Goths And Gothic Identity In The Ostrogothic Kingdom 221
group identity, however, one might expect to see stiffer resistance. What do the
sources suggest? Frustratingly, both; and lines of debate have been drawn up
accordingly.
On the one hand, it is argued that the pressures exerted by Justinian’s armies
provide clear proof that hard allegiances to ‘Gothic’ or ‘Roman’ identities did
not determine individuals’ resistance to or cooperation with invading impe-
rial forces. Instead, immediate concerns on the local, civic, and personal levels
predominated and influenced people’s choices. The terms ‘Goth’ vs. ‘Roman’
which Justinian’s war foisted upon the inhabitants of Italy were abstract and
unrealistic, and people picked sides (and sometimes changed them) for the
sake of survival and personal advantage. The Italo-Roman noble Liberius,
originally loyal to Odovacer, later served the Gothic kings only to eventu-
ally throw in his hat with Justinian. The Gothic royals Amalasuentha and
Theodahad were inclined to cut deals with Constantinople that guaranteed
their safety and comfort in exchange for the surrender of Gothic Italy.101 At
the start of the war the mere approach of Belisarius’ army saw the surrender
of the Gothic commander Pitzias together with half the Goths in Samnium
without resistance.102 And perhaps most strikingly, a papyrus reveals the case
of a certain Gundila, a Gothic soldier and Arian whose land was seized by
Justinian’s armies, was later returned upon his conversion to Catholicism, was
then taken by Totila’s Gothic forces, re-taken by imperial armies, and finally,
only after Gundila pleaded with the Roman bishop Vigilius, was returned to
him.103 It is suggested that Gundila’s vicissitudes belie any notion of a stalwart
allegiance to a ‘Gothic cause’ and instead reveal only an individual trying to
remain whole in the face of a destabilizing war. Gundila shed his ‘Gothic’ mili-
tary and religious identity at the drop of a hat in favour of a ‘Roman’ Catholic
one purely for economic reasons. Local and immediate concerns were more
potent than notions of Gothicness or Romanness and characterized the con-
duct of the war on both sides.104
On the other hand, opposing interpretations point out that despite the
quick surrenders and swapping of allegiances, a substantial number of people
who were called and self-identified as Goths resisted the armies of the empire
for nearly thirty years. An aggregate of separate reactions to immediate eco-
nomic advantage and personal interest cannot account for this sustained
101 Procopius, Wars 5.2.23–9, 5.3.1 ff., 5.4.11–22; Secret History 16.1.
102 Procopius, Wars 5.15.1.
103 The papyrus (PItal 49) is translated with commentary in Appendix 1 of Amory, People and
Identity, pp. 321–5.
104 Amory, People and Identity, ch. 5.