Heraclius and the Evolution of Byzantine Strategy

The Byzantine military strategy expressed in the 10th century treatise On Skirmishing marked a decisive shift in Byzantine strategy and an entirely new mindset in approaching war. What is unique about this strategy is that it was not created during a war against the Arabs, but before they existed as a military power. The foundation was laid during the Emperor Heraclius's Persian campaigns of 622-628. To demonstrate the key contributions of Heraclius, these Persian campaigns shall be analyzed and compared with the advice prescribed in On Skirmishing. Also, the military events recorded by Theophanes of the 7th and 8th centuries will be compared with Heraclius and On Skirmishing to show the development of the strategy after Heraclius and how it measured up to the final form in On Skirmishing. This article is available in Constructing the Past: http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/constructing/vol10/iss1/11 Constructing the Past 73 Heraclius and the Evolution of the Middle Byzantine Art of War Bob Ekkebus While much of the continual successes of the Byzantines in the 9 and 10 centuries after the colossal failures in the 7 and 8 centuries can be and has been attributed to the Theme system and the overall decline of the Caliphate, the untold story of success lies in the evolution and perfection of a standard doctrine of military strategy uniquely adapted to border warfare. This strategical doctrine, enclosed in a treatise called On Skirmishing, was written during the reign of Nicephorus II Phocas (963-969). It is, in the words of the author, “Our part by writing down these things just as our predecessors handed them on to us, as well as from our own experience which goes back a long time.” It is selfevident that On Skirmishing is the enclosure of the knowledge of Byzantine strategy from a general's perspective, and the author frequently alludes to the use of this knowledge, in one form or another, in the past. However, it is also clear that the Byzantines had an overall concept of skirmishing and that the treaty was not just the enclosure of many unrelated strategical concepts together, but rather a unified strategical theory which had been refined over many generations. In essence, one could describe it as the Middle Byzantine Strategy or Art of War. As the author explains, it was only in the 10 century when the strategy was perfected: To the best of my knowledge, it was Bardas, the blessed Caesar, who brought this method to the summit of perfection. I do not want to enumerate all the ancient commanders but shall limit myself to those in our time whom everyone knows. When this method had completely vanished, it was Bardas who brought it back. 1 Nicephorus Phocas, On Skirmishing, edition, translation, and notes by G. T. Dennis, Three Byzantine Military Treatises, CFHB (Washington D.C., 1985), 211. 2 Ibid, 147. “Nonetheless, in order that time, which leads us to forget what we once knew, might not completely blot out this useful knowledge, we think we ought to commit it to writing.” For a modern interpretation of this, see Jason Moralee, “Military Requisitioning and its Consequences in the Byzantine Borderlands 500-1000” (Graduate Paper, UCLA, 1997), 19-20. “Anyone who reads these treatises eventually begins to question their historical validity. How much in them is 'tradition?' How much is 'reality?' There is no doubt that the treatises lift information from a long Graeco-Roman tradition of strategic theory, and that they are prescriptive in nature.” 3 The distinct lack of contribution towards this Art of War from Belisarius and Narses, whose campaigns in the 6 century are skilled enough to still teach lessons to generals of today, show a distinct difference in the warfare practiced before Heraclius and after due to the vastly changed eastern frontier after the Arab invasions in the 7 century. Thus it is more applicable to describe On Skirmishing as the Middle Byzantine Empire's Art of War. 4 Ibid, 149. By referring to him as 'Caesar' it is clear that this is Bardas Phocas the Elder who was proclaimed Caesar by Nicephorus II Phocas, which fits in the time line as Bardas Phocas the Younger came after Nicephorus II Phocas, during whose reign this treatise was written. The part about the method vanishing is likely, although not for certain, referring to the late 8 and early 9 centuries under Irene and later the iconoclast disputes, when military matters were put to the side in