Articles

The Battle of Adrianople: A Reappraisal

The Battle of Adrianople: A Reappraisal

By Robert Eisenberg

Hirundo: the McGill Journal of Classical Studies, Vol.8 (2009-10)

roman sword - photo by G.Garitan / Wikipedia

Introduction: The Battle of Adrianople (AD 378) is perhaps one of the most studied battles in history. It is seen as a major turning point in both the history of the Roman Empire and in the evolution of warfare. There have been numerous studies of the causes the battle and its outcome, yet each one tends to focus on one particular cause. This study will present a synthesized appraisal of the reasons behind the Roman defeat at Adrianople, including both proximate and ultimate causes. While there are many determining factors in the course of any battle, this paper will focus on the setting of the encounter, as well as on long-term general trends in the composition of the Roman Army and the evolution of ‘barbarian’ policy. Additionally, the short-term causes for the strengths and weaknesses of both armies, the role of the commanders, the function of intelligence gathering, as well as the ‘God’ factor will be examined.

The principal source for the Battle of Adrianople is the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus. Ammianus’ account is generally considered to be the most trustworthy and accurate, as he wrote within a short period after the battle, and was himself a military man, thus knowledgeable of technical details. Ammianus’ credibility is further supported by the fact that he openly confesses when he is unsure of details and presents opposing viewpoints instead of only including his own. However, there are certain weaknesses in his account. He is occasionally inaccurate with regards to geographical position and chronology. Moreover, as a pagan, Ammianus tends to moralize about the general decline of Roman society, for which he blames Christianity, an accusation which carries over into his descriptions of individuals. Finally, Ammianus often neglects to give a description of the course of major battles, instead focusing on creating dramatic rhetoric.



The other source for the battle is the pagan Zosimus, who attempts to trace the decline of the Roman Empire from a pagan perspective. Zosimus tends to take a negative attitude towards Christianity, and he is openly hostile to several Christian emperors, blaming them for Rome’s decline. The ecclesiastical historians, Socrates Scholasticus, Sozomen, and Theodoret all briefly mention the Battle of Adrianople, though not in detail. Moreover, they usually refer to the battle as an act of divine punishment for the sins of Valens and the empire as a whole. Thus, Zosimus, as well as the Christian historians, cannot be trusted to give unbiased accounts.

Click here to read this article from Hirundo

Sponsored Content