Zosimus-reliable or not?

[juvenus]

Is anyone familiar with his work Nova Historiae?
Could it be regarded as objective and accurate writing?

This is the link to an excellent web site which contains tons of useful data, including the work of Zosimus at the very bottom under Z.

CLICK HERE

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

Zosimus? What did he write about again?

[juvenus]

His work is named: Nova Historie (or something like that). It means New History.
I know he wrote about 4th and 5th century developments. His work may be useful for the UR as well. But I'm not sure how accurate he was. Heard some complaints that his narrative is confusing at some points.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

hmmm... ill look it up. you got a translation?

[juvenus]

yeah, give me a min...
EDIT:
first post updated with link!

[Valentinian Victor]

How can people who allegedly have an interest in the Late Roman Empire admit to never have heard of or read Zosimos? He is absolutely essential reading.

And no, much of what he said must be treated with caution, he had pagan leanings and was anti-christian, so some of his accounts are biased. Saying that, he did rely on histories now lost to us, so he is invaluable in that respect.

[juvenus]

Oh I see. That's all I wanted to hear VV. Thanks.
BTW, I knew he hadn't liked Theodosius for his religious policy for example. I was just wondering if his accounts of the events like battles, conduct of war, reforms, administrative issues are valuable and correct. But now as you say that he relied on the works of the previous historians I suppose his accounts are reasonably truthful.

I'm about to start reading his writings.

[Renatus]

Ronald T. Ridley, in the Introduction to his 1982 translation, sums up Zosimus thus:

"By no stretch of the imagination can Zosimus be called a great historian. Too often he does little more than preserve his sources, and that not very intelligently or accurately, as a glance at the commentary will show. On the other hand, simply because he is a pagan, he has been the object of violent Christian abuse. A just assessment should concentrate on the interest he deserves as a sixth century Eastern historian writing when, according to him, the Roman Empire had already fallen, and attempting to explain why that had happened."

[juvenus]

Nice one Renatus. Did you, by any chance, read Zosimus?

[Renatus]

Only odd passages, not all the way through. That's something else on my extensive "To do" list.

[juvenus]

I see.

[Lionheart]

I think that Zosimus possess some interest. However i believe the best rider for that time frame is Ammianus Marcellinus.

But to try to understand that time-frame we must read some sources for that time. Not posterior versions or even contemporian interpretations.

I'm not criticizing anything my opinion all sources or even interpretations about the sources are important.

[juvenus]

I agree, but don't forget-Ammianus narative ends in 378ad! That's a major problem. Ammianus is the best source by far but only up to 378ad! Zosimus covered the later period as well.
I wonder if there is any other source that could be compared to him?

[Lionheart]

I know Ammianus ends about that time frame. We have Eunapius but is works are mainly incorporated in Zosimus. Olympiodorus works sadly are lost. But i must agree with you Zosimus and Procopius probably are thw two main names of the late period.

Several other writte but their works are unfortunaly lost.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

Yeah, i hope we one day find olypiodorus. His pre-merobaudes works seem like they'd be great to describe aetius' army.

[Valentinian Victor]

Yeah, i hope we one day find olypiodorus. His pre-merobaudes works seem like they'd be great to describe aetius' army.

Whilst I would echo your sentiment, and those also who lament the loss of the first 13 books of Ammianus (and also the fact that there may have been other books after book 31 which are also missing), I think it is too much to hope for that these histories will now be found. Thats not to say such things have happened in fairly modern times. A book thought to be lost turned up in a monastary in Greece several years ago, and we know that monks reused documents by washing off the inks and reusing the paper, but still leaving traces that modern forensic equipment can now reveal. A number of poems and short works have been, and are still being discovered in the rubbish mounds outside cities such as Antioch in the middle East, so there may be hope in that direction.

But, the reality is that all we are ever likely to have are the echo's of the lost works in other ancient historians writings.

[ray243]

Whilst I would echo your sentiment, and those also who lament the loss of the first 13 books of Ammianus (and also the fact that there may have been other books after book 31 which are also missing), I think it is too much to hope for that these histories will now be found. Thats not to say such things have happened in fairly modern times. A book thought to be lost turned up in a monastary in Greece several years ago, and we know that monks reused documents by washing off the inks and reusing the paper, but still leaving traces that modern forensic equipment can now reveal. A number of poems and short works have been, and are still being discovered in the rubbish mounds outside cities such as Antioch in the middle East, so there may be hope in that direction.

But, the reality is that all we are ever likely to have are the echo's of the lost works in other ancient historians writings.

What about archaeological finds in Egypt? Aren't they discovering lost Roman documents one after another?

[Valentinian Victor]

What about archaeological finds in Egypt? Aren't they discovering lost Roman documents one after another?

Yes, but translations in the public domain will be years away. And the documents are in the main just inventories and the such like, not juicy stuff like the lost books of Ammianus, Enuapius or Cassiodorus!

[ray243]

Yes, but translations in the public domain will be years away. And the documents are in the main just inventories and the such like, not juicy stuff like the lost books of Ammianus, Enuapius or Cassiodorus!

Yeah, but those documents can be much more useful to us than narrative history. Sure, it takes time to craft all those primary source into a narrative, but at the very least, those sources are not really biased in anyway.

[juvenus]

who knows, maybe something juicy comes on the surface...