11-27-2004, 08:51 PM
The increased reliance on barbarian troops was not as much a downside because of the barbarians being lesser soldiers, it was simply because it led to a diffusion of the heavy infantry tactics and strict dicipline that the roman army so long had relied on, and so they lost their traditional upside! It is true that for a long time romanized barbarians, that is, non-latin roman citizens had been the mainstay of the army, but something obvioulsy happened from around 400 to 450. It may appear that the romans struggeled to recruit from their own citizens. The Theodosian Code speaks of a number of measures taken to force people into the army, and later even slaves, that first were seen as unfit, were included. In this situation, the increased reliance on barbarian troops, and more "horde-like" armies makes sense. In this context, perhaps the switch from the gladius to the spatha may also be seen as a matter of preferance. The barbarians may have relied more on longswords, and it would fit better with their style of fighting. The spatha was not the only equipment that changed, remember. The traditional scutum, and the body armour also changed, and all in all the roman army seemed more like the people they were fighting. <p></p><i></i>
