After Tacitus, the writing of history in the Roman Empire largely passed into the hands of Greek authors, exemplified by the monumental work of Cassius Dio in the early 3rd century. This Greek dominance was temporarily interrupted in the second half of the 4th century, when there was a notable resurgence of Latin historiography. This trend culminated with Ammianus Marcellinus's 31 books, which continued from where Tacitus left off.

The two fragmentary authors translated in this volume, Eunapius and Olympiodorus, mark the revival of the Greek tradition of secular historiography in the early 5th century — a tradition that would reach its peak in the 6th century with Procopius of Caesarea.

Neither Eunapius nor Olympiodorus are widely known, mainly because their works survive only in fragments. However, these fragments reveal interesting personalities. Eunapius was a sophist and teacher in Sardis, Asia Minor. He seems to have had little contact with the imperial court and complained that his provincial position isolated him from the information necessary to shed light on court intrigues. He compensated for this lack of information with a multitude of opinions. He was largely anti-Christian, mourning the death of Emperor Julian and accusing monks of raids on cities and the countryside of the empire.

Olympiodorus from Thebes in Egypt, who lived a generation earlier, was a poet who pursued a career in Constantinople and was sent on various diplomatic missions. On these missions, famously, he was accompanied by a parrot that could sing, dance, and speak Greek. Being closer to the imperial court, his historical account was more documented than Eunapius’s, though it survives only in a short summary by Photios.

Although the complete works of both authors have been lost, they served as essential sources for Zosimus, who wrote a history of the Roman Empire around 500 AD. Zosimus was the last pagan historian of Rome and strongly anti-Christian. He drew heavily from Eunapius’s polemic, and parts of his work, based on Olympiodorus, may also echo this influence.

The fragments of Eunapius and Olympiodorus thus offer two complementary — yet distinct — perspectives on the history of the last decades of the 4th and early 5th centuries. For modern historians, they are invaluable. Despite the great upheavals, such as the Goth invasions, the rise of Alaric, and the sack of Rome in 410 AD, these fragments — skillfully presented here by Panagiotis Manafis — allow us to glimpse the threats faced by the empire, the internal conflicts, and how contemporaries sought to explain these challenges.

Dr. Manafis’s deep knowledge of late antiquity and Byzantine historiography provides valuable guidance to the reader, helping to shape their own interpretations. This translation invites the reader to draw parallels with our turbulent times and perhaps find comfort in the fact that the "New Rome" endured another thousand years.

Peter Van Nuffelen (Ghent University, Belgium)