Navy and army

[Guest]

Salve,<br>
<br>
That would be the <i> Notitia Dignitatum OC</i> XL, 22: <i> Praefectus numeri barcariorum Tigrisiensium, Arbeia</i>.<br>
<br>
Cf CIL VII, 285 = RIB 0601 <i> Deo / Mart<i> / Sabinu[s] / p(rae)p(ositus) et milit[es] /n(umeri) Barc(ariorum) s(ub) c(ura) / ei{i}us po[ s(uerunt</i></i> ('To the god Mars. Sabinus the commander and the soldiers of the unit of bargemen have erected (this) under his supervision').<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

Cheers Sander<br>
<br>
I thought it was from the Notitia that I recalled the reference, but I wasn't sure, and having moved house I cannot find anything quickly anymore (or for a while at least)<br>
<br>
Lucius <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/uluciuscassius.showPublicProfile?language=EN>Lucius Cassius</A> at: 4/22/01 7:32:55 pm<br></i>

[Praefectusclassis]

Hi,<br>
About the tertius ordo, I think my guess is as good as yours. It seems like a good possibility. Squadron size was possibly 10 ships/sq, fleets may have comprised something like 40+ ships, so 4 squadrons would fit. Evidence however, is, as usual, quite another matter.<br>
<br>
Considering the Barcarii, since they are late Roman units, would the fact that a unit was permanently stationed somewhere to ferry others units be an indication of the inability (finances?) of building a bridge?<br>
<br>
Greets<br>
<br>
Jasper <p></p><i></i>

[Guest]

Salve,<br>
<br>
The late Roman army build several pontoon bridges spanning the Rhine and the Danube to make campaigning against the tribes across the frontier easier. This was found highly threatening by the barbarians, who did not appreciate such invasion routes to their homesteads. The army still possessed the skills required for such tasks.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i></i>

[Praefectusclassis]

Hi,<br>
I didn't mean to say that the army lacked the skill to build a permanent bridge (which a pontoon bridge isn't), but perhaps they lacked the financial means to build one. It was just an idea though.<br>
By the way, isn't the Humber river quite a bit south of Hadrian's wall, or was the border moved south later on?<br>
<br>
Greets<br>
<br>
Jasper <p></p><i></i>

[Guest]

Salve,<br>
<br>
According to some ancient sources Britain was thought of as a province that cost more in the maintenance of its garrison than it made good in taxes and other revenue. This would support an argument for cutting costs in the British provinces. Nevertheless the strained economy of the later Roman empire did not prevent the government from massive investment in new fortifications throughout the empire, which , even if labour costs were kept low by using press ganged labour and otherwise idle troops, would require considerable financial resources. So one may have to consider other factors beside costs.<br>
<br>
Point taken, pontoon bridges are indeed something else then fixed bridges, though late Roman combat engineers were still as skilled as their predecessors in constructing those as well. For a late Roman fixed bridge in your own backyard there is the bridge at Cuijk.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst<br>
<br>
Addition<br>
<br>
The part of the <i> Notitia Dignitatum</i> dealing with Britain is considered to have retained many characteristics of a much earlier date than the date of composition and it is thought not to have been updated to reflect current affairs. It still lists units in a separate command stationed along Hadrian's wall however and it is likely that this still functioned as the northern border. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showLocalUserPublicProfile?login=sandervandorst>Sander van Dorst</A> at: 4/26/01 9:26:15 am<br></i>