Siege of Ariminum (538)

Last updated

Siege of Ariminum
Part of the Gothic War (535–554)
Gothic War - First Phase, 535-540.svg
First phase of Gothic War campaigns
DateMarch – 24 July 538 AD
Location
Ariminum (present-day Rimini), Italy
Result Byzantine victory
Territorial
changes
Ariminum successfully captured and defended
Belligerents
Purple Chi Rho sign.png Byzantine Empire Ostrogothic Kingdom Flag.webp Ostrogothic Kingdom
Commanders and leaders
Vitiges
Strength
Unknown under Belisarius [a]
7,000 under Narses [2]
3,200 garrison under John [3]
Unknown [b]

The siege of Ariminum (Italian : Assedio di Ariminum, present-day Rimini), also known as the siege of Rimini (Assedio di Rimini), was an encounter in 538 AD during the Gothic War, where the Byzantine forces broke the siege by the Ostrogoths (Goths).

Contents

In March 538, Byzantine commander John the Sanguinary captured Ariminum, which was near the Gothic capital in Ravenna, to entice the Goths into lifting the siege of Rome. Byzantine General Belisarius sent reinforcements to Ariminum and ordered John to leave the city. However, John refused to obey and stayed in the city. In the meantime, fearing for their capital, the Goths retreated from Rome and moved to besiege Ariminum. They were unsuccessful in taking Ariminum by force, and instead, the leader of the Gothic forces, Vitiges, decided to starve the town.

Initially, the Byzantine leadership was divided over whether to rescue John despite his insubordination. Belisarius ultimately chose to save him after an appeal from General Narses. Belisarius wanted to avoid direct battle engagement because the Goths outnumbered the Byzantine forces. He split his army into smaller groups and sent them to Ariminum by land and sea. The near-simultaneous arrival of Byzantine forces from multiple directions created the impression of a much larger army, unnerving the Goths. As a result, they abandoned the siege on 24 July 538 and withdrew to Ravenna. Despite the victory, disagreements over John's insubordination fractured the unity of the Byzantine leadership.

Prelude

Ostrogoth territories between 508 and 534 AD, before the Byzantines launched a campaign to reclaim the Italian peninsula (Ostrogothic) Kingdom of italy - 508 to 534 AD.png
Ostrogoth territories between 508 and 534 AD, before the Byzantines launched a campaign to reclaim the Italian peninsula

In 535 AD, the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I launched a campaign to liberate the Italian cities that were under the control of the Ostrogothic Kingdom. The commanders Belisarius, Mundus and Constantinianus had made swift gains, conquering Sicily and then southern Italian Peninsula, as well as regions of Dalmatia and Illyria. [8]

Siege of Rome

Belisarius entered Rome in December 536, prompting the king of the Goths, Vitiges, to march with an army that had superior numbers to besiege the city (contemporary historian Procopius claimed a Gothic force of 150,000 [c] ). The Siege of Rome (537–538) featured repeated Gothic assaults on Rome's walls, countered by Belisarius's defensive preparations, use of artillery, and cavalry sorties that exploited the Goths' difficulties in countering mounted archers. Both sides suffered from shortages and disease, but Byzantine control of sea supply routes gradually weakened the besieging Goths, who faced greater logistical challenges in supplying their large army by land. [12]

Capture of Ariminum

In March 538, and while the siege of Rome was ongoing, Belisarius sent John, nephew of the Byzantine general Vitalianus, to raid Picenum. John defeated the Gothic commander Ulitheus in battle, gaining a reputation among the Goths. He ignored the cities of Auximus and Urbinus due to their strong garrisons. When he approached Ariminum, its citizens invited John to take the town. John realized the importance of Ariminum, which was a day's march away from the Gothic capital of Ravenna, and its capture would force Vitiges to lift the siege of Rome. [13] The Gothic garrison retreated from Ariminum to Ravenna "as soon as they learned that [John's] army was approaching", and John took the city without resistance. [14] In the meantime, Vitiges' wife, Mataswintha, opened negotiations with John and proposed the idea of marriage, on account of Vitiges marrying her by force. John's reputation was bolstered by the town's capture, and according to Procopius, John and Mataswintha frequently exchanged messages. [14]

The Goths, upon hearing the fall of Ariminum, lifted the siege of Rome and traveled towards Ravenna. Their travel was slow because they moved as a large army and took detours to avoid the Byzantine fortresses at Narnia, Spoletium, and Perusia. [15]

John's insubordination

Belisarius mosaic.jpg
Narses.jpg
Mosaics, 6th century, depicting Belisarius (left) and Narses (right), from the Basilica of San Vitale, Ravenna, Italy

Belisarius, anticipating that the Goths would attempt to besiege Ariminum, sent infantry forces to replace John and his cavalry unit, ordering John along the Via Flaminia with a thousand horsemen to arrive in Ariminum before the retreating Goths did. Belisarius's order was motivated by two reasons: first, the Goths would not consider a small garrison with an unknown commander as a threat and focus their attention elsewhere. Second, John's cavalry would not be as effective in a siege as it was when it was harassing the Goths in the open. [16] However, John disobeyed the orders and stayed in Ariminum with the infantry reinforcements sent by Belisarius. [17] [18] [19]

Belisarius and Narses met at Firmum, where they convened a council of officers to decide whether the army should march to John's aid in Ariminum. Most of the officers opposed helping John, resentful of his challenge to Belisarius's authority. Narses, however, appealed to Belisarius and his officers to carry out the rescue. [19]

Now if John treated your commands with insolence, most excellent Belisarius, the atonement you have already exacted from him is surely ample, since it is now in your power either to save him in his reverse or to abandon him to the enemy. But see that you do not exact from the emperor and from us the penalty for mistakes committed by John through ignorance. For if the Goths capture Ariminum at the present juncture, it will be their good fortune to have made captive a capable Byzantine general, as well as a whole army and a city subject to the emperor. [19] [20]

Narses' argument and John's message stating that he would be forced to surrender to the Goths in seven days if there was no support, convinced Belisarius to rescue John and Ariminum. [19]

Army movements and engagements

Siege

Quarter Siliqua of Vitiges (also known as Witigis) Quarter Siliqua of Witigis.jpg
Quarter Siliqua of Vitiges (also known as Witigis)

Vitiges besieged the town of Ariminum upon the arrival of the Gothic forces. They built a siege tower which, unlike during the siege of Rome, was not pulled by oxen, but moved by men stationed inside. The tower was placed relatively close to the wall with the expectation that it would be used the following day. During the night, the Byzantines sortied out of the town to dig a trench in front of the siege tower. When the Goths found out, they attacked the Byzantines, who retreated as soon as the trench was deep enough. In response, Vitiges had the trench filled with faggots before moving the siege over it. The weight of the tower caused it to sink slightly into the trench as the faggots were crushed and the earthwork, made of the dirt out of the trench, which was built behind it, stopped the advance entirely. [21] [22] Vitiges ordered that the night guards responsible for this setback be executed. [23]

Vitiges decided to withdraw, taking the tower with him. John wanted to prevent this and sallied out, but was unsuccessful at destroying the siege tower. Having suffered many casualties, Vitiges decided against storming Ariminum and began starving it out. [21] Needing fewer men for this, he also sent men to attack Ancon. [24]

Belisarius' deception

Schematic capturing the conceptual plan of Belisarius to break the siege of Ariminum. 538 Siege of Ariminum.svg
Schematic capturing the conceptual plan of Belisarius to break the siege of Ariminum.

Belisarius wanted to avoid actual fighting because the Goths outnumbered the Byzantines. He split his army into smaller groups, three of which were sent to the vicinity of Ariminum. The central idea was to surround the Goths from three sides, leaving only one safe passage to escape. [25] One group, led by Ildiger, was to move by sea, accompanied by a group led by Martinus on land. Meanwhile, Belisarius and Narses came through the Apennines, passing Urbisaglia. Their forces encountered a group of Gothic soldiers, who were defeated. The survivors fled back to the Gothic camp and claimed that the Byzantines were approaching with a large force from the north. This led the Goths to move their camps to the north of Ariminum. [26] [25]

In the meantime, Martinus' forces approaching from the south lit numerous campfires at night, which projected a larger force than the true Byzantine strength. [25] The appearance of the Byzantine fleet further shook the Goths. On 24 July 538, the Goths lifted their siege of Ariminum and moved to Ravenna. Belisarius and his army entered Ariminum around noon. [27]

Aftermath

After the siege, John declined to express any gratitude to Belisarius and instead claimed that Narses deserved the credit because it was Narses who had compelled Belisarius to come to his rescue. [27] Narses and John, along with their supporters, withdrew from the main army and acted independently from Belisarius. Byzantine forces, unable to act together due to division in their leadership, became ineffective. Poor coordination led to the loss of the major city of Mediolanum (modern day Milan) to the Goths in early 539. Procopius recorded that the Goths executed 300,000 [28] men, sold the city's women to Burgundians, and razed the city to the ground. [29] [30] In response to this setback, Emperor Justinian called Narses back to Constantinople, leaving Belisarius as the sole commander of the Byzantine forces in Italy. [31]

Scholarly assessment

Historians argued that Belisarius's actions during the Siege of Ariminum are notable primarily for achieving victory without a fight against a numerically superior adversary. Specifically, they praise his ability as a commander to anticipate the enemy's reactions and, through strategy and psychological warfare, make maximum use of the forces available to him to achieve success. [32] [33] Historian Ilkka Syvänne placed the break of the Siege of Ariminum as a prime example of Sun Tsu's principle of "Subjugating the enemy without fighting is the true pinnacle of excellence." [34]

See also

Footnotes

Notes

  1. Belisarius had 5,000 men under his command during the Siege of Rome. Although he received reinforcements, his army was still small compared to the Gothic army. [1]
  2. Estimated at 110,000 Goths, based on Procopius provided numbers. This assumes a starting force of 150,000 [4] for the Siege of Rome (537–538), a loss of 30,000 men during the siege, [5] and Vitiges leaving men behind to reinforce several Gothic outposts during his return to Arinimum (9,800 men [6] [7] ).
  3. The size of the army is plausible as it represented a national army in which all Goth males were required to serve in the army. [4] However, historian J. B. Bury considered it an exaggeration. [9] Historian Leif Petersen proposed an army size of 25,000–30,000 for besieging Rome, but considers Procopius's number to be a reasonable estimate of the total Gothic army in all their territories and navy. [10] Historian Roy Boss argued for a 40,000 strong Gothic army. [11]

References

  1. Syvänne 2021, pp. 139, 155.
  2. Bury 1958, p. 197.
  3. Syvänne 2021, pp. 161–162.
  4. 1 2 Syvänne 2021, p. 131.
  5. Syvänne 2021, p. 139.
  6. Hughes 2009, pp. 159–160.
  7. Syvänne 2021, p. 162.
  8. Hughes 2009, pp. 122–125.
  9. Bury 1958, p. 181.
  10. Petersen 2013, pp. 155–156.
  11. Hughes 2009, p. 126.
  12. Hughes 2009, pp. 157–158.
  13. Hughes 2009, pp. 156–157.
  14. 1 2 Procopius 1919, Book VI part x.
  15. Hughes 2009, p. 160.
  16. Hughes 2009, p. 161.
  17. Hodgkin 1896, p. 268.
  18. Procopius 1919, Book VI part xi.
  19. 1 2 3 4 Parnell 2015, pp. 119–120.
  20. Procopius 1924, Book VI part xvi.
  21. 1 2 Procopius 1919, Book VI part xii.
  22. Syvänne 2021, p. 163.
  23. Hodgkin 1896, p. 270.
  24. Procopius 1919, Book VI part xiii.
  25. 1 2 3 Syvänne 2021, p. 165.
  26. Procopius 1924, Book VI part xvii.
  27. 1 2 Procopius 1924, Book VI part xviii.
  28. Procopius 1924, Book VI part xxi.
  29. Parnell 2015, pp. 120–122.
  30. Bury 1958, p. 204.
  31. Parnell 2015, p. 122.
  32. Syvänne 2021, p. 166.
  33. Hughes 2009, p. 165.
  34. Syvänne 2021, p. 379.

Sources

Primary

  • Procopius (1919) [545–553 AD]. Procopius: History of the Wars, Books V. and VI. Translated by Bronson Dewing, Henry. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press via Project Gutenberg.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: ref duplicates default (link)
  • Procopius (1924) [545–553 AD]. Procopius: History of the Wars, Books VI and VII. Translated by Bronson Dewing, Henry. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. OCLC   491843455.

Secondary

Further reading