Military art
The period of the 6th century can be characterized as a period of growth of the Roman military art in new historical conditions: both theoretical and practical. And if E. Gibbon wrote that in "the camps of Justinian and Mauritius the theory of military art was no less well known than in the camps of Caesar and Trajan" to a higher level than in the previous period. [Gibbon E. History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. T. V. SPb., 2004. S. 105; Kuchma V. V. "Strategicon" Onasander and "Strategicon of Mauritius": the experience of comparative characteristics // Military organization of the Byzantine Empire. SPb., 2001. P.203.]
Based on the combat experience of the 5th-6th centuries, new problems were developed that were relevant to new historical conditions. It would be wrong to say that "all this" did not help the Romans very much. On the contrary, it was precisely the superiority in theory and its application in practice that ensured military successes for the Empire, with scarce, first of all, human resources and vast territories, and an extended theater of military operations. Despite the extreme barbarization of the army, the Roman infantry continued to exist as an important fighting force, as the commander Belisarius himself spoke of.
The main branch of the army is becoming cavalry: so the Romans had to fight both the light cavalry of the Arabs, the Moors (Maurus), the Huns, and the "heavy" cavalry of the Sassanids and Avars, a mixed cavalry of the Franks and Goths. Therefore, the commanders use both the cavalry of the allies-barbarians, and the Thracian, Illyrian cavalry itself, which was in terms of weapons and tactics under the strong influence of barbarians (for example, magnificent riders - Avars). It should nevertheless be noted that during this period there is a decline in the infantry and an increase in the role of cavalry.
The peculiarities of the tactics of the Romans include the use of throwing weapons, the use of a bow. Archery, throwing all kinds of shells in the army were given special attention. and this often ensured them victory in battles, as was the case in the battles in Africa and Italy. At the same time, camp and fortification art received further development. With the might of the walls, the power of siege equipment increased, military tricks, bribery and negotiations were constantly used. The siege and subsequent defense of such a gigantic city as Rome only underlined this. During sieges, all siege and assault weapons known in antiquity are used (siege towers, ballistae, battering rams, mines). The training of soldiers remained an important part of the art of war.
In the battles of this period, both elephants (Sassanids) and camel cavalry (Arabs, Maurussia) are used.
Finally, the art of diplomacy and intelligence (military and civilian spies) is being improved as an integral part of military operations.
It should be separately noted an important fact, which often passes by, the Byzantine army has undergone a lot of transformations and "reforms" throughout its existence. Which is quite understandable: opponents and their tactics changed. For example, horsemen at the turn of the 6th-7th centuries had stirrups, a real revolution in horse control, and, accordingly, battle tactics. The so-called heavy horseman in the period of "Stratiguecon Mauritius" (beginning of the 7th century) and Nicephorus II Phocas are not the same thing. There was an evolution in defensive weapons and offensive weapons. Therefore, each conditional period in the development of Byzantine military art can and should be considered autonomously. Not forgetting about the connection of times. But, I repeat, from the militarily successful 6th century to the "renaissance" of the 10th century - in military affairs the distance is enormous and not taking this into account means making a big mistake.
Generals
The empire, which fought throughout the Mediterranean, had many outstanding military leaders. This is Solomon, who defeated the Maurusians in Africa; Besa, who successfully fought in Mesopotamia and the Caucasus, but surrendered Rome to the Goths; John Troglit - "pacifier" of Africa; Mauritius became emperor; Herman, Master of Offices of Justinian, and his son Herman and many others. But the most outstanding among them: Ursicius Sitta, a commander who was considered equal in ability to Belisarius, the Armenians Narses and Belisarius, the greatest Roman commander.
Few people managed to conquer such vast territories in such a short period of time (Africa, Italy, Spain, the war in Asia). And if we take into account the factor that the campaigns of Belisarius were carried out in conditions of an unequivocal numerical superiority of the enemy, a constant lack of resources for conducting hostilities, then his glory as a commander stands at an unattainable height. For the sake of justice, we must admit that we learn about his talents thanks to his secretary, who wrote about him and about the wars of the times of Justinian. It should be noted that he also lost battles, seized enormous wealth and participated in intrigues. However, unlike, for example, Bes, he did not do it to the detriment of the cause. And lastly, all the generals of this period were themselves excellent fighters: both Narses and Belisarius personally fought the enemies, and Sitta died during hand-to-hand combat. Moreover, Belisarius was also a well-aimed archer, in modern parlance - a sniper. On the other hand, it should be recognized that it was during this period that the principle was laid, which assumed that who is the best swordsman is the best commander, a principle that more than once harmed the Romans afterwards.
Belisarius (505-565) - an outstanding commander of Justinian the Great, it was his victories that made the emperor famous and ensured the return of Africa and Italy to the Roman state. Belisarius began his service in the personal squad of the emperor Justin's nephew, Justinian. He was a spearman, and began his military career when "the first beard was shown." However, this path, in the Roman state, was closely connected with the court service. In this article, we will not describe (or rewrite after Procopius) the biography of the commander, but we will touch on the hostilities in which he participated and the description of the battles.
We will dwell on several key battles of this commander in more detail.
On August 1, 527, the basileus of Justinian came to power, who ordered the construction of the Mindui (Biddon) fortress near the Persian city and the fortress of Nisibis, which caused a war from the Sassanian Iran.
Battle of the Mingdui fortress (Biddon). In 528, the Persians moved troops under the leadership of Miram and Xerxes to destroy the fortress of Biddon, built by Silentiarius Thomas on the left bank of the Tigris. The Romans were coming to meet them from Syria: the troops were commanded by the dux of Damascus Kutsa, the commander of the Lebanese troops of Vuza, the dux of Phenicia Proklian, the dux of Mesopotamia Belisarius, the Comit Basil, Sevastian with the Isaurians, the warlike mountaineers from Asia Minor, the filarch of the Arabs Tafar (Atafar). In the Tannurin desert, the Persians lured the Romans into a field with traps and trenches dug. Tafara and Proklian fell from their horses and were hacked to death. Sevastian was captured, Kutsa and Vasily were wounded. The infantry was partly destroyed, partly captured. Belisarius fled with the cavalry to Dara. After that, the leadership of the troops in the Middle East was entrusted to the master of offices, commander and diplomat Hermogenes and now the military master of the East, Belisarius.
It is worth noting that this leapfrog, the unwillingness to obey the commanders to each other, in the absence of the supreme commander appointed by the emperor, was extremely harmful to the cause. The troops, each duksa, marched in a separate column, often located in separate camps, and not in a single camp. This situation with the lack of one-man command, of course, was associated with the fear of the emperor, who did not personally participate in the leadership of the troops, with the usurpation and proclamation of a new emperor in a field camp or in a remote province (Italy). This fear led to the fact that Novella 116 of March 9, 542 banned personal squads - bukkelarii or shield-bearers (hypaspists) and spearmen (doriforians) - to generals. By the way, the term bukkelarium is not found in the literature of the 6th century, it was used earlier, and suddenly "surfaced" at the beginning of the 7th century and in a different sense. About this in another work.
So, back to the battle path of Belisarius.
The battle at the fortress of Dara. In the summer of 530. the Persians advanced to the city of Dara (present-day Oguz village, Turkey). Since the Persians of the commander Peroz had an overwhelming numerical advantage, Belisarius decided to neutralize his numerical advantage (50 thousand against 25 thousand people) of the enemy by building field fortifications: trenches and ditches were dug.
Soon the main body of Mirran Peroz's troops approached: forty thousand horsemen and foot soldiers. It is worth noting that all Roman and Byzantine authors write about the extremely low combat capability of the Sassanian infantry, in contrast to the horsemen. The Sassanids used the natural fighting physical properties of one or another people that were part of their state: the Iranian nomadic tribes of Qadisins, Sunnis (not to be confused with Sunni Muslims) were horsemen, and the Deilemites were professional infantry, in contrast to the local Mesopotamian militia from Semitic tribes.
On the first day, Belisarius and Herman placed 25,000 cavalry and infantry as follows. On the left flank stood the riders of Vuza, even more to the left of the three hundred Heruls of Farah. To their right, outside the ditch, in the corner formed by the transverse trench, stood six hundred Huns of Sunika and Egazh. Opposite them to the right, in the opposite corner, are six hundred Huns Simma and Askan. To the right is the cavalry of John, and with him John the son of Nikita, Cyril and Markelle, Herman and Dorotheus. In the event of flank attacks, the Huns, who stood at the corners of the ditches, had to strike at the rear of the attackers. Along the ditches and in the center stood the horsemen and infantry Belisarius and Hermogenes. The Persians lined up in one phalanx. In the evening, the Sassanids attacked the left flank of Wuza and Fara, they retreated and attacked the enemies who retreated to the general formation. The clashes were limited to this.
On the second day, reinforcements of 10 thousand soldiers approached the Persians. The Persians lined up in two lines, the "immortals" - the guard, remained in the second line of the center, as the main reserve. In the center stood Peroz, on the right - Pityax, on the left - Varesman. Belisarius and Hermogenes left the disposition in the same way as on the previous day, only Farah, at his request, was allowed to settle on the left wing behind the hill, thereby hiding him from enemies.
The battle began with a firefight. At first, the tribal militia of the Kadisin nomads in a horse attack with spears struck the left flank of the Romans, as envisaged by the disposition, the Huns of Suniki and Egazh hit the Persians on the right, and the Heruls, descending from the hill, hit the enemy in the rear. The Romans put to flight the right flank and destroyed three thousand enemies.
The second stage began with the fact that Peroz secretly transferred the "immortals" to the left flank and began a swift attack on John's cavalry: "The riders began to put on helmets and shells … Sitting on horses in dense rows, they slowly marched with a proud step against the Romans" [Theophylact Simokatta].
At this time, the Huns of Suniki and Egazh were transferred to the right flank to Simma and Askan. They struck from the right on the Persians, breaking the line of "immortals", and Simma personally killed the standard-bearer Varesman and the commander himself. Five thousand horsemen were killed. The Persian infantry, "throwing away their long shields," fled. The Romans did not pursue the enemy for long, and retreated to the fortress of Dara. Thanks to this battle, Belisarius became the most famous commander in the state.
Even defeat in the next battle did not change this situation.
Battle of Kallinika, or Leontopol (today it is the notorious city of Ar Raqqa). April 19, 531 in the parking lot in the city of Suron, at a gathering, the soldiers accused the commanders of cowardice, and Belisarius was forced to take battle. The opposing forces were approximately equal to 20,000 warriors. The army was lined up in one line. On the left flank, by the river, stood the infantry of the emperor's spear-bearer, Peter, on the right, Arab horsemen with Philarch Arefa. In the center is the cavalry, consisting of the squad of Belisarius. To the left of them: the Hun federates with Askan; the Lycaonian stratiots, the Isaurian horsemen; right: Hun federates Sunik and Shema. Malala pointed out that the army immediately stood with its back to the Euphrates, at the same time, like Procopius, writes that at the beginning of the battle the left flank was at the river.
There is no contradiction here, the map shows where the modern city of Ar-Raqqa is located, one branch of the Euphrates runs in the south, and the second in the east of the city. Thus, the army was indeed formed in such a way that the infantry stood in the north, leaning on the Euphrates on the left, and Aref in the south, but after the right flank was overturned and the Persians went to the rear of the center, the right flank (infantry) was pressed against the river … Zachary Ritor reports that the day was cold, and the wind was also against the Romans. [Pigulevskaya N. V. Syrian medieval historiography. SPb., 2011. S. 590.]
The battle began with a skirmish and its outcome was unclear until the Persians attacked the Arabs, who, due to weak discipline, did not hold the line. The Isaurs decided that the Arabs were running and ran themselves. The left flank still held out while Ascon was fighting, but after his death, the horsemen also could not withstand the blow of the Persians. Belisarius himself with the bukelarii (personal squad), most likely, despite his excuses by Procopius, fled for the Euphrates. Only Peter's infantry pressed to the river resisted, and the exarchs Sunik and Shem who joined them, dismounted: “Having tightly closed their ranks in a small space, the warriors all the time kept close to one another and, firmly enclosing themselves with shields, struck the Persians with great skill. than they amazed them. The barbarians, repeatedly thrown back, attacked them again, hoping to confuse and disorganize their ranks, but again retreated without achieving any success. For the horses of the Persians, unable to endure the noise of blows on their shields, reared up, and together with their riders were in confusion."
So the Roman infantry again won fame, equal to the Sassanian riders. At night, the Persians retreated to their camp and the Oplites crossed the Euphrates. Belisarius was removed from command of the troops, although in the winter of 531-532. he was reinstated as magister militum per Orientem, and Sitta assumed command of the forces of the east.
It should be noted that Belisarius, who took part in the brutal suppression of Nike's uprising in Constantinople in January 532, became a confidant of Basileus. Perhaps that is why he received command over the troops heading to Libya.
War in Africa
The African Roman provinces were captured by the Vandals and the Alans allied to them in the 5th century, the Vandals ruled here by the time of the campaign of Justinian's troops for about a hundred years. For the local Romanized and Romanized population, the situation was complicated by the fact that the newcomers were not Orthodox, but Arians. Before the campaign, the Goth of the Year, who ruled the Vandal Sardinia, defected to the empire. The emperor decided to start hostilities and put Belisarius at the head of the troops. An army of 10 thousand footmen and 5 thousand horsemen was assembled against the vandals. The army consisted not of personnel arithms, but of soldiers "recruited from regular soldiers and from federates." The federates consisted of mounted Huns and foot Heruls. To transport this army, 500 long ships - dromons were used. The teams consisted of Egyptians, Ionians and Killikians, the fleet was commanded by Calonim of Alexandria. The emperor put Belisarius at the head of the campaign. At the same time, Gelimer, king of the Vandals, sent five thousand of the most efficient Vandals on one hundred and twenty ships under the leadership of his brother Tsazon, against Sardinia, who defeated the Goth Godu and his squad. Gelimer was left without the most capable unit at the most important moment of hostilities, the fact is that over a hundred years of life in the rich Roman province of Africa, they relaxed a lot, adopted the habits of the Romans (baths, massage) and lost their fighting spirit. Nevertheless, the Vandals remained a numerous warrior people, significantly outnumbering the expeditionary force from Constantinople.
On August 31, 533, after Belisarius carried out reconnaissance, the Roman fleet landed at Kaput-Wada (Ras Kapudia). The warriors set up a fortified camp on the seashore, surrounding it with a moat. When digging a ditch, a source was discovered, which in the arid region of North Africa was of no small importance for the troops and animals. Belisarius occupied the city of Siddekt, where he showed the locals that the army had arrived to free the Romans. After that, the army moved to Carthage, which was five days' journey from the landing site.
Battle of Decimus
On September 13, 533, the Vandal king Gelimer advanced to meet the Romans. Given the numerical advantage, the vandals' plan was to encircle the enemy. Ammat, brother of Helimer, was supposed to go with all the soldiers from Carthage to Decimus. Gibamund, Gelimer's nephew, with two thousand fighters moved to the left of Decimus. Gelimer himself planned to go to the rear. Despite the fact that life in the fertile African province pampered the once harsh warriors of the Vandals and Alans, they nevertheless represented a formidable military force. The army of the Romans moved towards the enemies as follows: the vanguard led by John Armenin consisted of three hundred best horsemen, the Huns accompanied the vanguard on the left. Further, the horsemen-federates and shield-bearers of Belisarius moved. The main forces, the infantry and the baggage train followed them.
Stage 1. Ammat, in a hurry, arrived in Decimus with small forces earlier than the time appointed by Gellimer, his vandals from Carthage marched in small detachments and stretched along the road. John attacked the detachment of Ammat, killed him and scattered a huge army, marching from Carthage, beating the fleeing. Gibamund rushed to the aid of the neighboring flank, collided with the Huns and died, his entire detachment was exterminated.
Stage 2. Gelimer with his large detachment approached Decimus, not knowing that two other units of the Vandals had been defeated, here he entered into a clash with the federates, who also did not know about the course of the victories of John and the Huns. The vandals threw them away, and the archons began to argue about what to do. They decided to retreat, fearing the forces of Gelimer, on the way they met a detachment of 800 horsemen - bodyguards of Belisarius, those, not understanding what had happened, fled. At this time, the leader of the Vandals found the body of his deceased brother in Decimus, and stopping the persecution of the Romans, began to groan, preparing for the funeral of Ammat.
Stage 3. Thus, Gelimer did not take advantage of the overwhelming numerical advantage. At this time, the fleeing Romans were stopped and reprimanded by Belisarius, he put in order the army and with all his might fell on the vandals, defeating and scattering them. The way to the capital was clear.
September 15, 533 Belisarius entered the city, in parallel entered the fleet, which, despite the order, plundered the merchants' property in the port. Since Carthage was not fortified by a wall, the vandals did not defend it. After that, the commander began to restore the walls, a ditch was dug and a palisade was installed.
An important task of waging war in Africa since the Punic Wars was the task of attracting autochthonous Semitic tribes - the Maurusians or the Moors - to the side of the opposing sides. They were in no hurry to choose a side. Soon his brother arrived from Sardinia to Gelimer on the Bull plain. Combining forces, the Vandals marched on Carthage. The Maurusians joined the vandals. Gelimer tried to bribe the Huns and counted on the Arian warriors. Belisarius impaled one of the traitors and the Huns, struck by fear, confessed to Belisarius that they had been bribed.
Battle of Tricamar. Belisarius sent his cavalry ahead, and he himself, with the infantry and five hundred horsemen, followed them to the place of battle. In December 533 the troops met at Tricamar (west of Carthage). In the morning, leaving their wives and children in their camp, the vandals moved on the Romans. In front were experienced warriors who had arrived from Sardinia with Tsazon. The Romans lined up as follows. Left wing: federates and soldiers of archons Martin, Valerian, John, Cyprian, committee of federates Alfia, Markella. The right flank is the cavalry, the commanders are Papp, Varvat and Egan. Cent - John, his shield bearers and spearmen, as well as military banners. Belisarius was also here with 500 horsemen. The infantry had not yet arrived. The Huns lined up separately. The vandals also settled down on the wings; Tsazon stood in the center with his retinue. In their rear, the Maurusia were located. The vandals decided to abandon the use of throwing weapons and spears and fight only with swords, which decided the outcome of the case. There was a small river between the troops. John the Armenian swam across the river and attacked the center. But the vandals threw the Romans back. In response, John, taking the shield-bearers and spear-bearers of Belisarius, counterattacked the enemies: Tsazon was killed. The Romans attacked the enemy head-on and put him to flight, while retreating to their starting position, fearing the large number of the enemy. Finally, in the evening, the Roman infantry approached, which made it possible for Belisarius to attack the Vandal camp. The first fled for no reason Gelimer and his entourage, the camp fell without resistance. The Romans got fantastic wealth, including those that were plundered by the vandals in Rome in the 5th century. Since all the soldiers were plundered, Belisarius even lost control of the troops. But the enemy did not return, and the battle was won.
Then the Romans captured the islands of Sardinia, Corsica and Mallorca. Soon Gelimer was captured, and the war against the vandals was over.
The victory over the Vandal state was won in one year.
But the subsequent policy of Justinian's mistakes, in modern terms, in personnel matters led to an incessant war in this province. The war went on with the remnants of the vandals, the new governors could neither agree nor calm down the local nomadic tribes of the Maurusians (Moors). The standard non-payment of soldiers led to desertions and an uprising of the soldiers, which was suppressed at the cost of colossal efforts.
Unfortunately, we have to note the fact that the brilliant military victories were not supported by proper civil administration, but this in this case has nothing to do with our topic.
