Justinian: Emperor, Soldier, Saint

by Peter Sarris

WINNER OF THE LONDON HELLENIC PRIZE

SHORTLISTED FOR THE RUNCIMAN AWARD

A Sunday Times, BBC History Magazine, and Evening Standard Book of the Year

‘Majestic, sparkling’ Peter Frankopan

‘Superb and gripping’ Simon Sebag Montefiore

‘Effortlessly erudite’ Rory Stewart

‘Masterful’ Anita Anand

‘Spectacularly good’ Dominic Sandbrook

The definitive story of the Roman Emperor who shaped modern times.

This groundbreaking biography gives us an intimate insight into Justinian, a man who, from the humblest beginnings, rose to become ruler of much of the known world achieving an almost god-like status. An emperor who infused even the most mundane tasks with spiritual significance. A gifted administrator obsessed with detail. A middle-aged lover who fell for a dancing girl, ruling with empress Theodora by his side for over twenty years. A brilliant military strategist who was never on the frontline. The challenges he faced – climate change, battles over culture and identity, the first recorded global pandemic – and many of the solutions he found still resonate with us today. His legacy remains all around us. In this tour de force, Sarris shows us that in all his complexity and contradictions Justinian was, in many ways, a very modern emperor.

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

544 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2023

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 ask 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 · 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!

[Ray]

Can one of you librarian types merge this with the other version of this on Goodreads. Much obliged

[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.

[Professor · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was given this last Christmas and it took me over a year to finish it. This is less a fault with the book and more a simple fact that I do not spend enough time reading. I've always found the history of the Eastern Empire confusing and unengaging. Sarris helped to steady my understanding a bit and made this history engaging...in fact when stuck home with a nasty cold over a long weekend, I finally really got back into it and finished it!

[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

[Hüseyin Can Eren · Rating 5 out of 5]

Bu kitap ve sonrasında okuduğum tamamlayıcı kaynaklar sayesinde milattan sonra altıncı yüzyılın en önemli liderini tanıma fırsatım oldu. İmparator Justinianus her konuda tarihe yön veren bir lider. Tabi onun askeri başarılarının tamamlayıcısı General Belisarius'u unutmamak gerekir. Yahut beraber kritik kararlar aldığı İmparatoriçe Theodora. Yazar gerçekten bu konuda son derece donanımlı bir akademisyen. Birinci elden kaynak olması sebebiyle Procopius'un eserleri bu kitabın yazımında temel taşlardır diyebiliriz.

Bazı eleştirilerde kitap için imparatorun biyografisinin bu şekilde olmaması gerektiği yorumlarını gördüm ancak bu kitap bir biyografi iddiası taşımıyor. Justinianus'un amcası İmparator Justinus'tan başlatılan süreç İmparator Justinianus'un ölümüne ve ölümünden sonraki etkilere kadar devam eden bir anlatıyı biyografi olarak değerlendirmek yanlış olur.

Yazılış şekli ve kaynak kullanımı itibariyle eseri çok beğendim. Doğu Roma'nın kaderini değiştiren ve dolayısıyla tarihe yön vermiş olan İmparator Justinianus'u herkesin okuması gerektiğini düşünüyorum.

[/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.

[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.

[Mateusz Kołota · Rating 5 out of 5]

Justynian. Cesarz, żołnierz, święty Petera Sarrisa to znakomita, dojrzała biografia, która w pełni zasługuje na miano jednej z najlepszych współczesnych syntez dotyczących VI-wiecznego cesarstwa wschodniorzymskiego. Autor nie tylko przybliża postać samego Justyniana, ale z niezwykłą swobodą i erudycją odtwarza całą epokę – jej mentalność, napięcia społeczne, religijne obsesje i brutalną realność polityki.

Sarris pisze w sposób bardzo przystępny, nie rezygnując przy tym z naukowej rzetelności. Justynian jawi się tu jako władca obsesyjnie konsekwentny, zdeterminowany, by stworzyć państwo bez granic, herezji i chaosu. Cesarz-reformator, który wierzył, że prawo, wiara i władza powinny stanowić jedną, spójną całość. Kodeks Justyniana, budowa Hagii Sophii czy bezwzględna walka z herezjami nie są tu suchymi faktami, lecz elementami większej wizji świata podporządkowanego boskiemu porządkowi.

Ogromną siłą książki jest to, że Justynian nie istnieje w próżni. Sarris z dużą wyczuciem kreśli portrety postaci drugiego planu, które w rzeczywistości współtworzyły cesarską potęgę. Teodora nie jest jedynie legendarną cesarzową, lecz pełnoprawnym partnerem politycznym, zdolnym do bezwzględnych decyzji i głębokiej empatii. Belizariusz to wybitny dowódca rozdarty między lojalnością wobec tronu a własnymi ambicjami, Prokopiusz – inteligentny, cyniczny obserwator epoki, a Jan z Kapadocji symbolizuje brutalną, ale skuteczną machinę fiskalną państwa.

Kampanie wojenne w Afryce, Italii i Hiszpanii opisane są dynamicznie, ale bez taniej glorii. Autor pokazuje zarówno militarny geniusz Bizancjum, jak i ogromne koszty tych przedsięwzięć: finansowe, demograficzne i społeczne. Wojny z Persami, najazdy Słowian i presja na granicach ukazują imperium jako organizm stale balansujący na krawędzi kryzysu. Długie panowanie Justyniana to nie tylko pasmo triumfów, lecz również epidemie, bunty i narastające zmęczenie społeczeństwa.

Sarris bardzo przekonująco ukazuje napięcie między ideą świętego cesarstwa a ludzką ceną tej wizji. Jego Justynian to władca głęboko religijny, niemal ascetyczny, a zarazem zdolny do bezwzględnych decyzji, jeśli wymagała tego racja stanu. To portret człowieka, który chciał rządzić w imieniu Boga, ale musiał robić to przy użyciu armii, podatków i terroru prawa.

To biografia kompletna, świetnie napisana i znakomicie osadzona w źródłach, a jednocześnie wyjątkowo czytelna. Justynian. Cesarz, żołnierz, święty to nie tylko opowieść o jednym z największych władców późnej starożytności, ale też fascynujące studium władzy, ambicji i ceny, jaką płaci się za próbę stworzenia świata idealnego. Książka, do której chce się wracać i która zostaje w pamięci na długo.

[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...

[Miguel Garzón · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excelente biografía de un personaje problemático y complejo, supongo que como su era o precisamente por ello. Se lee con fluidez e interés y las luces (el derecho, la construcción de edificios aún mágicos, el impulso de recuperar lo que significó Roma) y las sombras (fanatismo religioso, autocracia) conviven en un retrato fascinante. Muy recomendable.

[Susanna]

The Hagia Sophia is MY Roman Empire. I kept thinking while reading this book that the story of Justinian would make such a good TV show. The story and characters and events are interesting and monumental within history but also the book is written so well that it actually does credit to that story and makes it genuinely compelling and exciting to a general audience person like me. Honestly hbo should commission it and hire Peter Sarris as a consultant. The history is great and this book is great

[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

[Nathaniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Justinian, Wife Guy

Finished in the shadow of the Hagia Sophia

[Giovanni · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed this greatly. I'm grateful that it reminded me that Justinian is the sole speaker in the sixth canto of Dante's Paradiso, and of one of my (MANY) favorite tercets:

Diverse voci fanno dolci note;
così diversi scanni in nostra vita
rendon dolce armonia tra queste rote.
~~~
Differing voices join to sound sweet music;
so do the different orders in our life
render sweet harmony among these spheres.

[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

[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.