Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
VI Ferrata
#1
Does anyone know the earliest dated reference to the use of the name 'Ferrata' by Legio VI? I'm guessing it's pre- or early Augustan, but I'm not sure. Are there any new theories about the derivation of the name? - the most common of those I've read refer to some unusually ferrous type of armour (?!), but are there any more definite ideas? <p></p><i></i>
Nathan Ross
Reply
#2
According to Lawrence Keppie, "The Making of the Roman Army", the first reference to a Legio VI as "Ferrata" is CIL IX 1613 (CVSI 36), an inscription concerning a colonist at Beneventum in 41 BC.<br>
<br>
Shaun<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>
Reply
#3
You should check our website, we have a pretty detailed history we did (although we have redone it recently with new info that is not posted... so if you see the mistake, we know about it). Sourced it too. New one must be on my laptop, or I would have posted it here.<br>
<br>
Justus Longinus<br>
Legio VI FFC <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#4
Interesting that the first mention of Ferrata shold be the Beneventum colonists - 41BC fits for those veteran troops demobilised after Phillippi. The odd thing is that this colony was the same one as Octavian was supposed to have used to form VI Victrix a few years later!<br>
<br>
What evidence is there, then, that a legion called VI Ferrata went to the east with Antony? I've read this in several places now - is it a sort of process of elimination?<br>
<br>
I'm supposing the assumption to be that since Octavian didn't name his own legio VI Ferrata, that name, and more importantly the insignia, Aquila and so on of the old legion must have been taken by Antony - to designate, surely, a legion of freshly recruited men! Thus Keppie's argument (that Antony's VI Ferrata was the 'true Caesarian legion', and Octavian's VI Victrix merely a duplicate) must be wrong...<br>
<br>
Rusty - on your site you mention that "the remainder of Legio VI Ferrata was taken by Antony to the East where it garrisoned Judea. (Life in Ancient Rome, Adkins and Adkins)... Legio VI fought in the Parthian War in 36 BC. (Life in Ancient Rome, Adkins and Adkins)"<br>
<br>
I've found the Adkins book, but it doesn't give any references for the statement - do you know of an original source for the presence of Ferrata in the east (especially the Judean garrison?). As far as I can discover, the only verifiable legions for Antony's eastern campaign are III Gallica (mentioned by Tacitus) and V Alaudae (another assumption - they were Antony's 'bodyguard' legion!) - plus possibly the four named legions from his Actium coin series. I've read in Adkins and elsewhere that Ferrata and X Equestris went with Antony, and that his XII Antiqua were 'really' XII Fulminata, but this never seems to be substantiated - any clues? <p></p><i></i>
Nathan Ross
Reply
#5
What you see is pretty much what we have, there are other contradictions and such, and we actually habve a fallacious history that we fleshed out with things that might have been but are unsubstatiated, but we are very careful to call it the Fallacious history, so the two cannot get confused. I suspect large vexillations cause issues, even today the 3rd Armored is in Iraq but has a headquarters here in the states... I think some of that accounts for the contrary informations. I would love to see anything else you find! <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#6
My interest in this question stems from some thinking I've been doing about the origins of the initial Augustan legions, and particularly the links between these and the earlier Caesarian units. It seems to be taken as read, following Keppie, that a direct ancestry can be traced - certainly an attractive prospect, but I think the picture is more complex.

This might be rather an academic issue, but nevertheless...

What, after all, was 'a Roman legion'? Was it the soldiers themselves, or was it the name, numeral and insignia (eagle and standards)? In the republic it connoted a single body of men, raised 'en bloc', fighting together for the period of a campaign and then being demobilised - there seems to have been little reinforcement, and the short terms of service usually didn't warrant this.

By Caesar's day, legions stayed under arms long enough to acquire a certain esprit de corps of their own - it's at this time that titles are being awarded for particular actions - X Equestris, for example, in Gaul. It would see, however, that the initial draft of men still comprised the legion proper, and fought on until depleted beyond value or demobilised - thus we have Caesar's sixth legion down to a few thousand men (?) in 47BC, but no new recruits being introduced. After these long-serving veteran legions were disbanded, however, it seems that the (by now rather prestigious!) titles, numbers and insignia were kept on and tranferred to new units, thus laying the groundwork for the 'Augustan establishment'.

In the case of VI Ferrata, the veteran at Beneventum in 41 implies that this legion was indeed the one raised by Caesar in 52, that fought with him through the Alexandrian war and the Zela campaign - its steadfastness at Zela seems a likely excuse for the unusual name being awarded. This, then, could be called 'Ferrata 1'. But this legion was retired in 46 or 45 and settled in southern Gaul. I don't think there's anything to link it with the legion that defected from Scipio in Africa.

Next we have Lepidus (or possibly Plancus?) reconstituting the legion from the colonies - but as it was so depleted, a large number of other men would need to be introduced - more than 50% of the total number. Even if Lepidus/Plancus used the old 'Ferrata' title and dusted off the eagle and standards, was this the same legion? As it must have fought at Philippi to have had settlers in 41BC, we can call this legion 'Ferrata 2'.

After Philippi, however, all the veteran troops under Antony and Octavian were sent back to Italy, and those that remained formed into Praetorian cohorts. As a legion called Ferrata turned up on the Augustan list after Actium, we can assume a continuity - somebody still had the eagle and the prestigious name!

As Octavian had his own VI Victrix (formed in part from the remains of 'Ferrata 2'!), we can assume that Antony had a 'Ferrata 3', composed almost totally of new recruits and men from Brutus and Cassius' armies, with perhaps a few of the old veterans as centurions. Still the same legion? Perhaps...

Antony's hypothetical 'Ferrata 3', then, was the one sent to the east. It may have marched on Parthia, but there's no proof. As for garrisoning Judea - Josephus has 'the legions' (all of them?) marching back to Syria after Sosius and Herod took Jerusalem. VI was in Judea much later, and perhaps there's some confusion there, but as yet I haven't found evidence of a Roman military presence under Herod.

After Actium, Augustus reorganised everything. He kept the name Ferrata and the number VI - perhaps recognising their admirable Caesarian origins - but how much else he kept we cannot know. By this time, the definition of a legion rested with the names and insignia, the record of battles, and everything else we generally associate with 'legion history'. If the Augustan legion was a 'Ferrata 4', this is the one that we know most about!
Nathan Ross
Reply
#7
Any new perspective/research on this topic?

VI Ferrata is certainly an interesting topic--as would be sourcing out the identity of any possible Roman garrison in Jursalem during Herod's tenure (and thus for the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth).
Bryan Dove
Reply
#8
Belay my last on the Jerusalem garrison--found it in another thread.

Still interested in more info on VI if anyone has something to add.
Bryan Dove
Reply
#9
Not sure if this is any help but Ritterling has the following on the early history of VI Ferrata:

Caesarian foundation (first mentioned in Gaul 52 BC)

Fought in Gallic and Civil wars and against Pharnaces

Settled in Arelate (CIL XII 83)

Re-actived for Spanish war 45 BC (Bell. Hisp. 12,5)

Fought at Philippi and then taken to the East by Antonius with 7 other veteran legions (App. Bell.civ. 5,3, and an inscription in Ephesos (Dessau 8862) referring to leg. VI “Makedonike”, according to Mommsen a title used by several legions having fought at Phillippi, a legion VI is also mentioned on Antonius’ legionary coins, and the fact that these coins were re-issued (? “restituiert”) during Marcus Aurelius’ Parthian war is taken as evidence that this legion VI survived into the Empire and thus must be VI Ferrata)

Settled at Beneventum, first reference to “Ferrata”

Ritterling believes that both VI Victrix and VI Ferrata trace their origins back to the Caesarian formation and that both titles refer to its steadfastness (cf. the “Iron Brigade”) and the exceptional number of (victorious) battles in which this legion took part during the Civil wars.
Regards,


Jens Horstkotte
Munich, Germany
Reply
#10
VI Ferrata was probably split up into Vexilliationes during one of the civil wars, and that's how it got to the east.
Reply
#11
Question - what does anyone know about VI Partica? It's under the command of the Magister Militum per Oriens in 395, and I was wondering if there was any possibility of Relation to VI Ferrata? I know it's dated back to the Tetrarchic era but I don't know if it was formed then.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Ferrata - Ironclad. Conjecture alert!!! Tarbicus 68 10,970 11-26-2006, 05:44 PM
Last Post: Tarbicus

Forum Jump: