Late Roman Army - seniores and iuniores

[Nathan Ross]

so now you see the first detachment as the seniores and the second detachment as the inuiores? That's different from the first theory but I can go along with that.

It's the same theory - I just tried to explain it better!

My first attempt was this:

"c320s... detachment... taken into the field army as an independent unit... known as Moesiaci.


c.350s: A second detachment... named Moesiaci Iuniores to distinguish them from the earlier unit, which takes the [i]Seniores title."[/i]

But how about a third detachment? Another iuniores?

Iuniores Gallicani!

(not used previously, perhaps, as the situation in Gaul was fine at the time and the army there required no dedicated reinforcement?)

we can't trust the military sources to give us 100% correct details and allowing us to draw conclusions from them.

True enough. We're trying to patch together a theory from a few comments in Ammianus, a very late official document, and the few tombstone inscriptions we can put a date on. If any or all of the above are faulty or omit details, the theories collapse!