The Barbarization of the Late Roman Army, a Fatal Error or Inevitability?

When looking into the transformation of the Late Roman field army you have to look at the society which formed it and which it protected. Roman society was not something that was unique in fact almost nothing about it was unique. The Romans had always assimilated the cultures around them a prime example of this is when the Romans took the Greek concept of democracy and re-interpreted it and used it as their own. The Romans also retrofitted the Greek religion keeping the myths and legends the same but simply just changing the names of the Gods, Zeus became Jupiter and Poseidon became Neptune and so forth. Rome was moulded by her interactions with other cultures from the Gaelic invasion of the 4th century BC to the Punic wars right up to the Third Century Crisis, with each event changing her society and her military. So then, it should come as no surprise that when the Roman empire stretched from the moors of Scotland to the deserts of Iraq that it would see some change on a social level. When someone reads the word ‘barbarization’ they would register it as having a negative connotation.

The real allure to join the Roman army for many barbarians during this period was the prospect of material wealth and power[1]. Many of these people were migrating from their homelands due to either climate change or external forces (i.e. the Huns) this made the Roman Empire seem like the ideal place to settle. By the third century Rome was forced to realise that it faced a fundamental shift in the way it conducted war, Rome could no longer pick and choose where it fought, Rome was no longer the instigator.

Instead, it now simply reacted to aggression instead of being the aggressor with most campaigning happening within Rome’s own borders[2]. Rome’s policy of frontier defence had changed drastically over time, it went from a static line of forts positioned all along the frontier with watchtowers placed in-between each fort at regular intervals.

The idea behind this was that with the forts and their large garrisons that they would be able to deter and repel any incursion by a barbarian tribe. By the 4th century this had changed radically for now the policy had changed from that of a static line to a defence in depth, this meaning that instead of stopping any attempt of an incursion at the border the army would allow the attacking force to advance unhindered into Roman territory forcing it to move further away from its supply line and giving the army more time to mobilise a counter attack. However, this new plan had disastrous consequences for the people of the Roman countryside since the barbarians were given free reign until the army could arrive this meant that entire towns, villages and farms were ransacked.

Recruitment during this period was difficult since the new strategy of elastic defence/defence in depth which was successful in repelling the barbarian incursions allowed them to destroy much of the provinces that they raided creating a shortage of manpower and damaging tax revenue. This led to the recruitment of resettled barbarians into the army this reliance on barbarian troops only become more common as time went on, this peaked during the fifth century with an increasing reliance upon barbarian federates which significantly changed the Roman military. Following the disaster at Adrianople, increasing numbers of less than reliable federates began to fill the military ranks. So, when Germanic barbarians invaded in 406AD Rome was unable to use its field army since it was made up of primarily of Germanic federates[3] One of the main reasons why Rome adopted this new policy was because the government had great difficulty in paying its soldiers and recruiting new ones from within the Empire [4] this meant that during this period Rome did not have the ability to field a standing army or man forts all across the frontier as it had done during the time Hadrian.

It was at this juncture that the Imperial government began to grant certain barbarian tribes such as the Danubin tribe of Sciri[5]land within the Empire along the frontier. This move allowed the Imperial government to resettle lands that were abandoned due to the raiding and also gave them a new source of soldiers for the army.

By the late 4th Century the Roman people had lost their martial spirit thus they became somewhat alienated from the armed forces no longer seeing it as a worthwhile career. This shift in public option meant that the government was forced to rely more and more on barbarians to fill the ranks of the army. However, this alienation worked both ways with the armed forces becoming less and less Italian meaning that the citizens begin to see the army as something foreign, but this had the same effect on the army who began to see the public as something alien[6].

Under the Emperor Hadrian Roman troops stationed on the frontier were forbidden from cultivating the surrounding land ‘for fear that through the desire of cultivating the soil they may be withdrawn from military service’. Also, if troops were stationed in a city they would erect a cross wall in order to reinforce the separation between the civilian and military life. All of this helped to create a very clear line that defined the role that the military played in Roman society. However, under the rule of Emperor Septimius Severus these polices were reversed the idea behind this was that this would make the army more self sufficient with soldiers now being able to farm the land, own cattle and trade. By throwing away army discipline the army turned into an administrative machine with soldiers being used as clerks and centurions being used as a kind of police force, this lead to men serving their 25 years as pen pushers not soldiers. The army was now involved in a multitude of civil activities ranging from policing to engineering but not war, this began to blur the once clear line between the professions of war and peace[7].

The period 305-313AD was marred by almost continuous civil war within the Roman Empire making it a fixture of everyday life for Romans[8]. Keeping this in mind we can now better understand why during this period that Roman generals and emperors decided to so willingly recruit barbarians en-masse, with law codes showing us that these mass recruitment drives usually took place when manpower was at a premium[9].

Throughout the history of Rome, the barbarian was always viewed with contempt and disgust for its lack of civilitas but its often one redeeming feature was its ‘strong martial tradition’[10] making them ideal soldiers since they would require minimal training. roman army training Romanised its recruits The German people through generations of war had become born professional fighters so much so that even Roman society acknowledged their martial prowess even to the point where it was considered a compliment to have ones fighting capability likened to that of a German[11].

It was during this time of civil wars, usurpations, unstable governments and external incursions that the army of late antiquity was forged The adoption of pants was not just a change in military life but also civilian life as well It was at this point that the army had begun to become less and less Italian and also began t move away from being a citizen army[12]. During these turbulent times the Roman army was the only thing that safeguarded the empire for despite numerous civil wars it was able to successfully repel external threats[13].

Soon conscription became a form of taxation and this would have serious ramification for the economy of the Empire since if all able-bodied men were in the army who would work the farms? This is where the barbarians come into play. During times of war provincial governors would be told to raise troops for the army or in times of crisis be told to provide troops instead of gold as tax, this would create a huge problem for when the governor would gather troops he was pulling men out of the economy thus lowering food production and tax revenue. There is even evidence of local landowners refusing to send men in response to the call up even during times of crisis[14]. With the introduction the new barbarian settlers the Imperial government saw an opportunity, they barbarians would provide troops as a form of taxation thus alleviating the pressure on landowners to provide men for the army. This idea of recruiting soldiers from barbarian tribes was most certainly not a new idea by late antiquity in fact Emperors had been using defeated tribes as a vital resource for their armies for a long time, but this was different this time the barbarians were doing this voluntarily since they saw this as the price for being a Roman citizen. With the increasing usage of barbarian soldiers in regular units meant that now these federates were quickly becoming the decisive factor in Roman armies[15] Throughout this period, a trend developed where large numbers of auxiliary troops served to help the regular army deal with threats. By 235, at least 400 of these units served the empire and they played a significant role in defending against these near constant invasions. These auxiliary units would have strongly supplemented the 33 legions known to have existed in 235. In spite of these additional military units, it does not appear that adequate troops were always available to deal with barbarian incursions even in the heart of provinces. This was especially true if large incursions occurred on multiple fronts at the same time. The collapse of the frontier between the Rhine and the Danube by the year 260 took place during a time of massive pressure in the east, as Persian Emperor Shapur captured Antioch in 256. An additional series of raids by Germanic peoples into Gaul in the 270s led to the sacking of nearly 60 towns, including Paris. While the Roman military was badly battered during this period of crisis, it still retained its ability to win substantial victories and this allowed the army, and the empire, to survive through the Third-Century Crisis[16]

To placate these invaders and maintain some semblance of control, Roman emperors continuously gave invaders large tracts of land to settle on within the Roman Empire in exchange for service as federates. The settlement of Gothic troops in Aquitania is a prime example of this. These federates did not pay imperial taxes, which only further strained imperial resources and led to a further dependence of federates for military support[17].