Age of recruits in the Roman Army

[Marcus Mummius]

Salvete,

What do we know about the age of recruits in the roman army? Is a minimum age for legionary recruits known?

Valete,
Falco

[Ironhand]

I've always heard 16, but unfortunately I don't have a first hand source aside from what other people have said and quoted.

[jkaler48]

I've always heard 16, but unfortunately I don't have a first hand source aside from what other people have said and quoted.

Also I suspect big enough to look old enough as in the US Army up to and including the Second World War.

[Tarbicus]

I've always heard 16, but unfortunately I don't have a first hand source aside from what other people have said and quoted.

Also I suspect big enough to look old enough as in the US Army up to and including the Second World War.

I don't.

Many recruits were in their twenties. That's a broad stroke, and in time of crisis younger would be okay. But the documented average seems to be 20+.

It don't tie in with modern recruitment practice, but tough titty.

[Magnus]

I thought I heard of one crisis where 14 year olds were permitted?

[wulfgar60]

I do know that many Militaries up until recent times, had a high official admittance age of around 21 for rank and file. The attainment of legal adulthood. Farmers and Small businesses used their children as labor. Had legal control of their children until adulthood. And didn't wish to lose the labor.

However such a rule was often broken.

In this day and age, many parents are ridding themselves of a financial burden!

[Tita Iuventia Martia]

Avete,
As far as I know: usual age of recruits was seventeen or eighteen, I am not sure now :oops: If a roman boy has put off his toga praetexta and has donned his new toga for citizens (white toga - toga candida?), he was adult man and he could have entered the forces legaly. Personaly, I know about cases where recruits were younger than seventeen: in critical times for Rome. In my opinion: It was not common to join up in four-teen but it was possible. Also, as far I know, a recruit could have been older than seventeen, for instance twenty and more. Easily, you could have entered the forces, when you were able to fight :-) )

vale and regards

[Carlton Bach]

16 is the age at which the Republican dilectus began (IIRC Polybius says so, not sure there), so it is reasonable to assume this was the age Romans thought you could be a soldier at. I am not sure whether this ever functioned as a minimum age, but doubt it because that's not how Roman law worked. More likely, it was a common sense guesstimate, because there aren't a lot of fourteen-year-old boys physically able to handle the pilum and scutum.

The actuasl recruitment age is another question, and for the Principate we have reasonably good data for that. Soldiers' tombstones typically include the deceased's age and length of service, so (with caveats about veterans, those woth a missio causaria, and the Roman habit of giving ages in roud five-year lustra rather than exact years) we can get a reasonable estimate of the age men joined the army. The answer is typically in their early twenties, with outliers as low as fifteen and as high as 35. The widespread rounding to five-year figures means we can't be more exact than that, but the biggest clustering is typically '20', with a second cluster at '25'.

[fasta]

“Next let us examine at what age it is appropriate to levy soldiers. Indeed if ancient custom is to be retained, everyone knows that those entering puberty should be brought to the levy .â€

[fasta]

Avete,
As far as I know: casual age of recruits was seven-teen or eigh-teen, I am not sure now :oops: If a roman boy has put off his toga praetexta and he has attired his new toga for citizens (white toga - toga candida?), he was adult man and he coult has entered the forces legaly. Personaly, I know about cases, when a recruits were younger than seven-teen: in critical timmes for Rome. In my Oppinion: It was not common, joint up in four-teen, but it was possible. Also, as far I know, a recruit coult has been older than seven-teen, for instance twenty and more. Easyly, you coult have entered the forces, when you was able to fight :-) )

vale and regards

I'm sure if the need was great it would be a case of who can ever hold a spear will do.

[Sean Manning]

In the Republic, I think recruitment was from age 17 to age 46 under normal circumstances. (That might mean age 16 to 45 based on the wierd way Romans counted). I remember one tribune of the plebs who tried to stop younger boys from being recruited, but can't name him. In practice, conscripts were mostly men in their late teens and early twenties who hadn't married (Rosenstein, Rome at War). This can be seen, for example, in the fact that there were 1000 velites (very young men), 2400 hastati and principes (somewhat older, maybe in their early twenties?), and only 600 triarii (older men and veterans) in the Polybian legion.

[D B Campbell]

What do we know about the age of recruits in the roman army?

Interesting question. Here's a random selection of raw data:

Late Roman cemetery at Concordia
AE 1890, 143: Fl(avius) Ursacius
vixit XL / militavit XX (Recruited aged 20)

AE 1891, 102: Fl(avio) Ziperga
vixit XXVII / militavit VIII (Recruited aged 19)

AE 1891, 104: Fl(avio) Cascinivo
vixit XLIII / militavit XXIII (Recruited aged 20)

Fleet
AE 1899, 97: Bubentis Tharsae / miles classis Germanicae
vixit XLV / militavit XVIII (Recruited aged 27!)

AE 1912, 184 : M(arco) Baebio Celeri / miles classis praetoriae Misenensis
vixit XL / militavit XVIIII (Recruited aged 21)

Rome/Carthage Cohorts
AE 1907, 170: L(ucius) Cornelius Maximus / miles cohortis I urbanae
vixit XXXX / militavit XVIII (Recruited aged 22)

AE 1913, 27: Q(uintus) Valerius Hostilian(us) / miles cohortis I urbanae
vixit XXX / militavit XI (Recruited aged 19)

AE 1908, 226: M(arco) Fl(avio) Flaviano / miles cohortis XIIII urbanae
vixit LII / militavit XXII (Recruited aged 30!)

AE 1911, 193: L(ucio) Oclatio Florentino / miles cohortis I praetoriae
vixit XXIIII / militavit VI (Recruited aged 18 )

AE 1913, 108: L(ucius) Sextilius Probus / miles cohortis I praetoriae
militavit VIII / vixit XXIII (Recruited aged 15)

AE 1914, 273: T(ito) Caesio Aprili / miles cohortis XII urbanae
militavit XI / vixit XXXV (Recruited 24)

AE 1916, 50: M(arco) Caracallio Lupo / miles cohortis IX praetoriae
militavit IIII / vixit XXII (Recruited aged 18 )

AE 1924, 117: Aur(elius) Victor / eques singularis Augustorum
vixit XXVIII / militavit X (Recruited aged 18 )

AE 1934, 139: L(ucius) Terentius Secundus / miles cohortis VI praetoriae
militavit XIII / vixit XXXVI (Recruited aged 23)

Legions
AE 1925, 63: Aurelius Quintianus / miles legionis II Traianae
militavit XIIII / vixit XXX (Recruited aged 16)

AE 1939, 157: Ti(berius) Cl(audius) Fatalis / centurio legionis II Augustae etc.
vixit XLII / militavit XXIII (Recruited aged 19)

AE 1946, 212: L(ucius) Scultidius Rufus / eques legionis VIII Augustae
militavit XXVI / vixit XL (Recruited aged 14)

AE 1955, 26: Aur(elius) Eptecentus / miles legionis II Parthicae
vixit XL / militavit XIIII (Recruited aged 26)

Just a purely random selection, showing the wide age range!

[Marcus Mummius]

Thanks guys, this is all wonderfull information . If anyone has more, please add. It's one of these questions a lot of people think they have an answer too, but few can back their statement with hard evidence...

Vale,
Falco

[Tita Iuventia Martia]

Avete,
Yes, wonderfull informations! Thank you all :-) )

vale and regards

[hansvl]

For this topic it might be interesting to read this article:
W. Scheidel: lnschriftenstatistik und die Frage des Rekrutierungsalters romischer Soldaten, Chiron 22, 1992, 281-297.

I haven't read it (yet), so I don't know his conclusions.

Greets,

Hans