Barbarization?

[Nathan Ross]

in border fortresses there were auxiliary troops in all the ages of the empire. So the fact that in the IV century many of the forts were garrisoned by Germanic troops does not seems to be a novelty.

Certainly. But for most of the period prior to c.380 these auxiliary troops were part of the regular Roman army, equipped by Rome and commanded by Romans (and often relocated hundreds of miles from their homelands too!)

What we seem to see from the end of the 4th century is a frontier zone garrisoned by Germanic troops in an almost totally Germanic social and cultural milieu, possibly commanded by Germanic leaders with or without Roman military titles, with only the barest trace of Roman military control remaining.

This may be a chimera, based on limited evidence or a misreading of the evidence, but it surely looks rather different to the previous situation. I don't think this is a particularly bizarre view, by the way - as far as I know everyone from Luttwak to Halsall seems to present much the same sort of picture (This does not mean it's necessarily true, of course!)


(I've just remembered a point from Pollard's Soldiers, Cities, and Civilians in Roman Syria - by the late 4th century, Syriac writers use the word 'Goths' to refer to Roman soldiers indiscriminately! Another point towards the 'hybridisation' argument, perhaps?)