03-07-2014, 03:09 PM
Evan wrote:
I would not argue that they "swithced to the Auxiliary organization" so much as they took the best traits of the Legionary and Auxiliary organization and tried to combine them.
In my research there is no real difference. What draws me to the auxiliary organisation is the ratio of infantry to cavalry because the cavalry numbers are in close vicinity to the numbers I have collected from the primary sources. I believe finding the rationale as to why the Romans called units Seniores will produce insights. For now I am going to explore the ratio of iuniores to seniores from the Servian constitution to see if anything can be determined. The ratio of iuniores to seniores if very different by the time of Diocletian began his rule. I will follow this up with a tally of the number of iuniores to seniores in the ND. It may be inconsequential but I won’t know until I try.
I would not argue that they "swithced to the Auxiliary organization" so much as they took the best traits of the Legionary and Auxiliary organization and tried to combine them.
In my research there is no real difference. What draws me to the auxiliary organisation is the ratio of infantry to cavalry because the cavalry numbers are in close vicinity to the numbers I have collected from the primary sources. I believe finding the rationale as to why the Romans called units Seniores will produce insights. For now I am going to explore the ratio of iuniores to seniores from the Servian constitution to see if anything can be determined. The ratio of iuniores to seniores if very different by the time of Diocletian began his rule. I will follow this up with a tally of the number of iuniores to seniores in the ND. It may be inconsequential but I won’t know until I try.
