[Discussion] The Heraclian Military (586 - 641)

[Armatus]

Open for discussion on what the military of Heraclius was composed of. The dates included reflect the first mention of Heraclius the Elder Exarch of Carthage until the death of his son Heraclius the Younger in 641.

What important changes or differences were implemented during this era if any? We know that Heraclius the younger revitalized the army in 622 prior to launching a retaliatory assault on Persia. This was a time of desperation for the Greco-Roman world, it was imperative something be done to take the reigns of an empire in trouble with constant threat of war.

Heraclius did just that he took a gamble investing all resources in military rejuvenation. Artifacts were melted down for currency to fund this bold venture and with his lead the army assembled in Mikra Asia ready to pounce upon the Persians like had not been seen in their day.

What were his reforms? We can assume our best source lies with the Strategikon of the mid 6th century A.D., the military source book used by the Greeks for centuries to come.

Sadly there is little imagry in this particular time which surivived by comparison with other periods. Between tyranny, war and later Arab invasions and Christian Iconocalsm this time is truely representative of a dark age in Greek history.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

Heraclius Reformed the Legionary system between 630-641. It evolved into the theme system. A much different style of fighting that not much is known about.
Here's a general information source:
Theme System

Some say they increased the unit size from the 1000 man legion to a 10000 man (I believe it's called a) Themata

[Armatus]

Likely so with all those provinces reacquired after the war with Persia. As for the sizes of the Theme, the Strategikon says to avoid making them all similar in size with equal number of banners as this will provide an easy way for the enemy to count the army.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

I heard that... but the theme system wasn't established until after the arab conquests. Persia's conquests influenced the creation of it but militarily they still used the legio system until at least 641. I think SBH knows a lot more on this.

[Armatus]

So we refer back to the Strategikon for the best ideas on actual troop composition I think.

From the wiki it seems unclear:

Tied to the question of chronology is also the issue of a corresponding social and military transformation. The traditional view, championed by Ostrogorsky, holds that the establishment of the themes also meant the creation of a new type of army. In his view, instead of the old force, heavily reliant on foreign mercenaries, the new Byzantine army was based on native farmer-soldiers living on state-leased military estates.[5][11] More recent scholars however have posited that the formation of the themes did not constitute a radical break with the past, but rather a logical extension of pre-existing, 6th-century trends, and that its direct social impact was minimal

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

So it went back to the volunteer army of the republican period. Interesting...
Mercenaries or "Foederati" were common in the late roman army, but their numbers are often overexcaggerated. For example most of the allied army at chalons was Roman Legions. Not foederati. Same thing at many other signifigant battles.

[Imperator of Rome]

You should rename the post to the Maurikan Military.

[Armatus]

Why is that? Is that the Greek spelling for Maurice?

[Imperator of Rome]

Yep.
Maurice also authored the Strategikon, a manual of war which influenced European militaries for nearly a millennium. Maurice stands out as one of the last emperors whose empire still bore a strong resemblance to the Roman Empire of previous centuries

[Bolkonsky]

I need to get the Strategikon.

[Armatus]

He is attributed to the strategikon him or possible a cousin of his or a general of this time. It's a good book, but doesn't seems to give you the trees you were looking for at least not in the English copy I have.

It states things like place spears here and user archers there, it gives you some general labels of and descriptions of armies.

It's basically the west's art of war.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

and the ND

[Armatus]

My thoughts on this were that we know Heraclius was in control at the time and pushed the advancement of the military, even if he used the same overall equipment and troops which is the likely case, I just wonder how he applied them in his strategy.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

only tactics, names, and unit sizes/formations were redone

[Armatus]

Are you sure on the names? The Strategikon already used common Greek.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

hmmm... i dunno, what does it say on the names?

[Armatus]

It doesn't give them at least not in my copy, but it says that the Greek common language was used quite often in the book for military terms.

[Armatus]

http://lonelygamers.blogspot.com/200...en-gate-2.html

Heraclian Dynasty Army



Old Glory Miniatures as Heraclian Regulars
(painted by Andrew Parr, shields and flesh repainted by me and are now in Matthew Williamson of Goulburn possession)



Heraclian Bucellarii led by the Army General

[Bolkonsky]

Action figures! I want them! Now if we could only figure out what they used for source pictures...

[Armatus]

"Action figures" lol... well one thing's for certain you can find a ton of minis on the net for Sassanids and "Byzantines"