Roman Army during the Sack of Rome(410)

[Mrbsct]

I am reading about the Sack or Rome in 410 AD under Alaric, and surprised that the Western Roman Empire was so incapable of handling the threat. What was the probable size, composition and fighting/deployable capacity of these troops?

The Eastern Empire suffered a huge defeat at Adrianople. 10,000 Comiatenses died in the battle right? Later at the Battle of Fridgidus, a huge chunk of the Western Army was killed in the hands of the Eastern army. Did Theodosius transfer many of the Western troops to the East to fill in the ranks of the defeat at Adrianople?

The Army of that Stilico used against Alaric(and troops later defected to Alaric) had mainly Foedereti troops right? According to the Nottia, most Lime troops were stationed in Gaul. Most of these guys defected to Constantine III right? Plus there was a huge number of Germans that poured across the Rhine, taking a huge toll on the Roman army. There was still 40,000 some troops in North Africa right?

What was the probable size of the Gothic force? The Eastern Emperor only sent 6,000 men to put down Alaric and the army was defeated instantly.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I actually don't know. The African Field Army was intact, while the Gallic and Spanish field armies were in rebellion (Gaul had the largest field army). The Illyrian Field Army was created in about 407 or 408, and the British field army (created in 405) was in rebellion. The Italic Field Army had lost most of its strength when the Gothic soldiers deserted, but Constantius III had enough men to reconquer Gaul and Spain and defeat the Goths after Alaric died.

The Romans did send 6000 men from the Illyrian field army to re-enforce Rome, but they were destroyed.

You should check this out: it's my estimates for the size of the Western Army in 419.

https://www.academia.edu/6474614/An_Anal...n_the_West

[Alanus]

Strange, ain't it. That's what happens when the "Roman army" isn't Roman.

If I recall, Alaric had been appointed Magister Militum at one time, with Athaulf as Master of the Horse. Maybe the malcontents who made their 3-day jaunt through the streets of Rome were once the better part of the Roman army. :whistle:

Of the high number of "Romans" killed at Fridgidus, most of them were Goths. And of the "huge number of Germans" that crossed the Rhine, a least one half were Sarmatians... not quite "Germans." They took no "huge toll" on the Roman army because nobody was there to stop them other than a skeleton crew of riparians. :dizzy:

[Mrbsct]

Roman army was still Roman. If you had barbarian blood, you were still Roman.

Barbarian troops were Foedereti. Allied armies with their own political structure and tribal leaders.(like Alaric's army)

[Alanus]

Roman army was still Roman. If you had barbarian blood, you were still Roman.
Barbarian troops were Foedereti. Allied armies with their own political structure and tribal leaders.(like Alaric's army)

Sorry to disagree. If you had barbarian blood, you were not Roman until you acquired citizenship. You were a barbarian. Back in the '30s, Bury estimated that the Roman army had one Roman (Italian) for every 99 non-Romans. In Alaric's time, Saul-- Master of the Horse for one day-- was an Alan. Alaric was most likely a Tyrfingi, Athaulf was probably a Greutungus. The huge recruitments of Theodosius and Gratian stacked the Roman army with Goths and Alans who rose to high positions. When you were not born a Roman, you had an entirely different agenda... and the fate of Rome suffered from it. Foedereti were not even in the Big Picture, in the high echelon of an army that played for personal gain and cared little for Rome's future.

[Mrbsct]

I never denied that. Roman troops were Roman troops. Barbarian troops were Barbarian troops.

No I was speaking about the "Roman Army" was Comiatenses and Lime troops. They were Roman troops holding citizenship with different ethnicities.

Alaric was foedereti. An allied mercenary.

[Alanus]

I don't think we can call Alaric a foederetus. He was Magister Militum of Illyricum. Then Magister Militum of the West. Indeed, his was a foederetus at the battle of Fridgidtus when under Gainus but that was back in 395. The cavalry under Saul were not foedereti; they were mounted regulars even though the majority were barbarians. Foedereti were called up to fight in individual campaigns, then dismissed, but units like the Equites Taifali were career cavalrymen. Likewise for barbarian-born troops within the legions.

Sorry, but I don't see where foedereti fit into the sacking of Rome... or the lack of defending it.

[Mrbsct]

You don't need a regular position in Roman army to hold those positions. Alaric either being Foedereti or not, he was a Foedereti tribal commander, commanding a full entity of Goths who had their own political values and political systems.
To say he is as Roman as Stillico is wrong.

The Goths held Illyricum during Theodosius negotiation with them. Alaric was called Magister Militum of the West because he demanded that position when he marched on Rome. No Foedereti were not dismissed because they had no were to go. They were fighters within Roman territory and served as useful manpower. They were barbarian states that served as buffers under Roman rule.

[Alanus]

Andy,

All I'm saying is that Alaric was not under any foedus (treaty) at the time he held high positions in the Roman army. That foedus, enacted between the Goths and Theodosius in 382, was voided by Theodosius' death in 395. Therefore, he and his followers could not be called a "foedereti" in 408 or 410. mile:

[Mrbsct]

Yes they would have. They were allied to Stillico who too had Foedereti troops like the Huns. After Stillico died, they all went to Alaric as an enemy army now.

Alaric's army were not Roman standing units. There is no doubt about that. They were not regulars.(Comiatenses)

[Alanus]

Andy,

I never said Alaric and his troops were Roman standing units. I said they were not foedereti... but I stand corrected. Claudian refers to Rufinus as "foederis auctor," so a treaty was concluded with Alaric in the East after the original one with Theodosius was voided, probably the same with Stilicho a few years later.

However, I don't believe the Huns attached to Stilicho were foedereti. They were probably bucellarii, paid by him (or his wife Serena) to protect him (so he could sleep at night)-- in other words, they were "biscuit eaters." ;-)

[Mrbsct]

Either way my point in this OP is about the standing Roman army.

Stillico probably had both Comiatenses and Allied troops in his Battles against Alaric. Then he allied with Alaric, and the Romans had to deal with a massive barbarian invasion from the Rhine, where probably a huge number of troops were killed spread out on the Limes. And then they all defected to Constantine III. (Gaul held the largest portion of West Roman troops). Probably the only available "Roman troops" during the Sack of Rome were under Sarus and Constantius along with the 40,000 men in North Africa.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

The Illyrian field army was evidently available, as 6000 men were sent to Rome and were wiped out.

The Rhine limes are funny. The Dux Mogontiacum command seems to have been created after the Rhine Crossing/Constantine III's rebellion.

[Mrbsct]

Wait didn't the Illyrian army even exist? I thought Alaric controlled Illyria. All of Gaul would have probably been with Constantine III(many Limes went PseudoComiateneses). So the only armies Honorious had was the Italic and African armies. That is about 60,000 Comiateneses.(26,000 in Africa, 34,000 in Italy) I believe Honorious tried using his African army to stop the private sectors(civilian traders) from giving grain to the Goths by navy? The 34,000 were probably used by Constantius against Constantine III.

So my guess is Alaric's army was about 30,000 or up, this explains why Honorius cannot use the African army against him.

[ValentinianVictrix]

I suggest reading Zosimus for a near contemporary account and also reading J. H. W. G. Liebeschuetz: Barbarians and Bishops: Army, Church and State in the Age of Arcadius and Chrysostom and Alan Cameron: Barbarians and Politics at the Court of Arcadius (The Transformation of the Classical Heritage) for indepth studies of the period.