10-14-2012, 05:04 PM
Quote:By more often using Roman troops to garrison key cities they might have somewhat fewer conflicts between garrisons and civilians,
Often civilians didn't like having to provide accomodation etc to soldiers, who often were demanding and arrogant.
Quote: and by more often using mercenary troops to fight their battles they might use the opportunity to get rid of the ones they don't want. A few Roman historians praise Theodosius for getting his barbarian troops killed at the Frigidus.
P.S. I don't think this was a good idea. A few modern historians have suggested that the losses at the Frigidus may have prompted some of the revolts after the death of Theodosius.
Even worse, using mercenary or "federate" troops meant relying on untrustworthy elements for the bulk of combat power. I think that Roman commanders would've preferred to have an army of citizen soldiers. They had to have, or tolerate mercenaries and "federates" because lack of enough citizen recruits left them with no choice. By or after 408, the only way to fight one barbarian group was to hire another.
