Battle of Adrianople, 378

Click here to view animation.

(Ensure you hit F5 or View Show)
Animation not displaying properly?

Emperor Flavius Valens versus Fritigern: A Gothic army under Fritigern fights for not only its own but its families’ lives as well against a Roman army under Valens. Can Fritigern delay Valens long enough for his cavalry to turn the tides?


While this battle is often viewed as a decisive battle that accelerated the decline of the Roman Empire, it would be more accurate to say that the Roman defeat indicated the Empire’s growing inability to assert its authority over its porous borders. Historians often refer to this period in Roman history as the “Barbarian Invasions.” However, these “invasions” were little more than migration of people south and west in to the Roman Empire, what the more astute historians refer to as the “Age of Migration” between 370-568. With this in mind, the Battle of Adrianople is really more of a story of refugees revolting against their host. Far from accelerating the destruction of the Roman Empire, which lasted at least another 600 years by even the strictest standards, the Goths and other “barbarian” migrants settled within the Empire and became a transformative part of it.


It is easy to see why the Romans lost this battle. Faced with a Gothic force occupying a good defensive position and expecting reinforcements, Valens failed to either launch a rapid, well-organized assault and destroy the Gothic infantry before the Gothic cavalry arrived or isolate the Gothic infantry and their families on the hill and prepare for the Gothic cavalry’s arrival. Either of these courses of action would have been reasonable but Valens did neither. Fritigern meanwhile conducted an excellent delaying operation by disrupting the Roman attack with use of fire and smoke and occupying a strong defensive position until his cavalry arrived. The end result was “relatively fresh troops fighting hot, tired, and thirsty men who were surprised by the unexpected appearance of enemy reinforcements” (MacDowall, 2001: 89). In this battle, it is easy to identify two extremely common reasons for the Romans being in this predicament.

First, Fritigern’s effective use and exploitation of tactical intelligence assets gave the Gothic army a distinct advantage over the Roman army from the outset:

Fritigern used his scouts to detect the approach of the Roman army in time to recall his cavalry. Valens failed to use his intelligence capabilities and had no idea where Fritigern and his army were. Valens stumbled into the Gothic positions by accident and could not exploit the absence of Fritigern’s cavalry. (Gabriel and Boose, 1994: 458)

In other terms, Fritigern operated well within the Roman decision cycle and was able to react to events more quickly and effectively as a result.

Second, Valens and his subordinates underestimated their enemy at all levels:

all the Roman commanders, with the possible exception of Sebastian, acted with the typical arrogance of a well-equipped, ‘civlised’ army dealing with what they saw as a rabble. They allowed themselves to be drawn into battle on three occasions (Marcianople, Ad Salices and Adrianople) without propert preparation or reconnaissance and without ensuring that the odds were stacked in their favour before committing to a fight. (MacDowall, 2001: 89)

Ineffective reconnaissance and hubris are of course all too common themes that did not begin or end at Adrianople, and carry on to modern combat.

Gabriel and Boose take issue with the idea Adrianople “demonstrated the newly discovered battlefield supremacy of cavalry over infantry” because the Roman defeat “was essentially due to tactical stupidity on the part of poor field commanders who exposed unprepared and exhausted Roman infantry to surprise cavalry attack” (1994: 456).

adrianople preview 2


You will notice that the recently upgraded PowerPoint animation varies quite a bit from the older video animation. This was one of the first battle animations I created and did not have access to a lot of the best sources on it. While I was still comfortable to keep the original animation (as seen in the video animation) posted for the last seven years, it was one I felt I needed to improve. I completed this animation before five years of university education and six years of experience in the military as an intelligence operator so it should not come as a surprise that my standards have improved, hence the basis of the 2015/2016 project of upgrading all animations. There are three major changes to Adrianople as of August 2016. First, I have revised the strength figures for each side down from 60,000 each side to MacDowall’s admittedly speculative but likely more accurate numbers (2001: 25-33). Second, I have reframed this battle away from being a barbarian invasion to a revolt among refugees in an age of migration. If anyone is interested, during my Master’s degree I actually researched and completed an essay on the significance of the Visigothic migration into the Roman Empire to contemporary debates about migration and the Western world. Third, I have drastically expanded my analysis of this battle with assistance from some excellent sources. I no longer think it is simply enough to show you what happened using colourful animation sequences. I feel it is also important to properly contextualize the battle and explain its result.

– Jonathan Webb

Works Consulted

Black, Jeremy. The Seventy Great Battles in History. New York: Thames & Hudson, 2004.

Davis, Paul K. 100 Decisive Battles from Ancient Times to the Present. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Dupuy, Trevor N. The Harper Encyclopedia of Military History: From 3500 BC to the Present, Fourth Edition. New York: HarperCollins, 1991.

Gabriel, Richard A. and Donald W. Boose Jr. The Great Battles of Antiquity: A Strategic and Tactical Guide to Great Battles that Shaped the Development of War. Westport: Greenwood, 1994.

Macdowall, Simon. Adrianople AD 378: The Goths Crush Rome’s Legions. London: Osprey, 2001.

“The Battle of Adrianople (Hadrianopolis)” Illustrated History of the Roman Empire. (accessed Jan. 27, 2008).

United States Military Academy History Department. “Atlas for Ancient Warfare.” United States Military Academy. (accessed Jan. 27, 2008).

Warry, John. Warfare in the Classical World. London: Salamander, 1980.

Zentner, Joe. “Adrianople: The Last Great Battle of Antiquity.” Military History. October 2005, (accessed Jan. 27, 2008).


Emperor Flavius Valens:

Gothic cavalry:

Gothic infantry:

Map of the Roman Empire:

Map of the world:

Roman cavalry:

Roman infantry:


If you enjoyed the Battle of Adrianople 378 battle animation, you may also enjoy these other battle animations:

Battle of Catalaunian Plains 451, the next battle chronologically on the site:

catalaunian plains preview 1

Battle of Walaja 633, another battle featuring the envelopment of both flanks maneuver:

walaja preview 1

Battle of the Bulge 1944, another battle featuring the arrival of reinforcements on the flanks:

the bulge preview 1Thank you for visiting The Art of Battle: Animated Battle Maps.

Readers Comments (8)

  1. I think the numbers and impact of the Gothic cavalry are highly inflated…see writing of T.S Burns as opposed to Oman. Nice animation though.

  2. There is actually a number of sources that suggest all numbers of “barbarian” enemies the Romans faced are highly inflated. This is based on the theory that man for man, fighters from less civilized armies were more aggressive, violent and overall more effective in combat than the Romans who were constrained by norms of society.

    I obviously do not have the knowledge of anthropology to decide if this theory is correct or not. In most cases, I use the lower numbers but for this battle, it seems plausible that a great number of Gothic cavalry must have been present to overcome such a strong Roman force.

  3. the roman army which were terminated here was the last important roman army. as i know.

    in the battle of chalons in 451, the army of aetius included many gothic warriors

  4. Ammianus suggests the Roman infantry (Legions) died hard, surrounded and hemmed in on all sides…what a disaster!!!! Valens was fool hardy to have under estimated his opponents who were after all merely seeking living space within the confines of the Empire. Evidence suggests that their (Goths) had actually been forced from their own territory by the movement of the Huns so this may well have left them with little choice other than to seek refuge for their families elsewhere. This is part of the ‘mover’ arguement promoted by some modern Roman historians.

    Certainly Adrianople was a battle NOT sought by the Goths since they sought to negotiate rather than fight. It seems that Valens was spoiling for a fight in order to teach the miscreant Goths a harsh lesson in the realities of life…..basically to make them heel. He should have waited for the Western army, which was being brought forward by his cousin and Western counter-part Gratian. His army’s additional strength would have been telling and might well have made the Goths reluctant to fight.

    This was, as Ammianus tells us a calamity to rival Cannae…..the flower of the Roman Eastern Comitatenses was destroyed and was never to again be such a force……truly a disaster for the Empire.

  5. This helped me a lot. Its a great article!!! I would love to read more.

  6. Thanks Katelynn!

  7. Thanks for the animation. I am looking at the disputes between the Christian Arians and the Christian adhering to the Nicene creed. With the death of Valens, an Arian, the dispute shifted and inclined Christians to accept the Trinitarian theology.

  8. I hate so much these barbarians.

Comments are closed.