URBAN CHANGE AND THE LATE ANTIQUE COUNTRYSIDEin the absence of other evidence. On the other hand, arguments which seek
to downplay its effects in relation to individual sites must logically be equally
suspect.^50 One can fi nd extreme variation among historians in the amount of
weight that they are willing to attach to the sixth- and seventh-century plague.
Yet this seems to have been the fi rst appearance of bubonic plague in Europe
and its impact should have been far greater than that of the regular diseases
which ravaged ancient cities as a matter of course. To take just one example
from the literary sources outside the three main descriptions of the epidemic
by Procopius, John of Ephesus and Evagrius, when the plague struck their
monastery, the monks of the Judaean monastery of Chariton went en masse
to the ancient holy man Cyriacus, who was living as a hermit at Sousakim, to
ask for his help against the disease, and brought him to live in a cave nearby.^51
At present it does not seem possible to do more than leave the matter open.
Second, according to the literary sources, the sixth century also experienced
a high incidence of earthquakes, which in some cases can, as we have seen,
be plausibly connected with the material record. But some of the literary evi-
dence for earthquakes in the period may be attributable to increased recording
of earthquakes by Christian chroniclers interested in pointing out the signs of
God’s wrath rather than to a quantitative rise in their actual incidence. Third,
other external factors can also be adduced for reduced prosperity in certain
areas, such as a possible withdrawal of military resources, which would imply
a lower level of economic demand in the region in the future, and poorer
roads and communications.^52
How far did Christianization play a role in the move away from the civic life
of classical antiquity, with its baths, temples and public entertainments? Liebe-
schuetz has argued that the process contributed to a decline in the old civic
values, but Michael Whitby points to the role of bishops and the new Chris-
tian framework in the continuing success of many cities.^53 The munifi cence of
public benefactors did not give way in any simple sense to Christian charity;
the two more frequently existed side by side. Bishops fulminated against the
games and the theatre, and some objected to public baths on moral grounds,
but often to little effect. The great temples slowly and gradually went out of
use and were often converted into churches – though not everywhere, not
always without protest and sometimes only at a late date; as we saw, Christians
themselves tended to make grandiose claims which were not always justifi ed.^54
But church building on a large scale certainly changed the appearance and feel
of towns, and even average-sized towns in the sixth century might contain far
more and far larger churches than their population would seem to warrant;
furthermore, they often went on being extended and altered after other forms
of public building seem to have stopped, a feature which is strikingly exempli-
fi ed by the large churches of Sbeitla in North Africa. The church and individ-
ual bishops gradually assumed more and more responsibility not only for civic
leadership but also for social welfare in their communities, in the distribution
of alms and maintenance of hospices and by storing food and distributing it
in the times of famine which were a regular feature of ancient urban life.^55