04-12-2014, 01:33 AM
Nathan wrote:
But why would a smaller unit be called an auxilium? The Roman words cohort and numerus both referred to units of less than legion size. Why therefore use a term which otherwise only connoted non-citizen troops?
During the principate, the auxiliary were defined by unit size (quingenariae and miliariae). I believe the term auxiliary in the Late Roman army still signifies a predetermined number of men. Let’s say for example, the term legion indicated 3000 men and the term auxiliary meant 1200 men.
By following the Servian system, when I increased the size of the tribe during Diocletian’s reign, and applied the increase to the auxiliary units of the principate, the terms quingenariae and miliariae became redundant. The old quingenariae increased to 600 infantry and the old miliariae increased to 1200 infantry, which are organised into two cohorts each of 600 men. With the ratio of infantry to cavalry for the auxiliary at 4:1, the 1200 infantry can theoretically have 300 cavalry, bringing the total to 1500 men. After applying the increase to the praetorian and urban cohorts, a praetorian and urban cohort numbered 2000 infantry accompanied by 200 cavalry. Here, the figure of 200 matches Julian’s bodyguard at Strasbourg.
Originally I believed Diocletian was responsible for the abolition of the tribal system, but having now matched all the empirical data for the Late Roman legion to the tribal system, as Diocletian is a pagan, he has no reason to abolish the tribal system. My new conclusion is it must have been Constantine, when he converted to Christianity.
But why would a smaller unit be called an auxilium? The Roman words cohort and numerus both referred to units of less than legion size. Why therefore use a term which otherwise only connoted non-citizen troops?
During the principate, the auxiliary were defined by unit size (quingenariae and miliariae). I believe the term auxiliary in the Late Roman army still signifies a predetermined number of men. Let’s say for example, the term legion indicated 3000 men and the term auxiliary meant 1200 men.
By following the Servian system, when I increased the size of the tribe during Diocletian’s reign, and applied the increase to the auxiliary units of the principate, the terms quingenariae and miliariae became redundant. The old quingenariae increased to 600 infantry and the old miliariae increased to 1200 infantry, which are organised into two cohorts each of 600 men. With the ratio of infantry to cavalry for the auxiliary at 4:1, the 1200 infantry can theoretically have 300 cavalry, bringing the total to 1500 men. After applying the increase to the praetorian and urban cohorts, a praetorian and urban cohort numbered 2000 infantry accompanied by 200 cavalry. Here, the figure of 200 matches Julian’s bodyguard at Strasbourg.
Originally I believed Diocletian was responsible for the abolition of the tribal system, but having now matched all the empirical data for the Late Roman legion to the tribal system, as Diocletian is a pagan, he has no reason to abolish the tribal system. My new conclusion is it must have been Constantine, when he converted to Christianity.
