The Earliest States of Eastern Europe

There is a popular opinion in the historiography that the diplomacy as a practice of interstate relationships appears only in the Modern period. Ancient sources can prove such kind of idea. However, on the other hand, some ways of interactions between different tribes, peoples and states are known since the earliest times. As a usual, diplomacy in Antiquity served as a kind of an additional resource in time of the war or as the substitute of military conflicts but not as an instrument for peacekeeping. The diplomatic negotiations usually started after the end of the war or if one of the sides of the conflict considered it a menace. The following problem is discussed in this paper based on the fragments of Priscus of Panion — the diplomat of the Eastern Roman Empire, who was very well acquainted with the relationships between Eastern and Western Romans and Huns due to his taking part in Roman diplomatic mission to different barbarian tribes. The extant part of his texts contains an important information about the practice of diplomatic treaties and negotiations in the Late Antiquity as well as about its main actors. His accounts demonstrate that in the same period there already existed some traditions and practices of organizing and acceptance of diplomatic missions.

Keywords:

the Romans, the Hunns, Attila, the Eastern Roman empire, Priscus, an embassy, an ambassador, negotiations

References

Грацианская Л. И. Центр и периферия: литературное воплощение этнопсихологических реалий в описании «варваров» // ДГ, 1996-1997 годы: Северное Причерноморье в античности. Вопросы источниковедения. М., 1999. С. 46–58.
Олимпиодор. История / Пер. с греч., вступ. статья, комм. и указатели Е. Ч. Скржинской. Изд. 2-е. СПб., 1999.
Сказания Приска Панийского / Пер. Г.С. Дестуниса // Ученые записки II отд. Имп. АН. СПб., 1861. Кн. VII. Вып. 1.
Удальцова З. В. Идейно-политическая борьба в ранней Византии (по данным историков IV–VII вв.). М., 1974.
Blockley R. C. The Fragmentary Classicising Historians of the Later Roman Empire: Eunapius, Olympiodorus, Priscus and Malchus. Liverpool, 1981.
Croke B. The Context and Date of Priscus Fragment 6 // Classical Philology. 1983. Vol. 78. №. 4. P. 297–308.
Dauge Jv. A. Le Barbare: Recherches sur la conception romaine de la barbarie et de la civilisation (Collection Latomus, 176). Bruxelles, 1981.
Evagrius. Historia Ecclesiastica // The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius with the Scholia / Ed. J. Bides, L. Parmentier. L., 1898.
Gurman G. G. Were the Barbarians a Negative or Positive Factor in Ancient and Medieval History? // The Historian. 1988. Vol. 50. №. 4. P. 558–572.
Hershey A. S. The History of International Relations during Antiquity and the Middle Ages // The American Journal of International Law. 1911. Vol. 5. №. 4. P. 901–933.
Millar F. Emperors, Frontiers and Foreign Relations, 31 B. C. to A. D. 378 // Britannia. 1982. Vol. 13. P. 1–23.
Millar F. Goverment and Diplomacy in the Roman Empire during the First Three Centuries // The International History Review. 1988. Vol. 10. №. 3. P. 345–377.
Olympiodori Fragmenta // Historici Graeci minores / Ed. L. Dindorfius. Lipsiae, 1870. Vol. I. P. 450–472.
Peretz D. The Roman Interpreter and His Diplomatic and Military Roles // Historia. Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte. 2006. Bd. 55. H. 4. S. 451–470.
Priscus. Fragmenta // The Fragmentary Classicising Historians of the Later Roman Empire: Eunapius, Olympiodorus, Priscus and Malchus / Ed. C. Blockley. Liverpool, 1983. Vol. II. Text, Translation and Historiographical Notes by Francis Cairns. P. 222–377.
Treadgold W. The Diplomatic Career and Historical Work of Olympiodorus of Thebes // The International History Review. 2004. Vol. 26. №. 4. P. 709–733.
Vogt J. Kulturwelt und Barbaren. Zum Menshheitsbild der spätantiken Gesellschaft (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Mainz, Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse 1967, №. 1). Mainz, 1967.