Christensen received his PhD in history from the University of Copenhagen in June 2002. His disputation was supervised by Ian N. Wood and Niels Lund.[2] His thesis, Cassiodorus, Jordanes and the History of the Goths, concerned the reliability of Getica by Jordanes and the latter's alleged chief source, the now lost Origo Gothica by Cassiodorus.[2] In his thesis, Christensen claims that the Origo Gothica and Getica are entirely fabricated accounts without any foundation in Gothic oral tradition, being instead based upon a dubious synthesis of Greco-Roman sources. Christensen claims that the Greco-Romans knew nothing about the Goths until the 3rd century AD,[2] and that archaeological evidence on Gothic origins is useless.[6] On this account, Christensen recommended that the history of the migration period be rewritten.[2]
An English translation of Christensen's thesis was published in 2002 by Museum Tusculanum Press.[7] Christensen's thesis has generated much interest among scholars.[8] It was praised by Walter Goffart as a useful work.[9] Anthropologist Peter S. Wells considered it a significant contribution to the study of ancient peoples of northern Europe.[10] Ian N. Wood considered it an interesting work, although he thought Christensen went too far in denying Gothic elements in the texts.[11] Sigbjørn Sønnesyn considered Christensen's theories suspiciously similar to circular reasoning.[12]Michael Whitby dismissed Christensen's work as extreme and a mere footnote to what has already been written on the subject.[13]Dick Harrison considered Christensen's book interesting, although he criticized its rejection of archaeological evidence and refusal to respond to the views of dissenting scholars.[14]
Selected works
Kristenforfølgelserne i Rom indtil år 250, 1977
Lactantius the Historian. An Analysis of the De Mortibus Persecutorum., 1980
Cassiodorus, Jordanes and the History of the Goths: Studies in a Migration Myth, 2002
^Wells, Peter S. (2004). "Cassiodorus, Jordanes, and the History of the Goths". The Historian. 66 (2). Wiley-Blackwell: 389–390. JSTOR24452833. Christensen concludes that Jordanes's Getica is a fabricated account... Christensen's clear and systematic presentation makes this book a significant contribution to the literature on the formation of the early historical peoples of Europe
^Sønnesyn, Sigbjørn (2004). "Arne Søby Christensen, Cassiodorus, Jordanes and the History of the Goths". Scandinavian Journal of History. 29 (3–4). Taylor & Francis: 306–308. doi:10.1080/03468750410005719. S2CID162534744. Peter Heather has argued that Jordanes' account of the genealogy of the Amal family may in part be based on a Gothic tradition. This claim is opposed by Christensen with something looking suspiciously like circular argumentation.
