10-09-2012, 05:08 PM
Quote:What this shows is that despite very damaging set-backs the Romans usually bounced back and could raise large forces if needed.
Right, this had been going on for centuries, at least since the time of Hannibal and continuing into the third century and, as you note, the fourth.
Quote:However, after Adrianopolis this appears to have changed, something happened to prevent the Romans raising large armies without having to resort to hiring large numbers of 'barbarians'. It's not as if the Battle of Adrianopolis was a complete disaster. Yes, two thirds of Valens army was lost, but that would only have amounted to something like 16,000 men at the most, and the Western army was largely intact. No, there must have been another factor and if we could only identify what that factor was then we could start to see waht actually casused the Western Empire to collapse.
Exactly, and there's good evidence that citizens just didn't want to serve anymore. Without much backing from its own men, the western Empire (the one under greatest stress) just didn't have the old resilience anymore.
