DOCSLIB.ORG

Byzantine Fronts and Strategies 300-1204 259

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Byzantine Fronts and Strategies 300-1204 259 Byzantine Fronts and Strategies 300-1204 259 Chapter 8 Byzantine Fronts and Strategies 300-1204 Denis Sullivan 1 Period of Transition 300-502: Rome to Byzantium* The period 293 to 502, from Diocletian to Anastasios, marked a new approach to sharing imperial administrative and defensive responsibilities in the late Roman Empire. Diocletian’s (r. 284-305) tetrarchic collegial system saw two Augusti and two Caesars with headquarters not in Rome, but at Nikomedia, Sirmium, Milan and Trier, closer to the frontiers. He also separated provincial civil and military responsibilities, creating dukes to command specifically mili- tary forces along the land frontiers.1 The development of mobile field armies is generally seen as incipient with Diocletian, but more fully implemented and substantial under Constantine I.2 Constantine (r. 306-337) after 324 in effect created regional prefectures3 and although ruling as sole Augustus himself, he named his three sons and a nephew as Caesars.4 Permutations of the col- legial system were attempted through much of the 4th century and into the fifth, but power sharing proved an “insoluble dilemma”.5 Valens, for example, made a disastrous decision to engage at Adrianople before reinforcements arrived from the West lest he share the glory of the victory with his counterpart Gratian.6 In the 5th century the East, despite the demands of the Persian and Danube fronts, provided military assistance to the West in 410 (against Alaric), in 425 to aid Valentinian II, in the 430s against Gaiseric in North Africa, and in 440/1 for the joint expedition to Africa.7 * This paper was submitted in September 2014. Unfortunately, it has not been possible to con- sider related research published since that time. I am grateful to Professors Muriel Atkin and Elizabeth Fisher of The George Washington University for numerous valuable suggestions during the preparation of this chapter. 1 Treadgold, Byzantium and its Army, pp. 8-9. 2 Nicasie, Twilight of Empire, pp. 40-41. See, however, Poulter, “The Lower Danubian Frontier in Late Antiquity”, p. 16. 3 Kelly, “Bureaucracy and Government”, p. 186. 4 Treadgold, History, p. 49. 5 Heather, Fall of the Roman Empire, pp. 130-31. 6 Ibid., p. 178. 7 Ibid., pp. 388-89. © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2018 | doi 10.1163/9789004363731_010 260 Sullivan Edward Luttwak8 has suggested that from the mid-3rd century and par- ticularly under Diocletian and Constantine Rome developed a “defence-in- depth” strategy (following earlier periods of “expansionist” and “preclusive” approaches), with forces and installations in reserve some distance behind the border to deal with incursions. His tripartite schematization and even the possibility of a Roman grand strategy have been criticized from a number of perspectives and remain contentious. Everett Wheeler, however, while not endorsing Luttwak’s specific formulation, analysed the debate and argued per- suasively that the Romans were capable of planning and carrying out a “grand” strategy.9 More recently Peter Heather has argued contra Luttwak that frontier “policy” was guided more by political and propaganda needs of emperors than by sustained rational planning.10 The approach here (and below in the more specifically Byzantine material) will be to focus, however, not on the issue of grand strategy, but rather the application of the various components of strat- egy to the specific fronts in question. Diocletian appears to have constructed significant fortifications to counter Persian inroads into Syria, among them at Circesium on the Euphrates,11 and against Saracens with the Strata Diocletiana from Sura to southern Syria; he also built arms factories in Damascus.12 The Battle of Satala (298) in Armenia and subsequent Roman victories under the Caesar Galerius over the Persian king Narses led to the Treaty of Nisibis (299), which gave Rome authority over Armenia, Georgian Iberia and portions of northern Mesopotamia.13 The terms dictated by Diocletian and Galerius were conveyed to the Persian king by the magister memoriae Sicorius Probus.14 The treaty of 299 led to a relative peace on the front until 337 when the Persian king Shapur II invaded Roman Armenia. Constantine I responded with war preparations, including fortification projects at Amida; he rebuffed Persian diplomatic efforts to find a peaceful accommodation, but died at the begin- ning of the campaign.15 His son Constantius II conducted annual campaigns against Shapur over the next twelve years with some successes.16 In 359 Shapur renewed his attacks, besieging Amida in 359 and taking Singara in 360. 8 Luttwak, The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire. 9 Wheeler, “Methodological Limits and the Mirage of Roman Strategy”, pp. 7-41 and 215-40. 10 Heather, “Holding the Line, pp. 227-46. 11 Millar, The Roman Near East, pp. 180-81. 12 Parker, The Roman Frontier in Central Jordan, vol. 2: p. 542. 13 See Blockley, “The Romano-Persian Peace Treaties”. 14 For an account of his embassy see Dodgeon/Lieu, The Roman Eastern, p. 116. 15 Fowden, “Constantine and the People of the Eastern Frontier”, spec. 392. 16 Treadgold, History, pp. 53 and 55..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Emperors and Generals in the Fourth Century Doug Lee Roman
    Emperors and Generals in the Fourth Century Doug Lee Roman emperors had always been conscious of the political power of the military establishment. In his well-known assessment of the secrets of Augustus’ success, Tacitus observed that he had “won over the soldiers with gifts”,1 while Septimius Severus is famously reported to have advised his sons to “be harmonious, enrich the soldiers, and despise the rest”.2 Since both men had gained power after fiercely contested periods of civil war, it is hardly surprising that they were mindful of the importance of conciliating this particular constituency. Emperors’ awareness of this can only have been intensified by the prolonged and repeated incidence of civil war during the mid third century, as well as by emperors themselves increasingly coming from military backgrounds during this period. At the same time, the sheer frequency with which armies were able to make and unmake emperors in the mid third century must have served to reinforce soldiers’ sense of their potential to influence the empire’s affairs and extract concessions from emperors. The stage was thus set for a fourth century in which the stakes were high in relations between emperors and the military, with a distinct risk that, if those relations were not handled judiciously, the empire might fragment, as it almost did in the 260s and 270s. 1 Tac. Ann. 1.2. 2 Cass. Dio 76.15.2. Just as emperors of earlier centuries had taken care to conciliate the rank and file by various means,3 so too fourth-century emperors deployed a range of measures designed to win and retain the loyalties of the soldiery.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political and Military Aspects of Accession of Constantine the Great
    Graeco-Latina Brunensia 24 / 2019 / 2 https://doi.org/10.5817/GLB2019-2-2 The Political and Military Aspects of Accession of Constantine the Great Stanislav Doležal (University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice) Abstract The article argues that Constantine the Great, until he was recognized by Galerius, the senior ČLÁNKY / ARTICLES Emperor of the Tetrarchy, was an usurper with no right to the imperial power, nothwithstand- ing his claim that his father, the Emperor Constantius I, conferred upon him the imperial title before he died. Tetrarchic principles, envisaged by Diocletian, were specifically put in place to supersede and override blood kinship. Constantine’s accession to power started as a military coup in which a military unit composed of barbarian soldiers seems to have played an impor- tant role. Keywords Constantine the Great; Roman emperor; usurpation; tetrarchy 19 Stanislav Doležal The Political and Military Aspects of Accession of Constantine the Great On 25 July 306 at York, the Roman Emperor Constantius I died peacefully in his bed. On the same day, a new Emperor was made – his eldest son Constantine who had been present at his father’s deathbed. What exactly happened on that day? Britain, a remote province (actually several provinces)1 on the edge of the Roman Empire, had a tendency to defect from the central government. It produced several usurpers in the past.2 Was Constantine one of them? What gave him the right to be an Emperor in the first place? It can be argued that the political system that was still valid in 306, today known as the Tetrarchy, made any such seizure of power illegal.
    [Show full text]
  • Calendar of Roman Events
    Introduction Steve Worboys and I began this calendar in 1980 or 1981 when we discovered that the exact dates of many events survive from Roman antiquity, the most famous being the ides of March murder of Caesar. Flipping through a few books on Roman history revealed a handful of dates, and we believed that to fill every day of the year would certainly be impossible. From 1981 until 1989 I kept the calendar, adding dates as I ran across them. In 1989 I typed the list into the computer and we began again to plunder books and journals for dates, this time recording sources. Since then I have worked and reworked the Calendar, revising old entries and adding many, many more. The Roman Calendar The calendar was reformed twice, once by Caesar in 46 BC and later by Augustus in 8 BC. Each of these reforms is described in A. K. Michels’ book The Calendar of the Roman Republic. In an ordinary pre-Julian year, the number of days in each month was as follows: 29 January 31 May 29 September 28 February 29 June 31 October 31 March 31 Quintilis (July) 29 November 29 April 29 Sextilis (August) 29 December. The Romans did not number the days of the months consecutively. They reckoned backwards from three fixed points: The kalends, the nones, and the ides. The kalends is the first day of the month. For months with 31 days the nones fall on the 7th and the ides the 15th. For other months the nones fall on the 5th and the ides on the 13th.
    [Show full text]
  • Part I. the Legacy of Roman Law
    Sec. iA JUSTINIAN’S INSTITUTES I–1 PART I. THE LEGACY OF ROMAN LAW A. JUSTINIAN’S INSTITUTES Contents, Proemium, 1.1–3, 1.8pr, 1.9–10, 2.1–2, 2.5.6, 2.9.6, 3.13, 4.1pr, 4.6.pr–30 J.B. Moyle trans. (Oxford, 1913) [Some emendations by CD.]1 CONTENTS) PROOEMIUM Book I. Title I. Of Justice and Law II. Of the law of nature, the law of nations, and the civil law III. Of the law of persons IV. Of men free born V. Of freedmen VI. Of persons unable to manumit, and the causes of their incapacity VII. Of the repeal of the lex Fufia Caninia VIII. Of persons independent or dependent XI. Of paternal power X. Of marriage XI. Of adoptions XII. Of the modes in which paternal power is extinguished XIII. Of guardianships XIV. Who can be appointed guardians by will XV. Of the statutory guardianship of agnates XVI. Of loss of status XVII. Of the statutory guardianship of patrons XVIII. Of the statutory guardianship of parents XIX. Of fiduciary guardianship XX. Of Atilian guardians, and those appointed under the lex Iulia et Titia XXI. Of the authority of guardians XXII. Of the modes in which guardianship is terminated XXIII. Of curators XXIV. Of the security to be given by guardians and curators XXV. Of guardians’ and curators’ grounds of exemption XXVI. Of guardians or curators who are suspected BOOK II. Title I. Of the different kinds of Things II. Of incorporeal Things III. Of servitudes IV. Of usufruct V.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Usurpers in Gaul.Pdf
    1 Chapter 2: Usurpers in Gaul The Gallic provinces faced their own challenges in the first decade of the fifth century. Severe threats to Italy under Stilicho’s regime, specifically the invasions of Alaric (401-402) and of an otherwise unknown Gothic leader named Radagaisus (405-406), forced the MVM to take a series of ad hoc decisions favoring the central provinces over the other regions of the western empire. Stilicho severely reduced the military forces of Gaul in order to supply men for the defense of the Italian peninsula.1 He also allowed the traditional conduct of Roman foreign policy with the barbarians beyond the Rhine/Danube limes to lapse, leading to confusion and tension on the frontiers.2 While Stilicho’s actions were arguably necessary responses to the threats of the period, they nevertheless amounted to a fundamental neglect of imperial management of the Gallic provinces. Under the circumstances, it is perhaps inevitable that such neglect would result in problems for the Honorian regime. The usurpations of Maximus and Eugenius remained a part of living memory and the extension of the control of the Theodosian dynasty into the western empire was a relatively new development.3 The potential for the abuse or rejection of Italian authority was therefore quite real, though it was perhaps an unavoidable risk given the circumstances prevailing in Italy during the first half of the decade. 1 Claudian De Bello Gothico 414-429. For discussion, see Drinkwater, “Usurpers”, 271-275; Janssen, Stilicho, 203- 204; Walter Goffart, Barbarian Tides: The Migration Age and the Later Roman Empire (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006) 95-96; Guy Halsall, Barbarian Migrations and the Roman West, 376-568 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007) 195-200, 206-211.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Tsjcl Certamen Advanced Division Round 2
    2017 TSJCL CERTAMEN ADVANCED DIVISION ROUND 2 TU 1 According to Quintilian, what author from Assisi was one of the four greatest elegiac poets of the Augustan Age? PROPERTIUS B1 Whose name completes this line from Propertius’ first book of elegies? Tū mihi sola domus, tū, ___________, sola parentēs… CYNTHIA B2 What Greek title did Propertius give to his first book of elegies? (CYNTHIA) MONOBIBLOS TU 2 Graduates of what school might argue that the welfare of the state depends on the character of its citizens, in defense of their Latin motto? UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA B1 Ambitious students at which school might be reminded by their Latin motto that the care of the future is theirs? HUNTER COLLEGE B2 Whether under oath or not, graduates of which university calling on their Latin motto might remind you that the truth will set you free? JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY TU 3 In Book 16 of the Iliad, what two deities carry the corpse of Sarpedon back home to Lycia? HYPNOS & THANATOS B1 Which Greek killed Sarpedon? PATROCLUS B2 How did Zeus respond to Sarpedon’s death? CAUSED SKY TO RAIN BLOOD 1 2017 TSJCL CERTAMEN ADVANCED DIVISION ROUND 2 TU 4 Of the nouns praeda, obses, formidō, vinculum, and delīctum, which is described here: in carcere captīvum retinet. VINCULUM B1 …which is described here: Est ratiō fugiendī periculum. FORMIDO B2 …which is described here: Ex nautīs eripitur navibus capiendīs. PRAEDA TU 5 After the death of Valens at the Battle of Adrianople, whom did Gratian choose as Emperor of the East? THEODOSIUS I / THE GREAT B1 Along with banning the pagan practice of the Olympics, Theodosius dissolved what religious group? VESTAL VIRGINS B2 After the killing of general Butheric, Theodosius ordered the massacre of the citizens of what Greek city? THESSALONICA [SCORE CHECK] TU 6 Translate the following sentence into English: Si Caesar Germaniam aggressus esset, vicisset.
    [Show full text]
  • This Remarkable Collection of Genuine Coins
    This remarkable collection of genuine coins traces the history of the Empire from the late second through the fourth centuries, a period of tumult and uncertainty, when emperors came and went, almost none of them dying of natural causes. The Roman Empire was the greatest the world had ever known. Its dominions stretched from Britain to Persia, from the Maghreb to Northern Europe, and encompassed every inch of shoreline along the great Mediterranean Sea. While Rome endured for centuries, establishing a system of colonization and administration that is still copied today, the Empire was always on the brink of collapse. Indeed, the definitive history of Rome, Edward Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, covers the period from 98 through 1590 CE. In other words, Rome’s decline and fall lasted for almost 15 centuries! This remarkable collection of genuine bronze coins traces the history of the Empire from the late second through the fourth centuries, a period of tumult and uncertainty, when emperors came and went, almost none of them dying of natural causes. Indeed, the entire history of the Roman Empire is revealed in its coinage. Coins were the newspapers of their day, used not only to exchange for goods and services, but to share information. The portraits, legends, and reverse iconographies describe the adoration of the emperors and their heirs and families, and communicate imperial agendas in the realms of politics, religion, domestic life and the military. All of this history is handed down to us on these ancient coins. 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Roman Empire Roman Empire
    NON- FICTION UNABRIDGED Edward Gibbon THE Decline and Fall ––––––––––––– of the ––––––––––––– Roman Empire Read by David Timson Volum e I V 1 Chapter 37 10:00 2 Athanasius introduced into Rome... 10:06 3 Such rare and illustrious penitents were celebrated... 8:47 4 Pleasure and guilt are synonymous terms... 9:52 5 The lives of the primitive monks were consumed... 9:42 6 Among these heroes of the monastic life... 11:09 7 Their fiercer brethren, the formidable Visigoths... 10:35 8 The temper and understanding of the new proselytes... 8:33 9 The passionate declarations of the Catholic... 9:40 10 VI. A new mode of conversion... 9:08 11 The example of fraud must excite suspicion... 9:14 12 His son and successor, Recared... 12:03 13 Chapter 38 10:07 14 The first exploit of Clovis was the defeat of Syagrius... 8:43 15 Till the thirtieth year of his age Clovis continued... 10:45 16 The kingdom of the Burgundians... 8:59 17 A full chorus of perpetual psalmody... 11:18 18 Such is the empire of Fortune... 10:08 19 The Franks, or French, are the only people of Europe... 9:56 20 In the calm moments of legislation... 10:31 2 21 The silence of ancient and authentic testimony... 11:39 22 The general state and revolutions of France... 11:27 23 We are now qualified to despise the opposite... 13:38 24 One of these legislative councils of Toledo... 11:59 25 A monk, who in the profound ignorance... 8:30 26 In a century of perpetual..
    [Show full text]
  • The Date of the Destruction of the Sanctuary of Poseidon on the Isthmus of Corinth
    THE DATE OF THE DESTRUCTION OF THE SANCTUARY OF POSEIDON ON THE ISTHMUS OF CORINTH (PLATES 61, 62) T HE deposit of coins here published was found in the spring campaign of 1971 at the Sanctuary of Poseidon on the Isthmus. Coins and five pieces of small sculpture in marble lay together within a small area in the fill at the southernmost of two corners made by joining walls of rubble construction in one of the buildings which occupy the field immediately east of the temple of Poseidon (grid S17, P1. 62).' We give here the complete account of the hoard promised elsewhere.2 Ninety-seven coins were recovered (IC 71-11 through 107), all bronze and all of small module (3 or 4). The seventy-six best preserved are these. ' Coins and sculpture were reported in AeXr. 26, XpOVLKa, 1971. Three sherds representing two vessels were found with the deposit. We thought that neither vase had been the container of the coins. 2 Clement, "The Date of the Hexamilion," Studies in Memory of Basil Laourdas, Thes- saloniki, 1975, pp. 98-101. Idem, "Alaric and the Fortifications of Greece," Ancient Macedonia (Second International Conference, August 19-24, 1973: Thessaloniki, Institute for Balkan Studies, forthcoming). The coin inventory for the 1971 campaign was written by Beaton during the course of the campaign. The coins of this hoard were studied in Kyras Vrysi by Clement in the summers of 1971 and 1974 and a draft of the present catalogue written. The whole material was put into essentially its final form by both collaborators working together in Los Angeles in the winter of 1974-1975.
    [Show full text]
  • Adrianople: Before and After
    Adrianople: Before and After Corry Atkinson East Carolina University Faculty Mentor: Wade Dudley East Carolina University ABSTRACT The Battle of Adrianople in 378, fought between the Roman Empire and the Goths, is often overlooked in the feld of Roman history. The purpose of this paper is to argue that the Battle of Adrianople is more important to Roman history than conventionally thought, and that it marked a major turning point for the Roman Empire. Throughout this paper I will argue that the Gothic victory at Adrianople caused a domino effect which led to the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. Using primary sources I show that many of the events that occurred after the battle, and played a role in the collapse of the Western Empire, can be linked together as aftereffects of the Roman defeat at Adrianople. he Gothic victory over the Romans at Adrianople led the Eastern Empire to abandon TAdrianople in 378 brought with it vast the West. Without the help of the East, the changes to the Roman world. The battle economically weaker Western Empire was in had a domino effect on both halves of the no condition to properly defend itself. Thus Empire, but the West suffered the most in 476 the Western Roman Empire fnally severe consequences. The Western Roman disintegrated, and by 493 Italy and Spain had Empire would never recover from the emerged as independent Gothic kingdoms. East’s defeat in 378. The political fallout The major barbarian groups of the fourth that followed Emperor Valens death at century consisted of Germanic confedera- Adrianople created hostilities between East tions who lived close to Roman borders, ei- and West that never dissipated.
    [Show full text]
  • REDATING AUSONIUS' MOSELLE 1 Traditional Dating of Ausonius' Most Famous and Perhaps Most Important Poem Rests on Several Passages in the Poem Itself: 1
    REDATING AUSONIUS' MOSELLE 1 Traditional dating of Ausonius' most famous and perhaps most important poem rests on several passages in the poem itself: 1. The opening of Moselle (1-22) recounts Ausonius1 movements as he was journeying from Bingen to Trier. It is usually assumed that this journey had been undertaken in conjunction with a military campaign in which Ausonius and his pupil, Gratian, participated or which, more precisely, they observed around the year 368.1 2. Verses 409-11 refer to an office which has been often interpreted as a consulate, and to an eminent personality identified by most as Sextus Petronius Probus who became consul in 371.2 3. Verses 420-25 refer to a Roman military victory of a father and his son, usually taken to have been that of Solicinium in 368 in which the presence of Valentinian and Gratian is attested by Ammi- anus.3 4. Towards the end of the poem (450) Ausonius mentions the emperor and his sons. Since Valentinian's second son was only born on July 2, 371, this line would have been written in that year or, at the earliest, in late 370. By scholarly consensus, then, Ausonius composed Moselle in 370/3714 Yet, these references are not as decisive as the case so far made suggests, and in what follows I propose to re-examine them with a view to identifying afresh Moselle1 s date or dates of composition and publication. *To avoid cross references to the different numbering systems adopted by the editors of the complete works of Ausonius, I normally give the full title of the work in question.
    [Show full text]
  • Gratian and the Jews
    The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law CUA Law Scholarship Repository Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions Faculty Scholarship 2014 Gratian and the Jews Kenneth Pennington The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/scholar Part of the Medieval Studies Commons Recommended Citation Kenneth Pennington, Gratian and the Jews, 31 BULL. MEDIEVAL CANON L. 111 (2014). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions by an authorized administrator of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law 31 (2014) 111-124 Gratian and the Jews Kenneth Pennington Since Anders Winroth and Carlos Larrainzar discovered earlier versions of Gratian’s Decretum, legal historians have explored these manuscripts for evidence that they hoped would reveal how Gratian’s changes and additions to his text could provide insights into how his thought and ideas developed.1 Although there is still a vigorous debate about exactly how the manuscript tradition reflects the evolution of his Decretum, we know far more about Gratian now than we did before. Not everyone agrees on what we know. I think that Gratian began teaching in the 1120s, that the Saint Gall manuscript 673 is the earliest witness to his teaching, and that the other manuscripts discovered by Winroth and Larrainzar provide evidence that a version of his Decretum circulated widely in the 1130s.
    [Show full text]