The Ethnology Notebooks. 2026. № 2 (188), 393—404
UDK 94:[355.01:623.4](=512.1-057.66:37-44)”05/06″
- Received: 01.02.2026
- Accepted: 09.03.2026
- Published: ??.??.2026
THE EVOLUTION OF ROMAN MILITARY AFFAIRS DURING THE STRUGGLE AGAINST THE AVARS IN 587—595: THE STRATEGIC DIMENSION
LAHODYCH Volodymyr
- ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0677-4408
- PhD student, Faculty of History,
- Assistant of the Department of Medieval
- and Byzantine History,
- Faculty of History, Ivan Franko National University of Lviv,
- 1, Universytetska str., 79000, Lviv, Ukraine,
- Contacts: e-mail: lagodicvolodimir@gmail.com
Abstract. Introduction. The adoption of strategic approaches during prolonged armed confrontations remains a key factor in the development of military affairs, regardless of the historical period. The era of Late Antiquity is no exception in this regard. As a result of the extended campaigns waged by the Asian nomadic Avars against Constantinople in the Balkans from the 560s to the 620s, both sides in the conflict absorbed military innovations from their adversary, particularly in the strategic dimension. Through persistent warfare against the nomads, the Romans developed specific strategic methods aimed at exhausting the enemy and making efficient use of human resources. Overall, this process reflected the dynamics of military engagements between the nomads and the Empire, with a particular emphasis on strategic adaptations.
Aim. The purpose of the article is to examine innovations in the strategic dimension of the military affairs of the Roman (Byzantine) Empire during the years 586—595, which emerged under the influence of campaigns against the Avars in the territory of the Praetorian Prefecture of Illyricum. The main focus is on identifying the impact of the nomads on Roman strategic practices, such as the reorganization of field armies, logistical planning, and troop preparation, illustrated with examples from the campaigns led by the magistri militum Commentiolus, Priscus, and Peter.
The research methodology is based on the analysis of narrative sources from the 6th—9th centuries, including the «History» of Theophylact Simocatta, the «Chronographia» of Theophanes the Confessor, and the military-theoretical treatise «Strategikon».
Results. The article demonstrates that the key strategic adaptations of the Romans took shape precisely during the period 586—595 and are reflected both in the practical actions of the magistri militum of Thracia (Commentiolus, Priscus, and Petrus) and in the theoretical generalizations of the «Strategikon». Among the principal methods applied by the Romans at that time are the following: careful selection of soldiers based on combat qualities; division of the army corps into autonomous units for encircling and blocking the enemy in difficult terrain; relocation of logistical bases southward to preserve recruitment potential and replenish forces; pre-campaign review and enumeration of troops; maintenance of discipline through payments, rotations, morale-boosting addresses, and punishments; and the formation of vanguard detachments to disorganize the opponent.
Keywords: Nomads, Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine), Avars, Emperor Maurice, military strategy, diplomacy.
REFERENCES
- Schefferus, J. (Ed.). (1664). Arrian’s Tactics and Maurice’s Art of War: Twelve books. Upsaliae [in Latin].
- Darko, J. (1935). The military reforms of Emperor Heraclius. In: Actes du IV Congres international des etudes byzantines Sofia, septembre 1934 (Pp. 110—116). Sofia [in German].
- Vari, R. (1906). On the transmission of Greek tacticians. Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 15 (1), 69—71 [in German].
- Whitby, M. (Ed). (2024). The Strategicon of Maurice. Military Literature in the Medieval Roman World and Beyond (Pp. 151—173). Brill. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004696433_007
- Von Scherff, W. (Ed.). (1883). On War. R. Wilhelmi [in German].
- Dennis, G.T. (1984). Maurice’s Strategicon: Handbook of Byzantine military strategy. University of Pennsylvania Press.
- Koehn, C. (2018). Justinian and the army of early Byzantium. De Gruyter [in German].
- Blockley, R. (1985). The History of Menander the Guardsman: Introductory essay, text, translation, and historical notes. Francis Cairns.
- Whitby, M., & Whitby, M. (1986). The History of Theophylact Simocatta. Oxford University Press.
- Mango, C., & Scott, R. (1997). The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor: Byzantine and Near Eastern History AD 284—813. Clarendon Press.
- Rance, P. (2017). Maurice’s Strategicon and «the Ancients»: the Late Antique Reception of Aelian and Arrian. In: Greek Taktika. Ancient Military Writing and its Heritage: Proceedings of the International Conference on the Greek Taktika held at the University of Torun, 7—11 April 2005 (Pp. 217—255).
- Rozycki, L. (2017). The Strategikon as a source — Slavs and Avars in the eyes of Pseudo-Maurice, current state of research and future research perspectives. Acta Archaelogica Carphatica, 52, 109—131.
- Foulke, W. (1907). History of the Langobards. University Press.
- Hurbanic, M. (2015). The Nomads of the Gates: Some Notes on the use of Siege Artillery by the Avars (From the first Attack on Sirmium to the Siege of Constantinople). In: The Cultural and Historical Heritage of Vojvodina in the Context of Classical and Mediveal Studies (Pp. 75—90).
- Kardaras, G. (2011). Byzantine-Avar Relations after 626 and the possible channels of communication. Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi, 18, 21—42.
- Kardaras, G. (2018). Byzantium and the Avars, 6th—9th Century A.D.: Political, Diplomatic and Cultural Relations. Brill.
- Kardaras, G. (2020). The attitude of Justinian I (527—565) towards the Eurasian nomads. Manipulations and aims. In: Идентитети. Зборник на трудови од Седмиот меѓународен симпозиум «Денови на Јустиниjан I», Скопје, 15—16.11.2019 (Pp. 82—90).
- Kardaras, G. (2015). The Avar Art of War. Acta Militaria Mediaevalia, 11, 7—25.
- Stein, E. (1919). Studies on the history of the Byzantine Empire mainly under Emperors Justinus II and Tiberius Constantinus. J.B. Metzlersche Verlagsbuchhandlung [in German].
- Zhdanovych, O. (2021). The Byzantine Empire and the barbarian world according to Menander Protector (Doctoral dissertation). Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
- Zhdanovych, O. (2016). Diplomatic relationship between Avars and Byzantine Empire by Menander Protector. Textus et Studia, 2 (6), 139—151.
- Melnyk, V. (2020). Social and legal realities of the «Avar Khaganate»: The Yersinia pestis factor and the discourse on the international legal personality of the Eastern European nomadic community. Annaly Yurydychnoi Istorii, 4/3, 30—72. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.38129/Ann.Yur.Ist.2020.4.3.30 [in Russian].
- Pylypchuk, Ya. (2016). The Avar Khaganate in the system of international relations of the early Middle Ages. Arhivum Eurasiae Medium Aevi, 22, 125—159 [in Russian].
- Lahodych, V. (2022). «It will be useful for you to accept us as your allies»: On the issue of Avar-Byzantine diplomatic relations in 557—565. Zapysky Istorychnoho Fakultetu, 33, 97—114. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.18524/2312-6825.2022.33.270462 [in Ukrainian].
- Lahodych, V. (2023). «Correct the mistakes by governing the state with all diligence»: The Avar policy of Tiberius II Constantine (578—582). Naukovi Zoshyty Istorychnoho Fakultetu Lvivskoho Universytetu, 24, 303—317. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.30970/fhi.2023. 24.4030 [in Ukrainian].
- Lahodych, V. (2024). «He was utterly defeated by the barbarians»: The campaign of the military magister Peter in 595. Etnichna Istoriia Narodiv Yevropy, 74, 38—44. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.17721/2518-1270.2024.74.03 [in Ukrainian].
- Maksymiuk, K. (2015). Geography of Roman-Iranian wars: Military operations of Rome and Sasanian Iran. Pracownia Wydawnicza WH Uniwersytetu Przyrodniczo-Humanistycznego w Siedlcach.
- Miller, D.J., & Sarris, P. (2018). The Novels of Justinian: A complete annotated English translation. Cambridge University Press.
- Watson, A. (Ed.). (1985). The Digest of Justinian (Vol. 4). University of Pennsylvania Press.