Philip Henry Stanhope, Earl Stanhope (1805–1875)

An excellent biography of a great man. Belisarius, brilliant and ever loyal to the empire, reconquered italy and north africa and reformed the Roman Empire, then defended the empire from Persia, then went back to Italy. Though he was given no support--practically no troops or equipment--he was able to win victories and the survival of the Byzantine empire. His reconquest of Africa did likely pave the way for the muslim invasion some centuries later, as he was never able to hold on to and organize the province, but there was no way he could have known of that at the time. He was offered the crown of the Western Empire, but declined it--perhaps he should have taken it. Hoton's writing is clear and he clearly researched the primary sources. Hoton absolutely hates Empress Theodora (although history has softened on her in recent years, perhaps justly), but this is a minor quibble. A book worth reading about a great man who was unfairly treated by his contemporaries and who should be recognized by us.… (plus d'informations)

Jon Coulston’s introduction describes this as “…a work of meticulous scholarship penned by a British aristocrat with the resources and leisure for travel and research.” Philip Stanhope (a/k/a Lord Mahon) was 24 years old when “The Life of Belisarius” was published, and it is clearly a commendable, if flawed, effort. The authorial voice is positively enslaved by a compulsion to mimic Edward Gibbon. Even so, it’s a good (definitive?) source for the perspectives of mildly pompous, 19th Century English dandies on the life and times of Belisarius.

Mahon is churlishly misogynistic (a fault which Coulston attempts to minimize by ascribing it to his [Mahon’s] era rather than his person), as well as nakedly pro-Christian. Even Gibbon acknowledged the inherent superstitious quality of all religions; Mahon finds it only in non-Christian actors (and occasionally in those Christian sects of which he personally disapproves). These are, in themselves, petty criticisms. However, throughout his book Mahon relies heavily upon his own biases and prejudices to explain historical causation.

Nevertheless, it is an engrossing and entertaining book – in no small measure because of the subject himself. Belisarius may not have bequeathed to posterity enough material to construct a first-rate psychological biography, but his actions precluded the necessity. His story would be impressive in any telling of it.… (plus d'informations)