|
Tagma (Byzantine Military)
The word tagma (tagmata pl.), means in the medieval Byzantine Armies
of the 8th and 9th centuries, a military unit of the approximate size
of a regiment or battalion. These units are best remembered and used
in the technical sense in referring to best-known and most technical
use of the term however refers to the regiments formed by and which
compromised the central army of the Byzantine Empire in the 8th–11th
centuries.
The term "tagma" as taken from the Greek language (τάσσειν, with
the meaning, "to set in order") was utilized in referring to a
military group of approximately 200–400 men (also termed bandum or
numerus in Latin, arithmos in Greek) of infantry training in the
contemporary Eastern Roman Army [1]).
Later in the period Byzantine usage, the term tagma came to refer only
to the standing troops, which were utilized for garrisoning in
Constantinople [2] and in the surrounding areas. For the most part
these units were an outgrowth of the former traced their origins to
the Roman Imperial troops. By the 7th century, these had declined to
little more than parade units, simply because of the revolts and
uprisings within the powerful new districts, in particular the
Opsician and Asian areas, which of all the themes were closest to the
capitol. Within the first sixty years since its creation,
Constantinople was involved in five revolts, culminating in the
rebellion and usurpation of the throne by its Opsician commander [3].
Emperor Constantine V (r. 741–775) in reviewing the problems with the
old guard units, made significant changes and reformed them into new
tagmata regiments. The main purpose of this change was to insure a
set of loyal as well as professional soldiers [4], both as a defense
against provincial revolts, and also, at the time, as a formation
devoted to Constantine's acceptance of the anti-religious image
policies.[5] These new tagmata were made up exclusively of heavy
cavalry units [6] which were certainly more mobile than the theme
troops, and were organized and maintained on a consistent basis.
During the 8th and 9th centuries, their role was that of a central
reserve, garrisoned in and around the capital, and in regions such as
Trace and Bythnia [6] order to support the Empire’s determination in
pursuing a defensive nature against her enemies. These new tagmata
also were intended to form the core of any imperial army on campaign.
These were then reinforced by the thematic troops (provincial levies),
who were more concerned with local defense.
In addition, the tagmata, like the late Roman equivalent, they served
very well as a recruiting and promotion ground for young officers for
young men who had the opportunity to catch the attention of their
seniors. A career in a tagma could lead to a major commands in the
provincial thematic armies or court appointment.[7] Officers in the
tagmata were recruited basically from the relatively well-off urban
and landed upper class and officialdom, of the Anatolian themes. These
areas came more and more to control the higher military offices of the
state.[8]In spite of this, the tagmata, as indeed military and state
service in general, offered a degree of mobility of a social type for
the lower strata of society.[9]
In the 9th and early 10th centuries, there were four tagmata proper
("τὰ δʹ τάγματα"):[10]
• the Scholai (Gr. Σχολαί, "the Schools"), were the most
senior unit, the direct successor of the imperial guards established
by Constantine the Great (r. 306–337). The term scholarioi
(σχολάÏιοι), was used as a general reference for all common
soldiers of the tagmata.[6]
• the Exkoubitoi or Exkoubitores (Lat. Excubiti, Gr.
ἘξκοÏβιτοι, "the Sentinels"), established by Leo 1.
• the Arithmos(Gr. ἈÏιθμός, "Number") or Vigla (Gr.
Βίγλα, from the Latin word for "Watch"),meaning the ‘Guard
Watch.†The regiment performed special duties on campaign, including
guarding the imperial camp, relaying the Emperor's orders, and
guarding prisoners of war.[12]
• the Hikanatol (Gr. Ἱκανάτοι, "the Able Ones"),
established by Emperor Nikephoros I(r. 802–811) in 810. [6]
Other units closely related to the tagmata, and often included among
them, were:
the Noumeroi (Gr. ÎοÏμεÏοι, from the Latin numerus, ("number")
were a garrison unit for Constantinople. [13]
the Optimtoi (Gr. Ὀπτιμάτοι, from Latin optimates, "the
best"), although formerly an elite fighting unit, had by the 8th
century been reduced to a support unit, responsible for the mules of
the army's baggage train (the τοῦλδον, touldon).[14]
the men of the central Imperial Fleet (βασιλικόν
πλώιμον, basilikon plÅimon), are also counted among the tagmata
in some sources.[6]
In addition, there was also the Hetaireia(Gr. ἙταιÏεία,
"Companions"), which comprised the mercenary corps in Imperial
service, subdivided in Greater, Middle and Lesser, each commanded by a
respective Hetaireiarchēs.
Systemization
The ongoing debate in considering the real size and the make-up of the
imperial tagmata, because of the inaccuracy of the few sources of
information (military manuals, lists of offices and Arab accounts,
primarily from the 9th century) relating to them s still very much
involved. The primary sources, which are the accounts of Arab
geographers Ibn Khurdadhbah and QudÄmah are really not very precise,
but they do provide the overall tagmata strength at 24,000. This
figure has been seen by many scholars, as too high, and revised
estimates put the strength of each tagma at 1,000–1,500 men.[17]
Others, accept these numbers, and correlate them with the lists of
officers in the Kletorologion to reach an average size of 4,000 for
each tagma (including the Optimatoi and the Noumeroi, for which it is
explicitly stated that they numbered 4,000 each). [18]
The tagmatic units were all organized along similar lines. They were
commanded by a domestikos except for the Vigla, which was commanded by
a droungarios. He was assisted by one or two officers called
topoteretes(Gr. τοποτηÏητής, lit. "placeholder",
"lieutenant"), each of whom commanded one half of the unit.[19] Unlike
the thematic units, there were no permanent intermediate command
levels (tourmarchai, chiliarchoi, or pentakosiarchai) until Leo VI
introduced the droungarios ca. after 902.[20] The largest subdivision
of the tagmata was the bandon, commanded by a komēs ("count"), called
skribÅn in the Exkoubitores and tribounos ("tribune") in the Noumeroi
and Walls units. The banda in turn were divided in companies, headed
by a kentarchos ("centurion"), or drakonarios ("draconarius") for the
Exkoubitores, and vikarios ("vicar") for the Noumeroi and Walls units.
The domestikos ton Scholon, the head of the Scholai regiment, became
gradually more and more important, eventually coming to be the most
senior officer of the entire army by the end of the 10th century.[21]
The following table illustrates the structure of the Scholai in the
9th century, according to Treadgold:[22]
In addition, there were a chartoularios (χαÏτουλάÏιος,
"secretary") and a protomandator (Ï€ÏωτομανδάτωÏ, "head
messenger"), as well as 40 standard bearers (βανδοφόÏοι,
bandophoroi), of varying ranks and titles in each tagma, and 40
mandatores ("messengers"), for a total unit size of 4,125.[22] On
campaign, every tagmatic cavalryman was accompanied by a servant.
The following table illustrates the structure of the Scholai in the
9th century according to Threadgold: [22]
Officer (no.) Unit Subordinates
Subdivisions
Domestikos (1) Tagma 4,000 20 banda
Topoteretes (1/2) 2,000 10
banda
Komes (20) Banda 200 5
kentarchiai
Kentarchos Kentarchia 40
The next table gives the evolution of the theoretical establishment
size of the entire tagmatic force, again as calculated by Warren
Threadgold:
Year Total Size
745 18,000
810 22,000
842 24,000
References:
1. Kazhdan (1991), p. 2007;
2. Bury (1911), p. 47;
3. Threadgold (1995), p. 28;
4. Haldon (1999), p. 78;
5. Haldon (1984), pp. 228-235;
6. abcdef Bury (1911), p. 48;
7. Haldon (1999), pp. 270-271;
8. Haldon (1999), pp. 272-273;
9. Haldon (1999), p. 272;
10. Bury (1911), PP. 47-48;
11. Haldon (1999), p. 111;
12. Bury (1911), p. 60;
13. Bury (1911), p. 65;
14. Haldon (1999), p. 158;
15. Bury (1911), p. 66;
16. Bury (1911), p. 54;
17. Haldon (1999), p. 103;
18. Threadgold (1980), pp. 273-277;
19. Threadgold (1995), p. 102;
20. Threadgold (1995), p. 105;
21. Threadgold (1995), p. 78;
22. ab Threadgold (1995), p.103;
Notes
a: The main contemporary sources for the period from the 8th to the
late 10th centuries are: i) the various lists of offices (Takita),
including the Taktikon Uspensky (ca. 842), the Kletorologion of
Philotheos (899), the various Byzantine military manuals, chiefly the
Tactica of Leo VI the Wise; iii) the works of Arab geographers Ibn al-
Fagih, Ibn Khurdadhbah and Qudamah ibn Ja’far, who preserve the
earlier work of al-Jarmi that dates to ca. 840; and iv) the
Administrando Imperio and De Ceremoniis of Emperor Constantine VII
Porphyrogennetos.
Sources
• (French) H’ele’ne, Glykatzi-Ahrweiler (1960). "Recherches sur
l'administration de l'empire byzantin aux IX-XIème siècles". Bulletin
de correspondance hellénique 84 (1): 1–111. doi:10,3406/bch, 1960,
1551
• Bury, John B.(1911). The Imperial Administrative System of the
Ninth Century - With a Revised Text of the Kletorologion of
Philotheos. Oxford University Publishing.
• McCotter, Stephen: Byzantine army, edited by Richard Holmes,
published in The Oxford Companion to Military History. (Oxford
University Press, 2001)
• Bartusis, Mark C. (1997). The Late Byzantine Army: Arms and
Society 1204–1453. University of Pennsylvania Press. ISBN
0-8122-1620-2.
• Haldon, John F. (1984). Byzantine Praetorians. An Administrative,
Institutional and Social Survey of the Opsikion and Tagmata, c.
580-900. R. Habelt. ISBN 3-7749-2004-4.
• Haldon, John F. (1999). Warfare, state and society in the
Byzantine world, 565-1204. Routledge. ISBN 1-85728-494-1.
• Haldon, John F. (1995). "Strategies of Defence, Problems of
Security: the Garrisons of Constantinople in the Middle Byzantine
Period". In Mango, Cyril; Dagron, Gilbert. Constantinople and its
Hinterland: Papers from the Twenty-Seventh Spring Symposium of
Byzantine Studies, Oxford, April 1993 (Ashgate Publishing).
• Kazhdan, Alexander, ed. (1991). Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium.
Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-504652-6.
• Treadgold, Warren T. (1995). Byzantium and Its Army, 284-1081.
Stanford University Press. ISBN 0-8047-3163-2.
• Treadgold, Warren T.: Notes on the Numbers and Organization of the
Ninth-Century Byzantine Army, published in Greek, Roman and Byzantine
Studies 21 (Oxford, 1980)
• Treadgold, Warren T.: The Struggle for Survival, edited by Cyril
Mango, published in The Oxford History of Byzantium. (Oxford
University Press, 2002).
Reference: Wikipedia, Tagma (Military)
Respectfully Submitted;
Marcus Audens
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|