12-22-2011, 03:22 PM
In a number of points we will have to agree to disagree then Robert.
My reading of Zosimos, Claudian, and other Late Roman sources that talk about the 5th Century definately give the impression that Goths served in large numbers across the Eastern half of the empire. Their style of dress was different to that of the other Roman infantry shown on the pen and ink drawings of the Column of Theodosius and the Column of Arcadius. It is known that large numbers of Goths had been recruited from 376AD onwards because after the Battle of Adrianopolis in 378AD messages were sent to cities all over the East for the Goth's stationed in those cities to be lured to their deaths on the promise of receiving back pay. It is entirely conceivable that by 400AD some cities may not have seen what we would think of as a 'Roman' soldier as entire garrisons were made up of Goths. There were odd situations where there was a mix of both Roman's and Goths, the Armies of Theodosius I, Gainas and Alaric being examples.
I know modern historians have thrown a lot of doubt on the 'barbarisation' of the Late Roman army. However, reading the ancient sources one gets the impression that it was a case of sheer necessity that forced the Roman's to rely increasingly on the new Germanic's for troops, and the first large wave of them was the Goth's.
As to the Pilum, it was still in use during the late 360's AD and the early 370's AD as troops under Valentinian I and Valens are described in two battle accounts of throwing 'pilis'. The use of the Pilum may have been reintroduced by Valentinian I who appears to have been a bit of a military innoventor, and was described by Ammianus as 'an inventor of arms'.
Anyway, its always good to have a healthy, friendly debate, especially during the time of the Festival of Saturnalia!
My reading of Zosimos, Claudian, and other Late Roman sources that talk about the 5th Century definately give the impression that Goths served in large numbers across the Eastern half of the empire. Their style of dress was different to that of the other Roman infantry shown on the pen and ink drawings of the Column of Theodosius and the Column of Arcadius. It is known that large numbers of Goths had been recruited from 376AD onwards because after the Battle of Adrianopolis in 378AD messages were sent to cities all over the East for the Goth's stationed in those cities to be lured to their deaths on the promise of receiving back pay. It is entirely conceivable that by 400AD some cities may not have seen what we would think of as a 'Roman' soldier as entire garrisons were made up of Goths. There were odd situations where there was a mix of both Roman's and Goths, the Armies of Theodosius I, Gainas and Alaric being examples.
I know modern historians have thrown a lot of doubt on the 'barbarisation' of the Late Roman army. However, reading the ancient sources one gets the impression that it was a case of sheer necessity that forced the Roman's to rely increasingly on the new Germanic's for troops, and the first large wave of them was the Goth's.
As to the Pilum, it was still in use during the late 360's AD and the early 370's AD as troops under Valentinian I and Valens are described in two battle accounts of throwing 'pilis'. The use of the Pilum may have been reintroduced by Valentinian I who appears to have been a bit of a military innoventor, and was described by Ammianus as 'an inventor of arms'.
Anyway, its always good to have a healthy, friendly debate, especially during the time of the Festival of Saturnalia!
Adrian Coombs-Hoar
