How long before post-Roman armies caught up

[Anonymous]

From what I recall, carolingian armies worked on a "double draft" system: you had the ban, which consisted mainly of the nobility and their retinues, and the heriban, which consisted of a levy "en masse" of the general population. Figures between the ban and the heriban should then vary considerably.<br>
The heriban was rarely, if ever used.<br>
In french the coined expression "appeler le ban et l'arrière ban" still mean gathering everyone available.<br>
Each member of the ban had to present himself at regular intervals in full armour and on horseback and heavy fines were levied on those who didn't show up with the proper equipment or at all.<br>
Again this is a recollection and needs checking, but this system was the basis of became in France the basic medieval tactical unit: the "lance", composed of a knight, his shire and between six and ten "gens de pied" (foot soldiers) armed with various implements of destruction such as spears, bills, axes, war scythes, assorted cutlasses, bows and later crossbows. When the medieval texts tell us about "five lances", it means ten horsemen (5 knights and 5 shires) and about 50 foot soldiers.<br>
As for the question of how long before post roman armies caught up first we have to determine what they were trying to catch up with.<br>
I think that if we are talking about the heyday of the Roman Empire, from the 1st to the 3rd centuries AD, a similar degree of logisitic and tactical organisation was not attained before the 17th/18th centuries. <p></p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

Hmmm. Was Odovacer truly motivated by loyalty to the eastern emperor in his coup against the party of Orestes and his son?<br>
<br>
I suggest that Odovacer was taking advantage of the rejection of Orestes et al by Zeno to ensure that he (Odovacer) was the true ruler of Italy and the surrounding territoriesstill acknowledging a central Roman authority. It is possible that Odovacer knew that Zeno was unable (or unwilling) to impose his will on the surviving rump of the western empire, so there was no threat to Odovacer's usurption of power. Any opposition could be potentially weakened by Odovacer's claim to be the military commander for Zeno. This did not save him from the Ostrogoths under Theoderic, who later entered Italy and overthrew Odovacer, also representing the eastern government. <p></p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

Though this does not pertain to the latest branch in the discussion it should be remembered that after the Western Empire fell, there was still an effective, professional, european army and it was Roman, I'm referring of course to the Eastern or 'Byzantine' Army. As Warren Treadgold's worthy book Byzantium and it's Army shows, the Thematic Byzantine Army was a direct descendant of Rome's legions. They lasted until 1081 when the last professional remnants of the post Manzikert army were destroyed. In my opinion, the next Army to approach the level of professionalism the Romans possessed was the Mongol Army of the 13th Century. Far from the hordes it is portrayed as it had all the systems we associate with a professional army to include recruiting, training, unit organization, a general staff, and a warfighting doctrine. <p></p><i></i>