Flavius Claudius Iulianus

I've noticed that the armies of the Western Empire seemed to be holding their own under talented generals such as Stilicho, Constantius III and Aetius. After such generals died however, it seems as though the Western army suddenly became impotent overnight. What factors led to this apparent reliance on individual generals to maintain the army's capabilities?

The Romans did use the handheld manuballista later on though, didn't they? How often were they used and what were they used for?

Sorry about not coming back to this topic earlier... in any case, I have some more questions: I've heard that Catholic Trinitarianism was considered rather nonsensical amongst the barbarians, but how was it seen by the Romans themselves? I assume that the elite didn't have a problem with it, but I'm wondering how did the ordinary people view Catholic theology, and whether they even concerned themselves with religious matters at all. I remember Ambrose saying once that congregations were dwindling, but I'm not sure what context that was made in. In any case, were they simply "naive rustics" who didn't really care what their god was supposed to be, as long as they were able to live decently? Was the Christian in-fighting of the era a popular movement, or was it largely conceived and directed by the ruling elite? This brings me to a similar question; was the general population of Western Europe during this period of time largely Nicene, or was it more split? Individual states had their own religous views amonst the elite, but what did the people believe? What was the result of attempts by the authorities to enforce a particular creed? It was interesting to hear that North Africa remained largely Donatist throughout, despite the repressive measures of the Romans, Vandals and Byzantines; I suppose that this indicates that Donatism did have a sizeable base of support among the population. Was Donatism itself a kind of anti-state movement? And as a point of comparison, how did the Arab invasions affect Christians in conquered provinces? I have one more question: to what extent did the Catholic Church influence the decisions of secular authorities of Rome and the barbarian states? In the case of the Roman Empire, I've been getting the impression that they merely managed to influence individual emperors, rather than the apparatus of the state as a whole. Emperors such as Julian and Valentinian I were generally able to pursue religious policy of their own, while the same can't be said for emperors such as Gratian, Theodosius I, or his successors. There may have been a point where the state became too weak to set its own policy, but when it posessed that capability, it seems that it was an emperor's individual beliefs that were reflected in their decisions. Thanks for considering these questions, I appreciate the responses.

Hi everyone. I'm trying to find reasons as to why Catholicism eventually became the dominant form of Christianity in Europe during Late Antiquity and the Dark Ages, and it would be greatly appreciated if I received people's opinions here about this subject. I have some specific points in mind, but I think it's best if I wait and see the responses before I let my inferior knowledge become known. Also, it would be fantastic if I'm directed to some relevant books on the matter. Thanks in advance for the help!