03-07-2014, 12:13 PM
I'm a bit more controversal on this topic I'm afraid!
My view is that Diocletian, and then Constantine the Great, reorganised the legions by removing their cavalry and artillery elements, which in turn were formed into their own, separate units.
This left each legion as being composed soley of its infantry and officers. My view is that this legion strength would have been approximately 4800 men strong.
Diocletian and Constantine then divided each of these legions into two halves, one the Seniores, the other the Iuniores. Each of these new legions was 2400 men strong. Taking men on leave, sickness and other absences, I would say that a 2000 man strength is a more reliable figure. These new legions were then divided between the Western and Eastern halves of the Empire as was needed.
My view is that Diocletian, and then Constantine the Great, reorganised the legions by removing their cavalry and artillery elements, which in turn were formed into their own, separate units.
This left each legion as being composed soley of its infantry and officers. My view is that this legion strength would have been approximately 4800 men strong.
Diocletian and Constantine then divided each of these legions into two halves, one the Seniores, the other the Iuniores. Each of these new legions was 2400 men strong. Taking men on leave, sickness and other absences, I would say that a 2000 man strength is a more reliable figure. These new legions were then divided between the Western and Eastern halves of the Empire as was needed.
Adrian Coombs-Hoar