206 Swain
self-sustaining (and we shall discuss different views about this below), but in
reality it would have only existed and reified itself because of its attachment to
external factors—perhaps Arianism, the Gothic language, or membership in
Theoderic’s army. Evidence for the expression of ethnicity (distinct from iden-
tity) is exceedingly hard to pinpoint in the ancient and early medieval sources,
especially for non-Roman peoples.
The Nodes of Polemic
The state of disagreement in the field is such that it cannot be assumed a priori
that Gothic identity was a historical reality, or that ‘Goths’ even existed—at
least as they are portrayed in the ancient sources. To be sure, most scholars
hold the reality of Gothic cultural distinctiveness as a positive conviction, or
at least a working assumption.13 There is, however, a minority that has made
strong and influential sceptical cases.14 The initial question that must concern
us is not what Gothic identity was, but if it was.
Differences in opinion over whether the people referred to as Goths in the
sources possessed a communal identity and were in fact culturally distinct
from other groups stem both from the nature of our sparse sources and from
the questions that have been asked of them. Some inquiries begin with a fairly
strict definition of ethnicity (e.g. belief in a common origin and a shared past,
distinct language, customs, and laws, and other clear cultural indicia that sepa-
rate one group from another). If the sources do not yield unassailable proof
of these, Gothic ethnicity is said not to have existed.15 But opponents have
noted that our sources for this period are few and written only by Romans who
were usually uninterested in providing the kind of information necessary to
‘prove’ the existence of Gothic ethnicity.16 Looking specifically at Ostrogothic
Italy, some have noted that contemporary Italian sources speak to the highly
Roman character of Theoderic, his regime, and even his ‘Gothic’ army and
following, and conclude that Goths were essentially Romans and that there
were no appreciable differences between them.17 Their opponents, however,
would point out that some of these Italian writers were in the service of or
influenced by Theoderic’s court and reflect the Gothic king’s propagandizing
13 E.g. Moorhead, Theoderic; Heather, Goths.
14 E.g. Amory, People and Identity; Kulikowski, Rome’s Gothic Wars.
15 Amory, People and Identity.
16 Heather, “Merely an Ideology?”.
17 Arnold, Theoderic and the Roman Imperial Restoration.