The Late Roman Army - 451

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

This thread is to discuss the size of the late Roman army at Chalons (I'm writing a book and a consensus on the size and quality of the Roman Field army at this timeframe is necessary)

The Nov. Val. 9., which was passed by Valentinian III on June 24, 440, while preparing for the Vandal campaign, states that:

"...We trust that the most excellent Patrician Aetius will soon be here with a large force."

This implies that Aetius must have had an availible Army of at least 15000 to be able to deal with the vandal threat (assuming that the Vandals crossed the Gibralter with 15-20000 able bodied warriors). He amassed 1100 ships in Panormus in late 440, where he subsequently joined the Thracian Field Army. The forces must have been of a very large number, as Peter heather states, based on sources by Theophanes and Courtois,:

"...a joint imperial army began to assemble in Sicily: 1100 ships to carry men, horses, and supplies. Aetius' 'large force' crossed the island, and was joined there by a substantial expeditionary force from the East. No source puts a figure to the Roman forces gathered there, but the shipping was enough to carry tens of thousands of men."

based on the vandal campaign of 468, the average roman merchant ship could carry around 70 men. If you take into account horses and supplies for the campaign, this was enough shipping for around 40000 soldiers.

So what do you think? How big was the Roman Army of 451? The one Aetius brought together to fight Attila?

[juvenus]

nice post mmfa! however, considering the rather poor conditions of the western empire at the time, it might have been the case that eastern forces actually provided a larger part.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

well, the thracian field army was (according to the ND) fairly large - between 10 and 20k men

[juvenus]

those might be just paper strength.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

possibly, let me check i have it pulled up

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

this is listed under the praesentalis field arm under the two Magister Militae Praesentali in the East
Five squadrons of palatine horse:
The senior promoted horse,
The companion cuirassiers,
[p. 9] The junior companion archers,
The companion Taifalians,
The Arcadian horse.
Seven squadrons of horse of the line:
The Biturigensian cuirassiers,
The senior Gallican heavy-armed horse,
The fifth Dalmatian horse,
The ninth Dalmatian horse,
The first shield-bearers,
The junior promoted horse,
The first Parthian cuirassiers.
Six palatine legions:
The senior lancers,
The junior Jovians,
The junior Herculians, The Fortenses,
The Nervii,
The junior Matiarii.
Eighteen palatine auxilia
The senior Batavians,
The junior Brachiati,
The Salians,
The Constantians,
The senior Mattiaci,
The senior Gallican archers,
The junior Gallican archers,
The third Valens' archers,
The Defenders,
The Ractobarii,
The Anglevarii,
The Hiberi,
The Visi,
The fortunate junior Honorians,
The Victors,
The first Theodosians,
The third Theodosians,
The fortunate Isaurian Theodosians.

[juvenus]

cool....would you be kind and give the link to the ND?

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/notitiadignitatum.html
no pictures and not much details on the armies

[juvenus]

thanks mate!

[juvenus]

hey i google for ND and this is another link. it has some pictures of shields.
http://www.ne.jp/asahi/luke/ueda-sar...aPatterns.html

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

thanks! +rep

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

Jordanes may offer some insight to the Roman tactics at chalons:

"You know how slight a matter a roman attack is. While they are still gathering in order and forming in one line with locked shields, they are checked..."

[wulfgar610]

This implies that Aetius must have had an availible Army of at least 15000 to be able to deal with the vandal threat (assuming that the Vandals crossed the Gibralter with 15-20000 able bodied warriors). He amassed 1100 ships in Panormus in late 440, where he subsequently joined the Thracian Field Army. The

I wouldn't imagine they were all a standard size. The problem with this sort of stuff is the bag of coin required to attract the boats. It would have meant boats leaving aside their usual jobs.

Laborers at Constantinople and in Levantine cities during the sixth and early seventh century received daily wages of 3 to 5 folles, the price of 1 modius of wheat. Since most work was seasonal, many laborers worked for wages only 4 months per year, earning 360 to 600 folles. Sometimes laborers could demand higher wages. In 506, when Anastasius rushed construction on the fortress of Daras, he offered daily wages of 35 folles per man and 70 folles (= 1 gold tremissis) for each man with a draft animal (Zach. Myt., Chron. VII. 6).

http://www.tulane.edu/~august/H303/c.../Justinian.htm

Just gives you an idea of what it costs when you want something done for the imperial government quickly. Might be paying 5 or 10x the usaul fare.

[wulfgar610]

So what do you think? How gig was the Roman Army of 451? The one Aetius brought together to fight Attila?

It was probably as big as ever. But that says nothing about the quality. Raising, training and maintaining good qualtiy untis was very expansive. Units could continue existing if the pay the cheque stopped. But they could become immobile and lose quality over time.

[juvenus]

It was probably as big as ever. But that says nothing about the quality. Raising, training and maintaining good qualtiy untis was very expansive. Units could continue existing if the pay the cheque stopped. But they could become immobile and lose quality over time.

I also wonder about their quality. Did limitanei/comitatenses system still work in 451? I heard once that comitatenses became stationary troops and their quality and equipment degraded. Aetius may have had 15k-20k troops but many of them could have been just a militia style troops.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

You also have to take into account the massive tax breaks that were given out by the roman government. In 440 Aetius ended those tax breaks (himself included) to the landowning class so he could fund his armies, and still a lot of that army went unpaid and fought for him out of loyalty and plunder. Aetius probably had Palantine units as his powerful center line, with lesser comitatenses on the flanks and as support, and limitanei wouldn't have been used - they couldn't even be moved from their fortress posts on the borders. If Aetius took the spanish field army, and the gallic field army to chalons, he would have had about 40000 infantry total. Aegidius and Marcellinus both reported in the 450s that they had lagre numbers of infantry in excelent quality and standing.

[Valentinian Victor]

Lets be totally honest here, the Late Roman army from 400AD onwards, and certainly from the 440's, was a shadow of its former self. One can barely call the Roman army at Chalon's 'Roman' at all, consisting as it did of at least 2/3's 'barbarian' troop types.

It's likely that the force Aetius was able to put in the field at Chalon's numbered from 15-25,000 maximum. 25,000 appears to be the 'standard' army size mentioned in Ammianus, except when engaging in full scale invasions of say Sasanid Persia where Constantius II, Julian and perhaps Valen's had assembled forces two to three times this size.

[wulfgar610]

Lets be totally honest here, the Late Roman army from 400AD onwards, and certainly from the 440's, was a shadow of its former self. One can barely call the Roman army at Chalon's 'Roman' at all, consisting as it did of at least 2/3's 'barbarian' troop types.

It's likely that the force Aetius was able to put in the field at Chalon's numbered from 15-25,000 maximum. 25,000 appears to be the 'standard' army size mentioned in Ammianus, except when engaging in full scale invasions of say Sasanid Persia where Constantius II, Julian and perhaps Valen's had assembled forces two to three times this size.

In many cases Barbarian units provided the security and were officially part of the Roman. Even the Visigoths in theory were a Roman field army led by by their own Duke, although in practice they were an independent state.

So very late Western army was a motley force, consisting of many units that were virtual feudal fiefdoms. A load of irregulars that could fall in with what was left of the field army. These would serve the Empire as long as their pay came through and when it didn't they increasingly set up on their own. The Western primarily disintegrated due to a lack of funds.

The coalition at Chalons could have been quite large because it involved barbarian forces from every corner of Gaul.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

The entire gallic field army was a total of 20000-30000 ment, and the spanish and italian field armies and Aetius had a sizeable force to engage attila. I'm representing the lack of armor in IBUr by making all units below comitatenses (and most comitatenses won't have it either) have no armor except a helmet on some troop types. And don't forget Ammianus and Vegetius were writing at a time where the Empire was unstable and in a crisis. In aetius time the empire was prospering. And i'd agree with you on that number considering the amount of troops that were paid. The others were fighting out of loyalty and/or for plunder and women. The Visigoths could field an army of 20000 max (I think Hydatius mentions it), and they probably had about 15-20000 men at chalons. With an equal number of other barbarians making up the center.

Theodoric II mentions in 453 that Aegidius alone had 12000 troops of excellent quality/standing in the north gallic field army.

[juvenus]

And don't forget Ammianus and Vegetius were writing at a time where the Empire was unstable and in a crisis. In aetius time the empire was prospering.

i've always imagined that aetius was struggling to keep the empire from falling apart. i wouldn't know if there was any prosper at all...
i think that empire from the 4th was considerably stronger than mid-5th empire.