Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
How old did recruits have to be?
#1
What was the common age for new recruits, and what was the youngest known age for recruiting in the Imperial Roman Army?<br>
<br>
I've looked all over the internet for my answer, but have had no luck. Can anyone please answer this?<br>
<br>
Thank You. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/ugigbch.showPublicProfile?language=EN>Gigbch</A> <IMG SRC=http://gigbitchgraphics.homestead.com/files/AnimatedBouncyBall.GIF BORDER=0 WIDTH=10 HEIGHT=10> at: 4/22/01 5:04:43 am<br></i>
Reply
#2
Hey, welcome! I think we can help you.<br>
<br>
One answer: It depends. If you're talking about the legions, 18-23 was the typical spread. Auxilia were also recruited at about those ages. Recruits in the Praetorian Guard tended to be a bit older, even into their thirties.<br>
<br>
I can't speak with certainty about the earliest age ever recorded for a recruit, but I seem to recall seeing references to soldiers having been allowed to join as young as 15. These would have been the exception, though, or a temporary measure practiced only during crisis periods.<br>
<br>
Sander, why don't you give us some insight on the epigraphic evidence (from Roman inscriptions)?<br>
<br>
Hope this is of some help,<br>
<br>
Jenny <p></p><i></i>
Cheers,
Jenny
Founder, Roman Army Talk and RomanArmy.com

We are all travelers in the wilderness of this world, and the best we can find in our travels is an honest friend.
-- Robert Louis Stevenson
Reply
#3
Salvete<br>
<br>
During the republic citizens were liable for conscription from age seventeen. Repeated legislation against the recruitment of underage soldiers suggests that younger recruits could in practice be enlisted despite legal bars to do so. At this time the younger troops were used as skirmishers in the legions, light infantry javelineers with minimal protective equipment, who would normally avoid close combat. Those able to afford the necessary equipment could eventually join the heavy legionary infantry.<br>
<br>
The evidence available for the imperial army shows that the vast majority of known Roman troops enlisted between 18 and 23 years of age. The youngest recorded age of recruitment in the imperial army is fourteen for the legions and fifteen for praetorians, the eldest known legionary recruit was thirty six, a year above what seems to have been the theoretical maximum age (for referenes to inscriptions read Forni). Such ages should not be taken directly at face value for accuracy in measuring age was not as strict in our modern highly regulated age. The available evidence is distorted by some factors. The available statistics show remarkable concentrations of terms of service, ages of recruitment, discharge and death around multiples of five, suggesting rounding off of such numbers. It is remarkable that the exact legal minimum age for the imperial army is not preserved in the available source material, perhaps indicating that recruitment was more dependant on the physical fitness of a candidate rather than age. Some of the officers could also enter the army at a young age. Senatorial youths are attested as serving from as young as age sixteen.<br>
<br>
Nevertheless the evidence of recorded age may be supplemented by other sources of evidence to argue the case for recruitment of adolescents as boy soldiers at certain times. Representational evidence may indicate under age recruits. Some soldiers have been portrayed on their grave monuments along with their offspring, showing sons dressed in the same manner as their father with the military belt which may suggest that these children were in some way already incorporated in the army, though this is far from certain. Children of soldiers were at some point given rations, though this priviledge was eventually revoked, and offspring of soldiers formed an important source of recruits at all times, compulsory enlistment even becoming a legal requirement for army brats in the fourth century CE. Tacitus records the recruitment of underage soldiers as an abuse contributing to the Batavian revolt which seems to point to a continuation of the republican practice of occasional resorting to recruitment of troops below legal age limits. A grave stone from an imperial horse guard trooper shows his sons training in archery in preparation for future service.<br>
<br>
<br>
The principal works of interest that I have on the shelf are:<br>
<br>
Scheidel, W., 'Inschriftenstatistik und die Frage des Rekrutierungsalter römischer Soldaten' in: <i> Chiron</i> 22 (1992), 281-297.<br>
Scheidel, W., 'Rekruten und Überlebende: die demographische Struktur der römischen Legionen in der Prinzipatszeit' in: <i> Klio</i> 77 (1995), 232-254.<br>
<br>
Tacitus, <i> Historiae</i> 4.14 for recruitment of underage and overage soldiers.<br>
<br>
Plate 14 in Speidel's <i> Riding for Caesar</i> shows two boys training with a bow and stones.<br>
<br>
The tombstone of Aurelius Bitus from the third century CE (plate 27b in Junkelmann's <i> Die legionen des Augustus</i>) shows his four year old son dressed in similar fashion as his father including the omega buckle military belt.<br>
<br>
Further source that I have not consulted, but contain relevant information are:<br>
<br>
Forni, G., <i> Il reclutamento delle legioni da Augusto a Diocleziano</i> (Milan, 1953)<br>
Scheidel, W., <i> Measuring Sex, Age and Death in the Roman Empire, JRA Supplement21</i> (Ann Arbor, 1996).<br>
<br>
Vale,<br>
<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst<br>
<p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showLocalUserPublicProfile?login=sandervandorst>Sander van Dorst</A> at: 4/22/01 4:14:31 pm<br></i>
Reply
#4
I am very grateful to both of you for all of the information you have given me. It will be extremely helpful.<br>
<br>
Thank you. <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#5
Oh, you're more than welcome. But if I may ask, what project are you working on that you need this info for?<br>
<br>
Jenny <p></p><i></i>
Cheers,
Jenny
Founder, Roman Army Talk and RomanArmy.com

We are all travelers in the wilderness of this world, and the best we can find in our travels is an honest friend.
-- Robert Louis Stevenson
Reply
#6
This information was actually for a debate between a friend and myself. She said one had to be at least 18 years old to join the Imperial Roman Army, and I said it had to be much younger, since children were getting married at 12. I hope you don't feel I've wasted your time. I'm sure there are many lurkers out there who could use this information for more worthwhile pursuits.<br>
<br>
Thank you again for your response. I found all the details very interesting, some of which I hadn't even considered before.<br>
<br>
Have a wonderful night.<br>
<!--EZCODE CENTER START<center> <i> -Gig</i></center><!--EZCODE CENTER END <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#7
Salve,<br>
<br>
That would be morning for us in Europe.<br>
<br>
You are welcome. The percentage of underage soldiers is however extremely low (about 1 to 3%) compared to the vast numbers recruited after eighteen and the evidence is possibly tainted by fuzzy reckoning of ages.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showLocalUserPublicProfile?login=sandervandorst>Sander van Dorst</A> at: 4/23/01 7:38:50 am<br></i>
Reply
#8
Time-wasting? Not at all! We love talking about this stuff. You're always welcome.<br>
<br>
J. <p></p><i></i>
Cheers,
Jenny
Founder, Roman Army Talk and RomanArmy.com

We are all travelers in the wilderness of this world, and the best we can find in our travels is an honest friend.
-- Robert Louis Stevenson
Reply
#9
Thanks, J. I appreciate it. <p></p><i></i>
Reply


Forum Jump: