Justinian

APPENDIX IV

PROCOPIUS — FIFTH COLUMNIST?

Although Libertas (see Chapter 14 et seq.) is fictional, it is tempting to speculate that a secret resistance movement on similar lines could have existed, and that Procopius might somehow have been involved. Certainly, the time could not have been more ripe. At the time of Nika and its immediate aftermath, Justinian (as hopefully the text makes clear) was extremely unpopular with all classes of society — especially among those of senatorial rank, who alone could provide the leadership, wealth, and organizing know-how necessary to promote change. Men like my character Anicius Julianus, who was suggested by a real person — Anicia Juliana, daughter of the West Roman emperor Olybrius, a member of the immensely rich and powerful Anician family, part of the West Roman diaspora settled in Constantinople, and whose son was one of the senators exiled after the revolt. None of the grievances which had provoked the Nika Riots had been resolved, nor was there any sign that solutions would be forthcoming. In the past, discontent with the rule of tyrants and incompetents had led to the toppling (often by a combination of senior army officers and senators) of emperors such as Nero, Commodus, and Valentinian III.

Incidentally, the Roman Senate (and that includes its East Roman incarnation) has often been portrayed as a toothless tiger, whose only function was to rubber-stamp the diktats of an autocratic emperor. Such a picture is deceptive. For it is a fact of history that rulers who continued to flout the mores of S.P.Q.R. were invariably removed from office — ‘with extreme prejudice’, to use a deliciously bizarre euphemism once favoured by the American Secret Service. Even in the dying days of the Western Empire, the Senate still had enough clout to have the emperor Avitus ‘disposed of’ for adopting too accommodating a stance towards the barbarians. Though the power of the Senate as an institution was severely weakened by Justinian, the class from which its ranks were drawn continued to be an influential sector of society, one which any emperor would be foolish to ignore or alienate.

Allowing, for the sake of argument, that an organization on the lines of Libertas could have existed (and, all things considered, it would perhaps be surprising if some form of underground resistance against Justinian had not arisen after Nika), then Procopius would have fitted perfectly into such a scenario — as spy, double agent, or fifth columnist. Cast in that sort of role, he becomes an absolute gift to the writer of historical fiction. We know that he detested and despised Justinian. (‘Without any hesitation he shattered the laws when money was in sight’, is one of the milder aspersions against the emperor in Secret History.) Given the opportunity to do him harm, it is hard to believe that he would have refrained from doing so. And an organization such as Libertas would have provided just such an opportunity, with Procopius (as part of Belisarius’ staff* in the African and Italian campaigns, and later as Prefect of Constantinople) ideally placed to cause maximum disruption. How else to account for the following?

i) Who started the drip-drip of malicious rumours about Belisarius, causing Justinian to harbour suspicions about his general regarding his conduct during the Vandal campaign,** and later, leading to his recall from Italy?

ii) Who almost persuaded the Huns to switch sides to the Vandals in Africa?

iii) Who supplied Totila with secret information enabling him to generate a resurgence of Gothic power in Italy?

iv) Who fomented mutiny in Africa, following its reconquest?

v) Who spread false rumours that Justinian was dead, which led to a constitutional crisis?

vi) Who was behind the hatching of a plot to assassinate Justinian?

None of the above directly points the finger at Procopius. Taken collectively however, they could be significant. On every occasion connected with these queries, Procopius — in an inversion of T.S. Eliot’s famous line about McAvity — was there. Which, if nothing else, does perhaps serve to ‘put him in the frame’.

* Procopius had little respect for Belisarius (as evidenced in Secret History, where he refers to the general’s ‘contemptible conduct’) so presumably wouldn’t have scrupled to betray him.

** ‘. . private despatches maliciously affirmed that the conqueror of Africa. . conspired to seat himself on the throne of the Vandals. . Justinian listened with too patient an ear; and his silence was the result of jealousy rather than of confidence.’ (Gibbon.)