03-16-2014, 06:09 PM
It's really hard to determine the policies or personalities of many characters of this Era.
Aetius is one of the few, thanks to Renatus Profuturus Frigeridus account which survives through Gregory of Tours. The way he was treated by Bonifacius, various bishops, and the Huns indicate he was highly respected and an honest character. He also seemed to be highly intelligent and very wise about who he took advice from.
Something about him certainly upset certain scholars of the time: Prosper Tiro hated Aetius, although I have no idea why. Maybe Aetius didn't support the church; that certainly would have ticked a lot of people off at the time, and Constantius of Lyon seems to bear some resentment towards Aetius (and indicates that Germanus of Auxerre may have as well.) Constantius also mentions that the "insolence of the Aremoricans" threw Aetius into a fit of rage, which could indicate he had some sort of personality disorder (he was clearly quite an egotist).
Attila also gets a brief description, thanks to Jordanes' quote of Priscus. I would make Attila out to be somewhat sociopathic, but certainly not insane. He was also wise in his council, and could make brilliant use of Hun tactics, as well as being skilled at sieges. He also seems to have been humble, judging by Priscus' account of him, or at least liked to present himself as so. However, he seems to have been only mediocre at a number of affairs, and certainly needed Aetius to send him secretaries and hostages to organize and administer to his so called "Empire."
Other characters of the era are very hard to judge: we know almost nothing of Rua and Octar, and there are only a handful of accounts of Valentinian III which seem to take his murder of Aetius as an excuse for defamatory accounts of him.
Uldin is a little bit better attested, but there's not enough to know what others thought of him; we know the Eastern Romans bribed a lot of his tribes, so the Vandals and Alans more likely turned on him through the Romans, rather than through his own arrogance. Poor leadership amongst the Huns did often cause revolts, especially after Attila's death.
Aetius is one of the few, thanks to Renatus Profuturus Frigeridus account which survives through Gregory of Tours. The way he was treated by Bonifacius, various bishops, and the Huns indicate he was highly respected and an honest character. He also seemed to be highly intelligent and very wise about who he took advice from.
Something about him certainly upset certain scholars of the time: Prosper Tiro hated Aetius, although I have no idea why. Maybe Aetius didn't support the church; that certainly would have ticked a lot of people off at the time, and Constantius of Lyon seems to bear some resentment towards Aetius (and indicates that Germanus of Auxerre may have as well.) Constantius also mentions that the "insolence of the Aremoricans" threw Aetius into a fit of rage, which could indicate he had some sort of personality disorder (he was clearly quite an egotist).
Attila also gets a brief description, thanks to Jordanes' quote of Priscus. I would make Attila out to be somewhat sociopathic, but certainly not insane. He was also wise in his council, and could make brilliant use of Hun tactics, as well as being skilled at sieges. He also seems to have been humble, judging by Priscus' account of him, or at least liked to present himself as so. However, he seems to have been only mediocre at a number of affairs, and certainly needed Aetius to send him secretaries and hostages to organize and administer to his so called "Empire."
Other characters of the era are very hard to judge: we know almost nothing of Rua and Octar, and there are only a handful of accounts of Valentinian III which seem to take his murder of Aetius as an excuse for defamatory accounts of him.
Uldin is a little bit better attested, but there's not enough to know what others thought of him; we know the Eastern Romans bribed a lot of his tribes, so the Vandals and Alans more likely turned on him through the Romans, rather than through his own arrogance. Poor leadership amongst the Huns did often cause revolts, especially after Attila's death.
Evan Schultheis | MODERATOR
Rhomaios Living History Society
Support us on Patreon
Rhomaios Living History Society
Support us on Patreon
