¹ I can only cite, as general studies, Haedicke, W., RE XVIII, 1 (1939), 201–7Google Scholar, and the excellent article, to which I owe much, by Thompson, E. A., ‘Olympiodorus of Thebes’, CQ XXXVIII (1944), 43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

² Olympiodorus, Fragment 37 (cf. Müller, C., Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum IV, 57–68Google Scholar; cited henceforth as ‘Frag.’ simply).

³ Frag. 36.

⁴ Cf. the remarks of SirSyme, R., Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), esp. 104 f.Google Scholar

⁵ Cameron, Alan, ‘Wandering Poets; a literary movement in Byzantine Egypt’, Historia XIV (1965), 470–509.Google Scholar For a glimpse of Olympiodorus' cultural range cf. below, notes 102–3.

⁶ Cf. Photius' introduction to Olympiodorus, Bibliotheca, cod. 80 (FHG IV, 58 or in the recent edition of Henry, P., Collection Byzantine (Budé 1959), 1, 166 f.)Google Scholar

⁷ Cameron, o.c. esp. 471 f. For the converse of the argument—a continuing class of Byzantine bureaucrats as the patrons of traditional culture—cf. Mathew, G., Byzantine Aesthetics (1963), 69 f.Google Scholar

⁸ Frag. 18; Cameron, o.c. 497.

⁹ Frag. 28.

¹⁰ Frag. 32; cf. Frantz, Alison, ‘Honors to a Librarian’, Hesperia XXXV (1966), 377–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹¹ Frantz, o.c. 379 f.; cf. Thompson, Homer, ‘Athenian Twilight’, JRS XLIX (1959)Google Scholar, at 66 f. For the praetorian prefect of Illyricum Herculius, connected with the restorations (IG III, 2, 4224–5), cf. Frantz, , Akten des VII. Internationalen Kongresses für Christliche Archäologie, Trier 1965 (1969), 527–30Google Scholar; and for the sophist Plutarchos, associated with Herculius in IG III, 2, 4224, cf. 3818, where he finances a Panathenaic procession.

¹² Frag. 33.

¹³ Frag. 37:

¹⁴ Frag. 43; for the possible circumstances of the visit, cf. below, p. 88 f.

¹⁵ Frag. 44; cf. the acclamation to Johannes reported at Frag. 41.

¹⁶ Photius, at Frags. (19)

¹⁷ It was used by Sozomen (published c. 443–4) and Philostorgius (c. 440); cf. below, nn. 20, 25. Thompson, o.c. (n. 1), suggests tentatively an early date of publication, c. 427, because of the favourable view expressed of Bonifatius (Frags. 21, 40, 42).

¹⁸ I.e. Müller, FHG and Dindorf, , Historici Graeci Minores I (Teubner, 1870), 450–70.Google Scholar The recent edition of P. Henry (above, n. 6) does not use the traditional numeration. The Fragments are translated with interlinked commentary by Gordon, C. D.The Age of Attila (1960), esp. 25 f.Google Scholar

¹⁹ c. 498–502, as argued convincingly by Cameron, Alan, Philologus CXIII (1969), 106–10.Google Scholar

²⁰ His preface, to Theodosius II, refers (13) to an imperial visit to Heraclea Pontica as ‘recent’ cf. Nov. Theod. XXIII (12 May, 443). For this and other indications, cf. the introduction by G. C. Hansen to the edition of Sozomen, in Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der Ersten Jahrhunderte (1960), p. LXVGoogle Scholar f. Downey, G., ‘The Perspective of the Early Church Historians’, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies VI (1965), 57–70Google Scholar, esp. at 66, is imprecise and fails to appreciate Sozomen's use of Olympiodorus.

²¹ Cf. below, p. 82 and note 33.

²² I.e. his continuous narrative is carried to this point. Nevertheless, he gave a very compressed summary of later events (IX, 16), mentioning the marriage of Constantius and Galla Placidia (417), Constantius' elevation (421), and the installation (425) of Valentinian III.

²³ Best published by Bidez, J., Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller (1913), 140–50.Google Scholar

²⁴ I accept the arguments of Jeep, L., Jahrb. f. Class. Phil., Supp. XIV (1884), 73 f.Google Scholar, against those of L. Mendelssohn, ed. of Zosimus (Teubner, 1887), XLVII f.

²⁵ He was born c. 368; J. Bidez, o.c. p. CVI f.

²⁶ Cf. the edition of Mendelssohn p. XLVII, and on v, 26. Failure to acknowledge Zosimus' (and Sozomen's) use of Olympiodorus badly undermines the value of W. E. Kaegi's excellently entitled Byzantium and the Decline of Rome (1968).

²⁷ For the facts, Chalmers, W. R., CQ n.s. III (1953) 165–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar The difficult problem of the interpretation of the of Eunapius' history is not here germane.

²⁸ Cf. the balance of emphasis of the Fragments (Müller, , FHG IV, 7–56Google Scholar), esp. Frags. 62 f., with Eunapius' own comments on the difficulty of getting western information after 395, Frag. 74; cited by Thompson, , CQ XXXVIII (1944), 46.Google Scholar

²⁹ Zosimus v, 26, 1. The account of Alaric's journey is used by Thompson, o.c. 50, to establish Olympiodorus' geographical accuracy. But apart from the other considerations, his language here is literary, not technical; cf. below, p. 86.

³⁰ Cf. again Eunapius' remarks in self-defence, Frag. I.

³¹ Below, p. 90 f.; cf. Mendelssohn on v, 26: ‘iudicium cum fonte mutavit’.

³² The following passages are clear insertions: IX, 5 (barbarian incursions in east); 6, 6 (Alaric and Rome, cf. note 152); 10 (an anecdote on the sack of Rome).

³³ E.g. IX, 4, 3, cf. VIII, 25, 38 ∼ Zosimus V, 26, 2 (appointment of Jovius, cf. below, p. 87 f.); IX, 6, 3 ∼ Zosimus V, 42, 3 (desertion of barbarian slaves); IX, 8, 2–3 ∼ Zosimus VI, 7, 2 f. (supporters of Attalus); IX, 8, 2 ∼ Zosimus VI, 7, 3 (speech of Attalus); IX, 8, 5 (Frag. 13) ∼ Zosimus VI, 8, 1 (embassy to Attalus). For Sozomen and Latin, cf. below, p. 85 f.

³⁴ Zosimus VI, 1–6, 1 (in 409); Sozomen IX, 11–16 (after the sack of Rome). Cf. Frags. 12, 16–17, 19, etc., devoted to Gallic affairs.

³⁵ Below, p. 87 f.

³⁶ See the very different accounts of S. Mazzarino, Stilicone (1942); E. Demougeot, De l'unité à la division de l'empire remain (1951); and in particular Alan Cameron, Claudian: Poetry and Propaganda at the Court of Honorius (1970).

³⁷ Following Baynes, N. H., Byzantine Studies (1954), 330 f.Google Scholar, against Mommsen, , Ges. Schrift. IV, 517 f.Google Scholar; the policy does not go back to the beginning of Stilicho's regime.

³⁸ See esp. Cracco Ruggini, L., ‘“De Morte Persecutorum” e polemica antibarbarica nella storiografia pagana e cristiana’, Riv. di Storia e Letteratura Religiosa IV (1968), 433–47.Google Scholar

³⁹ Zosimus V, 26, 2–5; the dating 405–6 is chosen, against the arguments of Baynes, Byzantine Studies, 339 f. The argument is not developed here, but cf. Zosimus VI, 3, 2—a confused reminiscence of the defeat of Radagaisus, but dated clearly to 406.

⁴⁰ Zosimus V, 29, 1 f.

⁴¹ V, 32.

⁴² V, 32, 4.

⁴³ I.e. comes sacrarum largitionum, CTh 1, 10, 7 (27 Feb., 401); cf. Symmachus, , Epp. V, 74–5.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Ep. VIII, 29 (of 399).

⁴⁵ CTh VI, 2, 22 (pp 26 Feb., 401); emended by Seeck, O., Regesten der Kaiser und Päpste (1919), 102Google Scholar, to give a tenure succeeding, rather than preceding, that of Limenius (cf. note 43). But a repeated tenure is as likely as a continuous tenure of 7 years. Cf. Symmachus, , Epp. VII, 102–28Google Scholar to Petronius and Patruinus; and for their careers under Stilicho, Seeck's ed. of Symmachus (MGH auct. ant. VI, 1), CLXXXIX f.

⁴⁶ Chastagnol, A., Les Fastes de la Préfecture de Rome au Bas-Empire (1962), 255–7Google Scholar gives his career; cf. Symmachus, , Epp. VII, 93–101.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ As emerges from Zosimus v, 37, 6.

⁴⁸ V, 34, 7. The date of the mutiny at Ticinum was 13 August: Chron. Min. 1, 300.

⁴⁹ Zosimus V, 37, 2–3. The mention of Cremona, far to the west, raises a slight problem, which is not eased by the suggestion (by the Veronese Maffei). The question is relevant to the precise siting of Oecubaria.

⁵⁰ Zosimus V, 40, 1 f.; it consisted of Basilius, an ex-prefect (he was praefectus urbi in 395; Chastagnol, Fastes 346–7), and Johannes, a client of Alaric and later his magister officiorum (Sozomen IX, 8, 3; below, n. 153).

⁵¹ Zosimus V, 41, cf. Vita Melaniae 19 (ed. Gorce, D., Sources chrétiennes 90 (1962), 166).Google Scholar The full sequence may be: (1) siege, (2) pagan revival (Zosimus), (3) terms of Alaric and exactions of Palladius (Zosimus), proposal to requisition property of Melania (V. Mel.), (4) corn riot and death of Pompeianus (V. Mel.).

⁵² For his career, Cantarelli, L., Bull. Com. Arch. di Roma, LIV (1926), 35–41.Google Scholar

⁵³ Zosimus V, 41, 5:

⁵⁴ v, 43.

⁵⁵ To Theodoras, , CTh XVI, 2, 31Google Scholar; 5, 46; 111, 10, 1. To Caecilianus, , CTh IX, 2, 5Google Scholar; 3, 7.

⁵⁶ Zosimus V, 45, 2; for the career of Priscus Attalus, see Chastagnol, Fastes 266–8.

⁵⁷ Zosimus V, 45, 4, cf. ILS 1282; ‘legato amplissimi senatus secundo’. For the identification (involving some slight emendations in Zosimus), cf. Chastagnol, , Historia IV (1955), 178–9Google Scholar, and for a further detail on Tarrutenius Maximilianus, below, n. 128.

⁵⁸ Zosimus V, 45, 6–46, 1; cf. Frag. 8.

⁵⁹ E.g., Stilicho's arrival at Rome in 408 is mentioned twice (V, 27, 3; 29, 5).

⁶⁰ Zosimus V, 35, 1; Frag. 8.

⁶¹ Zosimus V, 32, 1 :

⁶² Augustine, Epp. 96–7, cf. esp. 97, 1 : ‘… ecclesiam Dei, cuius te veraciter filium esse gaudemus’.

⁶³ For instances, see below, p. 86.

⁶⁴ Noted by Thompson, CQ XXXVIII (1944), 48.

⁶⁵ According to Photius, Olympiodorus styled his work –i.e. he regarded it as the ‘raw material’ for a history, rather than the finished production. For Cassius Dio's similar use of see Millar, F., A Study of Cassius Dio (1964). 33.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Frag. 8, cf. 46; Zosimus V, 32, 6; 35, 1, where is supplied by Mendelssohn, perhaps unnecessarily.

⁶⁷ Frag. 13; Zosimus V, 32, 6.

⁶⁸ Frag. 13; Zosimus V, 40, 2, cf. 35, 1; 34, 7.

⁶⁹ Note also Frags. 12, 13, 46, 44, 16,17, 18, 26, One should not omit Sozomen IX, 4, 6, (sc. Constantine in Gaul). But (Frag. 43) is a significant error, trans lating ‘fora’; contrast Zosimus V, 41, 3,

⁷⁰ Sozomen IX, 4, 4; Zosimus V, 29, 1; 36, 1; 37, 1 etc.

⁷¹ Sozomen IX, 12, 6–7 12, 2 Zosimus VI, 1, 2; 4, 5; 5, 1, etc.

⁷² Frags. 40, 42; Sozomen IX, 8, 3, 7, etc. (but at 8, 3, 4); Zosimus V, 37, 6; VI, 7, 5; 8, 3, etc.; at Sozomen IX, 8, 4.

⁷³ Sozomen IX, 6, 2; 8, 1; Zosimus V, 39, 1; VI, 6, 2, etc.

⁷⁴ Zosimus V, 31, 1; 33, 1 37, 3 45, 5 41, 3 cf. Sozomen IX, 6, 4); 37, 5 cf. Sozomen IX, 12, 4, VI, 4, 3 cf. Sozomen IX, 11, 4). Zosimus VI, 2, 2 has (the position of Bononia); and note especially Frag. 17, Germania Secunda, thus raising an unresolved puzzle about (?) Moguntiacum; cf. Byvanck, A. W., Mnemosyne III, VI (1938), 380–1.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Jones, A. H. M., The Later Roman Empire (1964) 11Google Scholar, 988 f. Again, the case of Cassius Dio is instructive, cf. F. Millar, o.c. (n. 65), 41 f.

⁷⁶ Mansi, , Sacr. Conc. nova et amplissima collectio, VI, (e.g.) 563 f.Google Scholar Many of Olympiodorus' expressions can be paralleled from Du Cange, Glossarium ad scriptores mediae et infimae graecitatis (1688, repr. 1958).

⁷⁷ Zosimus V, 31, 1, (Bononia from Ravenna); 48, 2, (Ariminum from Ravenna; cf. Sozomen IX, 7, 1, Frag.16, For stades cf. also Sozomen IX, 9, 2 and (in an anecdotal context) Frag. 42.

⁷⁸ Frag. 5, cf. Zosimus V, 29, 9, 4,000 λίτραι (cf. V, 41, 4); Frag. 23, 20 plus 2,000 Frag. 44, many sums in

⁷⁹ Zosimus V, 29, 9.

⁸⁰ V, 38, 5.

⁸¹ V, 41, 7.

⁸² VI, 11, 2.

⁸³ Frag. 41.

⁸⁴ Zosimus V, 34, 7; above, p. 84.

⁸⁵ V, 42, 3; VI, 7, 4.

⁸⁶ Frag. 12.

⁸⁷ Above, p. 82.

⁸⁸ Zosimus V, 31, 4; the regime of Constantine is narrated at VI, 1–5.

⁸⁹ V, 32, 3.

⁹⁰ V, 42, 3–43, 1.

⁹¹ V, 26, 3 f. and also at VI, 3, 2 (above, n. 39).

⁹² Sozomen IX, 4, 3, cf. VII, 25, 3.

⁹³ Zosimus V, 48, 2:

⁹⁴ Below, p. 94.

⁹⁵ Frag. 46.

⁹⁶ Frags. 17–19.

⁹⁷ cf. Photius's introduction:

⁹⁸ Frag. 28, cf. 31.

⁹⁹ Frags. 33, 37.

¹⁰⁰ Frag. 36.

¹⁰¹ Compare the cases of Ammianus Marcellinus (R. Syme, o.c. (n. 4), 131 f.) and Cassius Dio (F. Millar, o.c. (n. 65), 45). For Olympiodorus, the prime precedent was of course that of Herodotus.

¹⁰² Zosimus V, 29, 1–4. On Peisandros of Laranda, who wrote in the early third century A,D., see Keydell, R., ‘Peisandros 12’, RE XIX, 1 (1937), 145–6.Google Scholar (The place in question should of course have been not Emona, but Nauportus.)

¹⁰³ Zosimus V, 27 (he calls him ). Asinius Quadratus was a near-contemporary of Peisander, cf. F. Jacoby, FGrH 97; PIR ² A 1245 etc. One is tempted also to infer that Olympiodorus' speculations as to the wanderings of Odysseus, belong, as their placing (Frag. 45) suggests, to the context of the historian's own visit to Italy; thus, to north Italy.

¹⁰⁴ E.g., for the narrative of Alaric's journey in 408; above, p. 84.

¹⁰⁵ For brief indications, see Kaegi, W. E., Byzantium and the Decline of Rome (1968), 16 f.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ North Africa, Vita Melaniae 20–1 (ed. Gorce, 169 f.); Holy Land, Jerome, Comm. on Ezechiel, pref. to Book III (PL XXV, 75) and to Book VII: ‘occidentalium fuga et sanctorum locorum constipatio’; cf. Ep. 126, 2.

¹⁰⁷ Zosimus V, 30, 4–5.

¹⁰⁸ The suggestion has not to my knowledge been made before; to explore it was one of the aims of the original version of this paper.

¹⁰⁹ Above, p. 86.

¹¹⁰ He must, presumably, have interviewed the former governor of Thrace, Valerius (under Valens, not Constantius: cf. n. 180), at a time nearer the beginning than the end of the period covered by the history; Frag. 27.

¹¹¹ Cf. the anthology of hostile opinions collected by Cracco Ruggini, L., Riv. di Storia e Letteratura Religiosa IV (1968), 433 f.Google Scholar

¹¹² Eunapius, cf. n. 116, with Frags. 62–3, 88; Orosius, , Hist. adv. paganos VII, 38, 4f.Google Scholar; Namatianus, Rutilius, De Reditu II, 41 f.Google Scholar Jerome's opinion was most clearly expressed at Ep. 123,16 (to a Gallic lady), ‘scelere semibarbari proditoris’. For Jerome as in touch with western opinion and information, see ibid. 15 (invasions of Gaul), Ep. 127 (sack of Rome); Orosius VII 43, 4 (a distinguished visitor from Narbonne).

¹¹³ Zosimus V, 34, 5; note also Sozomen IX, 4, 8:

¹¹⁴ Cf. Philostorgius XII, I.

¹¹⁵ Frags. 2, 8.

¹¹⁶ n. 112, cf. Zosimus V, 1, 1 f.; 4, 2 f.; 7, 2 f.

¹¹⁷ Philostorgius XII, 1.

¹¹⁸ CTh VII, 16, 1 (10 Dec, 408).

¹¹⁹ Zosimus V, 32, 1; 34, 7; cf. Sozomen IX, 4, 7.

¹²⁰ The most recent account is that of Oost, S. I., Galla Placidia Augusta (1968), Ch. 4.Google Scholar

¹²¹ Frag. 34; Philostorgius XII, 12.

¹²² Frag. 23 :

¹²³ Frag. 34, cf. 23.

¹²⁴ Frag. 39.

¹²⁵ Frag. 34:

¹²⁶ Frag. 40.

^l27 See, e.g., Seeck, Symmachus (above, n. 45), LXVI f.; Mazzarino, S., Stilicone (1942), Ch. VIGoogle Scholar; and perhaps I may be permitted a reference to Chaps. X-XI of my Oxford D.Phil, thesis (1969) on the western governing classes (c. 365–425), which I am currently revising for publication.

¹²⁸ Senators at court: Valerius Messala, PPo Italiae 399–400, cf. Rutilius Namatianus, De Reditu 1267 f.; Caecina Decius Albinus, cf. Symmachus, Epp. VII, 40; 45–7; Tarrutenius Maximilianus, ILS 1282, the holder of an ‘honor aulicus’ in Symmachus, Ep. VIII, 48. Courtiers at Rome, e.g. Fl. Macrobius Longinianus, praefectus urbi 401–2, cf. CIL VI, 1188–90 (ILS 797); Fl. Peregrinus Saturninus, praefectus urbi 402/7, cf. ILS 1275;‘a primis adulescentiae suae annis pace belloque in republica desudanti’. On these and others, see Chastagnol, Fastes 246 f.

¹²⁹ cth VII, 13, 12–14 (June—Nov., 397), cf. Symmachus, Epp. VI, 58, 62, 64, etc. cf. Seeck, Symmachus, LXX

¹³⁰ On the financial imbalance between court and senators, see esp. Sundwall, J., Weströmische Studien (1915), 150 f.Google Scholar

¹³¹ Zosimus V, 29, 9.

¹³² Ammianus Marcellinus can no longer be claimed as such, cf. Cameron, Alan, JRS LIV (1964), 15–28Google Scholar; nor the Historia Augusta, R. Syme, Ammianus and the Historia Augusta, esp. Ch. XXVII. The Annales of Nicomachus Flavianus (ILS 2948, cf. 2947) remain, despite much modern speculation, totally unknown. A more typical case may be Symmachus' correspondent Naucellius, cf. Ep. III, 11; ‘opusculi tui, quo priscam rem publicam … ex libro Graeco in Latium transtulisti’. Symmachus and his friend occupied themselves with the early books of Livy, cf. Ep. IX, 13, and the subscriptions, most conveniently assembled by Bayet, J., Tite-Live, ed. Budé, , 1 (1947), p. xcii f.Google Scholar

¹³³ Zosimus V, 29, 6 f.; note the two votes taken by the senate, the second after Stilicho's forceful intervention.

¹³⁴ V, 38; 40–41.

¹³⁵ Above, p. 84.

¹³⁶ Zosimus VI, 9, 1; 12, 1. Not in my view a ‘doublet’, but cf. Stevens, C. E., Athenaeum XXV (1957), at 330 f.Google Scholar

¹³⁷ Sozomen IX, 8, 2; cf. Zosimus VI, 7, 3.

¹³⁸ Zosimus V, 29, 7.

¹³⁹ VI, 9, 1.

¹⁴⁰ V, 40, 2; (Mendelssohn

¹⁴¹ V, 41, 5:

¹⁴² V, 45, 3;

¹⁴³ VI, 7, 4;

¹⁴⁴ This depends on the possibility that Olympiodorus was the source of Procopius, Bell. Vand. 1, 2, 27—which is far from clear.

¹⁴⁵ Zosimus VI, 7, 4.

¹⁴⁶ VI, 7, 3; cf. Sozomen IX, 8, 2.

¹⁴⁷ VI, 7, s; cf. the praise of the barbarian general Druma, VI, 12, 1.

¹⁴⁸ V, 40, 3 f.

¹⁴⁹ V, 49, 1.

¹⁵⁰ V, 41, 4: 5,000 pounds of gold, 30,000 of silver, with tunics, skins and pepper.

¹⁵¹ V, 50, 2: cf. Sozomen IX, 7, 5–8, 1,

¹⁵² Cf. Claudian, De Bello Gothico (of 402), 546 f. (‘penetrabis ad urbem’), and the obvious insertion at Sozomen IX, 6, 6. Contrast, for instance, the praise of Alaric's at Zosimus V, 51, 1.

¹⁵³ Zosimus V, 40,2 and Sozomen IX, 8,3 (Johannes). Zosimus V, 48, 2 and Sozomen IX, 4, 3 (cf. VIII, 25, 3); IX, 6, 3 f. (Jovius).

¹⁵⁴ Zosimus V, 36, 1 (Aetius and Iason); cf. 42, 1; 44. 1; VI, 6, 1.

¹⁵⁵ V, 34, 1; VI, 2, 3 f.; 13, 2 (cf. Sozomen IX, 9, 3; Philostorgius XII, 3); Frag. 17 (Sarus). Frag. 40 (Gothic retainers of Galla Placidia).

¹⁵⁶ Frags. 7, 9, 11, 29; cf. Thompson, , CQ XXXVIII (1944), 47.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁷ Zosimus V, 33, 2.

¹⁵⁸ V, 35, 5 (massacre of Goths in late 408); V, 42, 3 (Gothic attack on Romans during truce).

¹⁵⁹ cf. esp. Zosimus V, 48–9.

¹⁶⁰ V, 48, 4; cf. Sozomen IX, 7, 3.

¹⁶¹ Frag. 13: Iovi[an]us, praefectus praetorio; Potamius, quaestor sacri palatii; Iulianus, primicerius notariorum; Valens, magister utriusque militiae. The last-named had evidently been promoted since CTh XVI, 5, 42 (14 Nov., 408, comes domesticorum).

¹⁶² Zosimus VI, 8, 1; Frag. 13.

¹⁶³ Zosimus V, 28, 2; cf. Philostorgius XII, 2.

¹⁶⁴ Frag. 40.

¹⁶⁵ Frags. 34, 38.

¹⁶⁶ Zosimus V, 31, 4:

¹⁶⁷ Frag. 23.

¹⁶⁸ Frag. 25. Albinus was praefectus urbi in 414 (Chastagnol, Fastes 273 f.). For interpretation of the relatio (repopulation of Rome since 410), cf. Chastagnol, , La Préfecture urbaine à Rome sous le Bas-Empire (1960), 292Google Scholar; cf. Sozomen, IX, 9, 5;

¹⁶⁹ Cf. esp. Zosimus v, 34, 6; 46, 2.

¹⁷⁰ Frag. 44. This is a highly speculative suggestion; with regret, I cannot accept the view of E. A. Thompson that the passage reveals Olympiodorus' sense of social injustice at inequalities of wealth at Rome; CQ XXXVIII (1944), 50 f.

¹⁷¹ Zosimus v, 29, 9 (Lampadius); 34, 3 (Stilicho); 35, 4 (Eucherius); 45, 4 (Heliocrates). Note esp. v, 35, 4,

¹⁷² V, 45, 5, cf. Sozomen IX, 6, 1 (Innocentius); V, 50, 2 (Italian bishops used by Alaric).

¹⁷³ Sozomen IX, 9, 1 (Sigesarius and Attalus); Frag. 26 (at Barcelona).

¹⁷⁴ Sozomen IX, 9, 4: (as asylum in 410); but this could clearly be Sozomen's own addition.

¹⁷⁵ Zosimus VI, 7, 4. Orosius, at least, thought he was a pagan, cf. Hist. adv. paganos VII, 42, 8, claiming to cite from a speech to the senate of ‘ille umbratilis consul’; ‘loquar vobis, p.c, consul et pontifex, quorum alterum teneo, alterum spero’.

¹⁷⁶ Zosimus V, 32, 1; cf. above, nn. 61–2.

¹⁷⁷ V, 46, 2 f. Generidus resigned his appointment in protest against a law prohibiting pagans (and others)from holding office; cf. CTh XVI, 5, 42 (14 Nov., 408): ‘eos, qui catholicae sectae sunt inimici, intra palatium militare prohibemus’, etc. The law was addressed to Olympius and Valens, comes domesticorum (cf. above, n. 161).

¹⁷⁸ Zosimus V, 38, 5; 41, 7; cf. 41, 5 (above, n. 53).

¹⁷⁹ V, 41, 2.

¹⁸⁰ Frag. 27. Valerius cannot however have held his office under Constantius; rather under Valens, c. 375.

¹⁸¹ Frag. 15. An inscription, CIL X, 6950 (ILS 23), of 132 B.C., mentions a statue ‘ad fretum’ near Rhegium (on the Italian side of the strait).

¹⁸² Frag. 38.

¹⁸³ Zosimus V, 36, 3: cf. V, 46, 1: (The Opinion of court eunuchs).

¹⁸⁴ VI, 13, 1.

¹⁸⁵ Cameron, Alan, ‘Theodosius the Great and the Regency of Stilicho’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology LXXIII (1968), at 267 f.Google Scholar