The Battle of Adrianople A.D.378 Was the Beginning of the End of the Roman Army

Introduction 

The Adrianople war that took place AD 378 is considered one of the key turning points throughout history when the Roman confidence was irrevocably shattered. The battle of Adrianople was believed to be the beginning of the downfall of the Roman Empire. The war took place between the Roman emperor Valens and the Goths in the year August 9, AD 378 1 . The war took place in the city of Adrianople currently known as the city of Edirne, Turkey. The battle was also believed to have established the cavalry dominance over infantry for a long time of about a thousand years. As result of this, the Adrianople got a considerable attention globally, and this is evident in the work of historian Ammianus Marcellinus. Most of the current analysis of Adrianople often blames the Roman defeat 2 . It has been established that the weapons used by the Romans could have resulted in their defeat, but research has established that there are a number of reasons that also led to their defeat. First, there was an aspect related to the Romans’ erroneous estimate of the Gothic fighting arm size. Secondly, a historian has argued that the decision by Valen to delay the hostilities at the battlefield to negotiate with Fritigern which was believed to have bought time for the Gothic cavalry to return. Thirdly, there was also the launch of Roman attack that in most instances were without orders, by the Roman cavalry on the army’s right wing. The chronicles of the Roman Empire are mostly scarred by specific events that occurred at Thracian city of Adrianople on August 9, ad 378.

During this time, Valens-the Eastern Roman Emperor- was killed together with several thousand warriors in the defeat that has been considered as the beginning of the end of Rome’s capability to resist various potential external pressure and further to prevent penetration of its defences. Ammianus Marcellinus, a great historian, confirmed that no battle throughout the Roman history had such a massacre. The Roman troop lose during the fight was huge to an extent that it attracted the global attention as the most horrific battle with massive deaths. During the Adrianople, Romans forces had more than half-a-million men strong who were deployed from Hadrian’s Wall in Britain. Therefore the loss of about of twenty- to thirty-thousand troops had a massive impact to the Romans 3 . The Adrianople war is thus considered a major blow to the pride and confidence of the Romans, and further, it had a lasting impact on their empire.

Historiography 

The Adrianople war was a major blow to the pride and confidence of the Romans and this impacted negatively on their empire. The Roman right wing cavalry together with the skirmishers initiated the war by attacking the Goth wagon laagers even before the Roman cavalry that was at the rear of the March column reached their strategic position at the left wing, and this was the beginning of the fall of Roman Empire 4 . This led to massive confusion that is believed to have led to the defeat of the Romans and destruction of the city. The Romans suffered massive casualties of approximately 10-15,000 troops which are considered catastrophic especially in the Western Roman Empire 5 . The defeat of the Roman marked the beginning of their downfall. It is clear that the Roman infantry centred were significantly drawn up and were very ready to attack the enemy but on the other hand, the right wing attack was instead repelled, and as a result of this massive confusion, the Goth Calvary came back. It attacked the flanks together with the Roman right wing that were at the rear destroying the entire city and causing massive number of deaths 6 . Throughout this time, the Goth infantry cleverly left the laager and then aided in returning the cavalry to the other side of the flank which was argued to have broken the partially deployed Roman left wing.

After the Roman flanks had been uncovered, the Goths grabbed the opportunity to sweep round the rear of the Roman foot pinning that was actually advancing to them against the laager. The fighting continued for a very long time through the nightfall even after being pushed so close to the point that they could not utilize their weapons effectively causing horrific destruction and death. The entire regions were highly disfigured and bodies of the Roman soldiers scattered across the field. The battle is thus considered one of the worst catastrophes in Rome history. The losses were believed to have led to the fall of Rome 7 . Approximately a third of the entire Roman forces were successful in escaping covered by the remaining team of the left wing cavalry but this did not entirely save them from being attacked by the Goths. However, during this time, Valens was killed when the Goths burned down a given cottage that he had taken refuge in together with his bodyguard. History has pointed out that the destruction that took place destroying two-thirds of the Roman army was the most catastrophic and the Roman Empire were never able to recover from it 8 . For instance, the material losses were considered to be bad enough such that the morale impact lasted for a very long time.

After marching for approximately eight miles, the Roman soldiers sighted what they believed to be the Gothic laager, but at that they time they were extremely exhausted, their right wing cavalry was at the time in the van and further, the infantry followed while at the same time the left wing cavalry had covered the rear. At the same time, the emperor opted to draw up his right wing to cover up the legions’ deployment to counter the potential attack from the Goths. The Gothic horsemen were in the fields foraging, therefore, for them to gain time, their leader sends out an embassy to the Roman emperor to ask for peace to prevail and at the same time, they set fire to crops and farms where the Romans had deployed 9 . However, the Romans failed to storm the laager because of several miles that would have been directed at them. The Romans were still deploying at the time when the Gothic cavalry showed up and immediately charged the right wing cavalry of the Romans and then rooted them. The left wing cavalry, on the other hand, advanced the laager, however; they faced a stronger number who attacked them massively killing thousands of them and turning their houses and properties into ashes 10 .

After the Roman cavalry had got defeated, they left their infantry without flank protection, and this gave the Gothic cavalry an opportunity to turn on the Roman infantry massively with arrows and lances where approximately 40,000 men got killed 11 . It is thus clear that the Adrianople war was a turning point for the Roman Empire, where they got destroyed completely by the Goth. The massive impact that had been afflicted on the Roman Empire was lasting, and this affected the entire nation such that the country was not able to recover from it. Based on this analysis, it is clear that the Romans were massively destroyed during the Adrianople war as a result of several factors that could have weakened their forces 12 . Various scholars have critically analysed potential reasons why the Roman troops were defeated during the Adrianople war. It is evident that most of these scholars believe that the Adrianople was the beginning of the fall of the Roman Empire. This paper fits into the 21st century into the historiography 13 .

Argument and Analysis 

Based on various existing studies throughout history, it has been established that Romans got defeated terribly during the Adrianople war and this was actually the beginning of their downfall. It is evident that the defeat of the Romans was not because that the Gothic cavalry were superior to overrun the Roman infantry. It has been shown that the barbarian horsemen’s decisive roles to a larger extend clearly reflected the Roman commander’s mistakes 14 . Research have pointed out that the Adrianople battle to a larger extend ushered in a time where the cavalry significantly dominated the entire battlefield. It is clear that the domination experienced during this time was the highly inevitable outcome of lack of discipline among the infantry that had excluded their stand in the face of the Calvary charges. Evidently, the horses used by the Romans could not charge into the infantry line that held its ground. The Goths displayed majority of their warriors at the front of their wagons forming a great circular formation. Most of the women and the children were sheltered behind the wagons thus protecting a large number of people using the laager. Further, the Goths placed several obstacles on the front of the wagons hence making it even more difficult for the Romans to have their way through the Gothic warriors. It was also argued that the extent of the laager played another role where it made it virtually impossible for the Roman scouts to be able to estimate the enemy army’s size.

The Romans upon arriving at the front of the laager, they were unable to estimate the approximate the number of their enemies. This therefore, gave the Goths an added advantage where they also had enough food, plenty water and also had spend a good time resting. The defeat of the Roman’s troops is believed to be as a result of their unfamiliarity with the terrain, for instance, the Roman’s right wing cavalry came at the Goth’s sight while on the other hand, the left wing of the Roman cavalry was still a distance away 15 . Further, majority of the horsemen of the left wing were scattered throughout the roads that were leading to the Goth camp. Historian believed that Goths were specifically fighting from behind the wagon laager during the entire Adrianople war. The Goth’s procedure was specifically to engage their enemies which in this case were the Roman soldiers in an open and them quickly fall back to their camp when they realize that the encounter was not working for them. Therefore, if the Goths had decided to remain behind the laager it is evident that they would have surrendered the initiative to the Roman and further, they would not have been able to utilize their most preferred fighting tactics of charging into the hand to hand combat using spears, sword and even shields 16 .

Boldly riding in the Roman right wing, the Goth militants disoriented the Roman cavalry line, taking it by surprise, only to turn and attack that Roman left wing. In a moment of time, the entire Roman horsemen were driven from the field and this left the exhausted infantry highly exposed. Fritigern immediately took the advantage and busted from the laager. Ammianus clearly described the plight of the Roman soldiers stating that “The different companies became so huddled together such that hardly anyone could pull out his sword, or draw back his arm, and as a result of immense clouds of dust, the heavens could no longer be seen….Hence Goth arrows whirling death from every side found their mark with fatal effect, since they could not be seen beforehand nor guarded against.” This to a larger extent affected the strategy employed by the Romans because, instead of engaging their enemies, they got caught up in a very small space that could not allow them to freely fight with the Goths 17 .

The Romans had an insufficient fund for the military spending, and most of their soldiers wore less metal armour. The majority of the Goths had served in the Roman armies and further had skills to wield sword, spear and even battle-ax. It was believed that these weapons were a great threat to the Roman warriors especially due to the Roman infantry. Additionally, the shields were small and rounder. Roman infantry formations, for instance, were highly formidable even though they had lost their unique invincible aura, which they had prided themselves in throughout the imperial heyday. The Goths had concentrated in a laager from where they fought, darting out and returning in quick succession. Ring mail was considered one of the most popular armour and was made of an iron ring linked together. Additionally, the Romans also had a scale armour made of overlapping bronze scales. It was believed that scale armour was much easier to produce compared to the ring mail; however, it was argued to be less flexible. There was also the use of breastplates. Common helmet used was the conical span gen helm made of several plates that were held together using reinforced bands. Among the Romans, the spear was considered one of the primary weapons and could be easily thrown at an enemy or even used in a close combatant. In addition to this, the Romans also used heavy slashing sword that was about 3 feet in length which was considered the preferred sidearm. Further, the Romans used Celtic spatha.

The Roman Empire during the battle of Adrianople was under intense pressure specifically; from the barbarian forces who were on the frontier. Studies have pointed out that Goths, Franks, Jutes, Saxons and Vandals had strategically encroached on the Roman borders, and further encroached the East Sassanid Persia which was considered a very capable opponent. In the year 376 AD, about 200,000 Visigoths under Fritigern and Alavivus requested to settle within the empire; therefore, the Eastern Roman Emperor, Valens, agreed but to the condition that they would disarm them 18 . This was believed to be an opportunity as it would act as a source of army recruits for their legions. The Adrianople battle, therefore, taught the individual who guided the Eastern Roman Empire policies a critical lesson related to the concept of the fragility of the military power. Therefore, the survival of the Roman Empire dependent wholly on the lesson learned for the next millennium 19 .

Gothic cavalry evidently had impetus and ferocity advantage over the Roman troops. This enabled them to charge into the Roman cavalry standing idle, and this was considered a recipe for appending disaster for the cavalry. The Roman had marched under a scorching sun heading towards the Goth camp. During this time, the Goths were encamped to the most secure position they believed to be easily defensible ground. At that moment, the Romans were exhausted from spending long hours in the sun and further most of them were highly panicked and easily dispersed. History has it that the Roman foot had declined regarding quality 20 . They, therefore, found themselves massively charged in rear and flank by cavalry while at the sake they were engaged in assaulting the field fortification. It is argued that the quality as well as the morale of the Roman soldiers were very low even before that campaign took place. It was 13 years earlier when Valens led them to successfully campaign against the Sassanian Persians hence abandoning the effort and then left Armenia in Persian hands. It is reported that it was an overwhelmingly hot August day when these Valen’s soldiers hurriedly matched from the Adrianople to where the Goths were reported 21 . Further, these soldiers were reported to be very thirsty even before they got engaged in fighting. However, Fritigern had shown a greater level of strategic skills despite intense logistics problems.

Studies have established that the Roman foot declined significantly. The Limitanei, for instance, was not of the high quality as the troops under Augustus or Trajan. However, it can be argued that the Army during the Adrianople war was the best throughout the 4th century Roman Empire could field. Numerous explanations have been given focusing on the improbable victory by the refugees over what it was belied to be a best organized, best disciplined in addition to the best-equipped military. On the other side, the Goths had an advantage over the Romans regarding numerical superiority where they had about 200,000 warriors 22 . Fritigern army experienced logistical difficulties in terms of feeding the army and sustaining their large number. Historians believe that Adrianople war proved the cavalry superiority over the infantry. Throughout the 4th century AD, the Roman Empire’s military services were considered highly unpopular, and most of the villagers turned to bribery and self-mutilation in order to avoid the conscription. Some of the best recruits were believed to come from the frontiers province and also beyond the empire’s borders. Further, the Germans and Sarmatia’s are believed to have risen to the highest positions of command. Additionally, the Romans soldiers adopted German battle tactics 23 .

On the other hand, leadership during the Adrianople was the decisive issue. The Romans evidently lost as a result of the brilliant strategy established by the Gothic leaders. On the other side, it can be said that the Valens were highly incompetent. The Valen’s cavalry failed in their strategy to scout the enemy and further protect the infantry’s vulnerable flanks. Clear, this is considered that mistake of the wing commanders. Rome is believed to have suffered the most disastrous defeat, especially when compared to the defeat of Teutoburger Forest, Arausio, and Cannae 24 . This was considered a trivial loss. On the left wing of the Roman army, the Roman infantry was believed to have significant success regarding fighting their way into the Goths to the wagons. However, with the cavalry collapse that occurred on the two flanks, the Roman infantry had very little chance to break the Gothic infantry and was also highly outnumbered. Historians argue that the fighting resembled the fighting that took place at Cannae where Roman soldiers were compressed into very small areas and thus was not able to make use of their weapons and at the same time, they began crushing one another to death. As stated by Marcellinus, the battle took place early afternoon and thus placed the impossible demand on the Roman soldiers who were by then emaciated by hunger and worn out with toil such that they could not support the weight of their armour 25 .

The Roman soldiers were hemmed from all the sides forcing them to be packed together so tightly that they could not create an effective battle formation. Studies have it that the slaughter that was done on the Romans was frightful especially as the infantry of Fritigern closed in at the same time, the cavalry also kept all Roman who had broken out from getting far. The battlefield was reported to have run red with blood, mostly of the Roman. The majority of the Roman soldiers slipped on the bloody ground while most of them died upon falling on their weapons. The entire field was covered with bodies of the Roman soldiers. There exist two different stories on the fate of Valen. One story claims that Valen was struck by an arrow while he was among the ranks of his own army. The other story claims that Valen was despite having been wounded by an arrow, was rescued by his guards to a pleasant place. However, even this place was attacked by the Goths.

The Roman defenders were able to drive the Goths back using arrows, but the Goths returned. They amassed brushwood and straw and set the house on fire killing several Roman soldiers and the Emperor. Ammianus in his book stated that a fair majority of the Roman army did die during the Adrianople war. Thereafter, Roman horsemen were driven even further away from the fighting field and in the process left the infantry encircled, hemmed in and massively destroyed. Studies have pointed out that the Adrianople war outcome was so terrific that it shocked the entire western world. It is reported that Roman’s had lost several battles before but not decisively as during the Adrianople war. The barbarians significantly made the Roman commanders appear utterly incompetent with respect to war as an art. Throughout the entire Adrianople war, Valens and his generals were tactically outsmarted and even outmanoeuvred by Fritigern’s Goths 26 .

The Roman defeat at the Adrianople is attributable to both strategic and even tactical reasons. Focusing on the strategic level, it is clear that the Romans were not able to strategically assemble adequate high-quality troops to fights strongly and competently deal with the threat posed by the Goth. During this time, the empire had approximately 500,000 men under an arm, and they were committed specifically guarding the imperial borders especially from the Britannia to Syria. They had the fear that if a significant number of their forces were moved to another point, then there was a higher chance that a potential enemy would have taken advantage of their weakened border 27 . Historians have argued that the Roman field armies were highly mobile and deployable and any order for them to move to another area of operation in most instances led to mass dissertation and this further thinned their ranks. Focusing on using the forces that were at their disposal, the Roman commanders during the Adrianople war acted with a high level of arrogance which is believed to be typical of leaders, especially within civilized armies. The commanders, therefore, did let themselves to get drawn into the war without having the necessary reconnaissance and further without ensuring that the war would proceed in a pattern that favoured their interests, militarily speaking 28 .

It has been established that the ancient Rome had at this point received a blow from which it couldn’t recover. However, it took about a century to die. Studies have it that the Roman Empire was in a very bad shape before however, it was not so bad such that a single effective leader could not have saved that particular situation. After the Adrianople war, the destruction that took place at Rome was highly irreversible. The power of the power collapsed miserably and on the other hand; the dominantly Goth army was not able to fend off various attacks mounted by persons who had infiltrated the entire eastern frontiers. After the Adrianople battle, the Roman armies are believed to have lost most of their classical character. Further, cavalry predominated and because most of their horsemen were also archers, their capability to attack particular at long range is believed to have incapacitated the infantry’s formation. The Valens were caught up with the infantry hence had no chance to escape resulting into a rapid collapse of the Roman cavalry 29 . He, however, did with his legions, and his body was never recovered. Other historians have argued that it is not the huge numbers of the Goths that defeated the Romans military but the massive mistakes in addition to their leader’s overconfidence resulting to the extensive catastrophe.

The Eastern Empire during this time was only able to bring about fifteen thousand soldiers to the battlefield, and this suggested an intensive decline in the Roman ability to support their military forces significantly. The destruction of the Valens’s army is believed to be very disastrous in the largest sense, and this is because it destroyed the Roman Empire’s reserve of military power 30 . The barbarians, therefore, overwhelmed their enemies and their provinces where the Roman armies wholly depended on for their reconstitution and rebuilding. Once these essential provinces fell into the hands of Goths, then it followed that there would be no potential recovery in the west. There was massive destruction of the highly disciplined and trained troops that uniquely characterized the power of the Roman forces at the height of their empire. It has been argued that it will take about a thousand years before the Roman-trained highly disciplined soldiers concept re-emerges throughout Europe in the early seventeenth century 31 .

Conclusion 

In conclusion, the essay has established that the Battle of Adrianople was actually the beginning of the end of the Roman Empire. Although the war took place in the East, Adrianople war had the massive effect on the Rome’s affairs especially of the western provinces. There are very many reasons that have been put forward explaining why the Romans got defeated. Evidently, the weapons used during this war could have contributed to their defeat since they relied on spears and shields. The leaders also have been reported to have been highly incompetent during the Battle of Adrianople, and this led to their defeat. Leadership during the Adrianople was the main decisive issue. The Romans troops evidently lost as a result of the brilliant strategy that adopted and implemented by the Gothic leaders. On the other side, it can be said that the Valens were highly incompetent. The strategies used by the Roman soldiers were also not effective compared to that applied by the Goths. The Roman Empire got massively destroyed, and a huge number of the Roman soldiers were killed in the process. It was established that the Romans had arrived at the battle field very exhausted and also dehydrated from several trials of their march.

Further, it appeared as if they had deployed a higgledy-piggledy fashion. Most of the Romans soldiers got slain even without who had smitten them. Others were highly overwhelmed by the crowd’s weights that were pressing upon them. Additionally, other soldiers were also slain by the wounds that were inflicted by their comrades. The barbarians as they were referred to spared none of those who yielded and those who resisted. Adding to the horrific scene, there were gallons of blood that were flowing on the ground. The blood covered a huge area on the ground, and it made the soldier's feet lip, and this made it difficult for them to resist their enemies who had pressed on them. The pool of blood had disfigured nearly everything; piled bodies had scatted on the fields. The essay as shown that the barbarian horsemen’s decisive roles to a larger extend clearly reflected the Roman commander’s mistakes and this also led to their defeat. It has been established that the Gothic cavalry had impetus and ferocity advantage over the Roman troops and this was also a major sign of the beginning of the Roman Empire downfall. This is argued to have enabled them to charge into the Roman cavalry standing idle, and this was considered a recipe for appending disaster for the cavalry.

Bibliography

Gibbon, Edward. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire . Vol. 3. Harper & Brothers, 1841.

Goffart, Walter A. Barbarians and Romans, AD 418-584: the techniques of accommodation . Princeton University Press, 1980.

Kulikowski, Michael. Rome's Gothic Wars: from the third century to Alaric . Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Newark, Timothy. The Barbarians: Warriors & Wars of the Dark Ages . Blandford, 1985.

Nicasie, Martinus Johannes. Twilight of Empire: the Roman Army from the Reign of Diocletian until the Battle of Adrianople . Vol. 19. Brill Academic Publishers, 1998.

Thompson, Edward Arthur. Romans and barbarians: the decline of the Western Empire . Univ of Wisconsin Press, 1982.

1 Gibbon, Edward. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire . Vol. 3. Harper & Brothers, 1841.

2 Goffart, Walter A. Barbarians and Romans, AD 418-584: the techniques of accommodation . Princeton University Press, 1980.

3 Gibbon, Edward. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire . Vol. 3. Harper & Brothers, 1841. 

4 Kulikowski, Michael. Rome's Gothic Wars: from the third century to Alaric . Cambridge University Press, 2006 .

5 Goffart, Walter A. Barbarians and Romans, AD 418-584: the techniques of accommodation . Princeton University Press, 1980.

6 Newark, Timothy. The Barbarians: Warriors & Wars of the Dark Ages . Blandford, 1985.

7 Nicasie, Martinus Johannes. Twilight of Empire: the Roman Army from the Reign of Diocletian until the Battle of Adrianople . Vol. 19. Brill Academic Publishers, 1998.

8 Gibbon, Edward. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire . Vol. 3. Harper & Brothers, 1841.

9 Kulikowski, Michael. Rome's Gothic Wars: from the third century to Alaric . Cambridge University Press, 2006.

10 Goffart, Walter A. Barbarians and Romans, AD 418-584: the techniques of accommodation . Princeton University Press, 1980.

11 Thompson, Edward Arthur. Romans and barbarians: the decline of the Western Empire . Univ of Wisconsin Press, 1982.

12 Gibbon, Edward. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire . Vol. 3. Harper & Brothers, 1841.

13 Newark, Timothy. The Barbarians: Warriors & Wars of the Dark Ages . Blandford, 1985.

14 Nicasie, Martinus Johannes. Twilight of Empire: the Roman Army from the Reign of Diocletian until the Battle of Adrianople . Vol. 19. Brill Academic Publishers, 1998.

15 Kulikowski, Michael. Rome's Gothic Wars: from the third century to Alaric . Cambridge University Press, 2006.

16 Goffart, Walter A. Barbarians and Romans, AD 418-584: the techniques of accommodation . Princeton University Press, 1980.

17 Gibbon, Edward. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire . Vol. 3. Harper & Brothers, 1841.

18 Nicasie, Martinus Johannes. Twilight of Empire: the Roman Army from the Reign of Diocletian until the Battle of Adrianople . Vol. 19. Brill Academic Publishers, 1998.

19 Goffart, Walter A. Barbarians and Romans, AD 418-584: the techniques of accommodation . Princeton University Press, 1980.

20 Gibbon, Edward. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire . Vol. 3. Harper & Brothers, 1841.

21 Newark, Timothy. The Barbarians: Warriors & Wars of the Dark Ages . Blandford, 1985.

22 Thompson, Edward Arthur. Romans and barbarians: the decline of the Western Empire . Univ of Wisconsin Press, 1982.

23 Kulikowski, Michael. Rome's Gothic Wars: from the third century to Alaric . Cambridge University Press, 2006.

24 Goffart, Walter A. Barbarians and Romans, AD 418-584: the techniques of accommodation . Princeton University Press, 1980.

25 Nicasie, Martinus Johannes. Twilight of Empire: the Roman Army from the Reign of Diocletian until the Battle of Adrianople . Vol. 19. Brill Academic Publishers, 1998.

26 Newark, Timothy. The Barbarians: Warriors & Wars of the Dark Ages . Blandford, 1985.

27 Gibbon, Edward. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire . Vol. 3. Harper & Brothers, 1841.

28 Nicasie, Martinus Johannes. Twilight of Empire: the Roman Army from the Reign of Diocletian until the Battle of Adrianople . Vol. 19. Brill Academic Publishers, 1998.

29 Kulikowski, Michael. Rome's Gothic Wars: from the third century to Alaric . Cambridge University Press, 2006.

30 Thompson, Edward Arthur. Romans and barbarians: the decline of the Western Empire . Univ of Wisconsin Press, 1982.

31 Goffart, Walter A. Barbarians and Romans, AD 418-584: the techniques of accommodation . Princeton University Press, 1980.