More Merovingian- Kingdom of Soissons

[AMELIANVS]

:evil:

[Diocle]

The Greek military structure after the Roman conquest: vanished, gone!

This had been on the way out for about 2 centuries now. The Macedonian Phalanx had been adopted first, and then the Phalanx system was dropped altogether.

The Langobard military organization after the Carolingian conquest: Gone in few years.

Actually not much different from the Caroliginian one, so the change was easy for the units to make.

Modern Military structures cannot be applied. In an age of information it is comparable easy to change military structure quickly.

Don't you think Pavel that before dreaming about not existent Roman military units in the VI century we should show some proof?

There is some proof, but negligent. The last reliable account of Roman military units in the west is Gregory of Tours' account of Clovis subduing the "Ripuarian Franks" i.e. "Riparienses" units on the Rhine. Most of the Limitanei on the Rhine probably had no idea that the Roman Empire had fell and had to be assimilated into Frankish government. The Rhine Limes were well over 450 years old and the organization and military system there would take time to assimilate.

No proofs Mag. Simply because there was not any Roman unit in the Mrovingian France.

The Carolingian Feudal warfare was another world compared to the Late Roman army, so probably I don't understand what you mean here ... :|

[AMELIANVS]

Carlo,
But I'm not talking about working Roman units continuing in existence in the west(although it is highly possible some Western army units were indeed kept in service by new barbarian overlords)-I'm talking about cultural and military traditions that usually can't disappear so quickly and especially not in such case where even invading ethnics were heavily inffluenced by Roman tradition and tried to imitate it for many centuries yet to come.With this you even go against your own words-remember how you defended continuation of ridge helmet in frankish army and how this evolved to famous Carolingian helmets?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

heavily inffluenced by Roman tradition

The Merovingian Franks were purely and entirely based off the Roman system of Government and a Roman model of military organization. The Salii and other Franks had no prior model to adopt and ergo used the Roman one, with some differences based on the various foedera they had entered into over the years.

[AMELIANVS]

And many other tribes with which Franks fought and had mutual frontiers were definitely heavily influenced by the Roman army and Roman way of life and even those Franks started to imitate this tradition very quickly-not to mention that majority of inhabitants in Gaul was still Gallo-Roman people,they did not emigrated from those areas(at least certainly not in their majority)they stayed there and lived with traditions they had and become one with the Frankish element as centuries passed.

[Diocle]

heavily inffluenced by Roman tradition

The Merovingian Franks were purely and entirely based off the Roman system of Government and a Roman model of military organization. The Salii and other Franks had no prior model to adopt and ergo used the Roman one, with some differences based on the various foedera they had entered into over the years.

Rarely I've read a more wrong description of the Merovingian State.

I repeat Pavel & Mag, some proof?

Now follow me Pavel:

If I state that there are no proofs of any survived Roman military tradition under which any European unit during the VI century marched in battle, you, Pavel what do you answer?
If I state that this idea of Roman remnants in the North European warfare during the VI century is only a dream and a fantasy tale, what proof can you show me to testify that I'm wrong?
If a whole language vanished in Britain in few years, because in Britain there was a Romance Language when Rome left the island, then not even a single word survived after only few years .... how can you say that some Saxons or Frisians or Batavians or Franks were still marching under the Vexilla or the Aquilae in the VI century?
If it's almost impossible distinguish between a Britannic burials and an Anglo Saxon one, if the weapons are the same, if even the pottery is almost the same, where are your Eagles in the Northern Gaul Pavel? Where can we find a sign to show that your dream is not a dream but an archeological reality?

Where are the proofs of the Roman-like units in the Merovingian Gaul of the VI century Pavel? Where are the proofs?

Or we need proofs only when we are talking of leather armors and late roman attic helmets? That is, we need proofs only when there is something we don't like, meanwhile when there is something of nice and good well ... no proof is needed, in this case dreams are more than enough ... :wink:

[Robert Vermaat]

Draco was not Roman it was Sarmatian and also Roman ... Procopius tells us a nice tale but there is no archaeological finds backing up this fantasy tale, what I find surprising is finding here nice people ready to believe in this absolutely laughable dream and at the same time ready to reject 'in toto' the more realistic possibility of existence and use of the Attic helmet in the Roman Army! Miracles of the 'New History!' illy:
I stay with Guy Halsall: No Roman units in the VI century.
... anyway if you find some archaeological find ... I'm open minded, and also I love dreaming: think that for me the Attic Helmets were used during the whole Roman History! :wink:

I'm not supporting 'Roman military units' by the 6th century, but we know that by the late 5th century, the units of the Roman army wetre incorporated into the Frankish army of Clovis.
Given the strict legal separation of Franks and Romans that continued after this period, I see possibilities that units such as these were regionally recruited and continued to be visible as such. The 'Roman' citizens of the Merovingian kingdoms may therefore for some time have fought in 'Roman' units, and the Franks in 'Frankish' units. Procopius may refer to this. That may be different from the notion 'Roman military units'but that's not what Procopius claims: he says that military traditions were continued into his day, not a military organisation. What that means exactly I don't know, but it's a bit strong to deny this as 'a dream and fantasy'.

I think that Bernard Bachrach and Ian Wood did mention the continuation of Roman military tradition into the Merovingian army during the later 5th century.
After all, the Franks did not conquer Roman Gaul and vanquished the Roman army, they took over from the inside and continued most of the organisational structure. Your examples of vanished army traditions are not similar to the Norman conquest of England etc.

The draco was a late Roman military standard. It's origin was indeed non-Roman, but for the 3rd, 4th and 5th centuries it had been a standard for every cohort. So if I see this image of Frankish troops from the 9th century, I see the survival of Roman military tradition, not a supposed survival of a Sarmatian influence.

[Diocle]

The point is: Procopius and then?

Is there .... some proof of surviving Roman units in VI century? Is there some archaeological proof? Because if there is not any proof also saying that Roman Traditions survived in the Merovingian Military System is 'a bit strong'.

The Language spoken in Britain in the half of the V century was a Romance language, after few years it vanished, totally vanished, no more existing, not even a single word survived in Britain of the Language of Caesar ....A whole civilization vanished in few decades and the Saxons were not Nazi mass murderers!

The Normans were more light handed than the Saxons, and they re-introduced in Britain some Romance word from France, we can say that their cultural action in Britain was constructive!


Procopius is only paying a tribute to the moronic policy of Aggression of Justinian: if there are Romans in Gaul the Byzantines can be justified in their aggression to the Kingdoms of Italy, and Spain and why not? even putting some pressure on the Franks! The effects of the idiotic policy of Justinainus were exactly the opposite: the creation of a Frankish superpower but anyway the Byzantine 'Reconquista' needed to be supported by an ideology, so even the Tale of the Romans in the North finds its justification in the Byzantine Policy of the VI century.

About Draco: It's a Sarmatian and Eastern Military Tradition influencing both the Romans, the Dacians and the Germans, I don't see the Draco as a sign of 'Romanitas', if not should we consider the poor Harold at Hastings Romanized? Or maybe a proto-Roman-Reenactor? 8+)

[ValentinianVictrix]

Were there any Roman military units in existance in Gaul when Romulus Augustulus was deposed in 476? I thought all the evidence pointed to their being some surviving units at that date? Is it not possible these units still existed on the 01st January 500AD and therefore Roman units would have indeed existed into the 6th Century?

[Diocle]

When a state ceases to exist, and the Roman state ceased to exist even earlier than 476, also its military machine ends.

SOURCES, I'm asking here only for sources, it's not that complex, if you have sources backing your thesis you can state what your sources allow you to state, but if there is not any source, (because the Byzantine writer Procopius is not a source he is a story teller and he never saw any Roman Unit in Northern Europe) how can you state a so strong statement about the survival of Roman Military Traditions in Northern Gaul (the most Germanized area of the whole kingdom!)? Is this another form of wishful thinking? ... is there such a large difference between a dream and this form of wishful thinking? Or here, are we talking of History and Archaeology? Are we talking of sources and finds or are we pushing our private dreams about Northern Romans in a dreamworld made of Saxons & Franks carrying Roman Banners and clad in Roman uniforms and probably also talking Latin?

Because if this is the case, if here we are talking of personal beliefs or individual dreams, REMEMBER BOYS: The first here who try to say that the Leather Musculata was not largely used in the Late Roman Army will be crucified as heretic and traitor!

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Were there any Roman military units in existance in Gaul when Romulus Augustulus was deposed in 476? I thought all the evidence pointed to their being some surviving units at that date? Is it not possible these units still existed on the 01st January 500AD and therefore Roman units would have indeed existed into the 6th Century?

Have you not read my hypothesis about the so called "Ripuarian Franks?" I have stated it several times. The evidence points to the Ripuarian Franks (who had to be subdued by Clovis) to be a copyist' interpretation of the Riparienses or Ripenses garrisons on the Rhine, still intact and oblivious to the change in government.

Gregory of Tours Book 2 Chapter (23 I think) talks about their subduing by Clovis.

[ValentinianVictrix]

When a state ceases to exist, and the Roman state ceased to exist even earlier than 476, also its military machine ends.

SOURCES, I'm asking here only for sources, it's not that complex, if you have sources backing your thesis you can state what your sources allow you to state, but if there is not any source, (because the Byzantine writer Procopius is not a source he is a story teller and he never saw any Roman Unit in Northern Europe) how can you state a so strong statement about the survival of Roman Military Traditions in Northern Gaul (the most Germanized area of the whole kingdom!)? Is this another form of wishful thinking? ... is there such a large difference between a dream and this form of wishful thinking? Or here, are we talking of History and Archaeology? Are we talking of sources and finds or are we pushing our private dreams about Northern Romans in a dreamworld made of Saxons & Franks carrying Roman Banners and clad in Roman uniforms and probably also talking Latin?

Because if this is the case, if here we are talking of personal beliefs or individual dreams, REMEMBER BOYS: The first here who try to say that the Leather Musculata was not largely used in the Late Roman Army will be crucified as heretic and traitor!

Well in that case those who believe Julian was murdered by Christian Romans, as suggested by Libanius who was not on campaign with Julian, are believers of fantasy as well then eh?.
Sometimes we only have the words to go on and Procopius may have had access to source material that no longer exists, much as we know Zosimus did when he wrote his history.
In an ideal world it would of course be wonderful if there were some archaeology to back up the claims made by Procopius, but just because there absence of proof does not mean this is proof of absence.

[Diocle]

Yes, sadly the tale of Libanius is only a tale.

We can study the circumstances of the battle at Samarra and the whole story of the Persian Campaign but, as Libanius himself wrote, without direct and voluntary testimonials, without written pages by those who were there, we cannot advance any serious accusation against the Christians, so, the story of Libanius, is only a lie or better a nice tale by a friend of Iulianus, accusing without any proofs the Christians of the death of the Emperor. (the fact that I, as Diocle, as private citizen, firmly believe that an elite unit of Candidati doesn't flee in panic leaving alone the Emperor to be killed by the first poor moron passing there, the fact that the political situation in my opinion required the death of Julian, the fact that still today after so many years the Internet English translation of Ammianus is a falsified translation saving the arse of the Candidati, the fact that all the witnesses of the events at Samarra were killed or silenced by the two bastards usurpers appointed by a mass of Byzantine eunuchs, clergymen and bureaucrats, all these facts are nothing else than personal speculations by Diocle and don't change History, and History tells us that Iulianus has been killed by a Persian javelin thrown at him by a fleeing Persian soldier. END OF THE STORY)

In the Merovingian Gaul of the VI century there was not any Roman Unit nor any surviving Roman Military Tradition organizing the warfare in the Mrovingian Kingdom, if someone disagrees, well, produce some source and show us one of the most astonishing discoveries of the last 100 years.

[Agraes]

The Language spoken in Britain in the half of the V century was a Romance language, after few years it vanished, totally vanished, no more existing, not even a single word survived in Britain of the Language of Caesar ....A whole civilization vanished in few decades and the Saxons were not Nazi mass murderers!

It was only one of the languages. British latin did survive however until the late 6th century as a spoken language as demonstrated by the study of contemporary inscriptions - a large corpus of them.

The Romans had a lasting influence on the early medieval kingdoms in western Europe and roman military titles were still beeing used - see for exemple the titles of tribunus and protector used by the late 5th and 6th century elite of gaelic origin in Dyfed in south-western Wales.

Bede does record a standart "called by the romans the tuffa" preceding the 7th century northumbrian king Edwin on his visits to his estates.

[AMELIANVS]

Carlo and what about Vexillum type standards on king Agilulf helmet plate from early7th-century.Also no influence from the Roman army and only coincidence?Moreover lombards were relatively "wild" tribe when they came to Italy,much less affected by Roman culture than some other tribes.

And what about frankish general Mummolus leading quite successful campaigns in the second half of 6th century-that man was clearly a Gallo-Roman showing previous populace certainly was not somehow wiped out by Frankish newcomers who were numerically much lessser if compared to Gallo-Roman population.