Byzantium was heir to a tradition of Greek/Graeco-Roman military literature stretching back to the fourth century BC. This expansive genre, ranging from general compendia to specialised monographs, encompassed prescriptive tactical handbooks, technological blueprints for siege machinery, collections of exemplary historical stratagems and maxims, and didactic manuals for gentlemen who aspired to be generals. Diversity of content, style, language and approach reflects differences of authorship, audience and literary-cultural milieu. Byzantine reception of this military-literary heritage and its inherently intellectual approach to war fostered two complementary strands of scholarship – the collection, copying, editing and adaptation of surviving texts from classical antiquity and the composition of numerous new treatises. The genre seemingly flourished in the sixth/early seventh and especially late ninth/tenth centuries, coinciding with major shifts in Byzantine strategic priorities, though the intervening ‘Dark Age’ was perhaps less barren than is conventionally assumed. Ancient treatises exercised fluctuating and multifaceted influences – practical, educational, literary, lexical, ethical – on Byzantine military culture, and variously shaped and reflected the schooling, tastes, ethos and identities of an educated officer class, military aristocracy and even civilian elites. In addition, from the tenth century, military books written by ancient Roman authors and/or for Roman emperors played a rhetorical role in the self-conscious military-literary ‘renaissance’ and imperial resurgence of contemporary Rhomaioi.

Unsurprisingly, among Byzantine readers, writers and editor-copyists certain ancient military works became more popular and influential than others, with some attaining canonical status. Relative popularity or influence may be variously gauged in terms of manuscript tradition; explicit citations and references; editorial interest evidenced by recensions and interpolations; textual adaptations such as excerpts and paraphrases; and intertextual impact as models for the form, language and/or content of Byzantine compositions. To judge by these criteria, the three most authoritative, often-read and fashionable military ‘classics’ were Onasander's Strategikos (AD 49–57/58), a military-ethical treatise on the qualities, background and conduct of an ideal Roman general; Aelian's Taktikē Theoria (c. 106–113), a schematic exposition of the structures, deployment and manoeuvres of an arithmetically idealised Hellenistic army; and Polyaenus’ Strategemata or Strategika (c. 161–163), an excerptive compilation of historical ruses and aphorisms. Among military-technological treatises a clear favourite is less easily discerned, though Apollodorus’ Poliorketika (c. 101–102) seemingly enjoyed the fullest Nachleben. While scholarship has extensively addressed the late antique/Byzantine reception of Aelian and Polyaenus, Onasander's contribution, though widely acknowledged, lacks comprehensive, detailed or recent inquiry.