[Tokhtamish]

A very interesting read.

I see in it why Arianism died out in the West. It was the religion of the 'treaty breakers', the Goths, and why Gothic rule turned out to be so fragile in both Italy, Gaul, and Spain.

The Goths were the most civilized of the barbarian nations, far more so than savages like the Franks. Emperor Theodosius had a policy, and clearly represented a faction of which the young Sidonius had been a part, of thinking the Goths could be peacefully absorbed into the Roman Empire. But Gothic ambition could not be contained by the crumbling empire. When appeasement fails, the result is fury for having been a fool. Gothic 'betrayal' of Roman trust created a legacy of bitterness between Roman and Goth which made their kingdoms in Italy and Gaul/Spain 'conquest zones' and nothing more.

When the savage but orthodox Franks appeared on the scene, one battle, one Frankish victory pushed the Visigoths out of Gaul entirely into Spain. When the Moors appeared one battle, one Muslim victory, destroyed the Visigothic kingdom.

[weikel]

I generally agree with Gibbon's intrepratation except for one thing. Theodosius "The Great" was a disaster for the Empire. He practiced a policy of appeasement( we won't even get into his Christian fanaticism which among other things he allowed a fanatical Archbishop to destroy the Great Library of Alexandria) which caused the Empire in the West to fall shortly after his death. The Ostrogoths and Theodoric's Visigoth's were fairly enlightened rulers. The Visigoth's in Spain generally were not. The Franks were savages but they tried the real destroyers were the Picts, Lombards, Spanish Visigoths, and Vandals( the Vikings later on Charlemagne almost managed to engineer a recovery but the Vikings stopped that after his death, then the Catholic church after the Viking invasions decided that it should rule Europe and horde knowledge which caused other problems).