Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Amled
That they used allied units as auxiliaries even before Marius’ reforms, yes. But the core legions were still made up of Romans and/or people subjugated by Rome. Their incentive to fight was it not based on the promise of land grants and/or the promise of Roman citizenship at the end of their tour of duty? Therefore they ultimately had an added personal incentive in preserving the Roman state, be it the Republic or the Empire.
When later Roman legions were comprised mainly of Gaul’s, Germans fighting mainly for a pay check, this incentive disappeared.
|
There is merit to your statement. Although I do not think that the Roman legions
themselves ever became German or Gallic. Essentially, a Roman legion started fighting along side of increasing numbers of Alans, Visigoths, and whatnot. I return to my point that the critical error was loss of control of the officer corps. This was both a cause and effect of the 'Germanization' of the Army, especially in the West. Since the legions were no longer guided by the senatorial military tribunes, there was less of a central loyalty to the state.
The lack of senatorial or central command meant that the barbarian troops were not moved around and split up as they had been during the Principate. For example, in the time of Trajan or Hadrian, Syrian auxiliaries may have served along the Rhine or Hadrian's wall, thus eliminating the problem of loyalty that would have resulted if these Syrian troops patrolled their own province. By the fifth century it seems that federated tribes were not moved around as much. This led to a situation where Alans and Franks served in France and Germany, the homelands of those people. This led to the decreased lack of loyalty. When federated barbarian units were kept intact, it meant that they acted as independent allies, not subject auxiliaries. That fact proved very dangerous.
Furthermore, the poor judgement of Theodosius I in settling the Visigoths in the Balkans was a critical error. Something must also be said for the tremendously poor quality of Emperors like Honorius and Valentinian III. These men were fools that executed their best commanders and allowed a viable strategic position devolve into outright imperial collapse.
I am doing some research in my Later Roman history books, I'll report what I find on the exact composition of the Army from about 395 AD to 565 AD. It is important to be accurate about history in this period.