gordopolis

Hi,

I hope this is the relevant forum for my question (Late Roman verging on Byzantine):

Around the time of the Battle of Adrianople, the Roman army in the east seemes to have a fairly clear high command system, namely:
1 * Emperor-> many magister militums -> many counts/dukes

...this is all good and clear. However, the structure underneath the counts/dukes is pretty sketchy and most pieces I have read are quite vague on this (understandable given the changes afoot in the army around this period).

As I understand it, a count would command many legions (1-2k men very roughly) of comitatenses and a duke would command many legions of limitanei (1-2k men again very roughly), but what rank of officer would command each individual legion? I have read that it would be a tribune in command of an individual legion, but also that the term tribune could be applied to a man who leads a cohort or any small detachment of troops.

Reading around on the web and in books is proving quite frustrating, as I think I have ironed out an answer, then the next piece I check contradicts my understanding!

Any help would be most appreciated

Thanks in advance,
Gordopolis

Salah

Military titles and organization in the Roman army from the time of Constantine onwards are very hard to figure out. Epigraphy attests to the continuation of the rank of "centurion" at least as late as c. 350 AD. The title seems to have been changed to "cenetarius" or something to that effect in the West, and was given a Greek name in the East. Officers over 80-100 soldiers were attested in the Eastern Roman Army well into the Middle Ages.

The title for the officer commanding a 4th-5th Century legion is unknown (along with the precise size and organization of said legions. My guesses would be tribunus or praepositis. In the 3rd Century, praepositis was used to describe a commander of a vexillation (an indefinitely detached body of 480 or 960 legionaries). Considering that the legions of the 4th Century were descended from the vexillations of the 3rd, it isn't too much of a stretch to imagine them being commanded by a praepositis.

gordopolis

Thanks S, it's good that you have confirmed my belief that the information from this era is conflicting and incomplete in places.

I'm doing this research for a book, so I think I'll go with Tribunus

Thanks,
Gordopolis

Salah

Glad to be of service

gordopolis

Thanks for all your suggestions. Should you be keen on historical fiction, my book (the one that raised all of my questions) has been released!



- Paperback edition - coming soon!
- Smashwords edition (all other eBook formats like epub, sony reader etc) - click here to buy a copy!
- Kindle edition -

Joshuaspoppa

Might be a case of being too late to show up for the ball, but for what it's worth at this point...

According to Treadgold's Byzantium and Its Army, 284-1081, pp. 96-7, the command structure between 290 and 480 or so would look something like this:

Prefect of legion: about 1000 men (infantry only)
Tribune (count): 500 (for both infantry and cavalry)
Centurion (hecatonarch): 80 for infantry, 120 for cavalry
Decurion (decarch): 8 for infantry, 30 for cavalry

After this period, but prior to the transition to the theme system (sometime around 660, exact dating disputed), the units and their command structures were apparently reorganized. I'm not sure if Emperor Maurice is the one who actually ordered this reorganization, or if his Strategikon merely documented changes that had by then already been accomplished, or a little of both. But he describes a structure something like this (again, based on Treadgold's summary tables cited above):

Merarch: 5000 men (roughly equivalent to the old legate of legion, apparently)
Chiliarch: 1000
Tribune (count): 500
Hecatonarch: 100
Decarch: 10
Pentarch: 5

The theme system, once it took hold, resulted in yet another organization scheme that was in use from roughly 660-840. Within the themes, it looked something like this:

Turmarch (topoteretes, meriarch): 2000-5000
Drungary (chiliarch): 1000
Hecatonarch (centarch): 100
Penteconarch (tribune): 50
Decarch: 10
Pentarch: 5

The tagmata - the mobile forces, as opposed to the thematic units, which were localized - were structured somewhat differently, once they came into being sometime around 743:

Turmarch (topoteretes, meriarch): 2000
Count: 200
Hecatonarch (centarch): 40
Decarch: 10
Pentarch: 5

There are a lot of explanatory details and caveats in Treadgold's explanation of all this, including variations in the number of men a given officer might command, changes over time and place (even within a given period), and differences depending on unit type (and presumably mission profile). I get the impression that, as in the earlier Roman army, unit structure was a fluid thing, and never as simple as it looked on paper - units might be split up and sent to entirely different parts of the Empire, the slots were rarely entirely filled, additional troops might be detailed to a unit for specific purposes, officers of a given rank might not be available (or there might be too many, leading some to command units they were technically over-qualified for), etc.

In short, the period you're asking about was highly fluid, and a lot of improvisation (both intentional and ad hoc) was being done, so you're probably safe making a best guess. Doubt anyone's going to call you up and give you crap for getting it wrong, as long as you don't call them "lieutenant colonels" or something. :^)

gordopolis

Cool - thanks for that info. I actually have Treadgold but as you say, I was finding that trying to pin down uniform structures was like walking on shifting sands, so I have went for a 'best estimate' approach where this was the case and explained this in my historical note. It seems to have went down well with the hist fic community which is good.

hmmm, lieutenant colonels....now that's got a ring to it...

Joshuaspoppa

FWIW, bought your book today - first ebook I've ever bought directly from the author. Looking forward to reading it. :^)

gordopolis

Nice one! Hope it's an enjoyable read