Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Late Roman Army - seniores and iuniores
#27
(03-03-2016, 06:34 AM)nikgaukroger Wrote: theory on the seniores/iuniores really has to include the auxilia in some way IMO

Yes, that is the difficult bit. But it occurs to me that this theory is quite similar to the idea of battalions, used in British and other armies in the 18th-19th century. The seniores would be the first battalion, and the iuniores the second battalion. The hierarchy would be determined by when they were first formed into an independent unit. Of course, it would be logical to call them (for example) Primi Herculiani and Secunda Herculiani, but that would lead to a confusion with the original legion numbering system, (especially if both were formed from detachments of Legio II Herculia!), which was still in use throughout this period.

So the auxilia could also have had a 'second battalion' raised at some point, also named iuniores to accord with the style used in the field army legions.

I still prefer it to the idea of all the units being split in half, or cadres being split off from each.


(03-03-2016, 02:25 AM)Steven James Wrote: many reject the primary sources references to maniples by simply discarding them without any logical reason... However, it might hurt ones ego.

We've discussed the maniple issue before, of course. I don't think anybody's 'discarding evidence' - it's just that the evidence we have isn't conclusive enough to allow for a firm enough interpretation: Ammianus mentions them, in what could be a stock phrase, but also says the Persians had them. The HA mentions them too, but the HA is notoriously unreliable (not an uncontroversial view, I know!). Vegetius mentions them, but claims they were 10 men strong... That hasn't stopped some scholars (Janniard for one) from suggesting a manipular reorganisation of the later legion.

Others are more cautious. I don't think this is to do with anybody's 'ego'. We'd all love to have some clarity about late army structure, but without further solid evidence, all we can do is compared hypotheses, and then it's a matter of burdens of proof and how much we choose to accept.



(03-03-2016, 02:25 AM)Steven James Wrote: my research shows that the 6,000 man legion under Diocletian was organised into five vexillations at full strength each numbered 1,200 men. Welcome to the world of the tagma.

Tagma is a Greek word, and Latin was still the language of the Roman army at this point. A vexillation is a detachment, so it's unlikely that a legion was organised into vexillations. Vexillations might have been organised into cohorts, but that's different.



(03-03-2016, 02:25 AM)Steven James Wrote: Under Constantine, and this is the first time it happened, the Roman legion was based on the number of iuniores and seniores in the thirty five tribes

The earliest evidence we have for seniores/iuniores dates from AD356, which is some time after Constantine. Sources for the period immediately before that are scanty, so the new titles may have come in before then, but it's interesting that Ammianus does not mention them in his account of Argentorate (at the same date as the inscription above!). He does mention them in relation to the revolt of Procopius some years later though. Another example of Marcellinian omision, perhaps (he was writing an historical narrative, not a military report), or a suggestion that these new titles were not applied across the entire army at the same time?
Nathan Ross
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Late Roman Army - seniores and iuniores - by Nathan Ross - 03-03-2016, 12:29 PM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Late Roman Army during the 5th century Robert Vermaat 89 17,329 01-11-2024, 04:34 PM
Last Post: Magister_Officiorum13241
  Late Roman Army Ranks - Numeri/Limitanei jmsilvacross 14 1,745 11-17-2021, 01:42 PM
Last Post: Steven James
  Seniores and Iuniores (again) Colonel Chabert 23 3,433 01-09-2021, 12:42 AM
Last Post: Nathan Ross

Forum Jump: