Notes bibliogr. Bibliogr. p. 97-99

One of these was Christian, more like a Roman (unus Christianus propiorque Romano ), and as events have proved, less savage in his slaughter through his fear of God. The other was a pagan and barbarian, a true Scythian (alius paganus barbarus et vere Scytha ), whose insatiable cruelty loved slaughter for slaughter’s sake as much as glory and plunder. This is how the Roman writer Orosius compares two Gothic warlords in the seventh book of his Histories Against the Pagans . Why is the leader of one attacking enemy group, Alaric, presented as propiorque Romano , ‘nearer to being Roman’, even though his troops sacked the city of Rome in 410? And why is Radagaisus, the leader of another attacking Gothic force, which devastated Italy in 405–406, described as a barbarian and vere Scytha , ‘a true Scythian’, as Goths were habitually called by Greco-Roman writers?

What is the difference between the two Gothic leaders? Orosius describes Radagaisus as insatiably cruel and bloodthirsty, while Alaric is depicted as ‘less savage in his slaughter’ because of his Christianity. Furthermore, Orosius states that Alaric was a Christian and Radagaisus a pagan. Thus, in the late fourth and early fifth centuries, one criterion for being Roman, at least for the Christian writer Orosius, was religious adherence.