battle of Adrianople

[eugene]

There is widespread view that the battle of Adrianople was the beginning of the end of the Roman empire. But many widespreadviews are in contracdictrion with reality. What do the modern researchers think about the role of the battle of Adrianople in the decline of Roman army and, generally, roman empire?

[Robert Vermaat]

So it was a bad day. And? 8) The Roman Empire ended in the 15th century, a LONG time after Adrianople.

Just a symptom, nothing more. It's been played out as the beginning of the end, until peoiple realise that it was the Eastern army that was destroyed, not the Western army. You are forgetting (as so many people do) that it was the Western Empire that folded in the later 5th century AD, not 'The Roman Empire'.

It may have caused the Romans a lot of time to rebuild their armies, but they did so.
It may have taken some time to subdue the Goths, but they were.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Whaaa...t? The Empire ended? Since when? Says who? And whos army?

[ioannes sebald]

Nice point Robert ,i'm sure we are not the only ones who are fed up with the Eastern empire being treated as if it was a seperate entity,with no connection to Rome whatsoever,personaly,i blame this,in part,on the term"Byzantine"which only helps to foster the notion that it may have been some kind of new,Greek,offshoot,though i suppose we could thank Western Europe of the middle ages(and some academics)as well!.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Well, it was Greek, really, as was the Roman empire, really.

Wanted to emulate Alexander....

Wore Greek influenced equipment....

Used Greek language and scientific advances....

REally, the question is ...was there really a 'Roman' Empire at all, other than in name?
I mean, if we're really, truely, honest with ourselves...really!?

[auxilary]

I have just finished the book The Day of the Barbarians by Alessandro Barbero.I do not totally agree with his conclusions but if you want a balanced read it is worth seeking it out.
It sets out the premise that thr Romans bungled the settlements of the Goths across the Danube and the battle was unavoidable. Again the split between Eastern and Western Empires is a cause.
Cheers

Graham

[Gäiten]

The Eastern Empire survived the annihilation of one of their field armies.

For the whole Empire the later battle of the Frigidus was far more destructive because the Western Empire lost most of their best troops in that certain battle to Theodosius` Goths. And those were never replaced.

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi Graham (please write your name in your signature - to be found in your profile),

I have just finished the book The Day of the Barbarians by Alessandro Barbero.I do not totally agree with his conclusions but if you want a balanced read it is worth seeking it out.
It sets out the premise that thr Romans bungled the settlements of the Goths across the Danube and the battle was unavoidable. Again the split between Eastern and Western Empires is a cause.

Sounds like what many writers (especially the first witnessed account by Ammianus Marcellinus) wrote before him. :wink: And they were probably right.

Hi Gaëten,

The Eastern Empire survived the annihilation of one of their field armies.
For the whole Empire the later battle of the Frigidus was far more destructive because the Western Empire lost most of their best troops in that certain battle to Theodosius` Goths. And those were never replaced.

Was that the case? I thought it was the Goths who were massacred as Theodosius' Eastern front-line troops, and held a grudge as a result of that ever since. In fact the best of the West were already lost a few years before that, when Theodosius beat the army of Magnus Maximus in 388. He then incorporated the best Western units into his eastern forces. That this hurt the Western armies far more was proven later when Stilicho, campaigning against Alaric in Greece, still could not rely on his newly rebuilt forces. Of course, Stilicho attempted to do the same as Theodosius had done, by 're-aligning' the field armies after Theodosius died. But his power was not strong enough and he had to let the Eastern forces go back home.

[Ioannes_Ahenobarbus]

Adrianople really is one of those misunderstood battles. It was originally easy for an antiquarian (proto-historian) to attach extreme significance to an event such as a battle. Perhaps the least accurate presupposition concerning this one is that it heralded the dominance of cavalry over infantry. I'm sure most everyone nowadays is convinced that is no longer accepted as very accurate.