03-07-2002, 12:10 PM
Hi Sander,<br>
<br>
You said "The imperial army retained a number of the characteristics of a militia army, retaining for instance conscription, now enforced for a longer stint than usual before, and in general (with the exception of the praetorians) requiring soldiers to acquire their equipment at their own costs"<br>
<br>
According to A.K.Goldsworthy in his book The Roman Army at War 100BC to 200AD page 28 "the majority of men in the legions under the principate were volunteers.<br>
He makes a note of a ref. to P.A.Brunts work "Conscription and Volunteering in the Roman Imperial Army". AKG then goes on to say that conscription was more common in the Auxilia.<br>
<br>
Another "Warfare in the Ancient World" Sir John Hackett page 170 Lawrence Keppie on the Late Reublican Roman says "Two major reforms are nowadays ascribed to Marius. The first was his sweeping away of the old system by which men were conscripted for a fairly short span of 6 years and their replacement by volunteers who remained under arms for much longer periods."<br>
<br>
He then goes onto talk about volunteers raised by Marius from the capitae censi, a class of citizenry who owned no property and who were thus normally excluded from military service. (this to me alone says the State provided the necessary clothing and equipment to the soldier !)<br>
<br>
More importantly he talks of a law being passed in 122 BC by Gaius Gracchus of the state providing the soldiers clothing. The provision of arms, weapons and clothing by state factories. already normal by Marius's time, must have encouraged uniformity of equipment, militating old divisions. (And again).<br>
<br>
In the same book under The Empire by Dr Brian Dobson, this system remains in place and that conscription was only forced upon by local circumstances or disasters.<br>
<br>
Dr Brian Dobson then goes onto discuss the burden on the state to provide land and money grants of cessation from military duty was considerable and if the State did not provide such grants at the end of a soldiers military service then rebellions were more than likely to occur !<br>
<br>
This and the rise of equipment factories and clothing mills during the Empire shows that the Principate provided the Legionaries with equipment and clothing initially, you even provided evidence for such practice from Vegetius, yet based on the evidence you have provided above the legionaire would have to subsequently provide for themsleves if damage or loss occurred to the equipment. (This would not have been as frequent as we are led to believe).<br>
<br>
As for Vegetius, he is one of the worst to choose from when considering evidence it is well known that he takes information from throughout Roman History and "polishes" it to fit into his arguments and thereby creating archaisms.<br>
<br>
IMHO we need more evidence and hopefully discussions like this on forums will help generate interest and useful debates.<br>
<br>
Kind Regards<br>
<br>
Mark<br>
<p></p><i></i>
<br>
You said "The imperial army retained a number of the characteristics of a militia army, retaining for instance conscription, now enforced for a longer stint than usual before, and in general (with the exception of the praetorians) requiring soldiers to acquire their equipment at their own costs"<br>
<br>
According to A.K.Goldsworthy in his book The Roman Army at War 100BC to 200AD page 28 "the majority of men in the legions under the principate were volunteers.<br>
He makes a note of a ref. to P.A.Brunts work "Conscription and Volunteering in the Roman Imperial Army". AKG then goes on to say that conscription was more common in the Auxilia.<br>
<br>
Another "Warfare in the Ancient World" Sir John Hackett page 170 Lawrence Keppie on the Late Reublican Roman says "Two major reforms are nowadays ascribed to Marius. The first was his sweeping away of the old system by which men were conscripted for a fairly short span of 6 years and their replacement by volunteers who remained under arms for much longer periods."<br>
<br>
He then goes onto talk about volunteers raised by Marius from the capitae censi, a class of citizenry who owned no property and who were thus normally excluded from military service. (this to me alone says the State provided the necessary clothing and equipment to the soldier !)<br>
<br>
More importantly he talks of a law being passed in 122 BC by Gaius Gracchus of the state providing the soldiers clothing. The provision of arms, weapons and clothing by state factories. already normal by Marius's time, must have encouraged uniformity of equipment, militating old divisions. (And again).<br>
<br>
In the same book under The Empire by Dr Brian Dobson, this system remains in place and that conscription was only forced upon by local circumstances or disasters.<br>
<br>
Dr Brian Dobson then goes onto discuss the burden on the state to provide land and money grants of cessation from military duty was considerable and if the State did not provide such grants at the end of a soldiers military service then rebellions were more than likely to occur !<br>
<br>
This and the rise of equipment factories and clothing mills during the Empire shows that the Principate provided the Legionaries with equipment and clothing initially, you even provided evidence for such practice from Vegetius, yet based on the evidence you have provided above the legionaire would have to subsequently provide for themsleves if damage or loss occurred to the equipment. (This would not have been as frequent as we are led to believe).<br>
<br>
As for Vegetius, he is one of the worst to choose from when considering evidence it is well known that he takes information from throughout Roman History and "polishes" it to fit into his arguments and thereby creating archaisms.<br>
<br>
IMHO we need more evidence and hopefully discussions like this on forums will help generate interest and useful debates.<br>
<br>
Kind Regards<br>
<br>
Mark<br>
<p></p><i></i>
