Late Roman Unit Sizes

[Flavivs Aetivs]

That is what I was trying to describe.

[ValentinianVictrix]

Hypothetically, if I decided to define the units of the Lanciarii and Mattiarii as light armed infantry, could I get away with calling the heavy infantry scutati?

I think so, yes. That is the sense in which I read Vegetius' use of the term. I would be careful about categorising the Mattiarii as light infantry, although their association with the Lanciarii suggests as much. We don't know what the mattium was, as far as I am aware. Personally, I do not think that it is the same as the mattiobarbulis but others may disagree.

I do not run with your idea of the Lanciarii fighting at close-quarters like the old hastati. Depictions of lanciarii on tombstones show them holding a clutch of javelins, which suggests to me that their role was to stand back and put down a barrage of missiles over the heads of the line infantry. Scutati seems much more descriptive of troops fighting in the line.

Surely though Michael the Lanciarii and the Mattiarii were heavy infantry because both Ammianus and the Notitia lists them as Legiones? I have seen their units names translated by others as 'The Spear-bearers' and 'The Mattock wielders'. I think most people know believe that the unit titles actually have nothing at all to do with the weapons, armour, clothing or fighting-styles implied by the unit names. They are more a nick-name if anything.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Hypothetically, if I decided to define the units of the Lanciarii and Mattiarii as light armed infantry, could I get away with calling the heavy infantry scutati?

I think so, yes. That is the sense in which I read Vegetius' use of the term. I would be careful about categorising the Mattiarii as light infantry, although their association with the Lanciarii suggests as much. We don't know what the mattium was, as far as I am aware. Personally, I do not think that it is the same as the mattiobarbulis but others may disagree.

I do not run with your idea of the Lanciarii fighting at close-quarters like the old hastati. Depictions of lanciarii on tombstones show them holding a clutch of javelins, which suggests to me that their role was to stand back and put down a barrage of missiles over the heads of the line infantry. Scutati seems much more descriptive of troops fighting in the line.

Surely though Michael the Lanciarii and the Mattiarii were heavy infantry because both Ammianus and the Notitia lists them as Legiones? I have seen their units names translated by others as 'The Spear-bearers' and 'The Mattock wielders'. I think most people know believe that the unit titles actually have nothing at all to do with the weapons, armour, clothing or fighting-styles implied by the unit names. They are more a nick-name if anything.

Mattock-Wielders (presumably you mean Axemen?) would be Mattiaci would it not?

[Longovicium]

Perseus details the Mattiaci as follows:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text...ttiaci-geo

MATTIACI

Eth. MATTIACI a German tribe, perhaps a branch of the Chatti, their eastern neighbours, probably occupied the modern duchy of Nassau, between the rivers Lahn, Main, and Rhine. They are not mentioned in history until the time of the emperor Claudius; they then became entirely subject to the Romans (Tac. Germ. 29), who built fortresses and worked the silver mines in their country. (Tac. Ann. 11.20) In A.D. 70, during the insurrection of Civilis, the Mattiaci, in conjunction with the Chatti and other tribes, besieged the Roman garrison at Moguntiacum (Mayence: Tac. Hist. 4.37); and after this event they disappear from history, their country being occupied by the Alemanni. In the Notitia Imperii, however, Mattiaci are still mentioned among the Palatine legions, and in connection with the cohorts of the Batavi. The country of the Mattiaci was and still is very remarkable for its many hot-springs, and the “Aquae Mattiacae,” the modern Wiesbaden, are repeatedly referred to by the Romans. (Plin. Nat. 31.17; Amm. Marc. 29.4; AQUAE MATTIACAE) From Martial (14.27: Mattiacae Pilae) we learn that the Romans imported from the country of the Mattiaci balls or cakes of soap to dye grey hairs. The name Mattiaci is probably derived from matte, a meadow, and ach, signifying water or bath. (Comp. Orelli, Inscript. Nos. 4977 and 4983; Zeuss, Die Deutschen, p. 98, foll.)

So it would seem that the Auxilia is perhaps named after this tribe which in turn is possibly named as those by the' water meadows'? I speculate obviously!

[ValentinianVictrix]

It is indeed odd that many Late Roman unit names are derived from tribes that had long ceased to exist.

[Longovicium]

Perhaps the tribal designation also survived as a territorial descriptor and that the unit was raised from Frankish recruits from that area or adjacent to it?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Germanic tribal identity was fluid, it's possible many still existed as Cantons but aren't mentioned because they were under a greater identity like Salii or Iuthungi

It's thought that the Lemovii went on to form the Rugii of Eugippiu, for example.

EDIT: It's clear that a number of units named after tribes were not recruited from them. The Heruli are a good example, being stationed in Gaul in the 4th century, while the Heruli were at that time bordering the Black Sea East of the Dniester.

[ValentinianVictrix]

Germanic tribal identity was fluid, it's possible many still existed as Cantons but aren't mentioned because they were under a greater identity like Salii or Iuthungi

It's thought that the Lemovii went on to form the Rugii of Eugippiu, for example.

EDIT: It's clear that a number of units named after tribes were not recruited from them. The Heruli are a good example, being stationed in Gaul in the 4th century, while the Heruli were at that time bordering the Black Sea East of the Dniester.

I'd be very careful with stating as bald fact that the Auxilia Palatina Heruli unit had not been recruited from the Heruls. They did enter Roman territory during the 3rd Century AD and it may well be the fact that a part of that tribe stayed north of the Danube in the area near to the Taifali tribe as the Taifali also were recruited into an Equites unit as well as a Auxilia unit.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I think we had a discussion about the Heruli in particular somewhere else. Either way, we have no idea whether the units named after Germanic tribes were actually recruited from those tribes, except in a few cases.

[Longovicium]

Evan, you stated that it is clear a number of units named after tribes were not recruited from those tribes. Can you advise me which ones? This is news to me that things were so clear cut! I would appreciate your sources for that statement. Thanks in advance.

[Nathan Ross]

Mattock-Wielders (presumably you mean Axemen?) would be Mattiaci would it not?

Aren't you confusing the Mattiaci with the Mattiari?

The latter was a legion - about which we know nothing much beyond the name. The former was a Germanic tribe, located east of Mainz. Mainz-Kastel was still being referred to as kastello mattiacorum as late as the 230s AD, and troops there were called milites mattiacorum. I don't think it unlikely that the original tribe later formed a subgroup of either the Franks or the Alamanni, but either way the name was still in use in the later period for a tribal civitatis.

I think we had a discussion about the Heruli in particular somewhere else.

We did. It's often assumed that there were two groups called the Heruli, either related or coincidentally bearing the same or similar name. One was in the east, the other apparently somewhere near the Rhine. Mythology suggests they were the same people and originated near the Baltic, but beyond that...

Evan, you stated that it is clear a number of units named after tribes were not recruited from those tribes. Can you advise me which ones?

The Sabini and Latini spring to mind - not really recruited from Sabines and Latins, presumably! I don't think Evan was suggesting that we know for certain where they were recruited though...

EDIT - I've mentioned before the early recruit to the Cornuti with an origo in Dacia. Not a tribal name, per se, but it might argue against the particular 'ethnic' origins of auxilia units.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Evan, you stated that it is clear a number of units named after tribes were not recruited from those tribes. Can you advise me which ones? This is news to me that things were so clear cut! I would appreciate your sources for that statement. Thanks in advance.

Things aren't clear cut. Some tribes with units named after them weren't around anymore: it doesn't mean they weren't recruited from Germanics. It's a naming convention.

Your sarcasm isn't appreciated either. If you want a list of Roman units named after Germanic tribes you can check the Notitia.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

The Sabini and Latini spring to mind - not really recruited from Sabines and Latins, presumably! I don't think Evan was suggesting that we know for certain where they were recruited though...

Sarson suggests that the cohors II Tungrorum millaria equitata civium Latinorum which is the same as the Milites Tungrecanorum in the Notitia (same stationing) is the Latini of Illyria, but this relies on the Pacatienses being the Numerus Pacensium rather than the two Cohortes Pacatianae in Spain and Tingitania.

[Renatus]

Aren't you confusing the Mattiaci with the Mattiari?

There are units of Mattiaci and units of Mattiarii in the Notitia, so they are clearly not the same. Bringing the tribe into the discussion just confuses the issue. The suffix -arius often means something like 'equipped with', e.g., sagittarius (pl. sagittarii), which is no doubt why it has been suggested that the Mattiarii got their name from a weapon called mattium but what it was, whether it was a weapon at all or whether the etymology is entirely different remains a mystery.

[Longovicium]

Evan, I was not aware I was using sarcasm. I was asking you to clarify a statement you made and also thanking you in advance for it. If you feel that came across as sarcastic, you have misjudged the post (always a problem on the internet).

I don't appreciate you labelling me as sarcastic in a public forum either. If you felt there was an issue then surely as a moderator, you should have approached me privately to explore it?