Roman Legion in late Antiquity

[Mark Hygate]

With - a century being a standard 80+3 throughout (at full strength);

Which is as theroretical as your guess about the strength of the late roman legion. 8+)
Nice guess. Who is your 2nd and 3rd supernumerarius beside the centurio himself? And WHY?

Of course it is - because, apart from the Polybius construct we have nothing else of comparable detail. A century of 80 men (10 x contubernia of 8) with a Centurion, Optio and Signifer. My question back therefore, is why would this have then changed? There's no reason it should that we are aware of and therefore, without any countering information, why not suggest that it was still the same over 700 years later.
.................

However I doubt, that the legions of the limitanei in the 4th century were still about 3000 guys...................

But as with almost everything about late roman legions, we have no proof.

I do not suggest that the limitanei/border legions were all about 3,000 guys, but it is not an unreasonable figure and I can understand why it was and could be used - for many of them seem to have garrisoned multiple forts. What I will suggest, however, is that they were still the same old legions (in theory), just as the auxiliary alae and cohorts were still often the same left in place and now a 2nd Class to the Field Armies. They did still sometimes provide new temporary and occasionally permanent field army legio/detachments, so their abilities were not that far reduced and some may have still contained significant numbers.

Overall, however, the point is true - we have little or no information. So, is it not reasonable to theorize a reasonable construct and then see if it stands. It may not, it may have holes, but is it wrong to try? :errr: