how tenuous things could be, even when put up against Justinian’s successes such as stealing silk eggs from China.

Sarris is straight out better (ironically) at describing the deterministic events of a 6th century global cooling and Justinian’s plague. I am not sifting through archaeological sites or have a JSTOR subscription. Nor have I read the original texts, and certainly not in their original Greek or Latin. However, Sarris explains how the effects of climate change and disease were major drags on the later part of Justinian’s reign in a way that seems coherent to the story. Sarris is also more in line with the conventional narratives, so it makes me more comfortable that Heather dodged that point in his book.

As to whether Justinian could be consider a panegyric, I am inclined to look at the results. Internal security does not seem to be common for any polity during this period, and the borders of the Eastern Roman Empire did greatly expand. Sarris is inclined towards the contingencies of history as to whether there was an overstretch which, depending how you feel about external impacts, seems fair. The memorability of the Code of Justinian also seems a point in crediting its promulgator. Sarris mentions many rebellions, religious disputes and cries of injustice as well. Perhaps he sees Justinian as too brilliantly minded, but even then I am inclined to point back to his successes, sometimes “scoreboard” is a fair retort.

I do feel that Heather did a better job of explaining causal effects overall than Sarris and is the more enlivening writer. Despite this, I would recommend Sarris as the first port of call as he gives a good grounding in the era before you expand to particular elements.

[Boudewijn · Rating 4 out of 5]

Was he truly the saint and benefactor that his contemporaries attributed to him or was he an intolerant dictator, as described by Procopius, a prominent Byzantine historian writing about Justinian's reign and offering a critical perspective?

Peter Sarris tries to answer just that question and manages to paint a nuanced picture of Justinian. Perhaps other books might have focussed on his various wars but Sarris does not neglect Justinian's religious agenda, and his handling of the ongoing conflicts within Christianity is at least equally important.

Justinian tried to unify the Christian faith under his rule, often intervening in theological disputes. He shows how Justinian, from a personal perspective, was deeply religious and did not hesitate to prosecute heathens, still a sizeable faction in that time period. While at the same time trying to keep the people happy but not hesitating to recruit the various hooligan factions for his gain. And as he wasn't yet busy enough, setting up the Codex Civilis, a set of laws which formed the basis for European law for a long time.

All in all an interesting story about a complex emperor which I really enjoyed. It give me some great insights in the social dynamics of the Eastern Roman Empire which were very illuminating.

[Sherif Gerges · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of my favorite books I've read all year! Sarris has crafted a richly detailed yet accessible chronological account where the Emperor's personality truly comes to life. This is a largely favorable account of him, although not hagiographical or dismissive of his faults, but does an excellent job of painting a portrait in somewhat positive a light, as it were.

Justinian is portrayed as a workaholic imbued with unfettered ambition, conniving, indomitable character and a sense of providential importance in light of Christian tradition. He is co-ruler with Theodora, his wife to whom he is much devoted. His reign is unquestionably remembered for his many successes, chief among them the construction of the Hagia Sophia—a marvel of engineering that still stands today, and which Harris discusses in great detail. Additionally, Sarris' exploration of Justinian's legislation is both illuminating and impressive, highlighting the significance of the 'Corpus Juris,' one of the most influential collections of secular legal materials in history that laid the groundwork for modern legal systems.

However, he does have failures. The loss of Antioch and the devastation wrought by Yersinia pestis foreshadowed the empire's turbulent future. Sarris delves into these calamities with great depth, providing a thorough - though never boring - analysis. Also, Sarris' dissects the eschatological debates that Justinian endeavored to resolve. Despite his ultimate failure, the discussions of Justinians attempt to reconcile Christological fissures is very well-presented, and one of the best breakdowns I have read on the subject hitherto.

In both Western and Middle Eastern history, Byzantium looms large, and it’s hard to imagine a figure more credited with its edification, for better or worse, than Justinian. While I previously held a somewhat negative view of Justinian's reign, mainly due to his contemptible zealotry—foibles typical of the period—this book has shifted my perspective. The personality of Justinian, with all its eccentricities, faults and complexities is brought into new light.

Altogether, Sarris has written a book that many will discuss over years to come, and it will be up to academic historians to debate the finer details included therein. Above all, his seamless integration of Justinian's triumphs and tribulations paints a holistic portrait of an emperor whose legacy is as complex as it is monumental.

[Jacob Stelling · Rating 4 out of 5]

A really interesting and accessible history of a Roman emperor I was first introduced to in my first university seminar, although that’s where my familiarity with Justinian ended!

Sarris’ book is perfect for those like me who want to learn more about one of Rome’s longest-serving emperors, by combining academic and popular history in a well-structured and engaging format.

The author clearly seeks to re-focus the study of Justinian on theological and administrative matters, whilst still giving ample attention to military issues. I’ll admit to getting slightly lost and bogged down in the intricacies of the Council of Chalcedon and also expected more focus on Theodora, given the allusions to her ‘co-rule’ with Justinian.

Despite these minor struggles, I really enjoyed this book and would highly recommend!

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent biography of the Roman emperor and lawgiver. The author /described the religious controversies well, but the disputes were over very precise issue that I could not remember, other than the "Chalcedonian" view prevailed in the Catholic/Orthodox church. The book included a nice chapter at the end discussing the influence and afterlife of Justinian's reign.

PS - I listened to the audiobook. The narrator uses British pronunciation for place names and persons which can be jarring to those taught the classical or Erasmian pronunciation.

[然然 · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dobra kompilacja materiałów, ale naprawdę zaskakuje mnie że po napisaniu tego wszystkiego autor ostatecznie ocenia typa generalnie pozytywnie. Okej chcesz mu zwalić konia NAPRAWDĘ WIDZIMY!! JUŻ NIE POTRZEBA DŁUŻSZEJ KONKLUZJI

[/Fitbrah/ · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great I love how much of the book is devoted to trying to explain why Procopius wrote what he wrote as opposed to just taking him at face value. I love how he'd occasionally draw parallels between Justinian and dictators like Stalin.

I just wish it had spent more time talking about the various wars during his reign. Especially the eastern conflicts could have used their own chapter dedicated to them.

Basically I just wish the book was longer.

[Jose · Rating 3 out of 5]

Biografía sobre uno de los más conocidos emperadores del imperio romano de oriente. En este libro veremos cómo desde unos inicios muy humildes Justiniano se irá habiendo paso hasta lograr obtener la púrpura imperial. El libro se centra en gran medida en sus reformas tanto judicial, como religiosa y administrativa. Además veremos relatados algunos de los hechos más característicos de su reinado como pueden ser los disturbios de Nika, la construcción de Santa Sofía o la polémica relación con Teodora.

El libro está escrito como un ensayo histórico y aunque se nota que el autor domina el tema, a veces se vuelve un poco soporífero cuando nos habla de todas sus reformas legales o de la problemática religiosa. Por otra parte, las conquistas de las provincias occidentales para mí gusto están poco representadas, puesto que solo tenemos dos capítulos dedicando uno a la conquista de África y otro a la de Italia. Nada sobre las acciones sobre las islas del Mediterraneo o la toma del litoral de Hispania. Además, la figura del general Belisario, aunque presente también me parece poco representada dada la importancia de este personaje en el dominado de Justiniano. Y por último, tampoco nos explica muy bien que fue del imperio después de la muerte del emperador, si bien los primeros capítulos se remontan al gobierno de Constantino y fundación de Constantinopla como marco inicial para enlazar con el reinado de Justiniano, esperaba algo similar al final de su reinado.

El libro está bien no aporta grandes innovaciones pero refresca los conceptos, lo que nunca está de más. El libro, en mi opinión, es disfrutable siempre que seas un apasionado del periodo, pero por ser muy técnico y extenso en ciertos apartados y (en mi opinión escueto en otros) hace que no sea un libro introductorio, sino más bien para aquellos que lleven cierto recorrido sobre el tema de bizancio. Como conclusión decir que si eres aficionado del tema es recomendable, sino sería mejor alguna cosa más introductoria, como Constantinopla del maestro Asimov.

[Andrés CM · Rating 4 out of 5]

Esta obra se distingue por su ambición de ir más allá de los relatos tradicionales centrados en las conquistas militares del emperador, ofreciendo una visión profunda y matizada de su vida, su reinado y su legado desde una perspectiva social, económica y cultural. Sarris adopta un enfoque ampliamente cronológico, aunque no teme avanzar o retroceder en el tiempo según lo requiera el tema. Los hitos del reinado están narrados con agilidad y atención al detalle, pero también presta atención a temas que a veces se pierden entre los grandes acontecimientos: aquí es donde el libro brilla más.
RESEÑA COMPLETA: https://atrapadaenunashojasdepapel.bl...

[Lizzy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I’ll be honest, this book made me realise I just wasn’t that interested in Justinian as a person. Theodora his Empress who started life as an enslaved sex worker sounds like a much more interesting character.

A lot of the book covers dry legislation and military campaigns. I’d be far more interested in more detail on the bubonic plague that ran amok through Europe and Asia at the time. One eyewitness claimed to have seen entire ships run aground as all the crew had died.

[Ted Prezelski · Rating 5 out of 5]

So many histories of that era are dense, but this is quite readable. He manages to keep things easy to follow even when the politics of the period get quite complicated.

[Carlos · Rating 5 out of 5]

Muy completo y minucioso, amén de entretenido y accesible

[Ben M · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very strong on military, legal, administrative aspects - showed a weaker understanding of the beliefs of the early Church, which were critical to many of the characters and events of the emperor’s reign.

[Jado · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoyed how Sarris gave insight into both perspectives on Justinian's rule. Procopius really had the switch up of the century on Justinian with his 'Secret History'. Also Belisarius was the goat and deserved so much better

[Harrison · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really engaging and accessible account.

[Joe Kraus · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’m going through a period of reading some of these popular histories by scholars who’ve already had distinguished careers, and this one will keep me going.

I’m in no position to judge the scholarship, but it feels like Sarris is on top of it. In any case, he writes with a comforting authority. He has a way of summarizing contentious material and making you feel like you’ve been part of working through the different positions and come out with clarity.

Most impressively, he does the best job I’ve ever seen of narrating how the center of imperial power shifted from Rome to Constantinople/Byzantium. I can’t do his narrative justice – it’s succinct, compelling, and informative – but he argues that the rise of the Persian empire meant that the Roman empire had to defend different fronts. Constantine had already created a kind of bifurcated empire – often with two Caesars each with a designated successor – but that was almost two centuries earlier. By the time of Justinian, various Vandals, Huns, Alans, and Goths had claimed traditional areas of Roman control, and Rome itself had been sacked. It simply wasn’t as significant a city as it had been, and its decline meant Byzantium’s rise.

Justinian began, in effect as a commoner. His Uncle, Justin, paved the way by leaving their small town and rising in the ranks of the army. When the previous Caesar died without a clear heir, Justin emerged as a compromise candidate – appealing in part because he was of an advanced enough age that he couldn’t have a long reign. When Justin died, though, his nephew succeeded him as a young man, a young man and a commoner which is a rare combination.

As Sarris tells it, Justinian felt that a crucial challenge to the empire was its tolerance. (That’s not something I associate with Rome, but there you have it.) He determined that he would impose a regularity of religion as a way of creating a more coherent culture. As part of that, he cracked down on those who practiced Arian Christianity, and, predictably, he began persecuting us Jews.

It followed that he inaugurated a massive building campaign, highlighted by the Hagia Sofia as the largest indoor space of the world, and he set the pattern for Byzantine architecture that would continue for almost a millennium.

From that reconstituted strength, he sent armies back to the Italian peninsula, briefly reconquering the area and restoring the empire to its traditional dimensions. In that way, he can make a claim as the last emperor to control the East – at least until Charlemagne established the Holy Roman Empire (about which, I have heard it said, it was none of the three).

I knew some of this part of the story, so I was glad to get a different perspective on the career of his great general, Belisarius. From a Wikipedia perspective, he seems like one of the great military minds, the last imperial warlord to dominate Italy.

Sarris doesn’t undercut that claim, but he balances it with the (new to me) Secret History of Procopius, an advisor and eventual historian who wrote the major accounts of the era. In his best-known work, Procopius praises Belisarius and Justinian. In a later account, written probably in exile, he mocks not just Belisarius but even Justinian and his beloved queen Theodora. I’m not sure if this is the origin of the term “secret history,” but it’s a fun text, one that Sarris quotes with real skill. I’m tempted to read it, but I doubt I’d know enough to enjoy it the way Sarris makes possible.

Sarris even manages to wrap all of this up in a way that still feels compelling. As Justinian aged, he dealt with staggering debts, his physical (and perhaps mental) decline, and a host of would-be successors. Having lost Theodora long before, he managed still to keep his status.

Justinian’s legacy includes a consolidated Byzantine Empire, one that played a clear transition between the Roman form of conquer-and-then-accommodate governance and the absolute monarchies of Europe’s Middle Ages. He did that as a man with a lot of contradictions – as Sarris shows him to us – someone who was vain and self-aggrandizing at the same time as he wrestled with the serious philosophy and theology of his age, shaping it for centuries to follow.

I am not an authority on Justinian, I know that. But, after reading this so-well-done book, I feel a little bit like one.

[George Rolls · Rating 4 out of 5]

"To some of his enemies he was a demon; to some of his admirers he was a saint. But whether they viewed him as a holy emperor or a demon king, his contemporaries understood that Justinian was a ruler of remarkable vision and drive. "

Justinian is perhaps a lesser known figure today. His name would almost never crop up when asking a random person to name a Roman emperor. I doubt it would come up in the first ten emperors the average person would name (if indeed the average person could name as many as ten Roman emperors).

Yet Justinian was a monumental figure, and deserves to be counted among the most significant rulers of the medieval world. For all his faults, Justinian was more than just a monarch, he was a trend-setter, an ever-diligent administrator and a domineering force on the development of Christianity and European law.

He was, as Peter Sarris points out in his book, a sleepless emperor, never doing anything by half measures to achieve some great successes and some (in my view) lasting failures. Clearly a workaholic, he was devoted to his wife and devoutly Orthodox. The way he had his eye on every detail led Sarris to give the modern comparison of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin. I found this rather intriguing.

I knew Justinian’s story from listening to the History of Byzantium podcast (my favourite podcast by the way), but I had never read a book about Justinian. Contrary to titles he is sometimes given (Justinian the Great, St. Justinian), I had considered his faults to outweigh his positive traits.

He may have reconquered half the Western Roman Empire, but in doing so he left Italy a war-torn wasteland ravaged by famine that would be mostly reconquered as soon as he died. He may have reformed the legal code, but he was at times a brutal tyrant who killed thousands of his own subjects during the Nika riots.

Sarris’s book takes a more charitable view of Justinian, although he does admit the paradoxes of an emperor who improved the legal rights of women and seemed genuinely keen on reducing corruption, but who clamped down viciously on religious divergence. The book consciously does not get bogged down with Justinian’s wars, but rather spends much of its page time on the aspects of his reign which actually have had a lasting impact.

These are in religion and in law. Justinianic law was the basis of European civil law right up until it was reformed by Napoleon and his upheaval of the Roman legal system was so complete that we don’t have a full picture of what Roman law looked like before Justinian.

Sarris has not convinced me that Justinian was a good ruler (nor I do really think he is necessarily saying that he was). But he makes a great case for the significance of Justinian, and the fascination which it is easy to have for the emperor.

There is a debate among historians about how much impact individual figures actually have on historical events, and whether you can better attribute events to social and environmental forces. With the Emperor Justinian, Sarris puts the point across that without Justinian ours may be a very different world.

Sarris is an expert in the subject, so I can wholeheartedly recommend this book as a great place to start if you want to learn more about Justinian. But I say that with a pinch of salt that you may not get the fullest critical eye.

I still feel that the actions he took during the Nika riots borders on the unforgivable, but Sarris makes a good case that Justinian was put between a rock and hard place by his political enemies who had fomented public opinion against him. I certainly felt slightly more empathy to Justinian’s position after reading this book.

However, the realm that Justinian ruled would be reduced to a rump within a century of his death, and while you cannot put the blame on him entirely, you have to ask the question of whether he acted prudently draining the Roman treasury for his wars.

I can’t quite believe I’ve reached the end of the review without mentioning the Hagia Sophia, Justinian’s great church in Constantinople (now a mosque) which is perhaps his most visible legacy. Now, I have so you can’t be mad at me. How about another quote to finish?

"Imperial Majesty should not only be graced with arms, but also armed with laws, so that good government may prevail in time of war and peace alike." - Justinian I, Emperor of the Romans c.533.

[Karl · Rating 4 out of 5]

Comprehensive biography of the emperor Justinian and his court. The reign of Justinian may be seen as a historical turning point, where the East Roman Empire of late antiquity can be demarcated from the Byzantine Empire of the very early Middle Ages. In truth, this transition was slow and irrelevant to the Empire’s inhabitants, who always called themselves “Romans”. However, the religious disputes, labyrinthine court politics, and complex diplomacy of Justinian’s era foreshadows the evolution of Byzantium over the next 900 years.

Peter Sarris does an expert job of chronicling the history of the late Roman world (the Empire proper and those areas still under its influence), as well as the personalities of Justinian, his empress Theodora, generals Narses and Belisarius, and the historian Procopius, among others. There is a lot of detail on the religious disputes that dominated the era, especially the debate between Chalcedonian and anti-Chalcedonian Christians, a dispute as arcane as it was intractable. The legal reforms that led to the compilation known as the Justinian Code occupies a large part of the narrative, as does Justinian’s military forays into the west and his diplomatic maneuverings with Persia and the Gothic kingdoms. Sarris also delves into the architectural history of the Hagia Sophia. Finally, Sarris deals with the greatest challenge in the historiography of Justinian: the historian Procopius, who is our major source. Procopius may have hated Justinian but he absolutely loathed Theodora. Sarris tries to tease out of Procopius’ neutrally phrased “mainstream” histories the subtle critique of the imperial couple, which would be made violently more explicit in The Secret History. That lurid and misogynistic account may have had an undue influence over the reputation of Justinian and Theodora, but Sarris attempts to put that critique into the context of Justinian’s overall record. The end result is a more nuanced portrait of an imperfect leader with genuine accomplishments but who also made many tragic errors. Theodora comes across as the victim of a social system geared towards exploiting women but who, as empress, became a vital advisor to her husband.

[Mick Maurer · Rating 5 out of 5]

‘Justinian Emperor, Soldier, Saint’ (2023) by Peter Sarris is another of the responses to Rod Dreher’s ‘Benedict Option’. Next will be ‘Constantine The Emperor’ a 2nd work I have read for the Constantine Project response to Dreher.
Sarris is Professor of Late Antique, Medieval & Byzantine Studies at Cambridge University. Has held Visiting Fellowships at Rice University, TX, & the Dumbarton Oaks Research Library, Washington DC (Harvard University). Published extensively on the history of the Early Middle Ages both East & West, & is a leading authority on the 'Plague of Justinian' & the 'Age of Justinian' more generally. His key message in the book is ‘that despite the many centuries that separate us from Justinian, this very ancient figure remains our contemporary’.
This book is a product of COVID-19, he has been studying Justinian since the 1990’s. He was 1st pointed to Byzantine history by his schoolmaster. His tutor at Oxford introduced him to Justinian. He committed himself fully to Byzantium, studying the period from the 6th to the 10th centuries. For his doctorate he focused on the Age of Justinian. This book is meant for the general reader.
The 4th Main Part ‘The Great Unravelling’ is dominated with what is known as the Justinian plague. But leading up to the plague he gives an account of the climate change since the 530s & the subsequent famine. He rightly casts doubt on the descriptions of the plague by Procopius & John of Ephesus. Current research questions the earlier analysis of the mortality & social effects of the plague as being exaggerated by these texts. The nontextual evidence suggests plague did not play a significant role in the transformation of the Mediterranean world or Europe. Reading Sarris I have gone deeper to expand my own knowledge on this plague.
Paleogenetics research demonstrates that premodern pandemics were cause by the same pathogen that causes the plague today. The Yersinia pestis identified in 1894. A double classification, contemporary plague, Black Death, & Justinianic Plague. It is simultaneously transhistorical that applies across all time periods & ahistorical,as late antique plague, medieval plague, & modern plague.

[Llee1000]

This book highlights the reign of Justinian I, delving into his military exploits, legal reforms, and theological conquests. While this book remains fairly high level, it is nonetheless a very comprehensive summary of Justinian's reign, as it begins with a detailed account as to how Justinian came to rule, as well as the greater context of world Justinian found himself in when he first ascended the throne. After dissecting different areas piece by piece, it concludes by shifting the scope to the broader impacts of Justinian's rule and how his various percolated throughout the centuries to come.

As someone with a burgeoning, but still rudimentary, interest in the early Byzantine era of human history, being able to read this book, which provides an excellent and comprehensive summary of one its great rulers helped me to better understand the context of this time period and the people within it. Seeing Justinian as a ruler and as a human truly helped me to better understand who he was and why he matters. Through a combination of many different sources, and not simply blinding relying on Procopius, Peter Sarris is able to analyze and synthesize many, sometimes conflicting and biased, accounts of Justinian, and is able to defend his thesis on why Justinian matters in this modern era.

Because of how well-written the accounts of history and the arguments within this book, it makes for a compelling and thought-provoking read, one that aided in better understanding my own interest in this sometimes underappreciated time period. There are always moment present within history, and even when they are overlooked for more prominent eras, the lessons we can take from them are just as poignant and powerful. Justinian, maybe because of his reckless abandon, was like a storm raging through the Mediterranean, ready and willing to exert his sometimes benevolent, sometimes wrathful presence upon his vast subjects. Ultimately, Peter Sarris is able to present the history and his arguments in such a way that kindles that reason to care within the reader, and it is through that I have gained a deeper appreciation for the era that Byzantine during the of Justinian.

[Lisioł Czyta · Rating 5 out of 5]

Listynian
.
Jeśli ktoś ma problem z zrozumieniem skomplikowanych i wielopoziomowych przyczyn podziału Imperium Rzymskiego na jego Zachodnią część oraz Wschodnią, to obszerny wstęp napisany łatwo przyswajalnym językiem autora Peter'a Sarris'a w jego książce "Justynian. Cesarz, żołnierz, święty" śpieszy z pomocą. Lisioł musi tutaj przyznać, że czytało się tą pozycję naprawdę przyjemnie. Dzięki takiemu wstępowi łatwo poczuć klimat tamtych czasów i zrozumieć np. jak ważne były w Konstantynopolu frakcje kibiców drużyn rydwanowych z hipodromu, tak zwane frakcje cyrkowe. Funkcjonowały cztery: Biali, Czerwoni, Błękitni i Zieloni. Tworzyli oni swojego rodzaju mafię! Mieli wpływy polityczne, koneksje, ludzi od brudnej roboty, a w dodatku rozlewali się na całe imperium - bo wszędzie były te same kluby! Wyobraźcie sobie to. Jesteście cesarzem, siedzicie na specjalnej trybunie i Zieloni głośnie krytykują Waszą cesarską mość np. za brzydkie kible publiczne. Gorzej jak się zebrali w kilka klubów to i cesarza mogliby zmienić na lepszy model. Takie to były czasy!
.
Justyn - ojciec Justyniana - wszedł na tron niespodziewanie. Nawet jego samego to zaskoczyło, a na dzień dobry dostał w twarz z pięści (tak, żeby mu się lepiej rządziło). Wejście na tron Justyniana było już lepiej przygotowane i trzeba przyznać, że ten Cesarz zaskakuje swoim innowacyjnym podejściem do problemów militarnych imperium. W dodatku politykę oparł o religię i co niesamowite, to się sprawdziło! Imperium za jego czasów dobrze prosperowało, a nawet umacniało oraz poszerzało swoje strefy wpływów. Justynian głęboko wierzył w to co robił. Jako człowiek bardzo religijny, był też zaskakująco romantyczny. Tak! To ten cesarz wziął sobie za żonę kobietę lekkich obyczajów czyli Teodorę. Aby taki mezalians był w ogóle możliwy, zmieniono prawo w całym Cesarstwie. To się nazywa prawdziwa miłość! Co ciekawe, Teodora poświęciła sporo energii na pomoc kobietom w takiej samej sytuacji życiowej, dzięki czemu wprowadzono nowo prawo, pozwalające wychodzić im za mąż za szanowanych oraz dobrze usytuowanych obywali Imperium, a to nie koniec! Chcecie wiedzieć więcej? To łapcie za książkę, nie będziecie żałować!

[Saúl · Rating 3 out of 5]

Como gran interesado por ese período histórico conocido como Antigüedad Tardía (que algunos se empeñan en llamar, erróneamente, siglos oscuros) tenía muchísimas ganas de leer esta gran obra de Peter Sarris, una vez que se tradujera al castellano, sobre un personaje importantísimo, el último gran emperador romano junto con Heraclio: Justiniano.

Una figura histórica con sus múltiples luces y sombras que Sarris ilustra de una manera erudita, haciendo un gran uso de las fuentes históricas, en especial de los escritos de Procopio de Cesarea y de otros autores. En general he disfrutado de la lectura del libro, aunque considero que es una obra bastante irregular. No se me malinterprete, hay pasajes sumamente interesantes: en especial los referidos al cambio climático (muy interesante la tesis que defiende Sarris), a la reforma y codificación del derecho romano (con gran repercusión posteriormente en el derecho europeo) o a la quijotesca idea de la renovación imperial, motivo, según otros historiadores, de la cercana decadencia del imperio romano oriental.

Sin embargo, la obra presenta algunos pasajes menos logrados que resultan algo aburridos, especialmente aquellos relacionados con las controversias religiosas. Estos aspectos podrían haberse abordado de manera más accesible mediante un mayor contexto y explicaciones orientadas al lector no especializado, como es mi caso. También se echa en falta un tratamiento más profundo de la figura de Teodora, consorte imperial y pieza fundamental en la vida del emperador. Aunque es de agradecer que el autor evite caer en el presentismo tan común en otros colegas y divulgadores, la obra podría haber analizado con mayor profundidad las tendencias autocráticas de Justiniano y no caer en cierta leyenda rosa.

En conclusión, se trata de una obra notable que merece tres estrellas y media, y que resulta altamente recomendable para cualquier persona interesada tanto en este período histórico como en la controvertida figura de Justiniano.

[Socraticgadfly · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good overall, but not quite great. Possibly, on quarter-stars, right at the Goodreads average of 4.25 this book had when I posted. Or maybe a flat 4, per further thought as I write out the review, as is my wont.

Good side? "Sympathetic" but not hagiographic. Sarris notes opposition to him. Explains why Procopius hated him — more traditionalist, less religiously fundamental. Rehabilitates Theodora vs the attacks of Procopius in the Secret History. (I know, from shorter pieces I have read, that Sarris is not alone in the rehabilitation.)

Minor failures?

Maps of the African and Italian campaigns would have been nice.

Bigger failures? Religious explanations are the biggie, where Sarris appears good but at times is off just a little bit. For example, on 135 he claims that Church of the East types would have supported veneration of Mary as Theotokos, which would officially be true, but only after 544 and a Council's approval of Chalcedon. However, late in the book, he references "Nestorian." (Modern scholars generally believe that using this to refer to the Church of the East is wrong.)

Then, in talking about Aphthartism, he never explains what it is. Worse yet, he uses the wrong term, after giving the seeming appearance of having a decent grip on Chalcedonian Christian emergence. The normal term is Aphthartodocetism and what it means that Christ's body, even pre-resurrection, was divine and incorruptible. In other words, a strongly miaphysite position. And, bad enough that its first proponent, Julian of Halicarnassus, was challenged by Severus of Antioch, a known miaphysite and mentioned repeatedly by Sarris.

And, in a non-religious "miss," Sarris never explains, or tries to explain, to the degree evidence might be available, WHY Justinian acted like "a man in a hurry" from the moment he took the throne. Was it eschatological leanings, even before the volcanoes and the plague?

[BenAbe · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book offers a rich and multifaceted portrayal of Emperor Justinian, exploring the various ways he was seen—both in his own time and through history. He appears as a saint, a ruler, and a soldier. He is the sleepless emperor, tirelessly working for his people, yet also a relentless persecutor of heretics and religious minorities.

Like the stunning mosaic of him in the Church of San Vitale in Ravenna, his legacy is made up of many pieces—glory and ambition, piety and cruelty, triumph and devastation. His reign unfolded in what many perceived as apocalyptic times, marked by famine, plagues, and wars on multiple fronts. In the West, he waged the Gothic Wars and fought the Vandals; in the East, he faced the might of the Persian Empire.

Yet, beyond war and crisis, Justinian was a ruler of exceptional brilliance and boundless enthusiasm for governance. His dedication to legal reform led to the monumental codification of Roman law, an achievement that became his most lasting influence, shaping not only his own era but also the generations that followed.

The book is both informative and engaging, written in an inviting style that brings Justinian to life. It balances historical depth with readability, making it accessible to both casual readers and those with a deeper interest in Byzantine history.

Rating: ★★★★☆
A strong start to February’s reading list.