The revolt of Alaric I was a military conflict between the Roman Empire and a rebel army, probably composed mainly of Goths.

Other early sources are Zosimus, a historian who probably lived about half a century after Alaric's death, and Jordanes, a Romanized Goth who wrote a history of his people around 550.

Emperor Valens who had a serious shortage of manpower for his armies saw in the newcomers a new source of soldiers and concluded treaties with the Goths.

This was an extraordinary circumstance, because for the first time in the history of the empire barbaric people were settled within its borders and not direct subjected to imperial laws.

Many newcomers tried to integrate into Roman society, but other Gothic groups attempted to maintain cohesion as well as gain greater power in negotiations by practicing distinct customs including an elected kingship.

[8] The background of this dispute went beyond mere territorial importance, as the region was the empire's main recruitment area for soldiers.

They demanded more security from him and chose Alaric, who had made a name for himself in an earlier, smaller uprising after the Maximus campaign - who also aspired to an important position within the Roman army - as their king.

[10] In any case, he had distinguished himself as leader and gained the appointment as a Roman comes rei militaris, though he was evidently dissatisfied with this position.

As ancient sources remain vague as to the exact composition of the emerging rebel army, historians continue to dispute whether it was mainly recruited from Gothic settlers or composed of a mixed force of disgruntled veterans of the Frigidus campaign.

Proponents of an ethnically mixed uprising point out that many armed, disgruntled groups were known to operate in the Balkans at the time, several of whom were either Roman or non-Gothic Barbarians.

Critics of this theory point out that, if the Goths were a minority in the rebellion, the rebels would have probably lost their Gothic identity over time; however, this was not the case.

As the rebel army then marched across the Roman Empire, it absorbed a great number of volunteers and stragglers of non-Gothic origin.

After commitments from Rufinus, the Pretorian prefect of the East, and chief adviser to Arcadius, the siege of Constantinople was lifted and the Goths moved further west.

Stilicho's propagandist Claudianus accuses Alaric's army of looting carried out far south of the mountainous peninsula Peloponnese, reporting that only Stilicho's surprise attack with his western field army (that he had sailed from Italy) put an end to the looting when he forces drives Alaric's troops northward in Epirus.

Rufinus, the strong man of the east, feared losing this area to the west with a victory of Stilicho over the Goths.

[16] In addition, the emperor demanded that Stilicho dismiss any Eastern Roman troops who were serving under his command at the time.

[18] Historian Roger Collins points out that although the rivalry created by the two halves of the empire, that fought for power, worked in the favor of Alaric and that of his people.

He kept his power over Alaric as a trump card in the political slit-off between the two parts of the empire that arose when Stilicho decided to pressure the emperor to send Eutropius away and accept him as counsel.

In doing so, the Eastern Empire made all kinds of commitments to the Goths and granted them better conditions and additional guarantees of local products.

Alaric obtained the title of magister militum per Illyricum,[25] which meant that he held the highest military rank in this province.

[26] With the prefecture under his control, Alaric was able to impose the cities his will and plunder their arsenals so that he could deliver and improve the weapons of his troops.