Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Aetius and the Western Empire
#46
The Cities were fortified, or had fortifications constructed, and seemed to be protected by the Army itself; Notable Examples being Aetius' Army and Bucellarii at Arelate, Massilia and Narbonne, Marcellinus' Army at Salonae, and Aegidius and the Gallic Field Army managed to protect Novidunum (Soissons, capital of that Area), Aurelianum (Orleans), Lutetia Parisorum, and the other towns/cities betweent he Seine and Loire until 487.

Toletum seems to have had a Garrison after Merobaudes was appointed Master of the Soldiers of Spain by Aetius. (For a pangeyrecist he did a good job too, except for Vitus' Defeat)

The Field Army Rescued Aurelianum (as far as we know, Iordanes says the Huns attacked the city, others say they were scared off when Aetius came) in June of 451 by raising a Wall around it and garrisning there before it was attacked by the huns.
Reply
#47
Quote:
Robert Vermaat post=319630 Wrote:441 - Another expedition by Theodosius against the Vandals in Sicily turns back because the Persians invade the Empire.
The Huns were the main problem in 441.
Maybe so, but there were not described as the reason for the expedition to be cancelled. I assume that's because the troops augmented for the expedition came from the part of the Empire that had been relatively peacuful. Until the Persian invasion, that is.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#48
Quote:But I do agree that the title of "last of the roman" is more a romantic view by the modern world than wat he really was or tried to achieve.
We agree there!
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#49
Quote:There's still a lot of evidence that remnants of the Field Armies Remained intact. Someone once mentioned the Excercitus always travelled with Aetius (can't remember who or thier source).
Elton, Hugh (1992): Defence in fifth-century Gaul, in: Drinkwater, J.F. and Hugh Elton eds.: Fifth-century Gaul: a Crisis of Identity?, (Cambridge), pp. 167-76.

Quote:Sidonius Appollinaris mentions that Aetius' force was "Once Roman Sources and Now the Flower of the Allied Forces" referring to that the Roman Soldiers were fighting out of Loyalty to Aetius, probably hoping that they'd get access to the "Pile of Loot" Attila gathered in his campaign accross Germany into Gaul.
Hardly an indicator that the Fiel Army of Gaul was still intact - sounds more like Aetius had a lot of mercenaries under his standards.
Quote:If the Landlords in aquitaine were loyal to Theodoric, the Visigoths controlled the Area (and they managed to continue to do so). However, the landlords weren't always loyal to Rome - Tournai was loyal to Rome, but when the Franks attacked the Countryside on the border-lands (Vicus Helena) in 448 it was likely to do with the Landlords shifting Loyalties (and who they were paying taxes to).
Sidonius mentioned Romans fighting in Gothic armies.
I would not make too much of ‘being loyal to Rome’. It was the Gallic nobility which had, after all, dropped their loyalty to ‘Rome’ when confronted with yet another emperor they did not want. Especially after Avitus and later Majorian had been killed the relation between Gaul and Rome turned sour, leading to the secession by Aegidius. Landlord in Gaul had been used to barbarians fighting for Rome for centuries. They also knew barbarians leading Roman armies for more than a century. They even knew barbarian armies fighting for Rome, or supporting Gallo-Romans fighting against Rome! So what would have been the difference when they supported Theodoric? Hardly anything, despite the ruckus that Sidonius made about it. We may draw a sharp line, but the populace may have seen nothing different.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#50
Quote:
Tim Donovan post=319632 Wrote:
Robert Vermaat post=319630 Wrote:441 - Another expedition by Theodosius against the Vandals in Sicily turns back because the Persians invade the Empire.
The Huns were the main problem in 441.
Maybe so, but there were not described as the reason for the expedition to be cancelled. I assume that's because the troops augmented for the expedition came from the part of the Empire that had been relatively peacuful. Until the Persian invasion, that is.

That doesn't make any sense - The Vandalk attacked Panormus in 440 but didn't take the city, and then Aetius was on the island in 440 waiting for the eastern ships (again in 440) to arrive, and then Merobaudes says the East left to deal with the Huns.

What's this about 441? Sicily was under Roman control
Reply
#51
Quote:That doesn't make any sense - The Vandalk attacked Panormus in 440 but didn't take the city, and then Aetius was on the island in 440 waiting for the eastern ships (again in 440) to arrive, and then Merobaudes says the East left to deal with the Huns.

What's this about 441? Sicily was under Roman control

Aetius was waiting for the eastern ships in 440, but did the eastern force arrive that year? I thought completion of preparations--which were disrupted--would've been in 441.
Reply
#52
Quote:That doesn't make any sense - The Vandalk attacked Panormus in 440 but didn't take the city, and then Aetius was on the island in 440 waiting for the eastern ships (again in 440) to arrive, and then Merobaudes says the East left to deal with the Huns.
What's this about 441? Sicily was under Roman control
I guess you mean the Vandals and Palermo - they besieged the city. Apparently the expedition was meant to break the siege? Aetius was in Italy by 440, but was he on the island? No matter, I've read that the eastern expedition was blown off due to the persian attack, but it's entirely feasable that the Huns invaded Pannonia not until after that happened.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#53
The huns had been in Pannonia since 432 when Aetius traded them the province for Military services. The Huns invaded Moesia, which was an eastern province.

Illyria was on-and off between the two, but after 395 seems to have been predominately Western.

Also, as far as I know Merobaudes says Aetius was in Panormus in 440 to defeat the siege.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  collapse of the Western empire eugene 4 1,255 07-08-2010, 02:06 PM
Last Post: Chariovalda
  Defences of the western Roman empire in 5th century Razor 60 12,946 03-08-2008, 12:16 AM
Last Post: Robert Vermaat

Forum Jump: