Login

04-20-2002, 12:24 AM

What sort of auxillary forces existed in the late Republic? I have been attempting to determine the various infantry types (exclusive of archer units) that may have been drawn from the Greeks at about the time of the battle of Phillipa, but can find nothing but generalities. All the resources available to me that show specific types of auxillary units, seem to draw their information from Trajanic and later armies. Did Greek auxillaries fight for Brutus and Cassius against Octavius? How were they armed if they did? Connolly, Warry, Robinson, Embleton, et al mention auxillaries being "...equipped in their native manner..." but give no details. Does this mean that any Greeks fighting as auxillaries in the late Republic were equipped as their recent Macedonian predecessors?...as peltasts? Any guidance on this would be most helpful, if anyone else has found other sources that could provide such information 
 
Martius

04-22-2002, 09:49 AM

Auxiliaries as in the Auxilia units of the empire didn't exist as a permenant force during the republic, but were hired as they were needed. Therefore, I'd be surprised if you could find any specific information for the period beyond a sort of "x number of y auxiliaries served with z". 
 
If any Greeks served I would expect them to have been thureophoroi as at this time this would have been the nearest to a native Greek style than anything else. By the time of the late republic the Greek states seem to have been pretty much de-militarised anyway.

Daniel S Peterson · 04-22-2002, 02:31 PM

Martin, 
Lead "glandes" slingshot bullets figure prominently on battlefields and camps from this period, includes some inscribed with the names of the principal "players" of the time, such as Marc Antony. Therefore, I believe they would have been in most Roman armies of the period. They are also found in Augustan camps and enemy hillforts in Germany. I suspect these slingers would not have differed much from those depicted on Trajan's Column, though possibly without the shield. 
 
As you know, native Gallic and even German Cavalry were employed often in these armies as well, presumably in their native dress. 
 
Dan.

04-27-2002, 11:03 PM

Then I have to assume that there were no formalized auxiliary units in the late Republic, only mercenary units hired on an 'as needed' basis. It would certainly make sense that there would be no Greek 'heavy infantry' since the Roman defeat of the Macedonians had proven the superiority of the flexible Roman units over the phalanxes. Why bother to hire a force of inferior quality for work the legions could do. All in all, I guess, in light of this information, I will need to 'rethink' the hero of the graphic novel I am writing 
 
Martius

Caius Fabius · 04-27-2002, 11:19 PM

Even so, in the "east" many rulers (allied to Rome or not) employed Hellenistic style soldiers in Macedonian/Greek equipment even unto the second century AD. The forces of Cleopatra, and those of Palestine, Syria and that area, who fought with or against Romans soldiers were most probably (can't prove it 100%) armed in the late Macedonian style as the style of professional soldiers for hire. The garrison of Masada before AD 50 seems to have had Greek (Macedonian) style equipment, from the articles I have read. I am sure there are more knowledgeable people who can answer this with more references.... (Dan, Sander, and others too numerous to list). "Just before class started, I looked in the big book where all the world's history is written, and it said...." Neil J. Hackett, PhD ancient history, professor OSU, 1987

05-12-2002, 06:39 AM

Perhaps Caesar's commentaries would provide some illustration? 
 
I've personally read through the conquest of Gaul, then I broke from that and am about half way through Livy's early history. 
 
Therefore, I can't say if Caesar sheds much light on Auxilleries in the Civil Wars, but there is plenty of mentions and talks of employment of allied Celtic forces in Gaul. Particularly, cavalry operations and skirmishes are noted in there. 
 
I hope this is in some way helpful. I'm here on this board to learn from these experienced folks...

05-12-2002, 12:19 PM

Salve, 
 
What you are probably referring to is the description of the bodyguard of Antiochus Epiphanes in Jospehus, BJ 5.460-465 ( ...kai peri hauton stiphos Makedonoon kaloumenon, hÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¨likas pantas, hypsÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¨lous, oligon hyper antipaidas, ton Makedonikon tropon hooplismenous te kai pepaideumenous... '...and around himself a unit said to be of Macedonians, all of military age, tall, only just adults, armed and trained in the Macedonian manner...'). Roman styles of armament and training had long influenced the Hellenistic armies and part of the auxiliaries at least would have been armed in the Roman fashion. Several states had fielded 'imitation legionaries' and copied the Roman model. The legiones vernaculae raised by Deiotarus were eventually merged into a regular unit and became part of the reformed imperial army. 
 
Regards, 
 
Sander van Dorst 
 
PS do you have the ISBN number of that book?

Caius Fabius · 05-12-2002, 09:45 PM

Ref: 
ISBN was probably 0-00000-00-1? 
I was sitting in the back of the class when one of the more clueless undergraduate coeds taking a class on Greek and Roman history (because she thought it was about the sororities and fraternities) disagreed with the professor. He replied with the comment I quote below. The sad part is, almost 60% of the class accepted the answer, while some of the grad students tried not to snicker. He is a excellent lecturer, with just the right touch of humor to make the dry parts more palatable. "Just before class started, I looked in the big book where all the world's history is written, and it said...." Neil J. Hackett, PhD ancient history, professor OSU, 1987Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/ucaiusfabius.showPublicProfile?language=EN>Caius Fabius</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ROMANISROMANORVM/files/C%20Fabius%201988b.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 5/14/02 3:54:31 am

05-13-2002, 11:05 AM

Salve, 
 
Auxiliary forces were not solely composed of mercenaries. Many troops fought as allies of the Roman state or were raised from foreign clients from powerful individuals. Even though the Italic socii disappear from the record after the gradual grant of citizenship to Italic allies after the Social War, other states and people continued to fight as allies rather than mercenaries. In modern publications it is usual to refer to the various auxiliary forces simply as auxilia, though the Roman vocabulary employed was much more varied. Most auxiliary forces were raised for the duration of a campaign and were disbanded when no longer needed, though a few units raised in the late republican era were eventually incorporated into the imperial army, the Germanic horse guard of Caesar for instance becoming the imperial cavalry guard. 
 
This publication deals with the civil war auxiliaries: 
 
Saddington, D.B., The development of the Roman auxiliary forces from Caesar to Vespasian (Harare 1982). 
 
Regards, 
 
Sander van Dorst

StrategyM · 05-14-2002, 07:00 AM

One opinion that I've heard is that the "imitation" legionaries never existed; and that what historical observers consider "imitation legionaries" were in fact merely troops armed as Thureophoroi - the traditional Hellenistic mercenary with javelins, long spear, and thureos. 
 
This is an interesting notion which makes a lot of sense, IMO. Thureophoroi were widely used in all the states of the Hellenistic world, were inexpensive to "produce" (they mostly did not wear chainmail), and were in fact quite simmilar to Roman legionaries. No need to retrain troops to fight in the Roman manner (and keep in mind that the Roman way of fighting involved more than just changing equipment - it required a wholly different level of training to be effective). If you needed heavier troops, you outfitted them with mail (the Thorakitai mentioned in Achaian and Seleucid armies, IIRC), and you'd be able to recruit these troops anywhere in the east. Strategy 
Designer/Developer 
Imperium - Rise of Rome

05-14-2002, 07:18 AM

To be more sure you'd have to see if the original sources said something like "armed in the Roman style" or similar. If they did it would be reasonable to assume that they were "imitation legionarii". 
 
In fact, of course, what is probably more important is their fighting style. The legionarius was a swordsmen who also carried a missile weapon whilst the Greek/Hellentic tradition was for spearmen with the sword as a weapon of last resort. 
 
Also BTW as far as I know there are no depictions or accounts of thureophoroi (or indeed thorakitai) armed with both a spear and javelins, it's something of a fiction. They are usually shown with a spear and there is one account (IIRC) of, I think, Achaen thureophoroi skirmishing with javelins. There is a good case that as the ubiquitous mercenary types the thurophoroi were a cheap hoplite replacement and would basically be spearmen fighting in the battle line.

05-14-2002, 07:39 AM

Salve, 
 
The reason why I mentioned the units raised by Deiotarus is that in the Bellum Alexandrinum they are described as using Roman armament and discipline (34 ...duas ab Deiotaro, quas ille disciplina atque armatura nostra compluris 
annos constitutas habebat ...and 68 ... Legionem autem eam quam ex genere civium suorum Deiotarus armatura disciplinaque nostra ...). This suggests that his legiones were indeed closely modelled on the Roman pattern. 
 
Regards, 
 
Sander van Dorst 
 
Addendum 
 
In Plutarch's Life of Lucullus the troops of Mithridates are described as being issued with Roman swords and to have been drawn up in Roman battle order. Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showLocalUserPublicProfile?login=sandervandorst>Sander van Dorst</A> at: 5/14/02 10:01:00 am

05-14-2002, 07:07 PM

would celts/germanics/greeks serving the Romans be issued Roman arms/armour or would they supply theyre own?

Caius Fabius · 05-15-2002, 05:15 AM

Yes. They would bring their own weapons and armor if serving in their own groups, such as Germanic cavalry, Balearic slingers, and in later times Sarmatian cavalry, but they would be issued replacement equipment from Roman stores or they might make or buy their own replacement equipment. The longer a unit was in service, (and we are looking at several years under C. Julius Caesar for some units of "allies") the more possibility that their equipment would start to have "Roman" items. If they were in "civil war" battles, they would have "booty" including armor, helmets and such. 
Cavalry would bring their own horses, (even if Caesar might borrow some to make the 10th Legion into temporary "equites"), and replacement spears and missile weapons would still be of a familiar style to the various specialists. The "allies" still wore their own clothing, in some cases allowing them to send "spies" back and forth into native camps. During the civil wars starting between C. Julius Caesar and Pompeii and continuing through the final victory of Octavian/Augustus, it is possible that some legions were made up of non-Roman allies, like LEG V "Alaudae/the Larks", and since Marcus Antonius lost, we don't have as good records of how he filled his "legions" with drafted Egyptians, Syrians, and Illyrian troops. 
By the end of this period, the units had begun to be permanent units, and were filled with whatever non-citizens wanted to or were drafted to serve for 25 years. They would have lost their identity as recruits not from their original area of recruitment filled the ranks back to strength. Some units still recruited from their "home base", some did not. "Just before class started, I looked in the big book where all the world's history is written, and it said...." Neil J. Hackett, PhD ancient history, professor OSU, 1987

StrategyM · 05-15-2002, 07:37 AM

This is not a position I am going to defend stubbornly, but: 
 
 Also BTW as far as I know there are no depictions or accounts of thureophoroi (or indeed thorakitai) armed with both a spear and javelins, it's something of a fiction. 
 
IIRC, aren't Maccabean Judeans specifically mentioned as being armed with long spear and javelins? 
 
I'm not about to argue against the cheap hoplite replacement thing; I am totally in agreement with such an assessment (and the Imperium game will have thureophoroi in the game as just such a unit type); I would not argue that they used both javelins and long spears in a pitched battle either; this does seem like a cumbersome combination. But I don't see any reason why they shouldn't have been able to fight with both if required - if Macedonian phalangites can be accepted as being trained to fight with pike and javelin (even during this time), why should the all-pervasive mercenary type of the era not have been able to? Strategy 
Designer/Developer 
Imperium - Rise of Rome

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	Tasks and age of Military Tribunes during the Late Republic and Principate	Corvus	8	741	12-11-2021, 04:00 PM Last Post: Flavius Inismeus
	Roman Auxillaries	Aquilae1	12	3,861	11-22-2021, 08:19 PM Last Post: Nathan Ross
	Late republic deployment	McClane	1	1,574	11-02-2016, 03:32 AM Last Post: Bryan