222 Swain
military effort, but a coherent and widely shared Gothic identity can. One par-
ticular line of argument admits that our limited and lacunose sources cannot
confirm or deny the existence of a Gothic ethnicity constituted by notions of
blood ties, common origins, divine ancestry, etc. They can, however, attest to
a fully functioning Gothic political identity forged by long and mutually expe-
rienced military struggle and, importantly, maintained by exclusive rights to
military participation, which furnished economic benefits in the form of tax
shares and royal donatives. The maintenance of Gothic identity, therefore, was
an extension of the desire to maintain a position of advantage.105 Further, the
primary bearers of Gothic identity can be pinpointed in the sources. Procopius
routinely differentiates between two categories of the Gothic soldiery, the
higher of which are called aristoi, dokimoi, or logimoi.106 While these terms
refer to significant Gothic individuals and policy-makers, they are also applied
to much larger Gothic military contingents. This broader military elite, it is
argued, perhaps a fifth of the 20,000–30,000 strong Gothic army, were politi-
cally enfranchised and central to group cohesion and morale. Over the many
years of the Gothic War this group proved durable and the eventual end of
Gothic resistance should be associated with its substantial reduction.107
Gothic Language and Religion
By almost all accounts, a distinct and commonly spoken language contributes
substantially to group cohesion.108 It is not surprising, then, that proponents of
the existence of Gothic identity argue for the prevalence and centrality of the
Gothic tongue among Goths in Italy, while detractors minimize its importance
and cultural capital. Spoken Gothic is attested in various sources. Cassiodorus’
letters indicate that Cyprian knew Gothic, that Athalaric was impressed when
that Italo-Roman’s children learned “our language”, and that, in addition to the
105 One notices that, at their core, both Amory’s and Heather’s arguments for the absence or
existence of Gothic identity hinge upon individuals’ reactions to economic advantage.
Amory’s model, though, suggests individualized, ad hoc responses to the exigencies of
the moment. Heather’s economics are better thought of as an investment in Gothicness,
in the notion that group solidarity, even in the face of danger, will continue to yield
dividends.
106 Heather, “Gens and Regnum”, p. 97.
107 Arguments developed in Heather, “Theoderic, King of the Goths”; id., Goths; id., “Gens and
Regnum”; id., “Merely an Ideology?”; id., Restoration of Rome.
108 Pohl, “Introduction—Strategies of Identification”, p. 4.