A Prosopographical Approach To Justinian PDF

A Prosopographical Approach
to Justinian’s Army
David Alan Parnell
This article examines the proportions of Romans and non-Romans (barbarians) in the
army of the emperor Justinian (AD 527–65), which have been discussed by several modern
scholars without decisive results. Here the problem is approached by compiling a database
of individuals from the works of the historian Procopius of Caesarea, who was the private
secretary and legal advisor of Belisarius, Justinian’s most prominent general. The database
indicates that during Justinian’s reign native Romans remained the majority in the army,
comprising about 60 percent of its men, that non-Romans formed a sizeable minority of
around 40 percent, and that most of Justinian’s soldiers, both Romans and non-Romans,
were recruited from economically depressed regions within the Balkans. Sixth-century
Romans seem to have considered the distinction between Roman and non-Roman soldiers
to be of interest, but not vitally important.
The reign of Justinian I (AD 527–65) saw the greatest expansion that the Byzantine
state would ever experience. Such expansion was due to an especially effective military
force backed by a shrewd and competent administration. The length of Justinian’s rule, the
importance of the army to his reign, and the extensive sources of the period combine to
make the army an ideal subject to show many features of Byzantine government and society
in this time. A study focused on the ethnic and regional origins of the army during Justin-
ian’s reign can reveal much about the administration of the Byzantine state, the importance
of the army, the evolving relationship between Romans and non-Romans in the empire,
and the attitude of the Byzantines toward those non-Romans. The ratio of Romans to non-
Romans in the army, the groups of non-Romans that were most prominent during this
time, and the regions from which the empire recruited the majority of its native soldiers
are all issues that should be addressed in such a study. The results of this analysis reveal
much about sixth-century social attitudes regarding ethnicity as well as the administrative
machinery of running an army and an empire.
Definitions
Before proceeding further, we need a basic understanding of terms such as ethnicity
and culture. The concept of ethnicity in the early medieval world has spawned an enormous
historiography over the past half-century on the origins of the Goths, Vandals, Franks, and
other barbarian groups. Debates about the homogeneity of such peoples and questions about
The ideas explored in this article are addressed in more detail in my dissertation, “Justinian’s Men: The Ethnic
and Regional Origins of Byzantine Officers and Officials, ca. 518–610.” I would like to thank Dr. Warren Tread-
gold for his advice, which improved this piece substantially.
© 2012 by the Board of Trustees of Western Michigan University
2 David Alan Parnell
what made a Goth Gothic or a Frank Frankish have encouraged attempts to define them.
The contact between non-Roman peoples and the Roman Empire has also prompted debates
over the difference between peoples on either side of the Rhine and Danube frontiers.
As a result, there is a great deal of modern literature on identity and ethnicity in the
fourth and fifth centuries, especially for the Roman West. Defining terms such as “ethnic-
ity” and “culture” is itself a problem that has been treated extensively. Stephen Mitchell and
Geoffrey Greatrex have rightly cautioned that these terms are elastic and that a strict defini-
tion of either would be arbitrary.1 Despite the arbitrariness, some sort of general definition
needs to be given here. Culture may be defined as “the ideas, customs, and social behavior
of a particular people or society.”2 Cultural groups are complex, with long histories and
institutions dedicated to maintaining their identity. The native inhabitants of the Byzan-
tine Empire, those who identified themselves as Roman, were the chief cultural group of
late antiquity.3 By the sixth century, being Roman had ceased to be a matter of being born
in Rome itself or even being a descendant of Roman colonists. The emperor Caracalla’s
edict granting all inhabitants in the empire citizenship in AD 212, along with centuries of
Roman rule, meant that being Roman was something that largely transcended definition by
descent, as will be examined further below.4
An important aspect of Roman cultural identity was the Romans’ belief in a Roman-
barbarian dichotomy. Roman rhetoric divided the known world between Romans and oth-
ers, who were considered uncouth barbarians. Of course, this distinction was a creation of
the Romans themselves, and not even the Romans believed that there was a universal barbar-
ian culture.5 The different identity groups that the Romans lumped together in this “barbar-
ian” category had little in common with each other but did have their own ethnic identities.
Ethnic identity may be considered to exist on a lower plane than cultural identity.
Ethnic identity defines groups that are generally less complex than major cultural groups.6
Ethnicity, as Patrick Amory puts it, is essentially the definition of a group, “usually on the
basis of its belief in common descent and a shared past.”7 Ethnicity in the sixth century rep-
resents the identification of a particular people (Latin gens, Greek γένος). Thus examples of
ethnic identity include Goth, Frank, and Lombard. This is the primary way that the sources
of the sixth century identify non-Romans. For the Romans themselves, ethnic identity was
wholly subsumed in the larger cultural identity of being Roman.8 Although the Byzantines
1
Stephen Mitchell and Geoffrey Greatrex, eds., Ethnicity and Culture in Late Antiquity (London: Duck-
worth and the Classical Press of Wales, 2000), p. xi.
2
The Concise Oxford English Dictionary of English, 11th ed. rev., ed. Catherine Soanes and Angus Stevenson
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2008).
3
Anthony Kaldellis, Hellenism in Byzantium: The Transformations of Greek Identity and the Reception of the
Classical Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), p. 43.
4
For a more erudite examination of how Caracalla’s edict changed the nature of Roman citizenship and
raised it above descent identification, see Ralph W. Mathisen, “Peregrini, Barbari, and Cives Romani: Concepts
of Citizenship and the Legal Identity of Barbarians in the Later Roman Empire,” American Historical Review
111, 4 (2006): 1011–40.
5
Walter Pohl, “Concepts of Ethnicity in Early Medieval Studies,” in Debating the Middle Ages: Issues and
Readings, ed. Lester Little and Barbara Rosenwein (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 1998), p. 18.
6
Mitchell and Greatrex, Ethnicity and Culture in Late Antiquity, p. xii.
7
Patrick Amory, People and Identity in Ostrogothic Italy, 489–554 (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1997), p. 14.
8
Kaldellis, Hellenism in Byzantium, pp. 83–88.
A Prosopographical Approach to Justinian’s Army 3
continued to refer to individual Romans with ethnic labels (e.g., Thracians), these labels
chiefly referred to geographical origin rather than ethnic group membership.9
Historiographical Review
Two different historiographies need to be examined for purposes of this paper’s
argument. The historiography of the ethnic and regional origins of Justinian’s army will
be summarized below. Before that examination, however, it is necessary to look at the
scholarship on cultural and ethnic identity in late antiquity. Overall, the historiography
of the field seems to indicate a consensus that identity, ethnic or otherwise, was largely
subjective. Indeed the general trend seems to be the rejection of any sort of rigidity in
ethnic identity. Historians have shied away from firmly labeling individuals as Goths
qua Goths, instead seeing them as Goths in respect to temporary allegiance or military
service, for example.
The Traditionskern school of ethnogenesis, which traces its origins to Reinhard Wen-
skus, argues that group ethnicity was forged by a common mythic narrative of the group’s
past, frequently focusing on the divine descent of its rulers, and that this narrative or “ker-
nel of tradition” was preserved by the elites of the group. The elites, often led by a single
family that featured prominently in the kernel of tradition, thus forged an ethnic identity
for their followers.10 Wenskus’s theories are largely outdated and have been revised consid-
erably during the late twentieth century, most prominently by Herwig Wolfram and Wal-
ter Pohl. Wolfram argued that peoples such as the Goths were polyethnic and that “their
formation is not a matter of common descent but one of political decision.”11 These groups
formed by political decisions are, however, still bound by traditions such as loyalty to par-
ticular families. Pohl therefore continues to take literary sources as strong indicators of
kernels of tradition of ethnic identity, for which he has been much criticized.12 His critics,
however, as Pohl himself has noted, do not have a coherent alternative explanation for the
creation of ethnicity.13
Thomas Noble neatly explains the state of current historiography when he writes,
“Today there is a general consensus that one cannot speak of Goths, or Franks, or Lombards
as discrete ethnic groups.”14 Adding to this, Pohl has argued that there was not a clear gen-
eral “Germanic” culture separate from Roman culture, that “there is no trace of any corre-
sponding sense of Germanic identity, or of any specifically Germanic cultural sphere.”15 As
an example, Pohl points to the eunuch general Narses (478–573), who incited his soldiers
to fight well before the battle of Busta Gallorum against the Goths by holding up gold and
9
Kaldellis, Hellenism in Byzantium, p. 97.
10
Reinhard Wenskus, Stammesbildung und Verfassung (Cologne: Böhlau, 1961).
11
Herwig Wolfram, History of the Goths, trans. Thomas Dunlap (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of
California Press, 1988), p. 5.
12
Andrew Gillett, ed., On Barbarian Identity: Critical Approaches to Ethnicity in the Early Middle Ages
(Turnhout: Brepols, 2002).
13
Walter Pohl, “Ethnicity, Theory, and Tradition,” in On Barbarian Identity: Critical Approaches to Ethnicity
in the Early Middles Ages, ed. Andrew Gillett (Turnhout: Brepols, 2002), p. 239.
14
Thomas Noble, ed., From Roman Provinces to Medieval Kingdoms: Rewriting Histories (London: Rout-
ledge, 2006), p. 16.
15
Walter Pohl, “Justinian and the Barbarian Kingdoms,” in The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Justin-
ian, ed. Michael Maas (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), p. 452.
treasures that they might win through valiant service. In Pohl’s eyes, this makes it hardly
possible to distinguish the forces of the Byzantines and Goths.16
The analysis of ethnic identity in late antiquity has recently been well served by the
Transformation of the Roman World project sponsored by the European Science Founda-
tion. Many of the volumes produced as a result of this project have added to our understand-
ing of the relationship between Romans and others and the development of peoples in this
period. Pohl has argued that ethnic units in the Roman army may have contributed to shap-
ing larger ethnic identities.17 About ethnicity itself, the general consensus seems to be that
it “is not a primordial category, but a negotiated system of social classification.”18 Beyond
this, the importance of ethnic identities in general has been questioned. Pohl argued that
for early medieval people “telling the difference between ethnic groups . . . was clearly not a
main concern.”19
One of the most recent explorations of a specifically Byzantine identity is Anthony
Kaldellis’s Hellenism in Byzantium (2007). In this insightful work, Kaldellis began by refut-
ing the common belief that Byzantium was a universal, Christian, and multiethnic empire.
Instead, Byzantium was essentially a nation-state of Romans, which assimilated Greeks and
many other peoples and cultures. With such a definition of the Byzantine state, it becomes
crucial to determine what made a person Roman. For Kaldellis, being Roman was not a
matter of common descent and was not in fact an ethnic identity at all. Instead, “it was a
social consensus that all belonged to a single historical political community defined by laws,
institutions, religion, language, and customs, in other words to a nation.”20 He explicitly
denied that political loyalty alone or Orthodox religion alone was the content of Roman
identity.21 Kaldellis thus helpfully isolated the Byzantine conception of identity, which rela-
tively few other scholars of identity in late antiquity have done.
Roman and Non-Roman Identity

Important though the historiography of the development of non-Roman ethnicity in
late antiquity is, it only indirectly affects the methodology of this paper. While Pohl, among
others, has argued that telling the difference between groups was not a main concern in
late antiquity, it was at least a point of interest, especially for the Byzantines themselves.22
Byzantine elites, to judge from the literary sources of the sixth century, frequently identi-
fied individuals by ethnic affiliation. While modern historiography of the ethnogenesis of
non-Roman peoples suggests that these peoples did not form “discrete ethnic groups,” it is
clear that the Byzantines felt otherwise. When one examines Byzantine social perceptions
and awareness of the diversity of their army personnel, Byzantine conceptions about others
16
Pohl, “Justinian,” p. 453.
17
Walter Pohl, “Telling the Difference: Signs of Ethnic Identity” in Walter Pohl and Helmut Reimitz, eds.,
Strategies of Distinction: The Construction of Ethnic Communities, 300–800, ed. Walter Pohl and Helmut Reimitz
(Leiden: Brill, 1998), p. 39.
18
Pohl, “Telling the Difference,” p. 21.
19
Pohl, “Telling the Difference,” p. 69.
20
21
22
Pohl, “Telling the Difference,” p. 69. Geoffrey Greatrex, “Roman Identity in the Sixth Century” in Eth-
nicity and Culture in Late Antiquity, ed. Stephen Mitchell and Geoffrey Greatrex (London: Duckworth and the
Classical Press of Wales, 2000), p. 268
become more important than the question of whether these others actually did form “dis-
crete ethnic groups.”
In this vein, the identifications of individuals in this paper are made according to the
identities that the Byzantines perceived them to have, with labels the Byzantines themselves
used. In other words, those listed as Goths were considered by the Byzantines to be Goths,
regardless of whether the individuals actually were or considered themselves to be Goths.23
Above all, this approach emphasizes taking the sources as much as possible on their own
terms, without an attempt to impose a grand theory upon them. This means that I make no
argument that individuals identified in this paper truly belonged to discrete ethnic groups,
only that their Byzantine contemporaries believed this to be true. As Pohl has admitted,
Byzantine observers “could identify [individuals] and knew much about their background
and history.”24
A few observations about Roman and non-Roman identity, according to how the
Byzantines distinguished the two, may provide a framework within which the identifica-
tions in this paper should be understood. The cultural dichotomy between Roman and non-
Roman (barbarian) is the primary distinction here, as it was for the Byzantines themselves.
John Teall has argued that Romanism was determined by area of birth: a Roman was born
in territories under the rule of the emperor and a non-Roman was born outside those ter-
ritories.25 Using geography of birth is probably too rigid a definition (even apart from the
fact that we are sometimes unsure where an individual was born). As noted already, more
recent definitions of ethnicity in the Middle Ages argue for its fluidity.26
Writing more specifically about Byzantine cultural perceptions in the sixth century,
Geoffrey Greatrex has argued that the “fundamental definition of a Roman in the empire
of Justinian was that of loyalty to the Emperor.”27 Politics were indeed an important part of
identity in the sixth century. Those who served the emperor were good Romans. Those who
served other rulers were identified in that capacity. For example, the sixth-century historian
Menander reports that the Suani, a Caucasian people, when they were threatened by the
Persian king Chosroes I (531–79), “in fear became Persians instead of Suani.”28
There were several other factors that identified someone as Roman or barbarian. A
typical designator in Byzantine sources was one that identified an individual’s place of ori-
gin, usually a city but sometimes a region or province. Well-known examples include the
sixth-century historian Procopius’s description of himself as a Caesarean and John the Cap-
padocian, the appellation of Justinian’s famous finance minister (in office 531–41).29 Physical
23
Compare to Kaldellis, Hellenism in Byzantium: he does not seek to determine of his subjects “whether
they ‘really were’ Greeks, but to understand what they meant by it when they said it, and if possible, why they
said it” (p. 8).
24
Pohl, “Ethnicity, Theory, and Tradition,” p. 237.
25
John L. Teall, “The Barbarians in Justinian’s Armies,” Speculum 40 (April 1965): 294–322.
26
Also see Patrick Geary, “Ethnic Identity as a Situational Construct in the Early Middle Ages,” Mitteilun-
gen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 113 (1983): 15–26 at p. 16.
27
Greatrex, “Roman Identity in the Sixth Century,” p. 268.
28
Menander Protector, The History, ed. and trans. R. C. Blockley (Liverpool: F. Cairns, 1985), 6.1.505–6,
p. 81. It should be pointed out that Menander probably means merely that the Suani became subjects to the
Persians, not that they actually changed their entire culture and society to mirror Persia. The language used is
worth noting, however.
29
Procopius of Caesarea, The History of the Wars, ed. and trans. H. B. Dewing, 5 vols. (Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1914–40), 1.1.1, 1.24.11.
attributes, particularly clothing and hairstyle, could also be singled out as indicative
of ethnicity. Procopius alludes to this in his Secret History when he complains that the
youths of Constantinople adopted barbarian hairstyles and that Justinian himself occa-
sionally “played the barbarian” in dress.30 This indicates that the possibility that ethnicity
could be determined by outward appearance should not be discounted.31 The Byzantines
also distinguished people by their personality traits, which they saw as being ethnically
based. The sixth-century historian Agathias, for example, says that quarreling, sulking,
and refusing to fight was the “usual barbarian reaction” when one of the general Narses’s
Herul soldiers was punished for murder.32 Language was also an important criterion of
identity, but it was complex, since language frequently crossed identity barriers. Some
Goths spoke Latin, and some Byzantine army officers, such as the Armenian general
Gilacius (547), spoke neither Latin nor Greek.33 Another criterion of identity was that
Byzantines generally considered non-Romans to be lawless and uncontrollable. Agath-
ias has one of his characters exclaim in the context of a court case against some Lazians
that barbarians chafe “at the imposition of the rule of law and incline instinctively to
turbulent and seditious behavior.”34 That religion was an important component of ethnic
identity should require little or no explanation. Byzantines frequently divided others
from themselves by noting their religious distinction. A substantial portion of Byzantine
army had Arian sympathies, which by the sixth century were explicitly linked with some
barbarian groups.35
All of these criteria, ranging from political loyalty to religious affiliation, went into the
definition of being Roman. Therefore, as Anthony Kaldellis has argued, being Roman was
not a matter of common descent and was not in fact an ethnic identity at all.36 To be Roman
was instead a function of a broad range of criteria that by social consensus were agreed
to make one part of the political community of Byzantium. Not surprisingly, the Byzan-
tines used the same criteria to distinguish those who were non-Roman. Consequently, these
identifications were ideological, political, and judgmental.
How then, should one identify men such as the general Bessas (served 502–54), who
though of Gothic descent was born in Thrace and served in Justinian’s army? Bessas rep-
resents a difficult case. He had certain characteristics of a Goth, including knowledge of
the Gothic language, but loyally served the emperor as an important general. It is tempting
to suggest that in doing so he had effectively become Roman, but this supposition is flatly
invalidated by Procopius himself. The historian explicitly identifies Bessas as a Goth on
multiple occasions.37
30
Procopius of Caesarea, The Anecdota, ed. and trans. H. B. Dewing (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1914), 7.8–10, 14.2.
31
Michael McCormick has argued for the determination of identity by outward appearance among Italo-
Byzantines (“The Imperial Edge: Italo-Byzantine Identity, Movement and Integration, AD 650–950,” in Studies
on the Internal Diaspora of the Byzantine Empire, ed. Helene Ahrweiler and Angeliki Laiou [Washington, DC:
Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1998], pp. 18–19).
32
Agathias, The Histories, ed. Rudolf Keydell (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1967), trans. Joseph Frendo (Berlin: De
Gruyter, 1975), 2.7.4.
33
Procopius, Wars 7.26.24
34
Agathias, Histories 4.8.5
35
Procopius, Wars 4.14.12
36
37
Procopius, Wars 1.8.3, 5.16.2.
The temptation to follow overarching scholarly theories that disregard the evidence
of the sources must be avoided. The case of Bessas suggests that, despite the importance of
political loyalty, it was not always sufficient to change a person’s identity in the eyes of his
peers. In general, being Roman was a cultural identity that existed apart from and even super-
seded local ethnic identities. It is possible then to imagine that a non-Roman, upon pledging
full allegiance to the emperor and still in the process of Romanizing, might identify himself
as both a Roman and a Goth, whether others chose to identify him that way or not. On the
other hand, it is quite likely that some individuals born non-Roman and in possession of non-
Roman cultural attributes were not interested at all in Roman identity. A non-Roman com-
mander leading a unit of allied troops (symmachoi) may have been serving a Roman general,
and indirectly the emperor, without necessarily identifying himself as a Roman.
It must be admitted that identity is an inherently slippery topic. Since identity was sub-
ject to change and to the opinion of the one making the identification, it may be described in
a number of ways. Most individuals that are identified as barbarians, including Bessas, were
probably in the process of Romanization. Despite this, they are not identified as Romans in
the sources.The only other option aside from trusting Procopius would be to pick out some of
these men as Romans and some as non-Romans, and that is a slippery slope that should not
be approached. Procopius was a close associate of the leading Roman general of the age. This
makes his opinion highly significant, because what he thought about “Roman” or “barbarian”
identity, especially regarding soldiers, is likely to reflect the typical view of the imperial gov-
ernment on the army’s composition. These views are self-evidently important for understand-
ing the empire of the time, even if modern historians may hold quite different views.
Names as Indicators of Ethnicity

The names of individuals can be useful in determining their ethnicity, though it has
become somewhat fashionable to suggest the contrary. Patrick Amory insisted that names
were of little value in determining ethnic identity, since Goths might take Latin names and
Romans might have Germanic names.38 Despite the tendency to downgrade the signifi-
cance of onomastics in determining identity, it remains widely used for that purpose, simply
because names are often the only evidence available. Amory, despite his criticism of the prac-
tice, finds it significant that no known Catholic clergy in Ostrogothic Italy had Germanic
names.39 Though Hugh Elton has also stated that “names alone are not reliable indicators
of ethnicity,” in the following paragraph he cheerfully uses names to produce an admittedly
“crude estimate” of the non-Roman soldiers in the field armies.40 Walter Pohl has allowed
that the principle of determining ethnicity through names has “a certain statistical value.”41
Since this study is a statistical one, it is fair to rehabilitate the use of onomastics for determin-
ing identity here. While the occasional identification by name may well be incorrect, over the
course of the study the majority of identifications should be relatively accurate.
Great care must, however, be exercised when using this method, because possible
problems abound. For example, Germanic and Hunnic names could not always be easily
38
Amory, People and Identity, pp. 87–91.
39
Amory, People and Identity, pp. 464–65.
40
Hugh Elton, “Military Forces,” in The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Warfare, 2 vols., ed. Philip
Sabin, Hans Van Wees, and Michael Whitby (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 2:300–301.
41
Pohl and Reimitz, Strategies of Distinction, p. 10.
transcribed into Greek or Latin. As J. Otto Maenchen-Helfen has pointed out, Byzantine
authors often tended to “alter foreign names until they sounded like Latin or Greek ones,”
which makes it difficult to determine the original name behind the transliteration.42 Because
of the difficulties involved in this process, this study tends to identify most names of appar-
ently Greek or Latin origin as names of native Romans, though a few of these may actually
have been of non-Roman origin. On the other hand, that a name is not obviously Greek
or Latin does not necessarily mean that its holder is a barbarian.43 Therefore for statistical
purposes a few misidentified Romans may well be counterbalanced by a few misidentified
non-Romans.
There is evidence to suggest that sixth-century men took names very seriously as
representative of culture and ethnicity. While there are exceptions to any rule, the bulk
of the evidence leans toward Roman individuals using Greek or Latin names. Many non-
Romans took such names as part of Romanizing, and some even before Romanizing, but as
long as one keeps in mind that the possibility exists that some individuals with such names
may still in fact be non-Roman, the overall principle is sound. Among dozens of examples,
one demonstrates how non-Romans could Romanize in respect to their names. The com-
mander Dabragezas (555), an Antian who served with the general Martin in Lazica, had
a son named Leontius (556) who also served in the Byzantine army.44 The cultural change
over the generation gap is noticeable and, more importantly, it seems clear that Dabragezas
intended to project a Roman identity in the choice of name for his son. Names, like lan-
guage, were a reflection of the identity that an individual wished to present.
A Prosopographical Approach
Most general studies of Byzantium have had something to say about the ethnic and
regional origins of the army during Justinian’s reign, although typically only a brief note
that the army tended to be predominantly native in origin. J. B. Bury argued, based on the
preponderance of non-Roman generals, that there were large numbers of barbarians in the
army of the fourth century.45 He refrained from making similar arguments about Justinian’s
era but did comment on the composition of the native portions of the army, claiming that
the regular soldiers of the field armies (comitatenses) were recruited “almost exclusively”
from Thrace, Illyricum, and Isauria.46
The works of A. H. M. Jones have become standard references for modern Byzan-
tinists. He argued that the armies of Justinian’s day were largely composed of native soldiers,
although individual barbarian recruits were accepted. He noted the extremely heterogeneous
composition of Narses’s army in 551, but did not take this as indicative of army composition
in general. For Jones, Romans greatly predominated in the army as a whole and even in
42
J. Otto Maenchen-Helfen, The World of the Huns: Studies in Their History and Culture, ed. Max Knight
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973), p. 381.
43
Procopius identifies the guardsman Gudilas as a Thracian (Wars 7.30.6), and while the name is not Greek
or Latin, it is a name in the old Thracian language (Dimitur Dechev, Die thrakischen Sprachreste [Vienna: R.
M. Rohrer, 1957], p. 249), which makes Gudilas a native of Roman Thrace who came from a family that used
traditional Thracian names.
44
Agathias, Histories 3.21.6, 4.18.1
45
J. B. Bury, History of the Later Roman Empire from the Death of Theodosius I to the Death of Justinian, 2
vols. (London, 1923; repr., New York: Dover Publications, 1958), 1:38.
46
Bury, History, 2:76.
the field armies. He even went so far as to argue that “under the stress of the long-drawn-
out Gothic war Roman manpower had to be increasingly supplemented by barbarians, but
contingents from the allied tribes were in general very sparingly used.”47 Thus although
there was an increase in the use of barbarians over time, they remained a small minority
of the army. Jones claimed that the so-called federates (foederati) of the comitatenses, who
had originally been entirely non-Roman, were still mainly barbarians in Justinian’s day, and
thus he saw the federates as distinguishable from the regular soldiers. Jones is justly famous
for his wealth of knowledge and careful compilation of late Roman administrative material,
but his analysis of the composition of the army is nonetheless based on impressions and far
from conclusive.
In an article that was published about the same time as Jones’s Later Roman Empire,
John Teall came to slightly different conclusions. His analysis led him to the conclusion
that over the course of Justinian’s reign, what had been primarily native-born or Roman
armies became to a large degree barbarian.48 Teall summarized previous literature on
the subject and simplified the argument by defining a “barbarian” as an individual born
outside the lands controlled by the Byzantine emperor and a Roman as someone born
within those lands. Unlike Bury and Jones, Teall argued that the federates were probably
not all barbarian and the regular soldiers were most likely not all Roman. Although he
admits that there were large numbers of barbarian officers during the early years of Jus-
tinian’s reign, he stresses that “pre-eminence in quality” does not mean “predominance
in quantity.”49
For Teall, four crises in the 540s caused a severe lack of manpower and subsequent
rise in barbarian recruitment in the army. These crises were the two-front war in Italy and
Persia, the fall from grace of Justinian’s best general, the famous Belisarius (ca. 500–565),
the fall of Justinian’s finance minister, John the Cappadocian, along with his financial sys-
tem, and finally the arrival of the plague.50 After these events, Teall argued, the role of bar-
barians in the army increased by a great deal. He cited Narses’s army of 551 as an example
of this, thus attaching more importance to this single example than Jones did.
The historiography of the question of the composition of Justinian’s army has been
addressed here to show that there is little consensus on the subject and that where there is
consensus it is based on relatively scattered evidence. It is possible to obtain more specific
data on the question. A prosopographical database of soldiers mentioned by sources cover-
ing Justinian’s reign yields evidence from which to make arguments about the composition
of the army. Why should this be attempted? Defending his narrative and chronological
approach to the subject, Teall commented that there was no statistical data to examine.51 Yet
a prosopographical database provides such statistical data, even if it cannot be considered a
comprehensive census or a random sample in a technical sense.
47
A. H. M. Jones, The Later Roman Empire, 284–602: A Social, Economic and Administrative Survey, 3 vols.
(Oxford: B. Blackwell, 1964), 1:668.
48
Teall, “Barbarians,” p. 296. Teall’s conclusion has been doubted but not systematically refuted. See Michael
Whitby, “Recruitment in the Roman Armies from Justinian to Heraclius,” in The Byzantine and Early Islamic
Near East, vol. 3: States, Resources, and Armies, ed. Averil Cameron (Princeton: Darwin Press, 1992), pp. 61–124,
at p. 108.
49
Teall, “Barbarians,” p. 300.
50
51
This article draws on a database consisting of 238 individuals connected with the
army who have been gleaned from Procopius’s Wars. Although a larger number would be
more representative, 238 examples does allow for some useful conclusions.52 Finding names
in the works of Procopius is relatively easy. It is more difficult to match up ethnicity or place
of origin with each name. For perhaps half of these individuals, Procopius himself provides
an origin. As a member of the household of Belisarius, the most significant general of Jus-
tinian’s reign and a participant in several of that general’s campaigns, he should be trusted
to know the individuals he describes.53 A variety of tools may be employed to discover the
origins of the many examples that he does not clearly label. Jones and Martindale’s Proso-
pography of the Later Roman Empire is of great assistance in this regard. Where this is not
helpful, one is reduced to looking at the names themselves. One can make reasonably cer-
tain guesses as to whether a name is Roman, Germanic, Hunnic, or eastern in origin, but
that is about as detailed as the identification can be.54
One might still wonder whether a prosopographical approach is even necessary. If the
federates were mainly non-Romans, and the regular soldiers were chiefly native Romans, it
would perhaps be reasonable to examine the numbers of each listed for armies and battles.
The problem is unfortunately not as simple as that, even if we did know the exact proportion
of federates in any given army. Teall was the first to point out the problems with this approach,
and he was correct in that neither the federates nor the regular soldiers were uniformly non-
Roman or native. Procopius himself makes it clear that one should not assume the difference
was that simple. He complains that although “formerly barbarians alone were enrolled in the
federates, now there is nothing to hinder anybody from taking on this name.”55
This suggests that the federates comprised not only non-Romans, as they had during
the late Roman period, but also some who were identified as Romans.56 In his account of
the Gothic war, Procopius describes a group of regular soldiers commanded by Innocen-
tius in 537 and later notes that some of these troops deserted to the Goths, “men who were
barbarians by race but Roman soldiers.”57 This is probably evidence that barbarians could
be enrolled among the regular soldiers as easily as natives could apparently be among the
federates. By Justinian’s time, it is not possible to assume that all federates were barbarians
52
It is understood that the use of a single source limits the findings. This article is a preliminary to my
dissertation, as mentioned in the above. The dissertation is a broader study and includes other sources of the
period. For the purposes of a concentrated article here, however, Procopius has been selected as the single best
source available.
53
For analyses of Procopius and his written works, please see Anthony Kaldellis, Procopius of Caesarea:
Tyranny, History, and Philosophy at the End of Antiquity (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004),
and Averil Cameron, Procopius and the Sixth Century (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985).
54
A. H. M Jones, J. R Martindale, and J. Morris, The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, 3 vols.
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971–92) (hereafter PLRE). For determining identities through
name alone, the following texts are particularly useful: Ferdinand Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch (Marburg: N. G.
Elwert’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1895); Maenchen-Helfen, World of the Huns; and Moritz Schönfeld, Wörter-
buch der Altgermanischen Personen und Völkernamen: Nach der Überlieferung des klassischen Altertums bearbei-
tet (Heidelberg: C. Winter, 1911).
55
Procopius, Wars 3.11.3.
56
As further evidence of this, the database assembled for this article connects only ten individuals directly
with the federates. All ten are called “commanders of the federates,” and are thus officers, but it is still interesting
to note that nine of these ten are of Roman origin and only one is certainly a barbarian.
57
or all regular soldiers are native. Thus it is necessary to examine individuals rather than
whole units, and for this a prosopographical approach is the best available.
Database Results: Romans and Non-Romans

With these parameters for ethnic identification, the prosopographical database sug-
gests that the field armies that campaigned in Justinian’s reign were largely, but by no means
overwhelmingly, native Roman in origin. It is important to emphasize that this statement
holds true mainly for the armies used in offensive campaigns, not the Byzantine army as a
whole. The examples in the database are drawn from the Wars of Procopius, and that author
was primarily recording information about the offensive campaigns of the state waged in
Asia, Africa, and Italy. For this reason the bulk of these examples are soldiers or officers
from field armies that fought in those campaigns.
Even these field armies, then, were largely composed of Roman soldiers. Out of 238
examples in the database, 61 percent are individuals who may be identified as Roman in
origin. It is important to understand the nature of the division between Romans and non-
Romans. For the non-Roman sample, a mere 2 percent out of a total of 93 individuals had
to be classified as “undifferentiated barbarian,” which indicates that it is not possible to
determine the ethnicity of the individual but the name makes it likely that he was in fact
non-Roman in origin. For the Roman sample, on the other hand, 47 percent out of a total
of 145 individuals were classified as “undifferentiated Roman,” indicating that no specific
identification was possible but that their names were Greek or Latin in origin. One must
also keep in mind that some non-Romans might adopt a Greek or Latin name to fit in,
while few Romans had non-Roman names. Thus, if the data are skewed, they are more
likely to be skewed in the direction of assuming too high a proportion of native Roman
soldiers. Although the database suggests that only around 39 percent of the soldiers of
the field armies were of non-Roman origin, it is possible that a larger proportion also had
such origins.
The numbers given above show the overall totals throughout the period of Jus-
tinian’s reign, but it is also important to examine the changes in composition over the
course of those years.58 It should be noted that the database is less reliable on this more
detailed question. When we break down the examples by year of first appearance, the
numerical base for each chronological period will obviously be smaller than the total
number of examples, which introduces a greater margin for error. That being stated, it
seems that there are still enough examples to divide into at least two different periods of
Justinian’s reign.
Within this framework, the database does not suggest that the proportion of barbar-
ian to Roman in the army changed much over the course of Justinian’s reign. Teall argued
that the catastrophes of the 540s caused a dramatic increase in the use of non-Roman troops,
and he loosely divided the reign into two periods, one 527–40 and the other 540–54.59 The
database does not support this argument. In fact, the ratio of Roman to non-Roman within
the samples remains about the same even when they are divided into these two periods.
The percentage of non-Romans in the database varies by only 4 percent between the two
58
This sort of analysis was the raison d’être of Teall, “Barbarians.”
59
Teall, “Barbarians,” p. 296. Again, cf. Whitby, “Recruitment in Roman Armies from Justinian to Hera-
clius,” p. 108.
periods of before 540 and after, which is too small a difference to be significant.60 The pri-
mary example that Teall, as well as others, relied on for showing the purportedly increasing
barbarization of the army by the 550s is Procopius’s description of the army that Narses
assembled in 551. The example was not poorly chosen, and indeed the historian’s descrip-
tion of Narses’s army seems to reflect quite a racially diverse force. Certainly it contained
large contingents of Lombards, Heruli, and Gepids; Teall speculated that “barbarians com-
prised one third or one half its total.”61
How can the database’s evidence that the proportion of non-Romans in the army did
not change during the course of Justinian’s reign be reconciled with this example? It should
first be noted that one example, no matter how important, remains just one example out of
many and should not be relied upon exclusively to prove an argument about the continuity
of non-Roman preponderance in the army. A more wide-ranging examination of individu-
als over time should carry more weight in this kind of argument than an example from a
single campaign. It should also be pointed out that the database supports Teall’s assertion
that between one-third and one-half of Narses’s army was non-Roman. Its evidence, how-
ever, contradicts Teall in suggesting that this large minority of non-Romans was not a new
feature of Justinianic armies in 552.62
The database is also able to say something about just what kind of role these non-
Romans had in the armies of the time. Both the Roman and the non-Roman categories
have roughly the same proportion of regular soldiers, at around 11 percent. What is inter-
esting, however, is that the non-Romans proportionately have a larger number of bucellarii
(personal retainers of generals), represented in their ranks, while the Romans have a larger
number of officers. Around 27 percent of the barbarians in the database are identified as
bucellarii, as compared to only 18 percent of the Romans. Conversely, some 71 percent of
the Roman sample is classified as officers of various ranks, while only 62 percent of the
non-Romans may be identified as officers. That officers are a statistically larger group in a
database based on personal observation by Procopius should not come as a surprise, but
the disparity between Romans and non-Romans among the officers, while not enormous, is
still worth noting.
Database Results: Ethnic and Regional Origins

It is also interesting not merely to look at how many non-Romans were in these armies
in general but to determine which non-Roman peoples contributed the most soldiers.63 The
60
Note that this calculation was achieved by comparing the ratio of Roman and non-Roman entries up to
and including 540, on the one hand, and the ratio of Roman and non-Roman entries after 540, plus a recount of
each individual from the first category who continued to serve after 540, on the other hand.
61
62
Michael Whitby correctly argued that “there is also no clear increase in the proportion of non-Roman
troops serving in the armies” during this period (“The Army, c. 420–602,” in The Cambridge Ancient History, ed.
Averil Cameron, 3rd ed., vol. 14, Late Antiquity: Empire and Successors, AD 425–600 [Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2001], pp. 288–314 at p. 306).
63
While some scholars have argued that Procopius’s classicizing tendencies affected his identifications
to the point of making them unreliable, this is unlikely to have been the case. Procopius did not believe that
nothing had changed since antiquity. He merely wanted to maintain a pure Attic style, as was the custom of the
time. Using archaic names for different ethnic groups does not mean that those groups were not distinct in his
eyes. The cautious historian should use Procopius’s designations but avoid the temptation to posit links between
ancient peoples and those given their name in the sixth century.
evidence suggests that Huns were the largest non-Roman group in Byzantine armies during
this time period. Certainly they are the most striking non-Roman group in terms of literary
impact in Procopius’s Wars. A Hunnic contingent played a major role in the battle of Dara in
530; Huns were involved in a violent breach of discipline on the voyage to Africa; and during
the Vandalic war itself they terrified the Vandals with their warlike presence.64 It is also inter-
esting that Huns are also the most numerically important non-Roman group in the prosopo-
graphical database, accounting for 19 percent of the ninety-three non-Roman examples.
The next most important group, the Heruli, account for only 13 percent, followed by
10 percent for both Goths and Persarmenians.65 Names that are generally Germanic, but
for which no positive identification may be advanced, account for 18 percent of the total.66
The list is rounded out by much smaller numbers of peoples such as Persians, Iberians,
Lazians, Gepids, Arabs, Lombards, Moors, and Slavs. It would appear from these results
that Huns and non-Roman peoples of Western Europe dominated the non-Roman portion
of the armies of the age, with eastern peoples such as Persians and Iberians providing a
substantial minority as well.
The corresponding question that should be pursued along with the distribution of
the non-Roman element is the distribution of the homeland of the native soldiers. In this
instance, the database is less informative. Whereas only a negligible minority of the non-
Romans was unidentifiable beyond the category “undifferentiated barbarian,” the larger
number of “undifferentiated Romans,” 47 percent, in the Roman category makes it difficult
to speak definitively on the breakdown of this group. For the Romans that are identifiable
in the database, however, the results are somewhat startling. Out of the total group of 145,
22 percent of the Roman soldiers had their origins in Thrace or are specifically referred to
as Thracians by Procopius.67 If one changes the formula so as to include only the Romans
in the database that are identifiable (77) then Thracians make up a remarkable 42 percent
of this total. The dominance of Thracians in the army that Belisarius assembled to invade
Africa is perhaps the clearest example of this preponderance. With a few noted exceptions,
Procopius writes that the subordinate commanders in the invasion of Africa were “almost
all inhabitants of the land of Thrace.”68
64
Procopius, Wars 1.14.44–55, 3.12.17, 3.18.17.
65
Because of the region’s nature as a battleground, real divisions may be made between Roman and Persian
Armenians. Although Teall appeared to count all Armenians as barbarians, this study attempts to draw a dis-
tinction between individuals whom Procopius presents as Persarmenians and those who were presumably born
in Byzantine Armenia. Teall implied that he considered Armenians to be non-Romans when he commented
that “perhaps even more telling is the penetration into positions of command by peoples of non-Roman origins,
the Armenians above all” (“Barbarians,” p. 312). Michael Whitby flatly insisted that “Armenians were not for-
eigners” (“Recruitment in Roman Armies from Justinian to Heraclius,” p. 106).
66
Schönfeld’s Wörterbuch is invaluable in helping to identify Germanic names. It should be noted that
Walter Pohl and others have criticized the concept of “Germans” or “Germanic culture” in late antiquity (“Jus-
tinian and the Barbarian Kingdoms,” p. 452). Stating that a certain proportion of names appear to be generally
Germanic is not to argue that there was a uniform German culture at this time but rather only that the names
appear to be connected to the Germanic language group.
67
Here and in the following pages, references to “Thracians,” “Greeks,” “Illyrians” and others should be under-
stood to refer to geographical origin of individuals only. No argument for a coherent ethnic identity of these
people is advanced or intended. For the purposes of this paper, as probably for the Byzantines of the sixth century
themselves, referring to an individual as a Thracian is intended only to suggest that he is a Byzantine Roman from
Thrace. See Kaldellis, Hellenism in Byzantium, p. 97.
68
Procopius, Wars 3.11.10–11.
Lagging behind Thracians in importance were Isaurians, mountaineers of Anatolia,

who make up 8 percent of the overall total of native soldiers, and Armenians at 6 percent.
All other regions of origin account for even smaller percentages of the total, but a great
number of regions are included in this minority. Procopius knows of soldiers that were
originally from all over the empire, from places such as Mesopotamia, Cappadocia, Cili-
cia, Palestine, Egypt, Pisidia, Scythia, and even Constantinople itself.69 Illyricum, a region
which historians have traditionally associated with major recruitment of Roman armies in
earlier periods, is represented by only four identifiable individuals in the database, making
up a mere 3 percent of the total.70
A final result that should be noted is the significance of the bucellarii in the proso-
pographical database. About 21 percent of the total number of individuals in the database,
including both barbarians and Romans, were bucellarii. These retainers were evidently an
important part of a Byzantine army. It may be questioned whether the number 21 percent
should be accepted as relatively accurate for the whole army. It is difficult to determine just
how many bucellarii were in an army at any given point.
Procopius relates that in 540, during the Gothic war, Belisarius had 7,000 bucel-
larii.71 This clearly represents a high mark, probably the most retainers this general ever
had, and Belisarius as the most powerful general in the empire at the time was most
likely an exceptional case. He certainly had fewer retainers in 533, before he had won
his great victory against the Vandals. Procopius gives accurate information about the
number of troops on the Vandal campaigns, which came to about 16,000 soldiers and
2,000 marines. Warren Treadgold has recently estimated that Belisarius had perhaps
around 2,500 bucellarii on this campaign, which may be added to the other numbers to
give a total of 20,500 troops in 533. This same scholar has estimated that Belisarius led
perhaps 4,000 bucellarii amongst a total army of perhaps 11,500 against the Ostrogoths
in 535.72 If these numbers are accepted, bucellarii made up only about 12 percent of the
533 campaign force but 35 percent of the army of 535. The 21 percent suggested by the
database fits nicely within this range.
Even if one does not accept that the database or these estimates reflect exact numbers,
69
Scythia was at this time a province in the diocese of Thrace, and so the one individual in the database
hailing from Scythia might reasonably be counted as a Thracian. He is differentiated here to illustrate the range
of the empire’s recruitment.
70
Illyricum was identified as a major recruiting ground by Bury (History, 1:39) and Jones (Later Roman
Empire, 1:660). By the beginning of Justinian’s reign, however, western Illyricum had not been in Byzantine
hands for decades. So here “Illyricum” most likely refers only to Dacia.
71
Procopius, Wars 7.1.20. Modern historians have criticized Procopius’s figure. Hugh Elton has charged
that the number is “probably an exaggeration” (“Military Forces,” p. 282). Whitby argues that this was too large a
number of guards to be “employed permanently by an individual” (“Recruitment in Roman Armies from Justin-
ian to Heraclius,” p. 117). There is no particular reason why this number has to be an exaggeration. As Belisar-
ius’s secretary, Procopius was in excellent position to know exactly how many bucellarii his boss employed.
Moreover, Belisarius was in need of troops at this point of his career, and it is reasonable that he would have
hired as many bucellarii as he could. The figure of seven thousand therefore represents those hired at a time of
need for the start of the Italian campaign and not necessarily the number that was always on permanent retainer
with Belisarius.
72
For the numbers of troops and marines, see Procopius, Wars 3.11.2–20. For the estimate of Belisarius’s
bucellarii in 533 and 535, see Warren Treadgold, The Early Byzantine Historians (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmil-
lan, 2007), p. 219 and n. 180.
they do reflect the importance of the bucellarii in running the army. Clearly a general
could not run an army without individuals he could rely on, and in example after example
one can see that the subordinate officers of the general entrusted with troops or a spe-
cial mission were almost always his personal retainers. Bucellarii were handpicked by
the general, were paid by the general, and swore an oath of allegiance to the general.73
They were often kinsmen or at least from the same region as the general; Belisarius, for
example, counted his stepson Photius among his bucellarii, and Damianus, the nephew
of the important Thracian general Valerian (served ca. 533–59), was in command of four
hundred of his uncle’s bucellarii.74
This perhaps helps to explain why these retainers were important in a Justinianic
army beyond what their low numbers might suggest. It may also be said that Procopius
would have been more likely to know bucellarii of Belisarius, since these are the soldiers
he would have known best as a member of the general’s household. This would explain
why so many bucellarii of Belisarius appear in the Wars, but it does nothing to explain
the presence of the retainers of other generals, which make up 37 percent of that type of
soldiers found in the database. Whether they were retainers of Belisarius or not, bucel-
larii clearly had a role to play in the armies of the age that was out of proportion to their
numbers.
Database Analysis
All this evidence may seem somewhat ambiguous, but when brought together it tells
an important story about the army and administration of Justinian. The campaign armies
of the period relied on both native Roman and non-Roman soldiers.75 Although natives
probably constituted a majority of these armies, non-Romans were by no means a negligible
minority. This does not contradict the opinion of A. H. M. Jones that Romans predomi-
nated in the field armies, but it does flesh out the details of that predomination. This study
suggests that Romans outnumbered non-Romans in the field armies, but only by a majority
of approximately 60 to 40 percent.
Perhaps more importantly, it does not appear, as Jones and Teall both argued, that
the number of non-Romans in the army increased noticeably over the course of Justini-
an’s reign.76 Instead, the proportion of non-Romans in the army remained much the same
throughout the period 527–54, despite the fall of the finance minister John the Cappadocian,
the arrival of the plague, and various military setbacks. That the proportion of non-Romans
should have remained steady despite the changing circumstances may seem illogical. Teall
and Jones both had plausible reasons for suggesting that non-Roman recruitment increased.
As the plague carried off more people, the Byzantine Empire would have faced a manpower
shortage. Justinian and his administration would have preferred to keep rural manpower
working on farms so that they could be taxed. In such a case, recruiting extra non-Romans
into the army would make sense, because they would not be paying taxes anyway.
73
Jones pointed out that they also swore an oath to the reigning emperor, which shows that these private
armies had at least some legitimacy in the eyes of the government (Later Roman Empire, 1:666).
74
Photius: Procopius, Wars 5.5.4; Damianus: Wars 6.7.26.
75
This study does not attempt to analyze the composition of the limitanei, or fixed border armies, because
these armies were of less interest to Procopius and cannot be tracked nearly as well as the comitatenses.
76
Jones, Later Roman Empire, 1:668, Teall, “Barbarians,” p. 296.
Yet the evidence in the database does not indicate that this is what happened. Perhaps
it is giving the Byzantine administrative machinery too much credit to assume that Justin-
ian or his administration could have consciously chosen to recruit either non-Romans or
natives into the army. In fact, recruitment, especially for the comitatenses which were to go
out on campaign, seems to have been a somewhat haphazard affair. A general was sent out
into a district with money and seems to have recruited whomever he could entice to join his
army. An example is the way the general Germanus (d. 550), a cousin of Justinian, collected
an army when he was given the command of the Italian theater. Procopius records that Jus-
tinian sent Germanus into Thrace and Illyricum to gather an army. He managed to recruit
the bucellarii of other generals and troops “not only from Byzantium [Constantinople] but
also from the towns of Thrace and Illyricum,” while “barbarians kept flocking to his stan-
dard.”77 It therefore appears that Germanus enrolled whoever was willing to volunteer with
little discrimination. This perhaps suggests why Justinian and his administration did not
plan, or at least did not manage, to increase recruitment of either natives or non-Romans
for these types of armies.
Why did the Byzantine field armies of Justinian’s day rely so heavily on Thracians
among their native soldiers and Huns and Western European peoples among the non-
Roman soldiers? The answer to this question becomes clear when one plots the examples
on a map of the Byzantine world. Although ethnic identity was situational and highly politi-
cal in this period, for Romans it was closely rooted to location. Ethnic identities within
the Roman supraculture, such as Isaurian and Thracian, were by the sixth century mostly
geographical locators. For this reason, one may safely posit place of origin for most of the
identified examples in the database.
Among the non-Romans, the majority of the individuals in the database come from
the Balkans, typically from just north of the Danube. These Balkan barbarians include the
Huns that Procopius frequently labels Massagetae, who probably lived in Thrace or farther
north of the Danube as remnants of the peoples that Attila had led.78 The bulk of the west-
ern European peoples with Germanic names in the armies of this time were probably also
recruited from the Danubian region. The Heruli, for example, were a nomadic people that
had been settled near Singidunum on the Danube in 512 by Emperor Anastasius (491–
518).79 The Gepids were likewise settled near Sirmium and Singidunum and have tradition-
ally been considered an eastern Germanic people much like the Goths.80
Many of the Goths themselves had of course followed the Ostrogothic king Theoderic
the Great (493–526) into Italy in the fifth century, but those that remained in eastern Europe
were most likely scattered in the Balkan provinces of the empire and some lived along the
Black Sea as far north as the Crimea.81 The lone Slav in the database was presumably also
77
Procopius, Wars 7.39.17–20.
78
Procopius identifies another Hunnic group, but he calls them the Epthalite (or White) Huns—they lived to
the north of Sassanid Persia. These peoples were a scourge on the Persians, but it is not likely that the Massagetae
who served in the Byzantine armies were from these peoples; indeed Procopius says that the White Huns “do not
mingle with any of the Huns known to us” (Wars 1.3.1–2). Whitby agrees that the Huns sent to the west during
Justinian’s reign were Danubian Huns (“Recruitment in Roman Armies from Justinian to Heraclius,” p. 107).
79
Jones, Later Roman Empire, 1:244, settlement by Anastasius: Procopius, Wars 6.14.28.
80
Alexander P. Kazhdan, ed., The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, 3 vols. (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1991), 2:844. Hereafter cited as ODB.
81
Kazhdan, ODB, 2:862.
from the region just north of the Danube.82 All the peoples who may be located securely
in the Balkans near the Danube constitute 49 percent of the ninety-three non-Romans in
the database. If one expands this figure to include the names that are generally Germanic,
assuming that most of these peoples also lived in the same region, then that figure swells to
68 percent. Thus, a comfortable majority of the non-Romans in the field armies of Justin-
ian’s reign were probably recruited from the Balkans.83
This information becomes significant when the map of the homelands of native
recruits in these armies is laid over it. If one tallies all the native Roman soldiers recruited
in the Balkans, including Thrace, Illyricum, Scythia, Greece, and Constantinople itself, one
finds that 28 percent of the individual soldiers were recruited in this region. This number
is not exceptionally high, but if one leaves out the individuals that had to be identified
as “undifferentiated Romans” because Procopius did not provide enough information to
locate them securely, then recruits from the Balkans make up 53 percent of the identifiable
soldiers.
These figures, then, suggest two conclusions. First, the clear majority of soldiers in
the campaign field armies during this period of time were recruited from regions close to
Constantinople, especially from the Balkans. Second, most were recruited from economi-
cally depressed regions within this zone.84 There are consequently few recruits from western
Anatolia and Greece but many from Thrace and the northern Balkans.
The literary evidence supports these arguments as well. Procopius says that the
majority of officers in the Vandal campaign army of 533 were from Thrace, and Justinian
frequently sent Thracians and Huns as reinforcements to Italy. In 544 the general Belisarius
toured Thrace to recruit an army for his second Italian campaign; the general Germanus
was likewise sent in 549 to recruit in Thrace and Illyricum, and a couple of years later the
general Narses recruited in the same area.85 The conclusion then is that Justinian consis-
tently ordered new armies for campaigns to be recruited in the Balkans, especially from the
82
This Slav was not, however, the famous General of Thrace Chilbudius, whom Teall identifies as a Slav
(“Barbarians,” p. 299). Procopius gives no indication that this general was a Slav, and the PLRE is silent on the
issue (3:286), so in the database Chilbudius has been identified as an “undifferentiated barbarian.” Florin Curta
has argued that Slavs were not originally a discrete ethnic group and were instead formed as such by Byzantine
thought and action (The Making of the Slavs: History and Archaeology of the Lower Danube Region, c. 500–700
[Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001]). Curta makes an important argument, but given the scope and
premises of this paper it does not seem inappropriate to label individuals as Slavs, as the Byzantines themselves
would have done.
83
Cf. Whitby, who argued that “in the context of the overall Roman military effort, and even with regard
to the size of expeditionary armies alone, the contribution of Danubian groups was limited” (“Recruitment in
Roman Armies from Justinian to Heraclius,” p. 108). The database presented here clearly fails to support this
assessment.
84
Although from a somewhat earlier period, the journey of the future emperor Justin and his friends
from their poverty-stricken homeland to enlist in the army is a vivid example of why peasants in agricultur-
ally depressed lands would have more reason to join the army than their more prosperous neighbors in richer
lands (Procopius, Anecdota 6.2–3). For the general economic condition of the Balkan Peninsula vis-à-vis other
regions of the empire, see Michael Hendy, Studies in the Byzantine Monetary Economy, c.300–1450 (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1985). Among other details, Hendy examines the low density of cities in the dio-
ceses of Dacia and Thrace and finds that, combined with the raids and devastation these regions had to endure,
this suggests a relative lack of communities and agricultural exploitation (p. 75).
85
Vandal campaign army: Procopius, Wars 3.11.10–11; reinforcements: Wars 7.6.10; Belisarius: Wars
7.10.1; Germanus: Wars 7.39.9–19; Narses: Wars 8.26.10–13.
peasants of Thrace and the non-Romans of the Danubian region. Preference for this region
was probably also due to the fact that several key generals, including Belisarius himself,
were Thracian, and that three large armies were permanently stationed in it, namely the
Army of Thrace itself and the two field armies “in the Emperor’s Presence” that were nor-
mally based around Constantinople. In fact on one occasion Justinian gave Narses explicit
authority to transfer the soldiers of these three armies into his new army, and he therefore
took with him “a great number of Roman soldiers from Byzantium [Constantinople], but
he also collected many from the lands of Thrace and Illyricum.”86
Thus the emperor intentionally used the peoples of a single, economically depressed
geographical area of his empire, the Balkans, to man his armies of conquest, although when
recruiting his generals he did not discriminate carefully between non-Romans and natives
within that area. It is important to emphasize that Procopius gives no indication that all
of this recruitment was anything except voluntary. Although conscription laws remained
in Justinian’s Code, the actual practice seems to have been a thing of the past by the age of
Justinian.87 It is likely that these generals simply showed up in an area, set up camp, and
recruited anybody who walked up, looked physically fit, and was prepared to swear an oath
of allegiance to the emperor. If this is indeed how recruitment was done, it shows vividly
how non-Romans and natives could be accepted side by side.
The apparently conscious decision of Justinian to recruit new field armies chiefly out
of the Balkans undoubtedly affected the administration of the Byzantine Empire. The task
of the generals, who appear to have been required to oversee the recruitment of their own
forces, was certainly made much easier. They simply had to begin marching to the west
and to recruit the peoples they encountered along the way. Since most of these armies were
headed for Africa or Italy anyway, this made quite a bit of sense.88 It was therefore eminently
reasonable from a practical perspective for these armies of conquest to be recruited chiefly
from the Balkans.
The recruitment, however, remained steady throughout much of Justinian’s reign,
and combined with the tendency for this region to be a battleground and the effects of
the plague, it probably led to a decrease in population or at least a decrease in security
and prosperity. At the same time, the Army of Illyricum itself, and possibly the Army of
Thrace, which were the only field armies responsible for covering the Danube frontier, were
frequently tapped as a source for new armies or reinforcements for the armies fighting in
Italy.89 In this massive recruitment, in the transfers to other armies, in the tendency for
86
87
Warren Treadgold argues this point, suggesting that a pay raise in the reign of Anastasius made army ser-
vice desirable and ended the need for conscription (pp. 14–15). He bases his argument on Jones, Later Roman
Empire, who pointed to the lack of complaints about conscription and argued that Justinianic recruitment was
voluntary but did not connect the pay raise to this issue (Byzantium and Its Army, 284–1081 [Stanford: Stanford
University Press, 1995], p. 668). Cf. Whitby, who argues that Justinian still made use of the traditional conscrip-
tion law (“Army, c. 420–602,” p. 303).
88
Generals being given command of the Persian theater would assume command either of the Army of
the East or the Army of Armenia, which were already in place there, so that the generals would not necessarily
have to do as much special recruiting as those assembling entirely new armies to move west and conquer new
territory.
89
Generals of Illyricum (Magistri Militum Per Illyricum) were frequently sent into Italy with portions of
their armies, for example, Justinus (Procopius, Wars 6.13.17) and Vitalius (Wars 7.10.2).
the Army of Illyricum to fight in Italy, and in the effects of the plague, it is tempting to see
the beginning of the collapse of the Balkans as a defensible administrative unit that would
require serious campaigning by Emperor Maurice (582–602) at the end of the sixth century
to repair (and then only temporarily). More research is clearly needed before such a propo-
sition may be proved, however.
Interaction of Romans and Non-Romans

This study of the composition of the army may also be used to speculate on the posi-
tions of non-Romans in the society of Justinian and on the attitudes of the Byzantines
toward ethnicity in general. It is clear that the Byzantines did not regard the distinction
between native and non-Roman to be a vitally important one when recruiting soldiers for
their armies, although non-Romans were apparently sometimes regarded as preferable.
Non-Romans made up a substantial minority of the field armies recruited for offensive
campaigns. All the chief generals of Justinian’s reign seemed quite eager to recruit non-
Romans. Narses relied heavily upon Heruli and Lombards in his army, Germanus accepted
barbarians in great numbers “collected from the whole world,” and Belisarius, when the
situation in Italy was extremely bleak, begged Justinian to send him “a very large force of
Huns and other barbarians.”90
In fact, not only do the generals seem to have been pleased to make as much use of
non-Roman soldiers as possible but Procopius himself also seems to put relatively little
stigma on non-Romans in army service. Granted, he somewhat condescendingly refers to
non-Romans as barbarians in what is probably meant to be a pejorative fashion, but this
largely occurs when the individuals he is labeling are doing something wrong. Thus he
complains about the antics of the “barbarian” Huns when they hold up the Vandal expedi-
tion by fighting among themselves while drunk, and when they hold back in the fighting to
see which side will win before committing, and when the “barbarian” Goths besiege Rome
while Belisarius is holding it.91
On other occasions, though, he speaks quite plainly about non-Roman soldiers with-
out slipping into such invective. Thus Pharas the Herul is described in 534 as “energetic and
thoroughly serious and upright in every way” and the Heruli that follow him are described
as orderly, while Pitzas the Goth is described positively and not labeled as a barbarian when
he willingly switches to the Byzantine side and accepts a Byzantine garrison in Samnium in
536.92 This is only a small sample of such examples, but it serves to illustrate that although
Procopius clearly saw that there was a difference between Romans and non-Romans, in
the cases where the latter were serving the empire’s interests he was not bitterly prejudiced
against them. A good soldier was a good soldier, and Procopius saw no reason to harbor
dislike or hatred of non-Romans who served well in the army; indeed, they were frequently
praised as valorous.93
As noted above, the generals of the period also harbored no particular prejudice
against non-Romans as long as they were serving loyally. Justinian himself also probably
90
Narses: Procopius, Wars 8.26.13; Germanus: Wars 7.39.19; Belisarius: Wars 7.12.10.
91
Procopius, Wars 3.12.17, 4.1.10, 5.17.15.
92
Procopius Wars 4.4.30, 5.15.1.
93
Such valorous barbarians include Argek the Hun (Procopius, Wars 2.26.26), Phazas the Iberian (Wars
7.28.5), and Artabanes the Persarmenian (Wars 8.8.21).
had little or no prejudice, since he organized the recruitment policy of the generals and
gathered reinforcements to send to Africa and Italy that consistently contained numbers
of non-Romans. This lack of prejudice makes sense in light of the importance of political
loyalty as a vehicle for joining the Roman political community. As Greatrex noted, “Preju-
dice toward someone qua barbarian no longer made sense, since it was a condition easily
susceptible to change.”94
This toleration of a significant non-Roman presence in the army contrasts substan-
tially with the intolerance of the Romans toward non-Roman soldiers in the previous
century. Only a century before, the reign of Leo I (457–74) saw extreme strife between
non-Roman soldiers led by the general Aspar (ca. 400–471) and the population of Con-
stantinople. Rumors that Aspar and his son were plotting to take over the throne caused
riots in Constantinople, and when Leo had Aspar assassinated, the Ostrogoths banded
together to ravage Thrace.95 Clearly, this type of strife had decreased significantly by the
reign of Justinian. The danger of non-Romans’ completely controlling the army and Con-
stantinople itself had disappeared, and this more than anything else suggests why preju-
dices against non-Romans were not strong. Because non-Romans in the empire were less
of a danger, and Justinian’s throne was certainly not threatened by overly powerful non-
Roman groups, fear and hatred of them was bound to be less evident. Non-Romans were
also very useful as soldiers, a fact that explains their considerable presence in the field
armies of Justinian’s day.
94
Greatrex, “Roman Identity in the Sixth Century,” p. 278.
95
For a summary of these events, see Warren Treadgold, A History of the Byzantine State and Society (Stan-
ford: Stanford University Press, 1997), p. 155.
Appendix
Abbreviations
Aga. Agathias, The Histories, ed. Rudolf Keydell (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1967), trans. Joseph Frendo
(Berlin: De Gruyter, 1975)
Anec. Procopius of Caesarea, The Anecdota, ed. and trans. H. B. Dewing (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1914)
Buildings Procopius of Caesarea, The Buildings, ed. and trans. H. B. Dewing (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Chron. Pasch. Chronicon Paschale 284–628 AD, trans. Michael Whitby and Mary Whitby (Liverpool: Liver-
pool University Press, 1989)
Corippus Ioh. Flavius Cresconius Corippus, The Iohannis, or, De Bellis Libycis, trans. George W. Shea (Lew-
iston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1998)
Corippus Iust. Flavius Cresconius Corippus, In Laudem Iustini Augusti Minoris, ed. and trans. Averil Cam-
eron (London: Athlone Press, 1976)
Elton Hugh Elton, “Military Forces,” in The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Warfare, 2 vols.,
ed. Philip Sabin, Hans Van Wees, and Michael Whitby (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2007)
Evagrius Evagrius Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History, trans. Michael Whitby (Liverpool: Liverpool
John Eph. John of Ephesus, The Third Part of the Ecclesiastical History of John Bishop of Ephesus, trans. R.
Payne Smith (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1860)
John of Epi. John of Epiphania, Fragmenta Historicum Graecorum, ed. Karl Müller, 5 vols. (Paris: A Firmin
Didot, 1849)
Malalas John Malalas, Chronographia, ed. Ioannes Thurn (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2000); translated
as The Chronicle of John Malalas by Elizabeth Jeffreys, Michael Jeffreys, and Roger Scott (Mel-
bourne: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies, 1986)
Marcellinus Marcellinus Comes, The Chronicle, trans. Brian Coke (Sydney: Australian Association for
Byzantine Studies, 1995)
Menander Menander Protector, The History, ed. and trans. R. C. Blockley (Liverpool: F. Cairns, 1985)
Teall John Teall, “The Barbarians in Justinian’s Armies,” Speculum 40 (April 1965): 294–322.
Theoph. AM Theophanes Confessor, The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor, trans. Cyril Mango, Roger
Scott, and Geoffrey Greatrex (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997)
Theophylact Theophylact Simocatta, The History of Theophylact Simocatta, trans. Michael Whitby and
Mary Whitby (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986)
Wars Procopius of Caesarea, The History of the Wars, ed. and trans. H. B. Dewing, 5 vols. (Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914–40)
Table 1. Roman Soldiers and Officers
Name Supracultural Regional Explicit? Yes, Rank Date Reference Comment (Itinerary, Notable Action, etc.)
Identity Identity Somewhat,
Guess
Adolius Roman Armenian Y Commander 542 Wars 2.21.2, A silentiarius in the palace, but in 542 was a com-
2.24.13 mander of some Armenian troops under Belisarius
in the East. Placed in faux command of 1,000 cavalry
for the purpose of impressing a Persian ambassador.
After Belisarius’s departure, served under Martinus
in 543 and was killed in that year fighting the Per-
sians when a stone was thrown at him from a build-
ing during a march. He was the son of Acacius and a
native of Armenia. Adolius in PLRE, 3:16.
Adonachus Roman ? G General 541 Wars 2.12.2 Commander of the garrison at Chalcis in Syria—he
and his men were concealed by the town’s citizens
when Chosroes came. Nothing definite is known
about his identity, but the name seems Greek in
origin (the pain of Adonis?). Adonachus in PLRE,
3:17.
Alexander Roman? ? G Commander 537 Wars 6.5.1 Commander with Marcentius of 1,000 regular cav-
alry, dispatched to Italy in 537 to reinforce Belisarius
when he was penned up in Rome. Perhaps identical
with Alexander 7 the father of Eutychius. He is
Alexander 2 in PLRE, 3:42.
Althias Roman Thracian? S Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5–15, Commander of the federates in invasion of Africa
Wars 4.13.14 (533). Possibly Thracian because of 3.11.10–11, in
534/5 he was in command of forts in the region of
Centuriae and engaged with the Moors in combat,
where he caught a spear in his hand and thus
defeated a Moorish chieftain. He is not mentioned
again, even during the Stotzas mutiny, and his fate is
uncertain. Althias in PLRE, 3:49.
Andreas Roman Byzantium Y Wrestling 530 Wars 1.13.30 A native of Constantinople, he was a personal
Trainer/ attendant of Bouzes and not technically a soldier.
Soldier Nevertheless he engaged in personal combat at Dara
and slew two Persian champions. Andreas 1 in
PLRE, 3:74.
Anonymous 01 Roman ? Y Soldier 541 Wars 4.20.27 Unnamed Roman soldier who climbed a tower and
killed its guard. Not listed in the PLRE.
Anonymous 02 Roman Isaurian Y Soldier 536 Wars 5.9.11 Unnamed Isaurian soldier who explored the aqueduct
of Naples and suggested a surprise attack through it
to Paucaris. Not listed in the PLRE.
Anonymous 03 Roman ? S Soldier 536 Wars 6.1.11 Unnamed Roman soldier who fell into a hole and
befriended a Goth. Not listed in the PLRE.
Anonymous 04 Roman Isaurian Y Soldier 547 Wars 7.20.4 One of four Isaurians who successfully handed over
the city of Rome to Totila. Not listed in the PLRE.
Anonymous 06 Roman Isaurian Y Soldier 547 Wars VII.20.4 One of four Isaurians who successfully handed over
Anzalas Roman Armenian Y Bodyguard 552 Wars 8.31.13 A guardsman of Narses, just before Busta Gallorum
(Doruphoros) he defeated in single combat the Gothic champion
Coccas (a Roman deserter). He was an Armenian.
On the name, see Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 18.
Anzalas in PLRE, 3:94.
Apollinarius Roman African Y Commander 534 Wars 4.5.7 Italian-born but brought up in Africa, he came to
Justinian on behalf of Hilderic and then participated
in the conquest of Africa with Belisarius, showing
great valor at the battle of Tricamarum, and was sent
in 534 by Belisarius to conquer and govern Majorca
and Minorca. Apollinarius 1 in PLRE, 3:100.
Table 1. continued
Guess
Aquilinus Roman? ? G Bodyguard 537 Wars 6.5.18 A guardsman of Belisarius, he fought bravely against
(Upaspistos) the Goths in battle outside the gates of Rome, where
his horse was felled. Aquilinus in PLRE, 3:102.
Areobindus Roman ? S General 544 Wars 4.24.1, Labeled a man “of the Senate and of good birth” and
4.26.33 therefore likely Roman with a long family pedigree.
PLRE 3 suggests he was descended from a consular
family. He married Praiecta, a niece of Justinian. He
was himself a patrician and vir illustris. In 545 he was
sent by Justinian as general to Africa, to share power
with Sergius; in late 545 he was given supreme
command in Africa but then was murdered by the
rebel Gontharis. Areobindus 2 in PLRE, 3:107.
Arsaces Roman Armenian Y Commander 540 Wars 2.5.11 Commander of Roman forces at the city of Sura in
540. He fought valiantly against Chosroes’s army but
was killed by an arrow. He is explicitly identified as
an Armenian, on the name see Justi, Iranisches
Namenbuch, p. 27. Not listed in the PLRE.
Artabazes Roman Armenian Y Commander 542 Wars 7.3.10, An Armenian and the commander of a force of
7.4.29 Persians during seige of Verona, seized gate and
fought valorously despite no support, defeated Valaris
the Goth in single combat at Faventia but died of
wounds afterward. Praised conventionally as a good
soldier. See Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 39.
Artabazes in PLRE, 3:130.
Athenodorus Roman Isaurian Y Bodyguard 537 Wars 5.29.20 An Isaurian and one of the guardsmen of Belisarius,
(Doruphoros) Procopius says he was one of the three most valorous
fighters in battle at the siege of Rome. PLRE, 3:149.
Babas Roman Thracian Y Commander 550 Wars 8.9.5, A Thracian and one of the commanders in the army
8.13.8, Aga. sent to Lazica in 550 with Bessas, in command of the
3.18.10 garrison at Archaeopolis with Odonachus in 551,
repulsed Mermeroes by a sally from his attack on the
city in that year. In 556 Agathias describes him as
“Commander of those Roman forces that had been
stationed in Lazica for a very long time”; by this point
he was perhaps MVM. Babas in PLRE, 3:161.
Barbation Roman Thracian Y Bodyguard 545 Wars 7.11.37, Guardsman of Belisarius, from Thrace, sent to Rome
(Doruphoros) 7.28.5 with Artasires in 545 to strengthen garrison and
support Bessas, placed in command with Phazas of a
scouting force of 900 in late 547; the force was
ambushed near Croton but Barbation escaped to
report on the disaster to Belisarius. PLRE, 3:170.
Barbatus Roman Thracian? S Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5– Probably a Thracian because of Wars 3.11.10.
15, 4.15.50 Commander of the Regular Cavalry in the invasion
of Africa, commanded right wing in final battle
against Gelimer, commanded cavalry against Stotzas
in Numidia in 536, murdered by Stotzas after the
soldiers deserted to him. Barbatus 1 in PLRE, 3:170.
Belisarius Roman Thracian Y General 526 Wars 1.11.21, A native of Germania, between Thrace and Illyricum.
1.12.20, 3.11.21, The famous conqueror of the Vandals and Goths. He
8.21.1; Anec. was an officer in the bodyguard of Justinian (ca.
4.4, 4.39; 520–27). In 527 he was dispatched with Sittas into
Aga. 5.16.1 Persarmenia. He was Dux Mesopotamiae (527–29),
and MVM per Orientem on multiple occasions (529–
31, 533–42 while fighting in Africa and Italy, and
finally 549–51). He helped quash the Nika riot in 532,
was consul in 535, and became patrician around the
same time. He fell from favor in 542 (for plotting
during the plague), and when restored was appointed
comes sacri stabuli and sent to Italy again (544–49).
On his return from Italy he remained in Constanti-
nople, although holding the office of MVM per
Table 1. continued
Guess
Orientem. He retired by 552, but was called up in 559
to repulse the Huns of Zabergan. He was accused of
plotting in 562 but restored to favor in 563 and died
in 565. Belisarius 1 in PLRE, 3:181.
Bonus Roman ? S Commander 544 Wars 7.10.14 The nephew (or cousin) of John (nephew of Vitalian)
in command of garrison at Genoa in 544. Bonus 2 in
PLRE, 3:241.
Boriades Roman ? S Bodyguard 533 Wars 3.16.9 Guardsmen of Belisarius, sent to investigate town of
(Upaspistos) Syllectus in Africa with other bucellarii, presumed
Roman because of affinity of name to Boraides,
Justinian’s cousin. Boriades in PLRE, 3:246.
Bouzes Roman Thracian Y General 528 Wars 1.13.5, Or Buzes. A native of Thrace, the brother of Cutzes
2.3.28, 2.20.20, and Benilus, uncle of Domnentiolus, possible son
7.32.41, of Vitalian. As Dux Phoenices Libanensis at
7.34.40; Anec. Palymyra, he was sent to assist Belisarius by
4.4; Aga. Justinian in 528, a general in Armenia in 539, and
2.18.8 was MVM per Armeniam (540–42), in command of
Hierapolis with Justus in 542 in Chosroes’s invasion,
imprisoned at Theodora’s behest for two years
(542–44) for plotting with Belisarius during the
plague, confidentially informed of Artabanes’s
conspiracy by Germanus in 548, MVM vacans
dispatched in 549 against the Gepids, in support of
the Lombards, one of the generals in command
against Persians in 554 in Lazica with Bessas and
Martin. He was active until 556. Made an honorary
consul by 542. Buzes in PLRE, 3:254.
Burcentius Roman Besi Y Soldier 539 Wars 6.26.3–26 A Besi, inhabitant of Roman Thrace, Burcentius was
a soldier under the command of Narses 1 the
Armenian; he was bribed by the Goths to take a
message to Wittigis and was burned alive when his
treachery was discovered. Not listed in the PLRE.
Calonymus Roman Alexandrian Y Admiral 533 Wars 3.11.5– From Alexandria, the admiral of the fleet in the
15, 3.20.24 invasion of Africa. Against the orders of Belisarius, he
plundered the coastal areas of Carthage but according
to Procopius paid the price for this by dying of
apoplexy later in Constantinople. PLRE, 3:267.
Claudian Roman? ? G General 549 Wars 7.35.27 The garrison commander of Salona, he sent a force
to fight against the army of the traitor Indulf, which
was sacking towns in Italy. This expedition went
down to heavy defeat. Procopius calls him an archon,
and PLRE speculates that he combined civil and
military authority, perhaps as the proconsul Dalmatiae.
His military powers are definite, and his civil authority
probable. Claudianus in PLRE, 3:316.
Conon Roman? ? G General 537 Wars 6.5.1, General with Paulus in command of 3,000 Isaurians,
7.6.2, 7.17.2, dispatched to reinforce Belisarius in Italy while he
7.30.7; was penned up in Rome, in command of 1,000
Marcellinus “Romans and Isaurians” in Naples in 543, shared
538, p. 47 command of Rome with Bessas during Totila’s siege
of 546, killed in Rome by his soldiers in 548 because
of late pay. He was a vir illustris, according to
Marcellinus, so his rank was perhaps MVM vacans.
Conon 1 in PLRE, 3:331.
Constantianus 1 Roman Illyrian Y General 544 Wars 2.24.3, Procopius labels him an Illyrian. He was sent as an
2.28.2; ambassador with Sergius to Chosroes in 543, was
Marcellinus MVM vacans in 544–45 in the East under Martinus,
p. 51 9 and went on a second embassy in 544, when he and
Sergius secured a five-year peace. In PLRE, he is
Constantianus 1, 3:333.
Table 1. continued
Guess
Constantianus 2 Roman? ? G General 536 Wars 5.7.26, Commander of the Royal Grooms (Comes Sacri
5.16.1,15, Stabuli), sent to Illyricum to fight the Goths in 536
6.30.2, 7.2.8, (presumably as MVM Per Illyricum), besieged by
7.3.4, 7.6.8, the Goths in Salona (537), sent to Ravenna in 540
7.32.41, when Belisarius was withdrawn, in 541 negotiated
7.34.40, with Totila for the latter’s surrender, in command
7.40.34; of combined Roman army in Italy with Alexander
Malalas in 541 when he was defeated at Faventia, holed up in
18.141, p. 303 Ravenna in 543. He complained to Justinian and is
not again mentioned in Italy, so he was presumably
recalled around the time Belisarius was sent as his
replacement (544). He was confidentially informed
of Artabanes’s conspiracy by Germanus in 548. MVM
vacans dispatched in 549 against the Gepids, in
support of the Lombards, and after in 551 sent against
the Slavs under Scholasticus, he remained an MVM
until 562 at least. He was also an honorary consul and
patrician. In 562 he assisted Marinus in investigating
the conspiracy of Ablabius and Sergius. Constantianus
2 in PLRE, 3:334.
Constantinus Roman Thracian Y General 535 Wars 5.5.3, A native of Thrace. One of the generals (presumably
5.16.1, MVM vacans) of Belisarius in the invasion of Italy,
5.19.16, 6.1.4, given an army including Belisarius’s guardsmen and
6.8.1–18; Huns and sent to invade Etruria in 537, where he
Marcellinus captured Perusia and Spolitium, commanded one
p. 47 1; Anec. of the gates of Rome during the siege of the city in
1.24–30 537, successfully led a sally of Huns out of the city.
He was ordered killed by Belisarius for stealing
daggers from Presidius and then trying to stab
Belisarius when compelled to return them (Anecdota
blames his death on Antonina). He was a patrician by
the time of his death. Constantinus 3 in PLRE, 3:341.
Coutzes Roman Thracian Y General 528 Wars 1.13.5 Or Cutzes. Brother of Buzes and Benilus, uncle of
Domnentiolus, possibly son of Vitalian. Sent from
Lebanon to assist Belisarius by Justinian, originally
from Thrace. Dux Phoenices Libanensis (at Damascus)
in 528, captured in battle with the Persians. Cutzes
in PLRE, 3:366.
Cutilas Roman Thracian Y Bodyguard 537 Wars 6.2.10 A Thracian and a guardsman of Belisarius,
(Doruphoros) commanded 600 cavalry in sally out of Rome with
Artasires and Bochas in 537; during the battle he was
struck in head with a javelin but continued to fight
quite unimpeded. He later died after removal of the
weapon. PLRE, 3:365.
Cyprian Roman Thracian? S Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5– Commander of the federates in invasion of Africa,
15, 4.7.11, Possibly Thracian because of Wars 3.11.10–11. Sent
5.23.19, 6.23.2, to accept surrender of Gelimer in 534. Present with
7.5.4, 7.6.8, Belisarius in Rome during its first siege in 537, sent
7.12.20 with Justinus to Fisula in 539. After 540 he was
probably MVM vacans. He fled ignominiously at
battle of Florence in 542, holed up in Perusia in 543,
was assassinated in Perusia by his guardsman Ulifus
(acting under bribe from Totila) in 545. Cyprianus in
PLRE, 3:368.
Cyril Roman Thracian? S Commander 530 Wars 1.13.21, Commander of cavalry at Dara, sent to support
3.11.1, 3.24.19, rebellion in Sardinia with 400 troops; one of the
4.5.2, 4.15.50; commanders of the federates in the invasion of Africa
Anec. 17.32 in 533. Possibly Thracian because of Wars 3.11.10–11.
Sent to Sardinia to recover it in 534; commander
of the federates against Stotzas in Numidia in 536,
murdered by Stotzas after the soldiers deserted to
him. Cyrillus 2 in PLRE, 3:371.
Table 1. continued
Guess
Cyrus Roman Mesopotamian S General 543 Wars 4.21.1, General sent to govern Pentapolis in Africa, nephew
4.21.16 of Solomon 1 and son of Bacchus, and thus a Meso-
potamian from near Dara. He was presumably a
military governor (dux) and perhaps titled dux Libyae
Pentapoleos. He marched against Antalas in 544 but
is not mentioned after this. Cyrus 3 in PLRE, 3:374.
Damianus Roman Thracian? S Officer 538 Wars 6.7.26, Nephew of Valerian, in command of 400 of Valerian’s
8.33.2 guardsmen near Alba in Italy in 538, present again
after Busta Gallorum in 552 when he was sent to
escort the Lombards home. Probably Thracian like
his uncle. Possibly identical with Damianus 3, a
commander against the Avars in 571. Damianus 2
in PLRE, 3:385.
Demetrius Roman? ? G General 535 Wars 5.5.3, Commander of Infantry in the army of Belisarius in
6.23.2, 7.6.13 the invasion of Italy (probably comes), still alive in
539 when some of his soldiers were sent with Cyprian
and Justinus to Fisula, appointed by Justinian as
general of Sicily in 542 (now MVM vacans) and while
there sailed to Naples to relieve the siege of the city,
where he was captured by the Goths. Demetrius 3
in PLRE, 3:392.
Diogenes Roman? ? G Bodyguard 533 Wars 2.21.2, An officer of Belisarius’s guardsmen. In Africa in 533,
(Doruphoros) 3.23.5, 5.27.11, he made a display of valorous deeds by escaping with
6.5.9, 6.9.9, only 22 men an ambush laid by Vandals with 300.
7.36.1, 7.37.9 In Italy, in 536, he was sent in command of 300
guardsmen by Belisarius to sally against Goths at the
siege of Rome; in 537 he again was in command of a
sally out of Rome, and was entrusted with discover-
ing a Gothic plot on a Roman aqueduct in 538. On
the eastern front, served as a faux commander of
1,000 cavalry to impress a Persian ambassador in
542. Returned to Italy with Belisarius, and was placed
in command of garrison of Rome in 549. Fled Rome
after its fall and was next found as garrison com-
mander at Centumcellae. Diogenes 2 in PLRE, 3:400.
Domnentiolus Roman Thracian S Commander 543 Wars 2.24.15, Nephew of Bouzes (and therefore possibly Thracian
7.39.3 like Bouzes). He fought in Mesopotamia against the
Persians in 531. In 543 he was one of the officers
encamped with Justus under the overall command of
Martinus on the eastern front. In 550 he was in
command of garrison at Messana, unsuccessfully
attacked Goths and then retreated back into the city.
Domnentiolus in PLRE, 3:413.
Domnicus Roman ? S Commander 536 Wars 4.16.1, Sent to Africa with Germanus in 536 to become
4.19.1, 6.29.1 commander of the infantry (perhaps as MVM
vacans). Withdrawn with Germanus in 539. He was a
senator, a vir illustris, and a comes domesticorum. In
late 539 he was an ambassador with Maximinus sent
by Justinian to Ravenna to offer a treaty to Wittigis.
Domnicus 3 in PLRE, 3:415.
Dorotheus 1 Roman? ? G Commander 530 Wars 1.13.21 One of the cavalry commanders in the army of
Belisarius at the Battle of Dara. Stationed on the right
wing. Probably not identical with Dorotheus 2.
Dorotheus 1 in PLRE, 3:420.
Dorotheus 2 Roman? ? G General 530 Wars 1.15.3, MVM per Armeniam (530–33). He served under the
3.11.5–15, authority of Sittas. Commander of the federates in
3.14.14; Malalas invasion of Africa (533). On the way to Africa, he
18.70, p. 275 died in Sicily in 533. Dorotheus 2 in PLRE, 3:420.
Ennes Roman Isaurian Y Commander 535 Wars 5.5.3, Commander of the Isaurians in the army of Belisarius
5.10.1, 6.12.27 in the invasion of Italy, one of the commanders in
charge of 400 soldiers as part of the aqueduct ambush
Table 1. continued
Guess
force at Naples. An Isaurian, because his brother,
Tarmutus, is explicitly identified as Isaurian. In 537
he was sent in command of some Isaurians to Milan,
under the overall command of Mundilas. He was in
Milan when it was captured, but his fate is not
recorded. PLRE, 3:441.
Florentius Roman Thracian Y Cavalry Officer 530 Wars 1.15.15 Thracian in charge of a detachment of cavalry in
Armenia. He was killed after valorously seizing the
Persians’ battle standard. He was possibly a tribunus
(numeri equitum). Florentius 1 in PLRE, 3:488.
George Roman Cappadocian Y Bodyguard 537 Wars 5.29.20 A Cappadocian and one of the guardsmen of Martinus.
Procopius says he was one of the three most valorous
fighters in battle at the siege of Rome. Georgius 3 in
PLRE, 3:514.
Germanus 1 Roman ? Y General 540 Wars 2.6.9, Nephew of Justin I and cousin of Justinian. Brother
4.16.1, 4.19.1, of Boraides. Father of Justin and Justinian. He was
7.37.24–26, already vir illustris by 519. He was MVM per Thracias
7.39.9, 7.40.6, under Justin (518/527). As MVM Praesentalis he
7.40.9 was sent to quell the mutiny in Africa in 536, with-
drawn in 539. He was sent to Antioch in 540 to
protect the city against Chosroes but not given a
compete army. Remained loyal to Justinian during
Artabanes’s conspiracy in 548. Named as commander-
in-chief of Italian theater in 549, after Justinian had
briefly flirted with the possibility of sending Liberius,
but he died suddenly en route (550). Germanus 4 in
PLRE, 2:505.
Germanus 2 Roman? ? G Officer 530 Wars 1.13.21 A cavalry commander with Belisarius at Dara, he was
stationed on the right wing. Possibly identical to
Germanus the cousin of Justinian, but Procopius does
not say so. Germanus 1 in PLRE, 3:527.
Gezon Roman? ? G Soldier 540 Wars 4.20.12 Infantryman and paymaster (optio) for his unit under
Solomon. He led an attack without direction from the
generals upon the Moors on Mt. Aurasium. Not listed
in the PLRE.
Gilacius Roman Armenian Y General 547 Wars 7.26.24 Commander of a small force of Armenians in the
army of John the nephew of Vitalian, captured and
killed by Goths; did not speak Greek or Latin and so
the Goths were confused as to his identity. He only
could say his name and title in Greek or Latin. He was
perhaps MVM vacans. PLRE, 3:536.
Gudilas Roman Thracian Y Bodyguard 547–48 Wars 7.30.6–20 A guardsman of John, the nephew of Vitalian and
(Doruphoros) a Thracian. Commander of garrison of 300 Illyrian
cavalrymen at Rusciane along with Chalazar the
guardsman. The name is ancient Thracian, see
Dechev, Die thrakischen Sprachreste, p. 249. Godilas
2 in PLRE, 3:540.
Herodian Roman? ? G Commander 535 Wars 5.5.3, Commander of Infantry in the army of Belisarius in
5.14.1, 6.16.21, the invasion of Italy, commanded garrison of Naples
7.1.1, 7.6.10, (300 infantry) in 536, sailed with Ildiger to Ariminum
7.12.14, in 538, returned with Belisarius to Constantinople in
7.21.15–16; 540. He was sent back to Italy in 543 as commander
Anec. 5.5 of some Thracians; as the garrison commander of
Spolitium he surrendered the city to Totila in 546.
In the Anecdota, Procopius alleges that Herodian
defected because Belisarius kept demanding money
from him. He became a Gothic officer and was called
a friend by Totila to the Roman senate in 547. He was
present in Cumae when the Romans captured it in
552. Herodianus 1 in PLRE, 3:593.
Table 1. continued
Guess
Himerius 1 Roman Thracian Y Commander 544 Wars 4.23.3; Commander of the troops in Byzacium in 543/4 (dux
Corippus Byzacenae), ordered to join John the son of Sisiniolus
Ioh. 4.8–65 at that time with his troops, but was captured by the
Moors en route. He was forced to make Hadrumetum
surrender to the Moors, but he then personally
escaped and fled to Carthage. A native of Thrace.
Possibly identical with Himerius 2. Himerius 1 in
PLRE, 3:599.
Himerius 2 Roman? ? G Commander 550 Wars 7.37.20, In 550 he was the co-commander of garrison at
7.39.5 Rhegium with Thurimuth; they surrendered the city
to the Goths. Possibly identical with Himerius 1.
Himerius 2 in PLRE, 3:600.
Hypatius Roman Dyrrachium? Y General 527 Wars 1.11.24; The patrician Hypatius, nephew of Anastasius,
Malalas 17.20, served as MVM per Thracias and Praesentalis under
p. 243, 18.34, that emperor. Under Justin and Justinian was Magister
p. 260 militum per Orientem (520–25, 527–29) until
replaced by Belisarius in 529. He was frequently
suspected of disloyalty by Justin and Justinian (e.g.,
Wars 1.11.39). Proclaimed as emperor during Nika
riot, captured and executed afterward. Anastasius was
a native of Dyrrachium in Epirus, so perhaps
Hypatius was as well. Hypatius 6 in PLRE, 2:577.
Ildiger Roman Germanic? G Commander 534 Wars 2.24.13, Son-in-law of Antonina, sent to Africa with
4.8.24, 4.15.49, Theodorus the Cappadocian in 534 to assist
4.17.6, 6.7.15, Solomon in putting down the Moorish uprising
7.1.1 (possibly as MVM vacans), left in charge of Carthage
by Belisarius in 536 with Theodorus, came to Italy in
command of some cavalry in 537, led small expedi-
tion that sailed to Ariminum in late 537, commanded
a division of Germanus’s army in the battle against
Stotzas, returned with Belisarius to Constantinople in
540. He was on the eastern front by 543, where he was
a commander under Martinus 2, possibly as dux (in
Phoenice Libanensis) or MVM vacans. Name is
Germanic, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 145. Despite
Germanic name, he is treated as a Roman, probably
because of his marriage alliance. Ildiger in PLRE,
3:615.
Innocentius Roman? ? G Commander 535 Wars 5.5.3, Commander of regular cavalry in the army of
5.17.17, Belisarius in the invasion of Italy; some of his troops
7.15.1–7 (idenitified as barbarians) deserted to Vitigis in 537;
commander of the garrison at Rome’s port in 546;
while he was in this position another of his soldiers
deserted to the Goths—to Totila. The man was cursed
with unreliable subordinates. Innocentius 1 in PLRE,
3:621.
Irenaeus Roman Syrian Y General 528 Wars 1.12.14–15; Magister Militum (MVM vacans) sent by Justinian
Malalas 18.4, in 528 to oppose the Persians in Lazica along with
p. 246, 18.35, Gilderic and Cerycus, dismissed after failed cam-
p. 261; Anec. paign. He was a native of Antioch. Appointed dux
29.16 Palaestinae (replaced Theodorus) in 530 to crush a
Samaritan revolt. Perhaps the same man whose
property was seized by Justinian after his death.
Irenaeus 7 in PLRE, 2:625.
John 01 Roman ? S Commander 523 Wars 1.17.44 Son of Lucas, captured by the Saracen Alamoundaras
and then ransomed in 524. He was a commander of
some type, either dux or comes rei militaris. John 70
in PLRE, 2:611.
John 02 Roman ? Y Comes 528 Wars 2.7.15; An honorary consul appointed comes of the Straits
the son Malalas 18.14, of the Pontic Sea (comes angustiarum pontici maris)
of Rufinus p. 250 and dispatched to Hieron with a force of Goths to
oppose the Huns. He was the son of Rufinus 13
(PLRE 2) and therefore the grandson of John the
Table 1. continued
Guess
Scythian and of Silvanus. Therefore of an old Roman
family. He was also an honorary consul. In 540 he was
an envoy to Chosroes along with Julian. John 7 in
PLRE, 3:625.
John 03 Roman? ? G Bodyguard 534 Wars 4.5.6 Guardsman of Belisarius, sent to Septem to capture
(Upaspistos) the fort there in 534. Possibly remained there as
tribunus. John 12 in PLRE, 3:635.
John 04 Roman Armenian Y Optio 533 Wars 3.17.1, Optio of Belisarius’s household, in charge of his
(of Belisarius) 4.2.2, 4.4.15 finances, he was given command of 300 men in
Africa and sent ahead of the main army as a scouting
force; they defeated Ammatas and many Vandals.
Again in command of all the cavalry in late 533
before the final battle with Gelimer, during the final
battle he commanded the center with Belisarius. After
he was charged with pursuing Gelimer but was killed
in Dec. 533 by accidental arrow shot by Uliaris. His
death was greatly mourned. He was an Armenian.
John 14 in PLRE, 3:635.
John 05 Roman Thracian? S Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5–15, Commander of the federates in invasion of Africa.
4.3.4 Possibly Thracian because of Wars 3.11.10–11. With
other commanders of the federates he held the left
wing at the final battle against Gelimer in 533.
Possibly identical with John Troglita, although
Procopius does not suggest this. John 15 in PLRE,
3:636.
John 06 Roman Dyrrachhian Y General 533 Wars 3.11.5–15, A native of Dyrrachium, Supreme Commander of
4.5.5, 4.16.2 the Regular infantry in invasion of Africa. Sent to
Caesarea in Mauritania with infantry to capture it in
534. Died of illness in 536. He probably held the rank
of MVM vacans. John 16 in PLRE, 3:636.
John 07 Tzibus Roman? ? G General 535 Wars 2.15.9, “A man of obscure and ignoble descent.” Sent to
2.17.4 Lazica as an officer (archon) of some sort, he super-
vised the construction of Petra and was based there
(535–41). He was killed when Chosroes besieged the
city. Despite his humble origins he attained the rank
of MVM vacans. John 20 Tzibus in PLRE, 3:638.
John 08 Roman? ? G Soldier 537 Wars 1.26.5; An infantryman (not clear whether he was an officer
Cottistis Marcellinus or ranker) serving at Dara who usurped power in the
p. 47 15 city and set himself up as its tyrant before he was
toppled by a group of citizens. John Cottistis 24 in
PLRE, 3:639.
John 09 Roman? ? G Commander 539 Wars 4.19.1, The son of Sisiniolus. Sent with Solomon on his
4.22.3, second trip to Africa as commander (MVM vacans
4.24.6–14 or comes rei militaris). He was hostile to the gover-
norship of Sergius in 543 and in 544 was ordered by
Areobindus to attack the Moors; he killed Stotzas but
then was subsequently killed himself. Justinian
lamented his passing. John 27 in PLRE, 3:640.
John 10 Roman? ? G Commander 530 Wars 1.13.21, Son of Nicetas, Commander of cavalry at Dara in 530.
2.19.36, 2.24.15 In 541, one of Belisarius’s staff officers (archontes) in
the Sisauranon campaign—his speech convinced
Belisarius to retreat back to Roman territory. After
Belisarius went to Italy, he served under Martinus in
543. John 32 in PLRE, 3:642.
John 11 Roman? ? G Mutineer 545 Wars 4.25.3, Called the tyrant and “Stotzas Junior,” he was elected
Stotzas Junior 4.27.25 the commander of the mutineers formerly led by
Stotzas after the latter’s death in 545. He linked up
with Gontharis in 545/6 and marched as a part of his
army. He was killed by order of Justinian after his
surrender in 547. He was presumably a Roman
soldier, probably even at least a junior officer, before
Table 1. continued
Guess
the mutiny, in order for him to be a mutineer. There
exists at least the possibility that he was related to
Stotzas as either a son or a nephew, although PLRE
suggests that he only held his nickname “Stotzas
Junior” because he was Stotzas’s successor. John 35
in PLRE, 3:643.
John 12 Troglita Roman Thracian Y General 533- Wars 2.14.12, Son of Evanthes, father of Petrus, brother of Pappus.
552 4.17.6, 4.28.45, Most likely a Thracian (perhaps from Trogilos in
8.17.20, 8.24.33 Macedonia). He served under Belisarius in Africa,
was a regional dux and a commander of a cavalry
division in Africa under Germanus (534–37), com-
mander of the troops in Mesopotamia (as dux Meso-
potamiae) in 541–45, MVM Per Africam 546–52,
allied with Cutzinas and defeated Moorish chieftains
in several battles. Corippus wrote his panegyric. He
apparently became a patrician after 548. John 36
Troglita in PLRE, 3:644.
John 13 Guzes Roman Armenian Y Commander 549 Wars 2.30.4, Son of Thomas 1 Guzes and an Armenian. He was a
8.8.15, 8.8.38, commander at Petra in Lazica in 549 under Dagist-
8.11.64 haeus, commander of Roman cavalry in Dagisthaeus’s
Roman/Lazi army of 551, killed an Alani champion
in battle in 551, fought conspiciously for Bessas in the
siege of Petra in 551 but was killed when a stone was
thrown down on his head from above. John 44 Guzes
in PLRE, 3:651.
John 14 Roman ? S General 537 Wars 6.5.1, The nephew of Vitalian the rebel. As an MVM vacans
of Vitalian 6.10.8–10, (537–49), he was dispatched in command of 800
6.21.23, 6.30.2, Thracian horsemen to reinforce Belisarius in Italy
7.6.8, 7.13.20, while he was penned up in Rome; won great fame for
7.26.1–14, capturing Ariminum in 538 and thus raising the siege
7.39.10, 8.23.7, of Rome; refused to march to relieve Milan unless
8.26.24; Aga. Narses ordered him to do so; put in command of
1.11.3 Italian theater with Bessas when Belisarius was
withdrawn in 540; holed up in Rome in 543. After
marrying the daughter of Germanus he brought rein-
forcements to Belisarius in 546; rescued captured
senators from Campania in 548. Appointed MVM
per Illyrici by 549/550 and ordered to join Germanus
in his invasion of Italy in 549, moved across Adriatic
to raise the siege of Ancona in 551 against imperial
orders; marched with Narses in 552/3; sent on expe-
dition with Phulcaris the Herul in 553. Nothing fur-
ther is recorded of him. May be identical with PLRE
John 71 or 72. John 46 in PLRE, 3:652.
John 15 Roman? ? G Commander 539 Wars 2.29.15, Called “the Glutton,” in 539 he apparently commanded
the Glutton 2.24.15, 6.23.3, his own small army and was sent with Martinus and
7.13.23, John the nephew of Vitalian to the Po River; in 541 he
7.40.34, was a member of Belisarius’s bucellarii put in com-
8.26.13; mand of 1,200 soldiers and sent with Arethas to fight
Anec. 4.4 in Syria. He and Peter tattled on Belisarius in 542,
resulting in his temporary disgrace. He tellingly did
not serve with Belisarius again. After Belisarius
went to Italy, he served under Martinus in 543 as a
commander, was sent with Narses to the Heruli in
546, was sent under Scholasticus to fight the Slavs in
551, joined Narses’s expedition of 552 in command of
a large force of “Roman” soldiers and fought at Busta
Gallorum. John 64 in PLRE, 3:665.
Joseph Roman ? S Chartularius of 536 Wars 4.15.7 He was formerly the “secretary of the bodyguards of
the Excubitores the emperor” but by this time was a member of
Belisarius’s household. In Carthage on a mission from
Belisarius. He was not of humble birth, so presumably
Roman. An ambiguous position. He was sent to
Stotzas by Theodorus the Cappadocian in 536 to
Table 1. continued
Guess
warn the mutineer not to approach Carthage. Stotzas
promptly killed him. PLRE speculates that he was
perhaps chartularius of the excubitores prior to
employment by Belisarius. Iosephius I in PLRE,3:714.
Justinian Roman ? Y General 551 Wars 7.40.10, The son of Germanus and brother of Justin, com-
8.25.1–11; manded to go to Italy in his father’s place in 551, with
Theophylact his brother Justin he commanded an army against
3.12.6; the Slavs in 552, then their army was turned against
Menander, frag. the Gepids in late 552. He was a patrician by 572,
18.6, p. 167; when he was appointed MVM per Armeniam. In 574
John of Epi, he was appointed MVM per Orientem by Tiberius. A
frag. 5 (4.276) defeat in 577 led to his dismissal. He was replaced by
Maurice. Iustinianus 3 in PLRE, 3:744.
Justinus 1 Roman? ? G General 536 Wars 6.13.17, MVM Per Illyricum (536–38), arrived in Italy with
6.21.16, Narses the Eunuch to reinforce Belisarius in 537/8
6.23.2, 7.5.1-4, (interesting, Procopius’s language makes it seem that
7.13.19, 8.28.4 Narses is Justinus’s superior). After 538 he reverted to
MVM vacans, which he probably held until 552.
Refused to march for relief of Milan unless Narses
ordered him to do so, sent with Cyprian to Fisula in
539, garrison commander of Florence 541–43, fled
ignominiously at battle of Florence in 542, given
command of the garrison of Ravenna in 546, again
(or still?) was garrison commander at Ravenna in 552
when Narses arrived. Not recorded again. Iustinus 2
in PLRE, 3:748.
Justinus 2 Roman ? Y General 551 Wars The son of Germanus, the brother of Justinian
7.32.14–15, and the cousin of Justin II, consul in 540, in 549 he
7.40.34, helped to reveal the plot of Arsaces and Chanaranges;
8.25.1–11; sent under Scholasticus to fight the Slavs in 551;
Aga. 2.18.8, with his brother Justinian he commanded an army
4.21.1–4; against the Slavs in 552, then their army was turned
Theoph. against the Gepids in late 552; in command against
AM 6063 Persians in Lazica with Bessas, Martin, and Bouzes,
made general of all forces operating in Lazica and
Armenia in 557 (as MVM per Armeniam). He served
on the Danube, possibly as Quaestor Iustinianus
Exercitus (561–65). He was murdered in 566 by Justin
II, because he was seen as too popular for safety. He
may have been the dux et Augustalis Alexandriae at
the time of his murder. Fl. Mar. Petrus Theodorus
Valentinus Rusticus Boraides Germanus Iustinus 4
in PLRE, 3:750.
Justus Roman Thracian G General 532 Wars 1.24.53, Cousin of Emperor Justinian (brother of Boraides and
2.20.20, Germanus), helped to topple Hypatius during the
2.24.15, 2.28.1 Nika riot. Later he was an officer at Hierapolis in 542
during Chosroes’s invasion. After Belisarius went to
Italy, he served under Martin in 543. Died in 544 of
illness. He had probably been MVM vacans under
Belisarius and Martin. Iustus 2 in PLRE, 3:758.
Lazarus Roman? ? G Commander 549 Wars 7.35.22 Commander of some Roman troops in Venetia,
defeated by Ildiges the Lombard in coordination with
the Goths. Lazarus 2 in PLRE, 3:767.
Leonianus Roman? ? G Commander 552 Wars 8.27.13 A commander in Illyricum, sent to track down Ildisgal
in 552, with the other commanders of the expedition
he was slain in ambush by him. PLRE, 3:772.
Libelarius Roman Thracian Y General 527 Wars 1.12.23 A Thracian, in 525 he was dux Osrhoenae; by 527 he
was MVM per Orientem and was sent by Justin to
invade the region around Nisibis with an army. His
failure to mount a successful invasion led to the
termination of his command and the appointment
of Belisarius as dux Meosopotamiae. Libelarius in
PLRE, 2:675.
Table 1. continued
Guess
Liberius Roman Roman Y General 538 Wars 7.36.6, A patrician from Rome who had a long career. He
7.37.26, 7.39.6; served Odovacer and Theoderic. He was PPO
Anec. 27.17 Italiae (493–500), a patrician by 500, PPO Galliarum
(510–34). In 538 he was appointed governor (prefect)
of Alexandria, replacing Rhodon. He quarreled with
John Laxarion over who was to have the office, and
John was killed, after which he was recalled to Con-
stantinople. Justinian named him overall commander
in Italy in 549 after Belisarius returned to Constan-
tinople. Proceeded to Sicily, but because he was old
and inactive Justinian almost immediately reconsid-
ered and relieved him of command. In 552 when he
was more than eighty-five years old, he was appointed
to the command of Byzantine forces in Spain. He
lived on until at least 554. Petrus Marcellinus Felix
Liberius 3 in PLRE, 2:677.
Longinus Roman Isaurian Y Officer / 531 Wars 1.18.7, An Isaurian, in 531 he was the commander of 2,000
Bodyguard 6.10.19 Isaurians at Callinicum; in 538 he was a guardsman
(Doruphoros) of Belisarius and was killed in Italy in an engagement
with the Goths near Rome. He was either co-opted
into the guards of Belisarius after 531 or already was a
guardsman in 531—Procopius’s phrasing is not clear.
Longinus 1 in PLRE, 3:795.
Magnus Roman? ? G Commander 535 Wars 5.5.3, Commander of cavalry in the army of Belisarius in
5.10.1, 6.4.7, the invasion of Italy and a comes, commanded 400
6.28.1, 7.11.19 soldiers as part of the aqueduct ambush force at
Naples, sent to Tibur in 537 during the siege of Rome
with 500 troops, guarded the Po in 539, in 544 was in
command of the garrison at Auximus. His fate is not
recorded. Magnus 1 in PLRE, 3:804.
Marcellus 1 Roman Thracian? S Commander 530 Wars 1.13.21, Commander of cavalry at Dara in 530, commander
3.11.5–15, of the federates in invasion of Africa (533). Possibly
4.15.50 Thracian because of Wars 3.11.10–11. With other
commanders of the federates he commanded the left
wing in the final battle against Gelimer. Commander
of the federates and overall commander in chief
against Stotzas in Numidia in 536, murdered by
Stotzas after the soldiers deserted to him. His position
was probably dux Numidiae. Marcellus 2 in PLRE,
3:814.
Marcellus 2 Roman? ? G Comes 549 Wars 1.25.24, He was a iudex pedaneus in 539 and a close asssociate
Excubitorum 7.32.22, of Justinian, made comes in 540, comes excubitorum
7.32.48–51; 541–52, was devoted to justice, relieved Belisarius in
Marcellinus 540 in Italy. In 541 he was sent by Theodora to spy on
p. 49 3 John the Cappadocian. In 549 he helped to expose
the conspiracy of Artabanes with the help of Germa-
nus; after the conspiracy was in the open he defended
Germanus despite Justinian’s conviction that his
cousin was guilty; honorary consul 552. He is
Marcellus 3 in PLRE, 3:815.
Marcellus 3 Roman ? Y General 544 Wars 2.28.2; Nephew of Emperor Justinian, brother of Justin II,
Malalas 18.132, appointed a commander in Martinus’s army in 544
p. 299; Theoph. (probably as MVM vacans), much later (562) dis-
AM 6054; patched to rescue the city of Obaisipolois, still with
Corippus Iust. the rank of magister militum (either vacans or per
2.287 Thracias). He was a patrician by 565. Possibly dead by
582, but it is not clear. Marcellus 5 in PLRE, 3:816.
Marcentius Roman? ? G Commander 537 Wars 4.27.5, Commander with Alexander of 1,000 regular cavalry,
6.5.1; Corippus dispatched to Italy in 537 to reinforce Belisarius when
Ioh. 4.532–40 he was penned up in Rome. Commander of the
troops in Byzacium in 545 (probably as dux Byzace-
nae), initially fled when Areobindus was killed but
returned to Antalas the Moor shortly thereafter. He
subsequently served under John Troglita until at least
546/7. Marcentius in PLRE, 3:818.
Table 1. continued
Guess
Marcian Roman Thracian? S Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5–15 Commander of the regular infantry in invasion of
Africa, probably Thracian because of Wars 3.11.10–11.
He is not mentioned again. Marcianus 2 in PLRE,
3:820.
Martinianus Roman Byzantium Y Soldier 547 Wars 7.23.1–7 From Constantinople, a soldier from the company of
Conon who fled the fall of Rome in 547, pretended
to desert to Totila in 547, organized some of the
soldiers in Totila’s army, slaughtered the garrison of
Spolitium and let in the Byzantines. PLRE does not
give him a position, merely identifying him as a
“young man in Italy,” but he was clearly a soldier of
some kind. Martinianus 1 in PLRE, 3:838.
Martinus Roman Thracian Y General 531 Wars 1.21.27, A Thracian. A hostage given to Persians (531),
2.13.16, 2.24.13; general at Dara in 541, MVM per Orientem (543),
Anec. 4.13; commander of the federates in invasion of Africa
Wars 3.11.5–15, (533), fled the African mutiny with Solomon in 536,
4.14.39, 5.24.18, sent to Italy to reinforce Belisarius in 536 (at this
6.21.13, 7.1.1, time he was elevated to the rank of MVM), Belisarius
8.17.12; Aga. sent him to break the siege of Milan, returned with
2.18.8, 3.2.8 Belisarius to Constantinople in 540, present in Lazica
in 552, in command against Persians along with
Bessas and Bouzes in 554; in late 554 he was put in
supreme command in Lazica after dismissal of Bessas
(as MVM per Armeniam, 555–56), dismissed from
this command in 557. At this point he was barred from
holding future offices. Martinus 2 in PLRE, 3:839.
Maxentiolus Roman? ? G Bodyguard 537 Wars 6.8.3 A guardsman of Constantinus, sent by him to steal
(Upaspistos) daggers from Presidius, a citizen of Ravenna. PLRE,
3:864.
Maxentius Roman? ? G Bodyguard 537 Wars 5.18.14 Guardsman of Belisarius, slain in the siege of Rome
(Doruphoros) while protecting Belisarius in combat; Procopius says
he fought valorously. Maxentius 1 in PLRE, 3:864.
Maximinus Roman? ? G Bodyguard 537/ Wars 4.18.1, Bodyguard of Theodorus the Cappadocian and then
(Doruphoros) 539 4.18.18 later Germanus, he plotted to form his own tyranny,
but the plot was discovered by Germanus, who
impaled him. Maximinus 1 in PLRE, 3:865.
Meligedius Roman? ? G Soldier 552 Wars 8.33.10 Soldier of the Gothic army, had previously defected
from Byzantine army; one of the commanders at
Perusia in 552, decided to surrender Perusia to
Narses after Busta Gallorum and killed Ulifus in
order to do so. PLRE, 3:872.
Mindes Roman Isaurian Y Soldier 549 Wars 7.36.26 An Isaurian and one of the cavalrymen in Paulus’s
force of 400 in Rome in 549, chose with that Paulus
to return to Byzantium rather than serve Totila. Not
listed in the PLRE.
Nazares Roman Illyrian Y Commander 544 Wars 7.11.18, Procopius describes him as an Illyrian by birth and
7.40.34 the “commander (archon) of the troops in Illryicum,”
although just before he had identified Vitalius as
MVM per Illyricum. Perhaps Nazares is a subordinate
officer of Vitalius. PLRE speculates he was either dux
or comes rei militaris per Illyricum. In 544 he fought
with valor at the battle at Bononia, sent under
Scholasticus to fight Slavs in 551. Nazares 1 in
PLRE, 3:936.
Odonachus Roman? ? G Commander 550 Wars 8.9.5, An officer in the army sent to Lazica in 550 with
8.13.8 Bessas, in command of the garrison at Archaeopolis
with Babas in 551, repulsed Mermeroes by means of
a sally from his attack on the city in that year. Possibly
identical with Adonachus. PLRE, 3:951.
Palladius Roman? ? G Commander 552 Wars 8.25.24; Commanded garrison of Croton in 552, threatened
Aga. 1.9.4 that he was near surrender. A commander (taxiarchos,
possibly comes rei militaris) of Narses during his
Table 1. continued
Guess
later campaign in Italy after this, late 552, especially
esteemed by him, “a leading figure in the Roman
army,” killed by Aligern the Goth at Cumae. Palladius
2 in PLRE, 3:961.
Pappus Roman Thracian? S Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5–15, Brother of John Troglita, in 533 he was a commander
4.3.4; Corippus of the Regular Cavalry in the invasion of Africa,
Ioh. 1.392 commanded right wing in final battle against
Gelimer. Probably a native of Thrace because of Wars
3.11.10. He apparently died young of natural causes.
PLRE, 3:966.
Pasiphilus Roman? ? G Mutineer 545 Wars 4.27.21, An officer who was “foremost among the mutineers
4.28.39 of Byzacium,” and a confidant of Gontharis, who
urged Gontharis to force Areobindus’s widow to write
a letter to Justinian. Killed shortly after Gontharis was
killed. As a mutineer he was presumably originally a
Roman soldier or junior officer. Pasiphilus in PLRE,
3:969.
Paucaris Roman Isaurian Y Bodyguard 536 Wars 5.9.17 Guardsman of Belisarius, an Isaurian, reported the
(Upaspistos) Unnamed Isaurian’s plan to capture Naples through
the aqueduct to Belisarius. PLRE, 3:972.
Paulus 1 Roman? ? G Commander 535 Wars 5.5.3, Commander of Infantry in the army of Belisarius in
5.23.2 the invasion of Italy; in 536/7 he was in command of
the Pancratian Gate of Rome during Wittigis’s siege of
the city. Possibly a comes. Paulus 4 in PLRE, 3:975.
Paulus 2 Roman? ? G General 537 Wars 6.5.1, General with Conon in command of 3,000 Isaurians,
6.7.16; dispatched to reinforce Belisarius in Italy while he
Marcellinus was penned up in Rome. Occupied Ostia. He was a
538, p. 47 vir illustris and therefore possibly a MVM vacans.
Paulus 5 in PLRE, 3:976.
Paulus 3 Roman? ? G Commander 538 Wars 6.12.27; In spring 538 he was sent in command of some
Marcellinus Thracians to Milan, under the overall command of
539, p. 48 Mundilas. When Milan fell, he and Mundilas were
carried away captive to Milan. He was a commander
of some sort. Possibly identical with PLRE Paulus 4 or
5, either commander of infantry or commander of
reinforcments. Paulus 7 in PLRE, 3:976.
Paulus 4 Roman Cilician Y Officer 549 Wars 7.36.16 Former head of household of Belisarius, in command
of a regular cavalry unit in Roman garrison in 549,
planned to fight Totila bravely with his 400 horsemen
when besieged in a tower but accepted Totila’s offer to
leave peacefully for Constantinople. Possibly identical
with PLRE Paulus 18, a suboptio of Belisarius. Paulus
13 in PLRE, 3:978.
Paulus 5 Roman? ? G Bodyguard 552 Wars 8.29.22–28 An infantryman who showed great valor in defending
(Upaspistos) a hilltop at the battle of Busta Gallorum, mentioned
as especially capable, made a guardsman of Narses
after the battle in recognition of his bravery. Paulus
16 in PLRE, 3:978.
Petrus 1 Roman? ? G Commander 531 Wars 1.18.6 Former bodyguard (doruphoros) of Justinian and the
commander of infantry in the army of the East in 531
at the time of the Battle of Callinicum. Whether he
survived the batle is not clear. Petrus 2 in PLRE, 3:993.
Petrus 2 Roman Thracian Y Bodyguard 545 Wars 4.28.3 A Thracian and a former guardsman of Solomon, in
(Doruphoros) 546 he was among the mutineers of Gontharis; he
cheered on Artasires and was glad to see Gontharis
killed. Petrus 7 in PLRE, 3:998.
Phocas Roman? ? G Bodyguard 546 Wars 7.15.1–8 Guardsman of Belisarius, an exceptionally able
(Doruphoros) warrior, sent to Rome’s port with Valentinus in 546,
killed making a sally out of it shortly thereafter.
Phocas 2 in PLRE, 3:1029.
Table 1. continued
Guess
Pompeius Roman ? S Patrician 528 Wars 1.24.19; Nephew of Anastasius, served in a variety of capaci-
Malalas ties in his reign. Consul in 501, general in Thrace in
18.26, p. 256; 517. In 528, one of four senators apparently deputized
Chron. Pasch. by Justinian to defend the cities of the East against
532, p. 624 Persian attack with makeshift forces after the defeat of
the eastern army. Possibly MVM vacans. No set
destination for Pompeius, but he was given a large
force of Illyrians, Scyhtians, Isaurians, and Thracians.
In 532 he was deeply implicated in Hypatius’s
proclamation during the Nika riot and was executed
afterward. Pompeius 2 in PLRE, 2:898.
Principius Roman Pisidian Y Bodyguard 537 Wars 5.28.23, A guardsman of Belisarius, present with him at the
(Doruphoros) 5.29.39 siege of Rome in 537, he with Tarmutus was eager to
fight with the infantry against Goths. He died in this
battle after fighting gloriously. He was a native of
Pisidia. Principius 1 in PLRE, 3:1050.
Rhecithancus Roman Thracian Y Commander 541 Wars 2.16.17, A native of Thrace. Commander of troops in Lebanon
2.30.29, 8.27.13 (with Theoctistus) and therefor probably a dux (in
Phoenice Libanensis, at either Damascus or Palmyra),
who opposed Belisarius’s invasion of Mesopotamia in
541 but was persuaded to go along anyway. Sent to
Lazica with an army in 549. He was sent to track
down Ildisgal in Illyricum in 552, and with the other
commanders was slain in ambush by Ildisgal’s men.
Rhecithangus in PLRE, 3:1084.
Rufinus 1 Roman Thracian Y Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5–15, A native of Thrace. Commander of the Regular
4.10.3–11 Cavalry in the invasion of Africa. Described as a
member of Belisarius’s household who typically
carried his standard. Remained in Africa after
Belisarius’s departure to serve Solomon and was
killed by the Moors in battle in 534/5. Rufinus 1 in
PLRE, 3:1097.
Sabinianus Roman? ? G Bodyguard 544 Wars 7.11.19, Guardsman of Belisarius, in 545 sent to Auximus in
(Doruphoros) 7.11.34 command of 1,000 troops with Ricilas and Thuri-
muth. With Thurimuth he later occupied Pisaurum.
PLRE, 3:1105.
Sarapis Roman Egyptian? G Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5–15, Commander of the regular infantry in invasion of
4.15.50 Africa, evidently remained in Africa, commanded the
infantry against Stotzas in Numidia in 536, murdered
by Stotzas after the soldiers deserted to him. Possibly
an Egyptian, judging from the name. PLRE, 3:1114.
Scholasticus Roman? ? G General 551 Wars 7.40.34 A eunuch of the palace, placed in overall command
of an army sent to fight Slavs in 551, one of the
cubicularii. He was assisted by Aratius, Justin, and
Nazares, among others. His exactly military position
is not clear, but authority over these other commanders
perhaps indicates he was an MVM. Scholasticus 1 in
PLRE, 3:1117.
Senecius Roman? ? G Bodyguard 531 Wars 1.21.27 Hostage given to Persians (531), a bodyguard of
(Doruphoros) Sittas. A possible Roman as a bucellarii of a non-
Roman. PLRE, 3:1121.
Sergius Roman Mesopotamian Y General 543 Wars 4.21.1, The son of Bacchus and therefore nephew of Solomon
4.22.1, 4.24.16, 1, brother of Solomon 2 and Cyrus. A Mesopotamian
7.27.2; Anec. from around Dara. He was a general sent to Tripolis
5.28–33; Aga. in Africa in 543 (as dux limitis Tripolitanae Provin-
5.23.8 ciae). His botched treatment of Moorish envoys
resulted in a war with the Moors. He became governor
of Africa (both MVM vacans and PPO Africae) after
Solomon’s death in 543, was recalled in 545, served in
Italy under Belisarius in 547 (presumably still as
MVM vacans); he was captured by the Cotrigurs in
their invasion of 559 and ransomed with other
Table 1. continued
Guess
prisoners by Justinian. Procopius describes him with
disdain. Sergius 4 in PLRE, 3:1124.
Severianus Roman Phoenician Y Commander 544 Wars 4.23.6 A Phoenician from Emesa (Homs, Syria). Com-
mander of a body of cavalry in the troops of Hime-
rius, the dux of Byzacium. He was the son of Asiaticus.
Captured by Moors in battle. He later escaped and
returned to Carthage. PLRE, 3:1138.
Solomon 1 Roman Mesopotamian Y General 533 Wars 3.11.5–15, Hailed from Idriphthon, a fortress near Dara. Brother
3.24.19, 4.8.23, of Bacchus, uncle of Cyrus 3, Sergius 4 and Solomon
4.11.47, 4.19.1, 2, he was Belisarius’s domesticus (from as early as
4.21.28; 527) and a commander of the federates in invasion
Marcellinus of Africa (533), sent to Constantinople to announce
p. 45 13; the victory over Gelimer, put in charge of Africa in
Corippus Ioh. 534 (as MVM vacans), won a battle against the
3.417–41 Moors in 534, became PPO Africae in 535, driven out
of Africa by mutiny in 536, returned for a second tou
in command of Africa in 539, killed in battle in 543
by the Moors. He was a eunuch (by accident as a
baby) and a patrician. Solomon 1 in PLRE, 3:1167.
Solomon 2 Roman Mesopotamian Y Commander? 543 Wars 4.21.19, Nephew of Solomon 1, brother of Sergius 4, fought
4.22.12ff.; with Solomon 1 and his other nephews against the
Anec. 5.33–38 Moors in Africa in 543. It is possible he did not have
an official position but was instead present as a mem-
ber of Solomon’s household. Captured by the Moors
but ransomed back. Tricked the Moors by pretending
to be a Vandal slave. Killed Pegasius who had saved
him from the Moors, but was pardoned by Justinian,
and then died on his way to the East. Solomon 2 in
PLRE, 3:1177.
Stephanacius Roman? Isaurian? G Commander 531 Wars 1.18.7; Commander of 2,000 Isaurians with Longinus at the
Malalas 463 battle of Callinicum. Possibly an Isaurian himself
since he commanded Isaurians and his co-commander,
Longinus, was an Isaurian. Malalas suggests he might
have actually instead been one of Belisarius’s guards-
men. PLRE, 3:1183.
Stotzas Roman ? Y Bodyguard 533 Wars 3.11.30, Guardsman of Martinus, traveled with him to Africa
(Doruphoros) 4.15.1; Aga. in 533. Revolted and was elected leader of mutineers
Preface 25 in Africa in 536. Killed in battle in 545. The name
could be Armenian—Agathias notes that he was
Roman. PLRE, 3:1199.
Summus Roman Palestine Y Commander 538 Wars 2.1.9 A native of Palestine. A former commander of the
troops in Syria (dux Syriae, 526) and Palestine (dux
Palaestinae, 531, 537), and the brother of Julian 8
(PLRE, 3:731) who had served as an ambassador to
the Ethiopians. In 538 he was sent as an ambassador
with Strategius to the Saracens of Alamundaras and
Arethas. PLRE, 2:1038.
Tarmutus Roman Isaurian Y Bodyguard 537 Wars 5.28.23, An Isaurian and the brother of Ennes. A guardsman
(Doruphoros) 5.29.39 of Belisarius, present with him at the siege of Rome in
536, he with Principius was eager to fight with the
infantry against Goths; died of wounds after this
battle in which he fought gloriously. PLRE, 3:1217.
Terentius Roman Thracian? S Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5–15, Commander of the regular infantry in invasion of
4.15.50 Africa. Possibly Thracian because of Wars 3.11.10-11.
Apparently remained in Africa, because in 536 he
commanded infantry against Stotzas in Numidia and
was murdered by Stotzas after the soldiers deserted
to him. PLRE, 3:1221.
Theoctistus Roman? ? G General 540 Wars 2.8.2, Commander of the troops in Lebanon (dux in Phoe-
2.24.13 nice Libanensis) in 540, brought 6,000 of them to
Antioch with Molatzes. He fled when the Persians
breached the walls. In 543 he might still have been
Table 1. continued
Guess
in this position when he joined Martin for a campaign.
By 570, he was MVM per Africam, and was defeated
and killed by the Moors in battle. Theoctistus 2 in
PLRE, 3:1226.
Theodoriscus Roman Cappadocian Y Bodyguard 537 Wars 5.29.20 A Cappadocian and one of the guardsmen of Martinus;
(Doruphoros) Procopius says he was one of the three most valorous
fighters in a set battle at the siege of Rome. PLRE,
3:1243.
Theodorus 1 Roman Thracian? S Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5–15 Commander of the regular infantry in invasion of
Cteanus Africa. Probably Thracian because of Wars 3.11.10–11.
Nickname could be Greek “ktenos” or “the beast.” He
is not mentioned again. Theodorus 6 Cteanus in
PLRE, 3:1246.
Theodorus 2 Roman Cappadocian Y Commander 534 Wars 4.8.24, A Cappadocian. Sent to Africa with Ildiger to assist
the 4.14.32, 4.15.6, Solomon in putting down the Moorish uprising in
Cappadocian 4.15.49, 4.17.6 534 (possibly as MVM vacans). Dispatched by Solo-
mon to try to calm the mutineers in 536. Instead, they
elected him their new general. This apparently did
not stick, for shortly after Theodorus was defending
Carthage from Stotzas and the mutineers. He was left
in charge of Carthage by Belisarius in 536 with Ildiger
and commanded a division of Germanus’s army in
the battle against Stotzas. Theodorus 8 in PLRE,
3:1247.
Theodorus 3 Roman? ? G Comes 535 Wars 4.12.17, The commander of the Excubitors, took part in an
Excubitorum 4.14.35 important battle at Mt. Burgaon under Solomon in
535, and in 536 was killed by the mutineers.
Theodorus 9 in PLRE, 3:1248.
Thomas Guzes Roman Armenian Y General 527 Wars 2.30.4–5 Father of John Guzes and therefore Armenian; MVM
Vacans in Lazica 527–35 where he built strongholds.
Possibly identical with PLRE Thomas 6, who was
comes Armenia Tertiae in 536. Thomas 2 in PLRE,
3:1314.
Timostratus Roman ? S Commander 527 Wars 1.17.44; Brother of Rufinus 13, son of Silvanus 7 (PLRE,
Evagrius 5.10; 2:1011), father of John 87 and Rufinus 7. He was dux
Theophylact Orshoenae 503–6 and dux Mesopotamiae 527. He
5.8.4 was captured by the Saracen Alamoundaras in 523.
Possibly served in the East continuously from 503 to
527. PLRE, 2:1119; also PLRE, 3:1327.
Trajan Roman? ? G Bodyguard 537 Wars 2.19.15, A guardsman of Belisarius, given command of 200
(Doruphoros) 5.27.4, 6.4.6, mounted guardsmen and sent to sally forth against
6.5.9, 6.5.24 the Goths in the siege of Rome of 537; sent to Tara-
cina in 537, again in charge of a sally in 537, wounded
by an arrow striking his face. In 541, he was in the
East with Belisarius and was placed in command of
1,200 soldiers and sent with Arethas to fight in Syria.
Traianus 2 in PLRE, 3:1333.
Ulimuth Roman Thracian Y Bodyguard 538 Wars 6.13.14 A guardsman of Belisarius and a Thracian, he pushed
(Doruphoros) Goths off of the wall at Ancona to save the fortress
from falling. PLRE, 3:1390.
Ursicinus Roman? ? G Commander 535 Wars 5.5.3, Commander of infantry in the army of Belisarius in
5.23.3 the invasion of Italy, commanded the Flaminian Gate
in Rome during Wittigis’s siege of the city in 536/7,
where he was in command of “the Reges,” an infantry
detachment. May have been a comes. Ursicinus 1 in
PLRE, 3:1394.
Valentinus Roman? ? G Commander 535 Wars 5.5.3, Commander of cavalry in the army of Belisarius in
5.28.16, 7.10.6, the invasion of Italy, commanded a detachment of
7.15.8 cavalry in the siege of Rome in 537, a subcommander
in Belisarius’s second campaign in Italy, sent to Dryus
to save it from siege in 544 (after saving it, he
Table 1. continued
Guess
returned to Salona to rejoin Belisarius), killed making
a sally out of Rome’s port in 546. Valentinus 1 in
PLRE, 3:1352.
Valerian Roman Thracian? S General 533 Wars 2.14.8, A Thracian. Commander of the federates in invasion
3.11.5–15, of Africa, he remained in Africa (perhaps as dux
4.14.40, 5.24.18, Numidiae) and Solomon appealed to him during the
7.1.1, 7.27.3, mutiny in 536. Sent to Italy to reinforce Belisarius in
8.23.4, 8.33.2; 536 (as MVM vacans), returned with Belisarius to
Aga. 1.11.3, Constantinople in 540 and was sent to Armenia
2.8.3, 3.20.10 as MVM per Armeniam in 541, recalled from Armenia
and sent to Italy to reinforce Belisarius with his
retainers (1,000) in 548, general at Ravenna in 552
when he moved to relieve the siege of Ancona, sent
on expedition with John Vitalian and Phulcaris in
553, present at Battle of Busta Gallorum, escorted
Lombards home after that battle, present at battle of
Capua in 554; by 556 he was in Lazica, where he
was the commander of “the Eastern Regiments” at
Phasis under overall command of Justiin and Martin,
possibly as MVM per Orientem. He was back in Italy
by 559, where he eventually died at an old age. He was
a patrician. Valerianus 1 in PLRE, 3:1355.
Venilus Roman Thracian Y Commander 551 Wars 8.9.5, Or Benilus, brother of Bouzes and Coutzes, possible
8.13.28 son of Vitalian, and therefore probably a Thracian.
Sent with an army to Lazica with Bessas in 550. His
army retreated from Mermeroes in 551. Benilus in
PLRE, 3:224.
Vitalian Roman Moesian Y General 519 Wars 1.8.3; A native of Zaldaba in Lower Moesia. Possibly of
Anec. 6.27; Gothic descent but surely thoroughly Romanized.
Buildings He was the son of Patriciolus and probably the father
4.11.20; of Cutzes, Buzes, and Benilus. He was the uncle of
Marcellinus p. John 46. He fought in the Persian war of 503. He was
41 12; Malalas comes, perhaps foederatorum, in 513, when he
17.5, p. 231; rebelled against Anastasius. Following reconciliation
Theoph. AM he was MVM per Thracias (514–15), MVM Praesen-
6005 talis (518–20), Consul (520). He was a patrician by at
least 518. He was a firm Chalcedonian. He was mur-
dered by Justin in 520 despite having been given a
pledge by him. Fl. Vitalianus 2 in PLRE, 2:1171.
Vitalius Roman? ? G General 538 Wars 6.22.7, General in the area of Venetia in 539 (as MVM per
6.28.2, 7.1.34, Illyricum). He convinced Heruli not to all go home
7.10.2, 7.11.11 and was called into Italy by Belisarius to guard the
region of the Po in 539; alone among the generals
in Italy he attacked Hildibad in 541 but was badly
defeated; in 545 he returned to Italy with Belisarius,
sent into region of Aemilia in 545, his troops aban-
doned the campaign and return to Illyria when the
Huns threatened the region. Vitalius 1 in PLRE,
3:1380.
Zeno Roman? ? G Commander 537 Wars 6.5.2, Commander of 300 cavalry, dispatched in 537 to
6.7.13 reinforce Belisarius in Italy, possibly as a part of the
1,000 cavalry commanded by Marcentius and
Alexander. He is later in 537 given to the Goths as
hostage during an armistice. His fate is not recorded.
Zeno 2 in PLRE, 3:1418.
Table 2. Non-Roman Soldiers and Officers
Name Ethnic Regional Explicit? Yes, Rank Date Reference Comment (Itinerary, Notable Action, etc.)
Guess
Abocharabus Arab Ghassanid Y Phylarch 528–43 Wars 1.19.8–13 Ruler of the Arabs in the Palmtrees, adjacent to
Palaestina Tertia, he gave his land to Justinian and
was made phylarch of the Arabs of Palestine, probably
in 528 after the death of Arethas the Kindite. He was a
Ghassanid. Still alive by 543. Abocharabus in PLRE, 3:3.
Adegis Germanic? N/A G Bodyguard 537 Wars 6.7.27, An officer in the guard of Belisarius, in command
(Doruphoros) 6.11.22 with Suntas of 800 of Belisarius’s guardsmen in Alba
in Italy, under the overall command of John the
nephew of Vitalian. Rejoined Belisarius at Rome in
538. The name is probably Germanic, as it is similar
to Adelgis, a ninth-century Lombard count. Adegis
in PLRE, 3:15.
Aeschmanus Massagetae N/A Y Bodyguard 537 Wars 5.16.1 A guardsman of Belisarius who was ordered to
(Hun) (Doruphoros) accompany Constantinus into Etruria. On the name,
see Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 11. Aeschmanus
in PLRE, 3:20.
Aigan Massagetae N/A Y Officer 530 Wars 1.13.20, Commander of 600 cavalry at Dara, commander of
(Hun) 3.11.5–15, the regular cavalry in invasion of Africa (533), when
4.3.4, he is also described as belonging to Belisarius’s house-
4.10.3–11 hold (a doruphoros of the guard, presumably). Com-
manded right wing in final battle with Gelimer. Killed
by the Moors in battle 534/5. Aigan in PLRE, 3:32.
Aluith Herulian N/A Y Commander 538 Wars 6.13.18, Commander of 2,000 Herulians in Narses’s reinforce-
6.22.8 ment army sent to Italy, he returned to Constantinople
with Narses in 539. Aluith in PLRE, 3:50.
Amalafridas Goth N/A Y General 552 Wars A grandnephew of Theoderic, son of Herminifred
8.25.11–15 king of the Thuringians, and cousin of Radegundis.
Captured with the Gothic nobility and Vitigis in 540
and taken to Constantinople, where he received a
military command from Justinian. In 552, he was one
of the commanders of an army to fight the Gepids
under the sons of Germanus, in conjunction with the
Lombards, possibly as an MVM. Amalafridas in
PLRE, 3:50.
Anonymous 08 Massagetae N/A Y Cavalryman 533 Wars 3.12.8 Hunnic cavalryman killed by his two fellows at
(Hun) Abydus. Not listed in the PLRE.
Anonymous 09 Massagetae N/A Y Cavalryman 533 Wars 3.12.8 Hunnic cavalryman who slew one of his fellows at
(Hun) Abydus after intemperate drinking, impaled by order
of Belisarius. Not listed in the PLRE.
Anonymous 10 Massagetae N/A Y Cavalryman 533 Wars 3.12.8 Hunnic cavalryman who slew one of his fellows at
(Hun) Abydus after intemperate drinking, impaled by order
of Belisarius. Not listed in the PLRE.
Anonymous 11 Massagetae N/A Y Officer 533 Wars 3.18.13 Officer of a few men, well gifted with courage, who
(Hun) fearlessly faced down an entire contingent of the
Vandal army. Not listed in the PLRE.
Anonymous 12 Moor N/A Y Soldier 539 Wars 6.23.36 Moorish soldier who attempted to drag off an
especially well armored Goth as spoil but got speared
in the calves. Not listed in the PLRE.
Anonymous 13 Slav N/A Y Soldier 539 Wars 6.26.20 Chosen out by Valerian to help Belisarius with a
special task; Sclaveni noted for their skill at ambushes.
Not listed in the PLRE.
Anonymous 14 Herulian N/A Y Cavalryman 540 Wars 2.3.21 Unnamed Herul horseman who accidentally broke
Sittas’s spear, revealing his presence to the Armenians,
who killed Sittas. Not listed in the PLRE.
Anonymous 15 Germanic ? G Officer 548– Wars 2.29.40 The brother of Dagisthaeus and presumably of
549 Germanic extraction like him. Dagisthaeus wanted
his brother to be rewarded for service in Lazica with
him, so presumably this brother also held a command
in the army in Lazica at the time Dagisthaeus cap-
tured Petra. Anonymus 69 in PLRE, 3:1439.
Table 2. continued
Guess
Anonymous 16 Goth N/A Y Bodyguard 551 Wars 8.8.27 A Goth and a guardsman of Artabanes 1, in 551 he
(Upaspistos) slew a Persian who was attacking his master in a
battle in Lazica. Not listed in the PLRE.
Ansilas Goth N/A G Soldier 552 Wars 8.29.22–28 Infantryman who showed great valor in defending a
hilltop at the battle of Busta Gallorum. His name is
Gothic Ansila, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 23. Not
listed in the PLRE.
Aratius Persarmenian N/A Y Commander 526 Wars 1.12.21, Brother of Narses 1 and Isaac. He was a Persian
6.13.17, officer but defected to the Romans in 530 (Wars
7.34.40, 1.15.31), served as dux Palaestinae in 535, served in
7.40.34, 8.19.3, Italy as a subcommander (either comes rei militaris
8.25.11, 8.27.13 or MVM) of Narses 2 in 538, MVM vacans dis-
patched in 549 against the Gepids, in support of the
Lombards, sent under Scholasticus to fight Slavs in
551, sent to the Cutrigurs as an envoy in 552 to
convince them to withdraw, given an army to fight
Gepids in 552 with the sons of Germanus, sent to
chase Ildisgal in 553, slain in ambush by him. See
Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 102 for name. Aratius
in PLRE, 3:103.
Arethas Arab Ghassanid Y Phylarch 528–69 Wars 1.17.47, The ruler of the Ghassanids between 528 and 569,
1.18.7, 2.16.5, a phylarch and a patrician. He fought with Belisarius
8.11.10; Anec. at Callinicum in 531, and again in Belisarius’s Persian
2.23.28; John campaign of 541; he killed Alamundaras the chief of
Eph. 3.6.3 the Lakhmids in 554 and died before 570. He was a
monophysite and championed their cause in the
empire. PLRE, 3:111.
Argek Hun N/A S Bodyguard 544 Wars 2.26.26 A guardsman fighting with a group of Huns at Edessa
(Doruphoros) (possibly bodyguard of Peter, but Martin and Peranius
are also present there), he showed great valor in killing
27 Persians in one battle. For the name, which is
Hunnic, see Maenchen-Helfen, World of the Huns,
p. 413. Not listed in the PLRE.
Arimuth Germanic N/A S Commander 552 Wars 8.27.13 Sent to track down Ildisgal in 552 with Aratius,
Leonianus, and others and slain in ambush. The name
is possibly Germanic, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch,
p. 26. Arimuth in PLRE, 3:116.
Artabanes 1 Persarmenian N/A Y Soldier 551 Wars 8.8.21 A deserter from Persarmenia, joined the Romans in
Armenia under Valerian (possibly as early as
541/547). Valorously killed a Persian champion in
battle in 551 in Lazica, under the command of
Dagisthaeus. Artabanes 1 in PLRE, 3:125.
Artabanes 2 Persarmenian N/A Y General 542 Wars 4.24.2, Son of John of the Arsacidae, brother of John 13.
4.27.9, A Persian deserter who came to Romans (in 542 or
4.28.27–33, 545) after having been responsible for the death of
7.31.10, 7.39.8, Sittas (538), a commander with Areobindus in 544,
8.24.1, 8.25.24; secretly pretended to go along with the rebellion of
Aga. 1.11.3, Gontharis, led revolt against Gontharis, became
2.2.5, 2.8.3 MVM per Africam for a time, was recalled in 548 and
named commander of the foederati, MVM Praesenta-
lis, and consul; he plotted against Justinian in the
late 540s but was forgiven and made MVM per
Thracias in 550 and sent to Sicily, where he was
commander in 551/2. He was in Italy after this, being
sent with John of Vitalian and Phulcaris in 553 to
stop the Franks; later he joined Uldach in an attack
on the Franks near Pisaurum, and after this (554)
rejoined Narses for the battle of Capua. The name is
Armenian; see Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 32.
Artabanes 2 in PLRE, 3:125.
Table 2. continued
Guess
Artasires 1 Persian N/A Y Bodyguard 536 Wars 6.2.10, A Persian and a guardsman of Belisarius; commanded
(Doruphoros) 7.11.37 600 cavalry in sally out of Rome with Bochas and
Cutilas in 536, sent to Rome in 545 with Barbation to
support garrison of Bessas. See Justi, Iranisches
Namenbuch, p. 35. Artasires 1 in PLRE, 3:131.
Artasires 2 Persian N/A S Bodyguard 545 Wars 4.27.10, Guardsman of Artabanes 2, informed of his master’s
(Doruphoros) 4.28.27–33 plan to topple the tyrant Gontharis, killed Gontharis
and Ulitheus in 545. Perhaps Persian like Artasires 1;
see Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 35 on the name.
Artasires 2 in PLRE, 3:132.
Arufus Herulian N/A Y Commander 547 Wars 7.26.24 Commander of the Heruli in the army of John the
nephew of Vitalian during fight with Totila in
Lucania. Possibly identical with Aruth. PLRE, 3:132.
Aruth Herulian N/A Y Commander 552 Wars 8.26.13; A Herul, married daughter of Mauricius the son of
Aga. 1.20.8 Mundus, in command of Heruli, joined Narses in
expedition of 552/3, put forward as a candidate for
leader of all the Heruli in Italy in 553. He was appar-
ently an admirer of Roman ways. Aruth in PLRE,
3:132.
Arzes Persian N/A S Bodyguard 537 Wars 6.2.16 A guardsman (of enlisted rank) of Belisarius, fought
(Upaspistos) in a sally of cavalry during the siege of Rome of 537;
he was shot through the head with an arrow but
continued to fight unimpaired. For the name, see
Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 42. PLRE, 3:133.
Asbadus 1 Germanic N/A S Commander 550 Wars 7.38.4–6 Former guardsman (candidatus) of Justinian, cavalry
commander in Thrace at Tzurullum; his army was
routed by the Slavs and he was captured and soon after
killed by them. The name is Germanic; see Schönfeld,
Wörterbuch, p. 32. Asbadus 1 in PLRE, 3:133.
Asbadus 2 Gepid N/A Y Commander 552 Wars 8.26.13, A Gepid, in command of a contingent of 400 Gepids,
8.32.22 joined Narses for expedition of 552/3, fatally wounded
Totila after Busta Gallorum. Asbadus 2 in PLRE, 3:133.
Ascan Massagetae N/A Y Commander 530 Wars 1.13.21, A Hun and the commander of cavalry at Dara in 530,
(Hun) 1.18.38 he was killed in the Battle of Callinicum in 531. On
the name, see Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, pp. 28 and
43. PLRE, 3:133.
Balas Massagetae N/A Y Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5–15 Commander of 600 Hunnic cavalry auxiliaries in
(Hun) invasion of Africa, with Sinnion. On the name, see
Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 345 (Walagas). PLRE,
3:169.
Beros Herulian N/A S General 543 Wars 2.24.14, Or Verus, commander of Heruli in Chorzianene
7.27.3, 7.37.28; under Martin in 543, sent to Italy in 548 to support
Marcellinus Belisarius with 300 Heruli, killed fighting Goths
p. 52 11 in 549 outside of Ravenna. Name is Herul/Gothic, see
Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 261. Marcellinus gives him
the title of MVM (Presumably vacans). Verus in
PLRE, 3:1370.
Bessas Goth Thracian Y General 531 Wars 1.8.3, Of Gothic descent but born in Thrace. Dispatched to
5.5.3, 5.16.2, Amida to serve as an officer in the army by Anas-
5.19.15, 6.30.2, tasius in 502. Garrison commander at Marytropolis
7.6.8, 7.19.14, in 531, where he served as dux Mesopotamiae. One of
8.9.4, 8.11.40, the generals of Belisarius in the invasion of Italy in
8.12.29–34; 535 (probably as MVM vacans), present at siege of
Aga. 2.18.8, Naples. Of Gothic descent and knew Gothic language
3.2.6–7 (5.10.10), sent to Narnia in Etruria in 537, commanded
a gate during the siege of Rome in 537, put in charge
of Italian theater with John (Vitalian) when Belisarius
was withdrawin in 540, holed up in Spolitium in
543, garrison commander of Rome during Totila’s
siege in 546–47, extorted money from the citizens by
selling grain at high prices, fled when Totila captured
the city, sent to Lazica as MVM per Armeniam
Table 2. continued
Guess
(550–54), still in command against Persians in Lazica
along with Martin and Buzes in 554. His failure in
Lazica resulted in his dismissal and exile to Abasgia.
Having been born ca. 480, he was more than seventy
years old at this time. He was at some point made a
patrician. Name is probably not Germanic, see
Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 51. Bessas in PLRE, 2:226.
Bleschames Persian N/A Y Officer 542 Wars 7.3.11 A Persian commander who was captured at Sisau-
ranon in 541 and shipped to Italy with his men by
Belisarius to serve there with other Persians; they
fought under Artabazes near Verona. On the name,
see Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 69. PLRE, 3:234.
Bochas Massagetae N/A Y Bodyguard 537 Wars 6.2.10, A Hun and a guardsman of Belisarius, commanded
(Hun) (Doruphoros) 6.24.32 600 cavalry in sally out of Rome with Artasires and
Cutilas in 537, then immediately after this battle was
sent to help Martinus near by; he assisted this force in
defeating the Goths but was wounded badly and died
three days later. PLRE, 3:235.
Cabades Persian N/A Y Commander 552 Wars A grandson of the Persian king Cabades I, he escaped
1.23.12–14, from Chosroes in 541 and fled to Justinian. He
8.26.13 evidently was given a commision in the army, for in
Narses’s expedition to Italy in 552, he was in command
of a contingent of Persian deserters. Cavades in PLRE,
3:276.
Caisus (Qays) Arab Kindite Y Phylarch 528 Wars 1.20.10 The grandson of Arethas of the Kindites, brother of
Amr (Ambrus), and Yazid (Iezidus), father of
Mu’awiyah (Mavia). He was the phylarch of the Arab
tribes of Kinda (the Kindites) and Ma’add (Maadeni)
from 528 to 531, when he resigned the post and
instead was appointed phylarch of some Palestinian
Arabs. PLRE, 3:259.
Chalazar Massagetae N/A Y Bodyguard 548 Wars 7.30.6, 20 A Hun and a guardsman of John the nephew of
(Hun) (Doruphoros) Vitalian, an especially able warrior, commanding a
garrison of 300 Illyrian cavalrymen in Rusciane;
when the city was forced to surrender, Chalazar was
put to death by Totila. PLRE, 3:280.
Chilbudius Barbarian? N/A G General 530 Wars 7.14.2 A member of Justinian’s household, appointed MVM
per Thracias in 530, a famous general, killed in 533
in a battle with Slavs; an Antae posed as an imposter
of him ca. 546. Teall suggests him to be a Slav but
provides no justification (p. 299). Teall has been cited
by others for their justification of identifying Chil-
budius as a Slav. Amory claims that the name is
Germanic but provides no justification (People and
Identity, p. 288). Elton describes him as a second-
generation Roman but again provides no justification
(Greek and Roman Warfare, p. 300). The name cer-
tainly appears barbarian in origin but further speci-
ficity at this point may not be possible. Chilbudius 1
in PLRE, 3:286.
Chorsamantis Massagetae N/A Y Bodyguard 537 Wars 5.16.1, A Hun and a guardsman of Belisarius, in early 537
(Hun) (Doruphoros) 6.1.21 he was ordered to accompany Constantinus into
Etruria. Was back in Rome not long after and com-
manded a sally during the siege, was injured, became
angry, and so tried to fight too many Goths at once
and was killed. An example of barbarian impetuosity,
according to Procopius, yet his loss was still greatly
lamented because his reputation was high. Presumably
Chorsomanus (5.16.1) and Chorsamantis (6.121) are
the same man. On the name see Justi, Iranisches
Namenbuch, p. 173. PLRE, 3:302.
Table 2. continued
Guess
Coccas Germanic N/A G Soldier 552 Wars 8.31.11 A soldier in the Gothic army who challenged Romans
to single combat, he was previously in the Byzantine
army but had defected to the Goths, killed in single
combat at Busta Gallorum by Anzalas. The name is
Germanic, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 66. Not
listed in the PLRE.
Cutzinas Moor N/A Y Allied General 534– Wars 2.28.50, A Moorish chieftain and ally of the Romans. He was
563 8.17.21; in revolt against the Romans in 534 but by 544 was an
Corippus ally and friend of Solomon. In 547 he received the
Ioh. 6.267, title of MVM vacans and supported John Troglita. He
7.268, 8.271 was murdered in 563 by John Rogathinus. Corippus
praises his loyalty. PLRE, 3:366.
Dagaris Germanic N/A G Bodyguard 530 Wars 1.15.6, Bodyguard of Dorotheus (or possibly of Sittas), sent
(Doruphoros) 1.22.18 with one fellow bodyguard to spy on the Persian army
in Persarmenia. The name is possibly Germanic, see
Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 69. Apparently captured at
some point, because he was released by the Persians
as a part of the Eternal Peace in 532. PLRE, 3:379.
Dagisthaeus Germanic N/A S General 548 Wars 2.29.10, Described as a young man in 548. He was sent to
8.8.1–16, 8.9.4, Lazica in command of 8,000 in 548 as a general; he
8.26.13, was probably MVM per Armeniam; he intended to
8.33.24 fight Persians with Gubazes in 549, marched with
Gubazes to fight them, was dismissed and imprisoned
by the emperor in late 549. He joined Narses for the
expedition of 551/2 (presumably as an MVM vacans),
was instrumental in the capture of Rome. He may
have remained in Italy into the 560s. The name is
Germanic according to Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, pp.
70, 283. Dagisthaeus 2 in PLRE, 3:380.
Gontharis 1 Herulian N/A S Commander 537 Wars 6.4.8 Sent to Albano, Italy, in command of a contingent of
Heruli by Belisarius during the siege of Rome in 537.
The name is Germanic and he was possibly Herulian
himself, given normal Herul tradition of being led by
their own. Guntharis 1 in PLRE, 3:574.
Gontharis 2 Germanic N/A S General 540 Wars 4.19.6–9, Bodyguard of Solomon, sent by him to fight Iaudas
4.25.1, the Moor in 539/40 and was initially defeated. By 545
4.26.33, he was in command of the troops in Numidia (and
4.28.27–33 probably had the titles of MVM vacans and dux
Numidiae) when he attempted to set up his own
tyranny. He had Areobindus killed, but after only
thirty-six days was slain in Carthage by Artasires and
Artabanes 1 in 546. His name is Germanic, see
Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 119. Guntharis 2 in PLRE,
3:574,
Goubazes Lazian N/A Y King 541– Wars 2.29.11, Allied with Dagisthaeus to fight the Persians in Lazica
55 8.8.1; in 551, murdered by John and Rusticus in 555. He
Aga. 3.4.5 had been a silentiarius at one point, perhaps when in
Constantinople as a prince. Gubazes in PLRE, 3:559.
Gouboulgoudou Massagetae N/A Y Bodyguard 538 Wars 6.13.14 A guardsman of Valerian and a Hun, he pushed
(Hun) (Doruphoros) Goths off of the wall at Ancona to save the fortress
from falling. Gubulgudu in PLRE, 3:560.
Gregorius Persarmenian N/A Y Commander 546 Wars 4.27.10; Cousin of Artabanes 1, encouraged him to resist and
Corippus murder Gontharis in 546. In 546/7 he was one of the
Ioh. 4.487 army officers serving under John Troglita. He was
either a dux or comes rei militaris. Gregorius 2 in
PLRE, 3:547.
Ildisgal Lombard N/A Y Commander 552 Wars 8.27.1–6 Fugitive from the Lombard kingdom, made com-
mander of the guards (commander of the scholae,
comes of a schola palatina) by Justinian, followed into
the empire by 300 of his kinsmen. In 552 he tried to
flee the empire and was chased by an imperial army.
He defeated his pursuers, killing the commanders
Table 2. continued
Guess
including Aratius, but was later put to death by the
Gepid king. The name is Germanic, see Schönfeld,
Wörterbuch, p. 146. Ildisgal in PLRE, 3:616.
Indulf Goth N/A S Bodyguard 549 Wars 7.35.23, Also known as Gundulf. A guardsman of Belisarius
(Doruphoros) 8.23.1, 8.35.37 and “of barbarian birth,” in 549 after Belisarius had
left Italy he defected to Totila “for no good reason”
and became one of his important generals, sacking
two Byzantine-controlled towns and defeating an
expedition sent by Claudian. PLRE speculates that he
was most likely a Goth, which perhaps explains his
defection after the departure of Belisarius. He was
one of 1,000 Goths who refused to negotiate with
Narses after Mons Lactarius. For the name, see
Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 146. Indulf in PLRE, 3:618.
Isaac Persarmenian N/A Y Commander 530 Wars 1.15.32, Youngest brother of Narses 2 and Aratius. He was a
2.24.14, Persian officer who defected to Byzantines after hear-
7.13.20, ing of his brothers’ defection in 530; he surrendered
7.19.29–34 the fortress of Bolum in his defection. In 543 he
commanded the troops in the region of Theodosiopo-
lis (probably as dux). He was sent to bring reinforce-
ments to Belisarius in 546 with John 14 (Vitalian),
foolishly attacked the Gothic camp outside of Rome
in 547 and was captured; two days later he was put to
death by Totila. Isaaces 1 in PLRE, 3:718.
John 16 Persarmenian N/A Y Commander 544 Wars 4.24.2–16 Son of John of the Arsacidae, brother of Artabanes 2,
a Persian deserter to the Romans (542?), commander
of some Armenians in the army of Areobindus in
544, killed with him in 545. John 34 in PLRE, 3:643.
Leontius Lazian N/A Y Commander 539 Wars 4.19.1, The son of Zaunas and the grandson of Pharesmanas
4.20.19 and brother of Rufinus, and a Lazican. Sent with
Solomon on his second trip to Africa as commander
—possibly MVM vacans. Fought with great valor on
Mt. Aurasium. Leontius 2 in PLRE, 3:773.
Mauricius Gepid N/A Y General 536 Wars 5.7.2; Son of Mundus, his daughter married Aruth. He
Chron. Pasch. helped put down the Nika riot in 532. He was pos-
532 sibly an MVM vacans in 536 when he was killed in
battle against the Goths in Dalmatia near Salona. He
and his father were descended from a line of Gepid
kings. Maenchen-Helfen suggests he and Mundus
were “of Attilanic descent” (World of the Huns, p.
383). Mauricius 1 in PLRE, 3:854.
Molatzes Barbarian? N/A G General 540 Wars 2.8.2 Commander of troops in Lebanon (dux in Phoenice
Libanensis), brought 6,000 of them to Antioch with
Theoctistus. He fled when the Persians breached the
walls. The name seems barbarian in origin, but a
positive identification may not be possible. PLRE,
3:894.
Mundilas Germanic N/A S Bodyguard 537 Wars 5.27.11, An officer of Belisarius’s guardsmen. In Italy, in 536,
(Doruphoros) 6.4.3, 6.10.19, he was sent in command of 300 guardsmen by
6.12.27; Belisarius to sally against Goths at the siege of Rome,
Marcellinus, accompanied Procopius on a mission to collect sup-
p. 48 1, 2 plies and reinforcements from Naples during the
siege of Rome. In late 537 he was instrumental in a
victory as the Goths retreated from Rome; named
commander of garrison at Milan in late 537 with
some guardsmen of Belisarius and 1,000 Isaurians
and Thracians, he wanted to fight to the last at Milan,
but his men forced him to surrender to the Goths,
who captured him. The name indicates barbarian,
possibly Germanic; see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p.
169. PLRE, 3:901.
Table 2. continued
Guess
Mundus Gepid N/A Y General 529 Wars 1.24.43, A Gepid and son of a Gepid king (named Giesmus?).
5.5.2, 5.7.5; Somewhat startlingly, he served Theoderic until 526,
Marcellinus then returned to the Balkans and in 529 pledged
p. 43, 8 allegiance to Justinian and was immediately appointed
MVM per Illyricum. He was MVM per Orientem in
531 (after Belisarius), again MVM per Illyricum in
532, when he commanded Heruli during the Nika
riot. Still MVM per Illyricum, he was ordered to
attack Salona in Dalmatia and was killed by Goths
there in 536. PLRE, 3:903.
Narses 1 Persarmenian N/A Y General 530 Wars 1.15.31, A native of Persarmenia, the eunuch Narses the
6.13.16, cubicularius (531–52), sacellarius and primicerius
7.13.21, sacri cubiculi (531), praepositus sacri cubiculi
8.21.6, 19, (537–54), sent to Italy with 5,000 troops as reinforce-
8.26.13, ment for Belisarius in 537, sent to recruit troops from
8.33.1, the Heruli in 546, chosen as supreme commander in
8.35.33; Italy in 552, collected a grand army for his expedition,
Aga. 1.8.1 victor at Busta Gallorum, gave God the credit for the
victory, victor at Mons Lactarius, fought the Franks in
Italy after the defeat of the Goths, remained in Italy
until his death in 573/574. He was a vir illustris,
patrician, and probably a monophysite. Narses 1 in
PLRE, 3:912.
Narses 2 Persarmenian N/A Y Commander 530 Wars 1.12.21, Brother of Aratius and Isaac. A Persian officer who
2.24.12, defected in 530 (1.15.31), was dux Thebaidis in 535, an
2.25.23, officer in the 5,000-strong army of Narses 2 in Italy in
6.13.17 538 (as comes rei militaris or MVM), sent with Ildiger
to sail to Ariminum in 538, commander of Armenians
and Heruli with Valerian in the East in 543, killed in
543 fighting the Persians. Narses 2 in PLRE, 3:928.
Odalgan Hun N/A Y Commander 547 Wars 7.23.6–7 A Hun and the commander of the Byzantine garrison
at Perusia after the death of Cyprian (545), in 547 he
went to Spolitium to assist Martinianus in destroying
the Gothic garrision there. Hodolgan in PLRE, 3:601.
Oilas Germanic N/A G Bodyguard 537 Wars 5.27.13 Guardsman of Belisarius. In Italy, in 537, he was sent
(Doruphoros) in command of 300 guardsmen by Belisarius to sally
against Goths at the siege of Rome. The name is
possibly Germanic, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p.
176. PLRE, 3:952.
Pacurius Iberian N/A Y Commander 547 Wars 7.27.2, Son of Peranius, of the Iberian royal family. Sent with
8.26.4 Sergius to Italy with reinforcements for Belisarius
in 547, in command of garrison at Dryus (Hydrun-
tum) in 552 where he worked out surrender deals
with Goths. Presumably had served in Italy through-
out 547–52. PLRE, 3:959.
Peranius Iberian N/A Y General 535 Wars 2.24.15, Son or brother of the Iberian King Gurgenes, father
2.28.1, 5.5.3, of Pacurius, uncle of Phazas. One of the generals
5.23.13, (possibly as MVM vacans) in Belisarius’s invasion
6.19.1 of Italy in 535, with Bessas he commanded a gate of
Rome during its siege in 537; he was sent in late 537
to besiege Urviventus (Orvieto). He served under the
overall command of Martinus on the eastern front in
543. Camped with Justus, died in 544 of a riding
accident. PLRE, 3:989.
Petrus 3 Persian N/A Y General 526 Wars 1.12.9, A native of Arzanene in Persia, captured and enslaved
2.16.16, by Justin I, originally his secretary but became a
2.24.13; general (MVM vacans) and was dispatched to Lazica
Anec. 4.4; with “some Huns” by Justin, around 526. He was a
Malalas 18.4, native of Arzanene (2.15.8). Returned to Lazica in
p. 246 528 after defeat of Irenaeus and Cerycus. In the 540s
he was a commander in Belisarius’s army fighting
the Persians. At this time with John the Glutton he
accused Belisarius and Bouzes of conspiring during
the plague. Procopius in the Anecdota called him
Table 2. continued
Guess
“Peter the General.” After Belisarius’s departure, he
served under Martinus in 543. Petrus 27 in PLRE,
2:870.
Phanitheus Herulian N/A Y Commander 538 Wars 6.13.18, Uncle of Phulcaris. Commander of 2,000 Heruli in
6.19.20; Narses’s reinforcement army sent to Italy, killed in
Aga. 1.11.3 combat at Caesena in December 538 or January 539.
PLRE, 3:1015.
Pharas Herulian N/A Y Officer 530 Wars 1.13.20, Commander of 300 Herul auxiliaries at Dara (respon-
3.11.5–15, sible for ambush); commander of 400 Heruli in inva-
4.4.28–31 sion of Africa (533), chosen to besiege Gelimer in his
mountain fastness in 534 and praised as a serious
fellow. He was killed by Stotzas in 535. PLRE, 3:1015.
Phazas Iberian N/A Y Commander 542 Wars 7.6.10, Nephew of Peranius, sent to Italy in 542 as commander
7.28.5 of a force of Armenian soldiers, placed in command
of a scouting force of 900 in 547; this force was
ambushed near Croton and Phazas fought bravely but
was slain with most of his men. PLRE, 3:1016.
Philegagus Gepid N/A Y Commander 549 Wars 8.8.15 Commander of Roman cavalry in the Roman/Lazic
army under Dagisthaeus in 549. A Gepid by birth
and “an energetic man.” PLRE, 3:1019.
Philemouth Herulian N/A Y Commander 543 Wars 2.24.14, One of the commanders of the Heruli in Italy under
6.22.8, 7.13.21, Narses (in both 538 and 545), commander of Heruli
7.34.42, in Chorzianene under Martin in 543, made overall
7.39.10, commander of Heruli while in Italy under Narses
8.26.13; Aga. in 549, convinced to rejoin imperial war effort in
1.11.3 Italy in 546, commander of 1,500 Heruli sent with the
Roman generals against the Gepids in 549, ordered
to join Germanus in his invasion of Italy in 549, again
joined Narses in his expedition of 552/3, died of
disease in Italy. Probably combined MVM vacans
with his command of the Heruli. Philemuth in
PLRE, 3:1020.
Ricilas Germanic N/A G Bodyguard 544 Wars Guardsman of Belisarius, in 544 sent to Auximus in
(Doruphoros) 7.11.19–25 command of 1,000 troops with Thurimuth and Sabin-
ianus, killed while drunk during a scouting expedition
out of Auximus shortly after arriving. Name is
Germanic, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 189.
PLRE, 3:1087.
Rufinus 2 Lazian N/A Y General 539 Wars 4.19.1, Son of Zaunas and the grandson of Pharesmanes and
4.20.19 therefore brother of Leontius. A native of Lazica. Sent
with Solomon on his second trip to Africa as com-
mander in 539, possibly MVM vacans. Fought with
great valor on Mt. Aurasium. Rufinus 2 in PLRE,
3:1098.
Simmas Massagetae N/A Y Commander 530 Wars 1.13.21; A Hun. A commander of cavalry at Dara. Perhaps
(Hun) Malalas 464–65 had the title of dux, which Malalas gives him for the
year 531. He also fought at Callinicum. PLRE, 3:1152.
Sinnion Massagetae N/A Y Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5–15, Commander of 600 Hunnic cavalry auxiliaries in
(Hun) 8.19.7 invasion of Africa, with Balas. We later find out
Sinnion was a Cutrigur Hun who was still alive to
seek refuge in the empire in 551. PLRE, 3:1156.
Sinthues Germanic N/A S Bodyguard 537 Wars 6.4.7 Guardsman of Belisarius, sent with 500 troops to the
(Doruphoros) fortress of Tibur in Italy during siege of Rome in 537.
Name is Germanic, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p.
208. PLRE, 3:1156.
Siphilas Germanic? N/A G Bodyguard 536 Wars 5.7.34 Guardsman of Constantianus 2, given command of
(Doruphoros) 500 soldiers by him in order to accomplish a special
mission in the battle against the Goths at Salona. The
name is possibly Germanic. PLRE, 3:1156.
Table 2. continued
Guess
Sisifridus Goth N/A Y Commander 546 Wars 7.12.12 A Goth by birth, but “exceedingly loyal to the Romans
and the emperor’s cause.” He was the garrison com-
mander of Assisi in 545 but was killed in a sally while
the city was under siege. The city then capitulated to
the Goths. On the name, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch,
p. 208. Sisiphridos in PLRE, 3:1159.
Sittas Goth N/A S General 527 Wars 1.12.20, Name is possibly Gothic according to Schönfeld,
1.15.3, Wörterbuch, p. 244, but PLRE cautions that it may be
2.3.25–27; Thracian. He began his career as a doruphoros in the
Buildings 3.6.6; bodyguard of Justinian. He was dispatched to Persar-
Marcellinus menia by Justin in 527. He served as MVM per
p. 45 13 Armeniam (528–30) during which time he defeated
the Tzani and compelled them to become Christian
(Buildings), MVM Praesentalis (530–39, in Armenia),
and was a patrician. He defeated the Bulgars in Moesia.
As MVM Praesentalis in 539 he was killed by the
Armenians in, as Procopius says, a manner unworthy
of his great valor. Sittas 1 in PLRE, 3:1160.
Suartuas Herulian N/A Y General 552 Wars 8.25.11 Given command of an army to fight the Gepids in
552 with the sons of Germanus, he had previously
been appointed by Justinian ruler of the Heruli.
When he was driven out by the Heruli (probably
548), Justinian appointed him “general of the troops
in Byzantium” (thus probably one of the MVM
Praesantalis). PLRE, 3:1205.
Sunicas Massagetae N/A Y Commander 530 Wars 1.13.20, A Hun. He fled to the Romans and received baptism.
(Hun) 1.14.50 Commander of 600 cavalry at Dara, where he killed
the Persian general Baresmanas in battle. He also
fought at Callinicum. He possibly held the title of
dux, although not a territorial command. PLRE, 3:1206.
Suntas Hun? N/A G Bodyguard 537 Wars 6.7.27 An officer in the guard of Belisarius, in command
(Doruphoros) with Adegis of 800 of his guardsmen in Alba in Italy,
under the overall command of John the nephew of
Vitalian. The name is similar to Sunicas and Simmas
and therefore could be Hunnic, like many others of
Belisarius’s guardsmen. PLRE, 3:1208.
Tattimuth Germanic? N/A G Commander 533 Wars 3.10.23, A commander sent “with no very great force” to
4.5.10 support Pudentius in Tripoli in his rebellion against
the Vandals. He received reinforcements from
Belisarius in 534. His post is not clear, as the position
of dux provinciae Tripolitanae was not yet created.
He might have been a tribunus. The name is most
likely Germanic, based on similarity to other -muth
names such as Thurimuth, Philemouth, and Arimuth.
PLRE, 3:1220.
Theudimund Gepid N/A Y Soldier 541 Wars 7.1.36 Grandson of Mundus, son of Mauricius. He survived
the battle of Tarbesium against the Goths while a
young man but is not again attested. Although he
fought in the battle it is possible that he was not an
official soldier. He could equally have been a guards-
man. Theodimundus in PLRE, 3:1236.
Thurimuth Goth N/A G Bodyguard 545 Wars 7.11.10–19, Guardsman of Belisarius, sent with Vitalius into the
(Doruphoros) 7.37.20, 7.39.5 region of Aemilia to take over towns there in 545,
later in 545 sent to Auximus in command of 1,000
troops with Ricilas and Sabinianus, co-commander
of garrison at Rhegium with Himerius in 548, sur-
rendered the city to Totila in 550. The name is
Gothic/Germanic, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 236.
Thurimuth in PLRE, 3:1322.
Table 2. continued
Guess
Uliaris Germanic N/A G Bodyguard 533 Wars 3.19.23, A guardsmen of Belisarius, commanding 800 other
4.4.15, 6.16.21, guardsmen during the battle at Decimum in 533,
6.21.1–13, accidentally shot John 10 the Optio in the neck and
6.22.3 killed him while his company was pursuing Gelimer
after the last battle, served in Italy as well, sailed with
Ildiger to Ariminum in 538, sent with Martinus to
relieve the siege of Milan in 538; his failure to do so
resulted in Belisarius banning him from his presence.
Name is Germanic, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p.
265. Uliaris 1 in PLRE, 3:1387.
Ulifus Germanic? N/A G Bodyguard 545 Wars 7.12.19, A guardsman of Cyprian, he was bribed by Totila to
(Doruphoros) 8.33.10 murder his master at Perusia in 545; he then fled to
Totila and presumably entered his service. He was
killed in 552 because he did not want to surrender
Perusia to Narses. Name is probably Germanic based
on similarity to names such as Uliaris and Ulfilas.
PLRE, 3:1389.
Uligagus Herulian N/A Y Commander 550 Wars 8.9.5; Also perhaps transliterated as Wilgang. A Herul and
Aga. 3.6.5 an officer in the army in Lazica in 550 under Bessas. By
555 he was the commander of the Herul contingent
in Lazica, under command of Martin and Justin. On
the name, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 245. PLRE,
3:1389.
Ulitheus Germanic ? G Bodyguard 545 Wars 4.25.8, Guardsman of Gontharis, served as a messenger to
(Doruphoros) 4.26.33, the Moors in 545 to arrange an agreement between
4.28.27–33 Gontharis and Antalas, killed Areobindus, was killed
by Artasires when Gontharis was killed. Name is
Ostrogothic, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 246.
Ulitheus 2 in PLRE, 3:1390.
Unigastus Goth N/A S Bodyguard 539 Wars 6.27.14 A guardsman of Belisarius, he placed his hand in the
(Doruphoros) path of an arrow aimed at Belisarius, saving the
general but losing the use of his hand. The name is
the Gothic Hunigasts, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p.
246. PLRE, 3:1392.
Varazes Persarmenian N/A Y Commander 547 Wars 7.27.3, A Persarmenian in command of 800 Armenians sent
8.13.10 to Italy to reinforce Belisarius in 547, he probably
remained in Italy until 550. In Lazica in 551 with
Bessas in command of 800 Tzani warriors. Probably a
comes rei militaris. On the name, see Justi, Iranisches
Namenbuch, p. 349. Varazes 1 in PLRE, 3:1362.
Visandus Herulian N/A Y Commander 538 Wars 6.13.18, Commander of 2,000 Heruli in Narses’s reinforce-
7.1.35 ment army sent to Italy, killed at Tarbesium in 541
in battle with Hildibad. Although not explicitly
desginated a Herul, he probably was, as were other
commanders of the Heruli. The name is certainly
Germanic, see Schönfeld, Wörterbuch, p. 267.
Visandus 1 in PLRE, 3:1378.
Zaidus Arab N/A G Commander 533 Wars 3.11.5–15 Commander of the regular infantry in the invasion of
Africa. Not mentioned again. Name is possibly Arabic
Zayd or Sa’id. Zaidus in PLRE, 3:1414.
Zarter Massagetae N/A Y Bodyguard 537 Wars 5.16.1 A Hun and a guardsman of Belisarius, he was ordered
(Hun) (Doruphoros) to accompany Constantinus into Etruria in 537.
PLRE, 3:1

A Prosopographical Approach To Justinian PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Prosopographical Approach To Justinian PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Prosopographical Approach

Roman and Non-Roman Identity

Names as Indicators of Ethnicity

Database Results: Romans and Non-Romans

Database Results: Ethnic and Regional Origins

Lagging behind Thracians in importance were Isaurians, mountaineers of Anatolia,

Interaction of Romans and Non-Romans

You might also like