Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Training Foreign Troops-Roman Evidence?
#1
I was discussing with a friend the current discussion in the United States to arm Syrian rebels in the fight against ISIS. Does anyone know of an instance in Roman history (say from 509 B.C. through A.D. 476) in which the Roman army ever trained or equipped foreign troops to deal with a distant conflict that could have been seen as a threat to Rome's interests? In other words, did Rome ever do anything like what we have done/are doing with regard to equipping/training foreign troops, or did Rome always send in legions and do it herself?

This is not to be a political debate on contemporary issues, but merely a discussion of ancient responses to distant conflict.

Thanks!
Reply
#2
Yep, they did that all the time. Aetius did this with the Hun Foederati, for example.
Reply
#3
During the 2nd Punic War, Rome sent some centurions to Numidia to help train Syphax's infantry when he was still an ally of Rome and was warring with other Numidians loyal to Carthage. During the Civil Wars, Quintus Sertorius sent officers to the court of Mithridates to train their infantry, while he was at war with the Roman Republic (Sullan dominated government).
Reply
#4
Thank you! Very helpful!
Reply
#5
Quote:Yep, they did that all the time. Aetius did this with the Hun Foederati, for example.

Before the Huns turned it could be argued Aetius was just training his own men.

Athenians however sent help to the Helot Rebellion after the Spartans sent back the help sent to Sparta caused the popular assembly to turn on Sparta.

Sparta sent a general to Syracuse.

Independently Xanthippus did exactly what are referencing; although without a state ordering it that doesn't really count.

Athens helped the Ionian Revolt so much that the Persians blamed them and the emperor had his servant remind him to remember the Athenians; but what is recorded is sending triremes not trainers.
Dan
Reply
#6
Good point. The Huns we often call Aetius' Foederati technically were not Foederati as there was no treaty established between the Romans and Huns calling on them for military service; nor were they on Roman lands prior to 439.

Technically, they were all Bucellarii.
Reply
#7
But still there for Aetius' benefit; although poor Aetius after all he did with the Huns they turned against him for a woman :-P
Dan
Reply
#8
I think one of the depictions on Trajan's column is of Dacians besieging a Roman fort in the same manner as the Romans undertook sieges. I have read that one of the conditions for peace made by Decebalus to Domitian was that the Romans supply him with engineers and equipment. They seemed to know a lot about Roman tactics as well but whether the Romans supplied trainers as part of peace terms or conditions or whether they were Roman deserters doing the training I suppose we will never know. :-)
Regards
Michael Kerr
Michael Kerr
"You can conquer an empire from the back of a horse but you can't rule it from one"
Reply
#9
Quote:But still there for Aetius' benefit; although poor Aetius after all he did with the Huns they turned against him for a woman :-P

Actually they turned against him over the succession of the Frankish throne.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Roman troops in Thuringia ? Simplex 17 6,325 09-17-2021, 01:33 PM
Last Post: Simplex
  Roman militia and garrison troops Legate 0 508 02-16-2019, 07:28 PM
Last Post: Legate
  Livy and Foreign Engagements Jugibar 2 1,231 04-27-2013, 04:58 AM
Last Post: Jugibar

Forum Jump: