+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Enlistment cycles (/showthread.php?tid=15989)
Enlistment cycles - Christian - 11-02-2009
I'm reading the book, 'Nero's Killing Machine' all about the 14th legion. This has introduced me to the idea that each Roman legion had mass enlistment, with no further recruiting or replacements until the previous enlistment had served out their 20 years (except in cases of where a legion suffered enormous casualties). I have to say this surprised me a lot, when you view the historical attrition rates on more recent regiments there seems to be a lot more losses to disease, accidents and desertion–let alone battle casualties-than you would expect a legion could sustain over 20-years without new recruits.
The book calls this a new development in understanding the Roman Army. So my question is: is this mass-enlistment idea an accepted theory? Or even considered fact now? Or do others, like you, reject it.
Any thoughts appreciated (also I did run a search to see if this question already exists as a thread, but couldn't find one, so please nudge me in the right direction if that's not the case).
Re: Enlistment cycles - D B Campbell - 11-02-2009
Quote:I'm reading the book, 'Nero's Killing Machine' all about the 14th legion.Big mistake! :lol:
Quote:... is this mass-enlistment idea an accepted theory?No. If it were true, we'd only see men enlisting every 20/25 years, which is demonstrably false (e.g. Lambaesis dedication lists).
Re: Enlistment cycles - Christian - 11-02-2009
I see. I thought it seemed like an incredibly problem-fraught system. I can't imagine what the roll call would be like in the 24th year.
Anyone pro this theory?
In general the book is ok, though I do have issues with a lot of the statements, a major one being the author's automatic acceptance of ancient estimates of the size of enemy forces. He also makes far too much reference to Roman 'uniforms' (it seems every man of the 14th was decked out in lorica segmentata :roll: ) you would hope this kind of ground level approach would avoid such misconceptions.
Re: Enlistment cycles - Praefectusclassis - 11-02-2009
No, there's very little in favor of this theory. (and for laughs, do a search on Dando-Collins' work here on RAT)
Re: Enlistment cycles - Gaius Julius Caesar - 11-02-2009
I have read about a 2 year alternation on discharges... so there could be a clue there?
Re: Enlistment cycles - D B Campbell - 11-02-2009
Quote:I have read about a 2 year alternation on discharges... so there could be a clue there?That's for auxiliaries, Byron. Some had served 25 years, some had served 26. Odd.
Re: Enlistment cycles - Gaius Julius Caesar - 11-02-2009
Ok, I thought it applied to legions as well.
It would seem a logical way to ensure the entire enlistment of veterans did not dissappear in one go, though!
Especially if there were more enlistments ongoing, say every 2 years or so.