How were officers trained?

[popularis]

The examples given by Theo were mainly sons of the senatorial order - Scipio was a military tribune, Publius Crassus and Titus had already been tribunes, and Titus had already held the post of quaestor. Constantine had spent most of his youth either at court or on campaign with the tetrarchic emperors, and was also a tribune ('of the first order', whatever that means) when he 'escaped' from Nicomedia and went to join his father in the west. Marius was probably equestrian, but was also an elected military tribune.

Equestrian examples are rather hard to find [1]! However, it seems to have been perfectly normal for even junior officers on campaign to take along with them groups of friends as 'contubernales' (the younger Cato, for example, took a large retinue away with him while a military tribune). Spending time on campaign, more than 'book learning', seems to have been the main way in which the Roman elite - including equestrians - acquired practical experience of military command. Have a look, for example, at Pliny, Ep. 8.14.4-5, and Statius, Silu. 5.2.164-165, 173, 180, or for a more well known example, Augustus' avowed aim, according to Suetonius, of encouraging the sons of senators to serve as equestrian prefects: to give them experience of military life (Suetonius, Aug. 38). Cicero says the same of Pompeius' time serving under his father (Cicero, pro lege Man. 28). It's also worth noting that Cicero's son's first equestrian prefecture appears to have involved 'war games' (equestrian military exercises), and it's only his second spell as a cavalry prefect where he appears to have taken a leading role on campaign. Compare Cicero's praise of his son at de Off. 2.45, with no mention of active command ("And yet, when Pompey placed you in command of an ala in theis war, you won the applause of that great man and of the army for your skill in riding and in spear throwing and for endurance of all the hardships of a soldiers life."), with his later service in 43/42BC.

For the interested, there's a very good article by Campbell: Campbell, J.B. (1987), ‘Teach Yourself How to Be a General’, Journal of Roman Studies 77, (1987) 13-29.

While modern novels etc tend to portray the aristocratic youth of Rome mincing about and writing salacious poetry all day, I'm sure that a great deal of their time would have spent on what we today might call 'military training' - even if to them it was no more than the stuff of everyday life!

Well, I'm not sure if we'd have called it 'military training', but there seems to have been a strong link - for example in Sicily - between Hellenistic gymnasia and an elite military ethos. That link might, I think, be extended to the Roman palaestra. Your point above about learning to be obeyed, and to lead, is also important, as is skill in oratory and, moreover, administration: management of a cohort or ala, let alone a military tribunate, would have involved a lot of 'paperwork'.

It also comes down to what junior officers were ultimately there to do! Military tribunes and cohort prefects, at least on campaign, would have rarely needed to act or think independently in a tactical situation. They'd be able to take their lead from the rest of the army and their commander. Keegan's point about military ethos among the British aristocracy seems to apply here as well: the sense of duty, and the importance of public courage and leadership to inspire their men, rather than military nous. Cavalry commanders, on the other hand, were far more likely to be involved in independent military action (skirmishing, or being caught in ambushes) - I don't think it's any surprise that cavalry prefects tended to be more experienced men.

blue skies

Tom

[1] Edit: in the Republican period, that is. I believe that Kleijwegt found some in the imperial period (Kleijwegt, M. (1991), Ancient Youth: The ambiguity of youth and the absence of adolescence in Greco-Roman society, Amsterdam.)