Eagles in the Dust

by Adrian Coombs-Hoar

Another interesting one, because had Valens waited for Gratian to arrive, and my calculation of how far way he was puts him at between four and seven days’ march away, then his combined force would certainly have outnumbered that of Fritigern. If he had waited then Valens could have continued the negotiations with Fritigern, and also been able to keep that chieftain and his fellow tribesmen under constant surveillance. Fritigern would have had to make some stark choices, agree to whatever terms Valens wished to impose upon him or risk a battle, which in all probability the Goths would have lost. Hindsight of course is a wonderful thing, and had Valens only waited a few more days then the whole course of Roman, and probably western European history would have changed and nothing we know now would be the same.

  Chapter Fourteen

  The Location of the Battle of Adrianople

  The location of the Battle of Adrianople has, up to the date of the publication of this book, not been discovered. McDowell believes the Gothic camp was near to the modern village of Muratcali, Turkey, approximately ten miles north-east from Edirne (Adrianople). Runkel locates it near to modern Demirhanli, whilst I have provided a quote earlier stating that the Gothic camp was at the twelfth milestone, approximately eleven miles away from Adrianople, but the direction unknown.

  Wherever the Gothic camp was, it must have been close to a source of clean drinking water, such as a stream or river. This would give credence to McDowell’s placing the camp near Muratcali as there is a stream that runs from north to south on its west side and it’s only a short distance east from the Tonzos River. If Valens wanted to take a route that would have involved approaching the Goths from a direction they were not expecting then following the course of the Tonzos River would be an ideal way of doing this. Marching north-west and then following the riverbank north would have allowed the troops to take water directly from the river, and would have negated the need to take the baggage train along. However, using Google Earth, one can see that if an army were to follow the river it is fairly flat on the banks as far as the village of Degimenyeni, and probably would not hinder the army much. The army could then turn north-east and head through what appears to be a plain towards Muratcali, again not hindering the army too much one would have thought. The area around Degimenyeni and Muratcali is heavy with cultivated fields and probably was during the Late Roman period, again likely to make it easier to march rather than more difficult. However, as Donnelly stated, Ammianus’ text could be read as the army was travelling along winding paths, which following a meandering river would have been the case. And following the river would have almost doubled the length of the journey the army would have had to travel to reach the Gothic camp. The army did travel by road for at least the last part of their march towards the Gothic encampment. This section of the march may have been of several hours’ duration during which the army may have had no access to water, and what water the troops had managed to fill up in their personal water containers was probably used up by the time they reached the wagons, and that’s the reason Ammianus stated the army was suffering from thirst. Just to the south of Muratcali, and also to the south of the village of Buyukdolluk, Google Earth shows there are some very interesting circular shapes in the ploughed fields that could, just could, be indicative of where a circular camp or camps have been made in the past. They are situated just off the road leading south from Muratcali and the road south-west from Buyukdolluk. We know from Claudian that the Goths after Adrianople did construct camps with a ditch and palisade, and whilst Donnelly argues that this would be for more permanent encampments, Fritigern had been exposed to Roman methods of laying out camps when Valens sent the army of Thrace to support Fritigern’s civil war against Athanaricus. This may well have led to Fritigern incorporating some Roman camp elements within their normal wagon encampments. The only drawback to this suggestion that the rings show the possible site of the Gothic camp is that Buyukdolluck is less than eight miles’ distance from Edirne, far too close for the army to have taken over six hours to travel there. Unless of course the army followed the river before taking the road north-east. Perhaps the markings in those fields are from Gothic camps set up when Fritigern turned from heading towards Nike and moving south-west towards Adrianople?

  If Valens had marched due north from the east side of Adrianople, where it’s entirely likely his camp was pitched, then his army would have passed through a lot of rough ground with little evidence of a usable road until you reach the village of Buyukdolluk and then turn north-east along the road to Muratcali. If the army travelled almost due east there is a main highway passing near to Demirhanli, this appears to run fairly straight towards Istanbul (Constantinople) and is probably built over the old Constantinople to Adrianople Roman highway. This may have meant a march overland to that area, and part of it does indeed appear to be rough going with a number of streams blocking the way. However, again, this would have meant that the troops would have had a number of opportunities to fill up on water, providing of course that the streams existed in AD 378, and that they do not dry up in the summer months. The issues with setting the battle near Demirhanli are that it would have made more tactical sense for Valens to have camped near to Demirhanli, which appears to have been near to the old Roman road, and also may have been very close to Nike, if not Nike itself. Once he marched from Melanthias, rather than travel onwards to Adrianople it would have made more sense for the army to camp at Nike. This would then have afforded a shorter distance to travel north with the army to reach the Goths, rather than march to Adrianople and then back eastwards again. Had Valens camped at Nike it would have prevented the Goths moving closer to Nike or even towards Constantinople. Other candidates for the location of the battlefield could be the area lying between Korucu to the north and Ortakci to the north-east. This area has a lot of rough terrain along with sources of water near the towns and also a few areas of cultivation and places where armies could set up camps or deploy. Two prime candidates for the battle location in this area are the villages of Sinankoy and Ortakci as movement through these two areas would have taken the Goths away from most inhabited areas on their move down from Kabyle. There are some streams nearby, and there are roads that led up to both villages. The evidence is then that the most likely candidates for the location of the battlefield are the villages of Muratcali, Sinakoy or Ortakci. All three require travelling over rough terrain or winding paths to reach them at least partway along the route, all lack access to water along the route for at least the last few miles, and all have roads that lead to them on the last part of the journey. Wherever the battle took place it was reachable within less than half a day’s march had the army taken the most direct route (see diagram 1 for the locations discussed above and distances noted from modern Edirne, site of ancient Adrianople).

  One important caveat about attempting to locate the site of the battlefield is that a series of very powerful earthquakes have occurred in this region over the centuries and this may well have caused the topography to have changed beyond recognition from that in AD 378. The land mass may have risen and fallen in places, streams and rivers changed course or dried up altogether etc. It will probably be the case that a very lucky archaeological find may be the only way of finding the location of the battle now.

  Chapter Fifteen

  The Roman Empire and its Army During the Reign of Valens

  The Roman Empire when Valens became Emperor was in many ways both the same, yet very different, to the Empire several centuries before. A person from the second century who had somehow managed to travel to the future would have recognized much of the artistic works and building styles, yet the people surrounding him would have been the most noticeable difference. By the middle of the fourth century the Empire was home to a diverse and multicultural group of peoples. As the Empire stretched from Hadrian’s Wall in Britain to the Euphrates River far to the east so did the peoples within the borders reflect this expanse. Walking down the streets of any city within the Empire one might encounter Sarmatians, Sa
ssanid Persians, Britons, Alamanni, Franks, Saxons, Vandals, and Goths etc. amongst the common Roman citizenry. This population make up was reflected within the ranks of the army as well.

  Diocletian began the reformation of the Roman Empire, introducing a western and eastern emperor, known as Augustus, with a junior emperor, Caesar, whose role would be to replace the Augustus when he stepped down at the proper time. This was known as the Tetrarchy and it lasted between AD 284–AD 305. Diocletian also divided the Empire into almost a hundred provinces. These provinces were governed by Proconsuls; under these were the Consulares, then the Correctores and finally the Praesides. The provinces themselves were grouped into Dioceses, overseen by a Vicarius, who oversaw their affairs. The exceptions to this were the proconsuls and the urban prefect of Rome, and later on in Constantinople, who were directly subordinate to the two Augustus’ and the two Caesars.

  Information on the Dioceses and Provinces, those who governed them and the military units stationed there are contained within the rather enigmatic document known as the Notitia Dignitatum (Record of Offices). This document is dated to around AD 420 for the western section and AD 390 for the eastern section. The Notitia is a favourite of re-enactors and wargamers because it shows the shield patterns of many of the infantry and cavalry units that served in the Late Roman field armies. Whilst it is very useful for locating where the officials were based, unfortunately many of the units in the document appear in both eastern and western sections, probably as a result of cross postings, so stating exactly where a unit was based can be difficult due to this. The Notitia also shows the location of the various high ranking military officers and the armies they commanded.

  The Tetrarchy system failed due to the inability of the emperors to agree to hand over power to their Caesars and civil war broke out. From the dust arose Constantine I, who would be known afterwards as ‘The Great’. He became sole emperor and instituted other reforms. In AD 318, he brought in an administrative system in the form of Praetorian Prefectures. The holders of these posts were rotated on a frequent basis and they did not have a co-colleague to assist them as was the case in the Tetrarchy they replaced. Constantine built a new city on the former city of Byzantium, this became known as Constantinople. Constantinople was the permanent seat of the government of the eastern half of the Empire. Rome had by this time become just the symbolic head of the Empire and various other cities became the imperial seat of government including Trier and Mediolanum.

  The Empire was briefly divided once more between the sons of Constantine but again civil war and strife led to an eventual victor, Constantius II, who became sole emperor by AD 350. Constantius elevated his nephew Gallus to Caesar of the East in AD 351 when it became clear that the Empire could no longer be solely ruled by one person. Gallus so abused his position that Constantius had him executed in AD 354 and in AD 355 he promoted his nephew Julian to Caesar. This relationship broke down and civil war loomed again but before both sides could clash Constantius died on route; he named Julian as his successor on his deathbed. Julian had no intention of sharing the Empire with anyone else and he ruled as sole emperor until his death on the battlefield against the Sassanids in June AD 363. The army promoted Jovian to the throne but his reign was very short-lived and in AD 364 the army promoted Valentinian to the throne.

  When Valens was acclaimed as emperor in AD 365 the Empire was at its greatest extent, only the northern section of the former province of Dacia, abandoned long before, and some small territories ceded to the Sassanids in the East were missing, but overall the Empire was larger than it had ever been. As shown in Chapter Three Valentinian divided the Empire between himself and Valens, Valentinian ruling from Trier whilst Valens’ seat was Constantinople.

  Another major change during this period was in connection with religion within the Empire and the rise of Christianity as the pre-eminent form of worship. Christianity was a minor cult by the time of Diocletian and it may have vanished altogether had it not been for the conversion of Helena, Constantine’s mother, to that faith. She was zealous in her devotion to the Christian faith and her influence over her son in religious matters cannot be overestimated. Constantine himself only converted on his deathbed, but his sons, Constantine II, Constans and Constantius, became committed Christians. On becoming sole emperor, Constantius began purges against the other religions within the Empire, ordering temples to be closed, others torn down and the persecution of their worshippers. There was a brief reversal of this policy when Julian ascended to the purple. He may have been studying to become a Christian priest before he became Caesar but his obvious Pagan leaning took over in full force once he ruled the Empire. He attempted to restore the old Pagan beliefs, not entirely successfully as many within the Empire were now dedicated Christians. He carried out limited purges against the Christians and it’s probably fortunate for Christianity that he did not rule for long. Valens and his brother Valentinian were committed Christians although they did retain the old Pagan title of Pontifex Maximus on their accessions to their respective thrones. Both emperors meddled constantly in religious affairs, much to the obvious disgust of those such as Ammianus and others who commented on this.1

  Diocletian also separated military from civil command at the lowest, provincial level. The governors of provinces along the frontiers no longer commanded the military forces in their provinces; instead the command of those forces was given to military officers called Duces Limitis (Commander of the Border). Although Duces normally commanded the forces in a single province, some controlled more than one province. Diocletian’s reforms also included the exclusion of the senatorial class from all senior military commands and from all top administrative posts, with the exception of those in Italy itself. Constantine continued the reforms instituted by Diocletian by introducing a new higher officer rank of ‘Comes’ (Count). The two highest ranking of the military Comes were the Magister Equitum (Master of the Horse) and the Magister Peditum (Master of the Foot). The lower officer ranks were also reformed. The highest ranking of these was the Tribunus, of whom Ammianus was one. These officers commanded both the old and new style units of both the legions and the auxila. The Praefectus was an officer who commanded the old style border legions along the frontiers; they could command several units at once if needed. There was another officer rank known as the Protectores who were initially created by the Emperor Gallienus as a form of personal bodyguard but who in time became a kind of officer recruiting school from where men such as Ammianus, who were, as a junior officer, once a member of the Protectores Domestici, the personal military attendants of the emperor, groomed to become senior officers. Other officer ranks were reformed and included the Praepostitus who originally was an officer in temporary command of a unit but by the time Ammianus wrote they either commanded the old style border legions and auxiliary units or it became a title an officer such as a Tribunus could be called when commanding a unit. The non-officer ranks were also reformed with the most senior being the Primicerius who could take command of his unit if the Tribunus was absent, he would then be known as the Vicarius. There were other NCOs including the Ducenarius who may have commanded 200 men, and the Centenarius who Vegetius equated to the old Centuriones rank but this is not entirely certain.2

  It has often been claimed that the Late Roman army relied more and more on ‘barbarian’ recruits to fill its ranks. In part this was indeed true, a larger army required more men, and those who lived beyond the borders of Rome were more than willing to enrol within the ranks of not only the Auxilia units but also that of the Legions. And the recruits were not just ordinary men, chieftains and kings of various tribes willingly offered their services and many rose to high rank.3 However, despite the claims of a number of those who have written about both the Late Roman army and the Battle of Adrianople, those who were contemporary with the Battle of Adrianople, such as Ammianus, still considered the army as ‘Roman’, and manned mostly by ‘Romans’.

  Along with reforming the officers and N
COs Diocletian began the reformation of the infantry and cavalry units that made up the Roman army. Manpower shortages were solved by the introduction of an annual conscription of Roman citizens for the first time since the days of the Roman Republic. Further, Diocletian may have been responsible for the decree, first recorded in AD 313, which compelled the sons of serving soldiers and veterans to enlist in the army. Diocletian increased the number of the legions, auxilia and other units. To this end he began raising new units and reforming existing ones. He kept some of the old style legions as border defence troops but the other legions and auxilia units were regraded as Palatine, Comitatensis or Limitanei. The Palatine units were higher status troops whose role would have originally been troops under the direct command of the emperor. The Comitatensis were what would be considered now to be units manned by regular soldiers whilst the Limitanei would have been units of a much lower status, generally tasked with providing static defence within a province. In time of need Limitanei units could be promoted to field army status where they would then be known as ‘Pseudocomitatensis’. If they remained in the field army long enough the unit could even be promoted to full Comitatensis status. The cavalry were similarly made up, with the highest status units being known as the Scolae, the rest as Equites.

  Diocletian further divided both infantry and cavalry units into two halves, which were then known as Seniores and Iuniores, i.e. the Lanciarii Seniores and the Mattiarii Iuniores being just two examples. By doing this Diocletian effectively doubled the size of the army although it’s not clear if this doubled the number of men in the Late Roman army as the exact number of men in those units is still a matter of debate.4 Vegetius claimed that the legions up to the reforms of Diocletian were made up of 6,100 infantry and attached to the legion were 726 cavalry. But this must have been the strength on paper, theoretical strength. A number of studies of the Late Roman army have shown that most units were below strength, some seriously so, and it’s likely that a legion that was supposed to total 6,100 men probably totalled no more than 5,000–5,500 in reality. Diocletian’s reforms may well have included removing the cavalry attached to each legion and forming them into their own, separate units. The same proved true for the artillery that Vegetius stated was attached to each legion, the number of men manning the artillery was eleven per cart-mounted bolt shooting ballista (carroballista), each legion having fifty-five such pieces, and an unknown number of men manning the larger artillery pieces known as onagri (‘wild asses’). As it appears the artillery was also removed from the legions and formed into separate units, this would have removed at least another 600–700 men from each legion. This would have further reduced the legion size to down to around the 4,300–4,800 mark. So when Diocletian divided the legions into the Seniores and Iuniores they may have been between 2,150 and 2,400 men strong. However, this directly conflicts with most modern historians who state that the new style legions that were created were probably no more than 1,200 men strong.5 My own personal view is that the Late Roman legions were approximately 2,000 strong on average, taking into account the fact that once these newer legions were established they too would have suffered a drop in numbers for the same reasons I have given above. I also base this view on examples in Ammianus where detachments of between 300 and 500 men were taken from each legion for special tasks, such as when Sebastianus was given 300 men from each legion to take with him when he attacked the Goths fleeing from Adrianople in the weeks before the battle of Adrianople itself. If the legions were only 1,200 strong then detaching even 300 men would seriously weaken the legion, as a quarter of it would be away and casualties would further diminish the fighting capabilities of a smaller legion. If the legions were 2,000 men strong then a detachment of 300 or even 500 men would have not had a serious impact on its ability to maintain combat effectiveness. The same debate also applies to the auxilia units. The old style auxilia units still existed but many were stationed on the borders alongside the old style legions that retained their old legionary names and numbering system. First Diocletian and then Constantine raised a new type of auxilia unit, the Auxilia Palatina, who had more status than the old style ones. Again, modern historians believe that Auxilia units were approximately 500 men strong, half of the size of the old style Auxilia units. Again, I really cannot believe this and cite the example of Silvanius who in AD 355 travelled through Gaul with 8,000 auxiliaries (Amm XVI, 2, 4). Now, if those Auxilia units were 500 men strong, that would equate to Silvanius travelling with possibly sixteen Auxilia units. The Notitia Dignitatum notes that there were only fifteen Auxilia Palatina units in Gaul when it was drawn up, and some of these were raised after Adrianople. Granted some Auxilia units may have been destroyed at Adrianople itself but this still leaves us with the question, did Silvanius really travel through Gaul with all of the Auxilia Palatina units stationed there? This is highly unlikely in my opinion. Therefore I would suggest that if the Auxilia were from 800 to 1,000 men strong then that would have meant that Silvanius would have been accompanied by between 8 to 10 Auxilia units, the rest being left to remain in their garrisons. Troops still continued to be stationed along the borders but these older units, often retaining the old style Roman numbering system, had lost much of their status, and many had detachments sent to other provinces and stations. It’s likely that these older legions may have retained their original troop strength and may have been around 4,000 men strong if they were at full strength. Other unit types were separate units of Ballistarii, which contained artillery pieces of various sizes, units made up of skirmishers and riverine and seagoing troops. The total size of the Roman army during the fourth century is another topic that is hotly debated. John Lydus stated that at the end of the third century AD the army size was 389,704 men. Zosimus gives a figure of 581,000 during the early fourth century whilst Agathias gave a total of 645,000 during the reign of Constantine. The first figure probably relates just to field army strength totals, whilst the last two contain naval, riverine, limitanae and other supernumeries. An effective field army strength of 400,000 across the entire Empire does not then seem too large taking these figures into account.