Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
High Imperial Roman army vs Late Roman army
Quote:Although the roman army was low on manpower, they were certainly not replaced with Barbarians. The Gallic Field Army was indeed strong. 22,500 men at Chalons is my estimate for the Gallic Army (based on a 2/3 strength of AHM Jones 34,000 in the ND to compensate for paper strength, wounded, sick, deserters, etc.)

So what happened to it after Chalons? From your other posts, you seem to state that a large part of the Gallic Field Army were personal retainers of Aetius and they just disbanded after he died. Or, am I misunderstanding you?
There are some who call me ......... Tim?
Reply


Messages In This Thread
High Imperial Roman army vs Late Roman army - by Tim - 11-01-2013, 02:39 PM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Vegetius and the later Roman army: common mistakes? Robert Vermaat 2 80 Yesterday, 02:41 PM
Last Post: Longovicium
Question Distances and distance measuring in the Roman Army? dcbrown 2 167 04-03-2024, 08:07 PM
Last Post: dcbrown
  Late Roman Army during the 5th century Robert Vermaat 89 17,722 01-11-2024, 04:34 PM
Last Post: Magister_Officiorum13241

Forum Jump: