Late Roman Army

This was very hard work, cos I studied very carefully military- and social structures of Rome. And of course, as usual, laws from codex Theodosianus. I was amazed at how different my view begins to be compared to common views of this history. The catholic church history and barbarian migration have a surprising new and massive part of Roman decline and fall. And I knew that is not what Finnish authors want to here.

Asturius vivas! Pictorial Programme and Function of a Late Roman Belt Buckle
A Late Roman brass belt buckle in the collection of the RGZM is decorated with the portrait medallion of a man between victories and two persons likely to represent apostles. An inscription on both sides of the portrait reads Asturius vivas. The object is likely to have been manufactured in North Italy or Pannonia in the second half of the 4th century. But its decorative features include elements known from a golden belt buckle from Asia Minor which belongs to a class of artefacts known to have been distributed as imperial largesse. In this paper, it is argued that the more humble piece it discusses was an object of largesse belonging to a dignitary or officer named Asturius who distributed it among his followers in imitation of imperial custom. In analogy to the golden imperial example, the decoration of the brass buckle is interpreted as an advertisement that its bearer was a loyal follower of Asturius.

This text gives some very small selection of details included in the forthcoming Caracalla: A Military Biography (as an advertisement) due to be published by Pen & Sword this year and in fact provides also a short overview of some of the unconventional strategies and tactics employed by Caracalla together with some quite new info regarding period equipment and military practices. A much fuller discussion of all things connected to military matters in its widest sense can be found in the book.

The Greek text of the famous late Roman compendium of the classic art of war, the Strategikon of Pseudo-Maurice, can be divided into different chronological layers, dated from the fifth to the seventh centuries. The basis for this division is the analysis of textual unity, of inner citation, of the described strategic and tactical schemes and used terms. The main three phases of the development of the text coincide with the three great military reforms – introduction of the Hunnic mobile cavalry tactics of "hippotoxotae" (the so-called defensors and cursors), the secret “hyperkerastae” reform of Justinian’s brother Germanus, and the reform according to the Avarian scheme of time of the emperor Heraklios. All three reforms are based on the deep contemplation of the ethnographical data gathered by imperial intelligence services.

Development of the Roman army presents to alike sight of the Roman History. Generally, army and administration of the Roman shared same fortune, and entity of Roman supremacy bounded to success of army. Especially, the army underlined the Roman system throughout Imperial period. In this time, Augustus established classical the Roman Army that seen as superior war machine starting from first century (AD) till third century. However, end of third century onwards the Roman army shows different character. Number of non-Roman soldiers and cavalry gradually increased in the compound of the Roman army. Generally, this process is called " barbarization " of the Roman army and it has been associated with disintegration of West Roman Empire. But also, it becomes one of the basic features of the Late Roman army or the Early Byzantine army.

Caracalla. A Military Biography is now available as a hardcover, Kindle and e-book an from the website of its publisher Pen & Sword Publishing and from most of the major booksellers.  It is not only the first published biography in English of this remarkable individual, but also the first that reassess the evidence from the point of view of military history.

Campaigns of Germanicus, AD 13-16 describes briefly the campaigns, joint and combined ops., tactics, strategy, foreign policy, espionage, intelligence gathering, and strategy between ca. 60 BC and AD 150 with particular focus on Germanicus' campaigns.

Pat Southern-Karen R. Dixon, El ejército romano del Bajo Imperio, Madrid, Edi-ciones Desperta Ferro, 2018, 317 pp., 83 figs. y 4 mapas [ISBN: 978-84-946499-3-6]. La obra que nos proponemos reseñar es una traducción de Marco Aurelio Balbás Polanco del conocido libro The Late Roman Army (London, Routledge, 2000) y cuya autoría recae en Pat Southern y Karen R. Dixon. Pat Southern es una historiadora especialista en la Roma clásica que ha realizado interesantes aportes al mundo aca-démico como, por ejemplo, The Roman Cavalry (en coautoría con K. R. Dixon; Lon-don, Routledge, 1997), The Roman Army. A social and Institutional History (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007) o su afamada obra sobre la Britannia romana: Ro-man Britain. A new History 55 BC. AD 450 (Stroud, Amberley Publishing, 2013). La segunda autora de esta monografía, Karen R. Dixon, se ha especializado en aspectos relativos a la moral en el ejército romano tardío en una línea investigadora que se asemeja a la iniciada por J. Keegan en su obra El rostro de la batalla (The face of Battle. A Study of Agincourt, Waterloo and the Somme, New York, Vintage Books, 1976). El estudio del ejército romano siempre ha sido un tema que ha originado abundan-tes y ricos debates entre sus especialistas. Sin embargo, hasta la publicación de este libro no poseíamos-y menos en lengua castellana-un estudio amplio que tratara con ahínco el ejército romano tardío, ejército que ya poco se parecía al del Alto Imperio al tener una personalidad propia debido a las sucesivas reformas de los emperadores y, también, debido a la situación histórica en la que se hallaba, puesto que en cierta medida el funcionamiento del ejército romano tardío refleja el propio funcionamien-to de la sociedad bajoimperial y su mentalidad. Por dicho motivo, agradecemos a las autoras y al traductor de este estudio que se hayan centrado en analizar la evolución de esta institución durante los siglos que componen el Bajo Imperio romano (siglos III-V d.C.), si bien también hacen referencia a sucesos y personajes del Imperio bi-zantino como, por ejemplo, Narses o Belisario. El libro está compuesto por una serie de capítulos temáticos en los que se tratan distintos aspectos del ejército romano tardío. El primer capítulo ("Fuentes", pp. 1-5) nos proporciona una serie de apuntes en lo relacionado a la metodología que se ha seguido para la elaboración de este análisis. Así comprobamos que las autoras han tenido en cuenta, más allá de la cultura material proporcionada por la arqueología, distintas fuentes literarias del periodo, tanto las que hablan directamente del tema del ejército (Vegecio o la Notitia Dignitatum), como otras que mencionan indirecta-mente aspectos relacionados con el ejército tardorromano (por ejemplo, la Historia Augusta, Procopio o Amiano Marcelino). Sin embargo, no se limitan a citarlas, sino que interpretan y analizan la mentalidad adjunta a ellas. En este caso, estamos en desacuerdo con la traducción cuando señala que Amiano Marcelino tiene una "extre-mada hostilidad hacia Juliano" (p. 3), cuando a nuestro juicio sucede precisamente Gerión. Revista de Historia Antigua

The Catalaunian Fields is a battle well known for the role of terrain in the battle, with Jordanes' description of the engagement focusing almost in its entirety on the hill. With the location of the battlefield now known and new research having recently come to light, the role of terrain on the battle can now be accurately assessed and used as an example to show the importance of terrain in battles as a whole. Ancient Warfare 13.2, October 2019.

This article presents a fragmentary and hitherto unpublished inscribed funerary stele, which was reused in Venice as an architectural spolium and has recently come to light. The text, written in Latin, is very likely to be the epitaph for a legionary, whose name is unknown since it occupied the part of the inscription that has not survived. Archaeological data and textual analysis suggest that the inscribed stone dates to the 1st - early 2nd centuries AD and probably came to Venice from the Eastern shores of the Adriatic. It also seems likely that the legionary mentioned in the fragmentary text was a native of Narbonese Gaul who died in Dalmatia or in Aquileia. The inscription can perhaps be associated with another funerary stele (CIL V 2162), which was reused in the base of the nearby San Vidal bell-tower.

This article provides an update on one of the most famous characters in the history of Ancient Caucasian Iberia. As an Iberian prince exiled in the Roman Empire owing to the changeover of his fatherland in the Sasanian orbit c. 368, Bacurius led career in the Roman army to become General of Theodosius.
Several testimonies by Ammianus Marcellinus, Libanius and Themistius, Rufinus, and Byzantine ecclesiastical historians enable to better understand this ambivalent figure, who was well favored by Christians as well as pagans.
This article offers a detailed explanation showing that the death of Bacurius during the Battle of Frigidus in 394 prevents him from being confused with other Iberian princes of the fifth century CE.
The account narrating the conversion of the Iberian king to the Christian faith delivered by Bacurius to Rufinus must also be understood as a political act in the context of the Acilisene Treaty of 387.

Revised and corrected working paper dated October 25, 2019.

Access to the original paper published in Iberia-Colchis, № 13, 2017, p. 166-192 :
http://dspace.nplg.gov.ge/handle/1234/242318

Dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the Erwin Schramm’s fundamental work "Μονάγκων und Onager".

The one-armed torsion throwing machine, μονάγκων – known since the end of the third century B.C.E. – became the main stone-thrower of the Roman army of the period of the Dominate under the name of onager. No technical manual of this engine, similar to those found in treatises of Philon, Biton, Heron or Vitruvius, is currently known. All we have at our disposal are fragments from the works of Apollodorus of Damascus (first century C.E.) and Anonymus Byzantinus (tenth century C.E.) with descriptions of machines similar to the μονάγκων as well as the well-known “Digression” by Ammianus Marcellinus.

Attempts to interpret the surviving information and to reconstruct the onager faced numerous contradictions with the text of Ammianus. While it is possible that Ammianus did not understand the principles of action of this machine, it is unlikely that he provided an erroneous description, since he personally saw it in action. Resolving all contradictions within the dominant theoretical model that places the horizontal framework on the ground does not seem to be possible. A careful analysis of the well-known sources, with assistance from new late medieval iconographic witnesses resolves the contradictions and results in the new model that raises the spring-frame to a vertical position and the torsion bundle to a higher altitude.

This monograph presents the first complete analysis of all campaigns and battles of the Armenian-Persian War of 449-451, one of the largest in a long series of wars fought between these adversaries during the III-Vth centuries. The study reveals the course and chronology of hostilities, the numbers and force structures of the Armenian and Persian armies, their battle orders and tactics. The two general engagements at Khalkhal and Avarayr (in 450 and 451, respectively) are dissected in detail, including their exact locations, the sizes of the battling armies and the numbers and deployment of their combat arms (cavalry, infantry, and еlephantry), as well as the chosen strategy and the original tactical designs of their high command. Special attention is given to the interaction of Persian and Armenian traditional military doctrines with practical demands of warfare. The meanings of many pieces and phrases of ancient Armenian military vocabulary and terminology are being deciphered and explained for the first time. Accordingly, extensive excerpts from the ancient Armenian sources receive new interpretation. To achieve his objectives, the author employs interdisciplinary methodology, effectively integrating source criticism, military-historical, military-theoretical, military-terminological, etymological, historical-philological, historical-demographic, historical-cartographic, topographical and chronological levels of analysis. The book is intended both for specialists and general readers interested in the warfare of the ancient world.

Монография представляет собой первый в историографии целостный анализ кампаний и сражений армяно-персидской войны 449–451 гг. – одной из самых больших в длинной серии aрмяно-персидских войн III–V веков. В книге устанавливается периодизация войны 449–451 гг. по ее основным этапам; методично уточняются динамика и хронология военных действий; выявляются численность и организационные структуры армянской и пер-сидской армий; рассматривается взаимодействие военных доктрин этих тра-диционных противников с практическими требованиями ведения войны и боя; детально разбираются генеральные сражения под Халхалом (450 г.) и Аварайром (451 г.), в том числе боевые порядки и тактические заготовки сто-рон, задачи родов войск, их количественное распределение по фронту и в глубину, наконец, ход самих этих битв. Трактуется и раскрывается значение многих единиц древнеармянской военной лексики и терминологии. Все эти и другие вопросы исследуются на основе междисциплинарной методологии и интегрирования различных уровней анализа – источниковедческого, военно-исторического, военно-теоретического, военно-терминологического, этимологического, историко-филологического, историко-демографического, историко-картографического, топографического и хронологического. Для специалистов и широкого круга читателей, интересующихся историей и военным делом античного мира.

Gordian III and Philip the Arab. The Roman Empire at a Crossroads (Dr. Ilkka Syvänne, Pen and Sword Publishing, Barnsley 22 March 2021) offers not only detailed analysis of the reigns of Gordian III and Philip the Arab, but also a very detailed analysis of the wars and political developments that preceded their reigns between 222 and 238.  It was during those years that the political and religious factions came into existence that dominated the events also after 238. The meager sources are milked for all their worth to achieve this.

The monograph shows how the Roman military organization, equipment and tactics changed from 222 until 249 and shows how and when the Romans developed the immediate predecessor of Gallienus’s famous cavalry corps and why it was that Decius was employing only cavalry when he fought against the Goths.

The campaigns of Alexander Severus, Maximinus Thrax, Pupienus, Crispinus, Timesitheus and the campaigns of the Arabic brothers Philip and Priscus, and others are analyzed in such detail as the sources allow.  The monograph shows what type of Empire Gordian III inherited and in what state he left it to his successor.  When Philip the Arab ruled the Roman Empire was still the most powerful Empire on earth.  Philip and his brother Priscus kept both the Goths and Persians in check so that it can be said with great confidence that their death was a great blow to the Roman Empire because their successor Decius was defeated by both. The monograph explains why the two successful brothers were killed and what the mistakes were that led to this situation and what was their inheritance for their successor Decius.

Includes a discussion of the Roman use of germ warfare.

For those who are interested in Sassanian history the book also offers new material which explain for example the circumstances in which Shapur I rose to power and how he may have infiltrated the Roman high command with his own operatives.

Generations of historians have often treated the large-scale recruitment of barbarians in the late Roman army as one of the root causes of the decline of the western Roman Empire. But evidence from both the literary and material sources for views on this so-called 'barbarization' of the field armies during the fourth century AD has been exaggerated and misinterpreted. On the contrary, the growing presence of barbarians in the Roman war machine did not diminish the Empire's status as Mediterranean super power.

Odin the Man traces the life and times of Odin.  The study suggests that Odin was a third century warrior captain who managed to convince his followers that he was a living god, and who caused the mass migrations of the Germanic tribes against the Roman frontiers in the late third century.  The analysis of several sources support the position taken by Snorri that we are dealing with a historical figure.  Despite being a great warrior, Odin's greatest achievement was to fool people up to modern times that he was a god.  He was not called a trickster, conjuror and magician for nothing.  The study of the career forms the Appendix 3 of the forthcoming Britain in the Age of Arthur (Dark Ages Britain), and one of the purposes has been to advertise this book by demonstrating what sorts of results one can obtain if one pays more attention to what the sources state rather than follows the consensus view as well as the book series Military History of Late Rome.

Plumbata, mattiobarbula and martzobarboulon were the names of a javelin with a lead weight. It was a part of standard military equipment of Late Roman soldiers. Vegetius, Maurice and Anonymous Reformer describe the рlumbata as a throwing weapon with a range of throw superior to the javelin. Archaeological remains of plumbata looks like small barbed head on the iron stem and barrel shaped lead weight. Their length could vary from 98 mm to 275 mm long and weight from 130 gm to 350 gm. Modern reanactors reconstructed plumbata as a shot javelin with special way of usage. It was held in the tail and throw away by untwisting. Due to the good weight respecting to the small size, the energy consumption during the plumbata flight was smaller than that of the javellin. It helps to use the plumbata as the effective weapon of the first strike and explains Vegetius’s recommendations to this weapon as well.

RESUMEN
Se estudian los documentos que hacen referencia al uso de la sal entre los soldados. Se proponen distintas
utilidades: para la dieta, para la conservación de alimentos, principalmente, pero también se propone
un uso terapéutico. Por otra parte, tras el análisis de inscripciones y de algunos papiros, se analiza la
importancia que la sal tenía como parte del sueldo de los soldados en época imperial. También, a través de
la epigrafía, se analiza el papel de los negotiatores salinarum y los conductores, evaluando su importancia
como proveedores y abastecedores de sal u otros alimentos para el ejército.
ABSTRACT
This paper studied the documents that refer to the use of the salt among the soldiers: for the diet, for
the food conservation, principally, but also one proposes a therapeutic use. On the other hand, after the
analysis of inscriptions and papyruses, there is analyzed the importance that the salt took as a report of the
salary of the soldiers in imperial epoch; also is analyzed the role of the negotiatores salinarum and the conductores,
merchants of salt and drivers (documented by the inscriptions), evaluating his importance as suppliers
of salt or other food for the army.

At the turn of the fourth century, four soldiers ruled the Roman Empire: Diocletian, Maximian, Constantius and Galerius. This Tetrarchy, as modern scholars call it, was the brainchild of Diocletian, and under this emperor's leadership, the regime brought stability to an empire shaken after a half-century of political and military convulsions. These Tetrarchs defeated the resurgent enemies of the empire, they ended an epidemic of military rebellion that had lasted decades, and they attempted numerous reforms in an effort to better the empire both economically and spiritually.

This dissertation examines the Tetrarchy as an imperial dynasty, and it uses the concept of dynasty to highlight how the Tetrarchic regime was often at odds with imperial precedents. Like other Roman dynasts, the Tetrarchs employed adoption, marriage and shared nomenclature in the expression of their rule, but they also ignored certain dynastic norms. Diocletian and Maximian presented themselves as brothers despite being unrelated, and they used the names Jovius and Herculius to imply a close connection to Jupiter and Hercules. Diocletian and Galerius repeatedly excluded the sons of the Tetrarchs from the succession, and the sons themselves were variously hostages, symbols of imperial unity and targets of assassination. Moreover, for most of the Tetrarchic period, imperial women were neither empresses nor deified.

This study investigates these issues through the lens of the Roman army, and it presents the Tetrarchic dynasty as a military experiment, created by and tailored to soldiers. At the beginning of Tetrarchic rule, Rome's armies exerted an unprecedented influence over imperial politics, and the Tetrarchs themselves were products of these armies. This thesis shows that the Tetrarchs gave their sons and the imperial women important but subdued roles within their regime. It proposes that these approaches to dynasty and the decision to create the Tetrarchy came about because of military experience and responded to the pressing need to forestall army rebellion. Furthermore, the study argues that the regime represented the Augusti and their Caesars as pairs of brothers, and that it did so to appeal to the army. It is concluded that friendship, namely the camaraderie of Diocletian and Maximian, was central to dynastic cohesion and imperial unity during the Tetrarchic period. Whatever the intentions of the Tetrarchs, their dynastic junta could only be temporary, since the friendship of the Augusti could not be replicated.

Ever since Edward Gibbon’s History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, barbarian migrations have loomed large in popular perceptions and scholarly discus-sions concerning ‘the Fall of Rome’. In particular, the arrival of Gothic tribes into Roman territory, crossing the Danube in 376, has usually been interpreted as the starting point of the ‘Great Migration Era’, eventually culminating in the end of western Roman emperorship a century later. However, the exact nature, organization, and aims of the Visigoths have been fiercely contested in the renewed surge of literature over the past decade debating the end of the Roman Empire. This piece will look at the different phases of the ‘genesis’ of the Visigoths and their itinerary, from their origins in the Balkans, to their uprising under Alaric, their move to Italy, and their eventual settlement in southwestern Gaul and Spain. We will see that these various episodes cannot be seen as the long trek of an ever-wandering mass of barbarian hordes, but rather the movements of an army constantly changing in composition due to political circumstances. The Visigoths only came into being as a force because of Roman power games, and were only able to forge a kingdom when the Empire became a failed state in its transalpine provinces long after their settlement.

Battle of the Catalaunian Plains The last victory of the Romans. By Ziv Yoffe.

אחרי שהשפיל את קונסטנטינופול והמזרח בשנת 449 , אטילה ההוני החל להביט לכיוון מערב. ניצחונותיו
הרבים והפחד שזרע ברחבי שתי האימפריות נתנו לו כבר בשלב זה את האפשרות לבוא בדרישות גם
כלפי האימפריה המערבית. במהלך הזמן אטילה הלך והגדיל את דרישותיו עד לשלב בו ביקש את
השליטה על מחצית מהאימפריה המערבית. בקשה זו באה עקב קשריו עם הונוריה ) Honoria (, אחותו
המרדנית של האימפראטור ואלנטניאנוס ) Valentinian ( ה- 3 , אשר ביקשה להתחתן עם אטילה במקום
הסנטור שאליו הייתה מאורסת כנגד רצונה, ובכך לתת לבעלה ההוני חזקה על מחצית האימפריה. אולם,
בשנת 450 פחתה השפעתם של ההונים על אירופה עקב מדיניותו הלוחמנית של מרקיאנוס ) Marcian ,)
האימפראטור החדש של המזרח, אשר ביקש להפסיק את התשלומים לאטילה, ועקב עלייתה של מדיניות
אנטי הונית במערב. השלטונות המערביים הודיעו לאטילה שלא יוכל להתחתן עם הונוריה ולקבל את -
השליטה אותה ביקש להשיג, וכן החלו להיווצר בריתות אנטי הונית עם שבטים גרמניים שונים. כתוצאה -
מכך, פתח אטילה במערכה צבאית, אותה כנראה היה מבצע בכל מקרה. מסיבה שאינה ברורה, ושעליה
ישנן השערות רבות אותן לא נוכל לפרט כאן, המערכה הופנתה דווקא כנגד האימפריה המערבית ולא
כנגד מרקיאנוס. בתחילת 451 יצאו ההונים מפָנוֹניה, חצו את הדנובה, ומסיבה שגם היא אינה מובנת,
פלשו לגאליה ולא לאיטליה. מול אטילה עמד פלאביוס אטיוס ) Aëtius (, המפקד העליון ) magister militum ( של הצבאות הרומיים באימפריה המערבית, אשר עד לשלב זה הפגין תמיד יחס חיובי להונים.
אטיוס חשד שהמטרה האולטימטיבית של אטילה היא כל מערב אירופה ולא רק גאליה או הויזגותים, או
שפחד מאפשרות של ברית ויזגותית הונית, ולכן יצא לטולוז על מנת להגיע להסכם עם תאודוריק - -
( Theodoric, Theodorid ( הראשון, מלך הויזגותים. למרות יחסי האיבה בין השניים, אשר התקיימו
עשרות שנים, הצליחו הרומאים בסופו של דבר לשכנע את תאודוריק לשתף איתם פעולה ולא לעמוד לבד
מול הפולשים. בינתיים, כבר הספיק אטילה לשרוף לא מעט ערים גאליות ופשט על בלגיה. בתחילת
אפריל בזזו ההונים את מ ץ ואחר כך את ריימס. ייתכן שההונים גם הגיעו להסכם עם סנגיבנוס -
( Sangibanus (, מלך האלאנים, כדי שיבגוד באטיוס וייתן לאטילה את השליטה על אורליאן במידה ויבוא
לכבוש אותה, אך הדבר אינו ברור. כך או כך, בסוף אפריל או תחילת מאי הטיל אטילה מצור על
אורליאן. אטיוס התעכב באיטליה עקב רעב כבד שפקד את האזור, רעב אשר השאיר אותו עם כמה חילות
עזר בלבד. בסופו של דבר, הרומאים חצו את האלפים, נפגשו עם תאודוריק ויצאו להציל את אורליאן.
כנראה שההונים כבר היו בתוך העיר כאשר הרומאים והויזגותים הגיעו, אך, בדרך שאינה מובנת, הכוחות
המערביים הצליחו לגרש את הפולשים מהעיר. כוחותיו של אטילה נסוגו כ- 150 קילומטרים לכיוון צפון-
מערב, לאזור "השדות הקאטאלאוניים" ) Catalaunian (, שם נפגשו עם כוחותיו של אטיוס, וניהלו את
הקרב ההיסטורי.

In our days we tend to think of conspiracy theories as a predominantly modern concept, which expanded widely during the Cold War and we often underestimate their influence in the public Logos, classifying them as pseudo-history and product of collective illusion. However the occasional unexpected course of politics and the accidental events which might occur only make conspiracies to appear even more attractive, turning them to self-fulfilling prophecies. The term ‘conspiracy’ and its context in the ‘modern’ sense (i. e. a ‘secret’ conspiracy that threatens the existence of a society)was firstly introduced by the fourth century historian Ammianus Marcellinus in order to describe what seemed to be a barbarian collaboration to invade and pillage the north-western Roman provinces in 367 AD. Therefore in order to explain this supposed barbarian collaboration against Rome, he coined the term Conspiratio Barbarica.  Half a century later the Roman authorities and the populus Romanus felt that they were facing the combined forces of an external threat and a collaborating enemy within. The gradual rise and influence of men of (semi)barbarian origin in the army and Court and the increase and effectiveness of barbarian raids and invasions became a great concern causing people to start searching for answers beyond the field of the Obvious or the effectiveness of the of the late Roman modus gubernandi, concluding in their fear and anxiety that the only explanation was that someone from within had invited the barbarians in order to destroy Rome. In such a time of uncertainty and insecurity, the manufacturing of invisible intruders and traitors of the Romanitas in the collective imagination was almost inevitable. This paper will attempt to examine the rise and influence of conspiracy theories among the late Roman elites and people and will highlight all those conditions and factors that made those theories so appealing and attractive as an interpretation and explanation of the Late Roman Realities.

Between Sanabor and Col several finds were found, which further suggest that in the past military operations were held in this area. An example is the discovery of a slingshot lead projectile in Gradišče near Sanabor. Such projectiles are usually associated with an earlier advance of Roman troops in the heart of Slovenia and are probably not related to the Battle of Frigidus River. Slightly more interesting is the discovery of a hiposandal near Col.

Med Sanaborjem in Colom so našli nekaj posamičnih najdb, ki še dodatno nakazujejo, da so se tu v antiki odvijale določene vojaške operacije. Tak primer je najdba svinčenega izstrelka za pračo na Gradišču pri Sanaborju. Uporaba izstrelkov za pračo je ponavadi povezana z zgodnejšim prodorom rimskih čet v notranjost Slovenije in verjetno ni v povezavi z bitko pri Frigidu. Nekoliko bolj zanimiva je najdba hiposandale v bližini Cola.

Entre 260 et 363, les Romains développèrent des éléments de distinction pour construire leur identité face à un Autre appelé Barbare. Bien qu'officiellement opposé à la romanité, le Barbare pouvait y entrer en étant recruté dans l'armée romaine selon différentes modalités dépendant des conditions de sa rencontre avec l'Empire. De ce recrutement des Barbares naquit la notion de barbarisation. Se manifestant dans divers champs d'opérablilité, la barbarisation de l'armée romaine tardive fut un phénomène pluriel et inégal en fonction du champ étudié.

Mémoire de Master 2 - Pierrick GUEGAN, Septembre 2017.

The Roman Empire historically obtained success on the battlefield through its
strategic offense ending with a decisive open field battle where the sword was the final
arbitrator. Amongst all the wars fought by the Roman Empire against Persia, the Nisibis
War (337-363) stands out as the first instance where Rome maintained a position of
strategic defense. After a twenty-four year defensive war, a change in Emperors (from
Constantius II to Julian) resulted in transition back to the strategic offense. Instead of
expected success based on historic experience this time Rome was decisively defeated
within six months. Historians have studied and analyzed the failed offense lead by
Emperor Julian the Apostate, but have generally neglected the overall conflict. This
neglect is surprising since up to this time of the Nisibis War the strategy was unique. The
use of the strategic defense by small frontier (limitanei) armies, based in fortified cities
and fortress, supported by maneuvers and limited operational and tactical offensives by
the Field (comitatus) Army of the East allowed the Eastern Roman Empire to survive the
advancing barbarians, as well as Persian and Muslim invaders until almost the 8th
century. This thesis will focus on the importance of the Nisibis War and its resulting
impact upon the defense of Rome’s Eastern provinces.

Experts have recently reported false bronze nummi with large reverse monograms of late Roman Imperial and Ostrogothic leaders. The experts include Alain Gennari and other members of Lamoneta.it, but not the present author. He is simply presenting this supplement to his paper “The Ricimer Monogram with Its Mysterious Additional A” and informing readers about the likelihood of spurious pieces thought to be of modern Serbian origin. His previous paper presented two Ricimer pieces, and here he presents two pieces with monograms interpreted as Eraric’s by some sources, but as mere fantasies by others. Some disagreement regarding authenticity appears to remain among some  experts and dealers.

This chapter seeks to highlight the dynamics behind the changing nature of the western Roman Army in the first half of the fifth century, through the concept of ‘Warlordism’. The term ‘warlord’ has often been used in a generic way in the field of history and only recently has ‘warlordism’ attracted the attention of scholars of the Late Roman Empire. However, these concepts have been vigorously developed in political sciences and third-world studies over the past few decades. While there is still some apprehension towards interdisciplinary approaches, and the application of theory and models from the social sciences, new studies have demonstrated that such methods can be very rewarding in helping understand political dynamics in the ancient world. The chapter will provide a survey of some of the most important sources in this area and then propose a meaningful way to employ this model by giving an analysis of the career of the African field commander (comes Africae) Bonifatius. Special attention is given to the relationship with his warrior retinue - the so-called buccellarii – as a case study for the semi-privatization of the Western Roman Army. Bonifatius’ rise to power witnessed the eclipse of traditional means to claim political and military authority through usurpation of the imperial office, whilst setting a precedent for future commanders to foster personal control over their armed forces. This chapter shows that middle-ranking commanders such as Bonifatius and Aëtius broke the monopoly of violence hitherto exercised by the emperor and his court.

Selon une idée largement répandue, l’Homme ne fut en mesure de tirer pleinement profit du cheval qu’à partir du Moyen Age en raison de l’apparition d’avancées techniques majeures à cette période de l’histoire. A en croire la liste des accessoires hippiques supposés médiévaux, l’Antiquité n’a quasiment rien produit et le rôle du cheval n’était que secondaire. Pourtant, dès l’Antiquité tardive, la place de cet animal gagne considérablement en importance dans la cavalerie et la production hippiatrique qui connaît un essor sans précédent vient confirmer ce nouveau rôle. Or, sans la mise en place de certains accessoires hippiques, tels les étriers, la force animale ne pouvait pas être utilisée au mieux.
La question de l’époque à laquelle sont apparus les étriers est donc fondamentale pour mieux comprendre et apprécier à leur juste valeur certains changements intervenus dans l’Antiquité tardive. Aussi, à la lumière de découvertes archéologiques récentes et à l’aide de l’étude des termes utilisés en grec pour désigner l’étrier, nous remettons en question la date de son apparition et, par conséquent, l’origine de son introduction dans la cavalerie protobyzantine. Le but final de cette contribution est de redéfinir la place du cheval aux IVe-VIe siècles, place prédominante liée très étroitement à l’utilisation d’accessoires hippiques majeurs tels que les étriers.

From the fourth century CE onwards, the Western half of the Roman Empire experienced a chain of dramatic events and developments. The last Western emperor was deposed in 476 CE and Justinian abolished the Western court in 554 CE. These events, marking the transition from antiquity to the Middle Ages in Europe, are often explained by "barbarian invasions". This book, by contrast, highlights internal Roman conflicts: The empire was not conquered by foreign invaders. Instead, it was hostile groups within the Western Roman ruling classes themselves who dragged the Visigoths, Vandals, Sueves and even the Huns into their conflicts as they sought to use their fighting power against their internal enemies. The prominent role played by these warriors in the internal wars of the fifth century has led to the widespread notion that the Roman West succumbed to barbarian invasions. However, most of these warriors only took advantage of the latitude offered to them. Their goal was participation in the Roman Empire, not conquest. However, in the face of growing chaos, these mercenaries, who were called foederati because they had concluded a foedus, a treaty, with the Romans, increasingly pursued their own interests. The “barbarians” who took advantage of the slow dissolution of the Roman frontier troops during the civil wars by invading the provinces must therefore not be confused with the federate armies inside the Western Roman Empire, offering their services against the grant of money or food in order to give themselves and their families a secure livelihood. It was them who, after the collapse of the central government, finally established their own regna.

A look at the climactic battle between Theodosius I and Arbogast at the Frigidus River in September 394. Was it a great victory for Christianity over paganism? Was Theodosius extremely lucky in his victory? Did the battle need to happen at all?

Theodosius and the Limits of Empire is the first English language biography of the emperor Theodosius 1st for 25 years. It seeks to provide a comprehensive analysis of the life and reign of one of the most important Roman emperors of Late Antiquity.