• Des [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Theres significant debate that the transition from late antiquity to the early middle ages (aka “Dark Ages”) was just evolutionary and technology and state capacity remained the same, but just changed hands.

        I personally don’t agree with that theory. There was definitely massive deurbanization (population crash) and loss of state capacity (the Romans had fucking factories producing weapons and armor, etc)

        There’s a reason the East Roman Empire was wiping out 10,000 man armies with like less then 500 guys. They still retained tight organization and those production facilities. Every soldier, decked in armor and with excellent weapons.

        • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 month ago

          fabricae were a unified logistical system connected to ancillary state organs, new states in western roman territory got their hands on maybe one node, it wasn’t very useful cut off from the other nodes. the notitia dignitatum even implies they were each specialized in one bit of kit. So even with the desire or determination to utilize such infrastructure, it wouldn’t bear much fruit, it’d be like seizing an ammunition factory when you don’t have a rifle factory or a train to deliver raw materials to make ammunition.

          fabricae in the east, which we have no idea of the fate of, probably were more reorganized/privatized than lost altogether (i mean besides the ones they literally lost to the caliphate), particularly the Constantinople factory ordered by Justinian seems irresistibly related to the later armies/regiments permanently stationed and outfitted there, however the name and particulars might have evolved.