diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/51769-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/51769-0.txt | 7953 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 7953 deletions
diff --git a/old/51769-0.txt b/old/51769-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 40bd73a..0000000 --- a/old/51769-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,7953 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Auxilia of the Roman Imperial Army, by -George Leonard Cheesman - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - - -Title: The Auxilia of the Roman Imperial Army - -Author: George Leonard Cheesman - -Release Date: April 15, 2016 [EBook #51769] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE AUXILIA OF THE ROMAN *** - - - - -Produced by Brian Wilcox and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive) - - - - - - -Transcriber’s Notes. - - The original spelling, accentuation, hyphenation and punctuation - has been retained. - Bold face text is represented =thus=. - Italic text is represented _thus_. - Letter-spaced text is represented ~thus~. - - - - -[Illustration: TOMBSTONE OF C. ROMANIUS OF THE ALA NORICORUM. - -(By kind permission of the authorities of the Stadtmuseum, Mainz.) - -_Frontispiece_] - - - - -THE AUXILIA OF THE ROMAN IMPERIAL ARMY - -BY - -G. L. CHEESMAN, M.A. - -FELLOW AND LECTURER OF NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD - - -OXFORD - -AT THE CLARENDON PRESS - -1914 - - - - -OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS - - LONDON EDINBURGH GLASGOW NEW YORK - TORONTO MELBOURNE BOMBAY - -HUMPHREY MILFORD M.A. - -PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY - - - - -PREFACE - - -The following essay is an attempt to deal with an interesting branch -of Roman military history which has not previously been made the -subject of an independent treatise. In a study of this kind, which -relies largely upon epigraphical evidence to which additions are -constantly being made, it is equally necessary that the scattered -material available should at intervals be collected and utilized, and -that the unfortunate collector should realize that his conclusions -will inevitably be revised in the future in the light of fresh -evidence. I hope, accordingly, that I have made some use of all -sources of information available without acquiring or expressing -excessive confidence in the finality of my deductions. Students of -the military system of the Roman Empire may complain that a certain -number of complicated questions are too summarily disposed of in the -following pages, but if discussion of the evidence in detail has been -occasionally omitted with the idea of keeping the size of this book -within reasonable limits, I hope that I have been careful to indicate -where uncertainty lies. - -I have in many places been glad to acknowledge my indebtedness to my -predecessors in this field of study, who in one branch of the subject -or another have removed so many difficulties from my path. To two -scholars, however, my debt is too extensive and general to have -received adequate recognition in the footnotes. Mommsen’s article, ‘Die -Conscriptionsordnung der römischen Kaiserzeit,’ was written thirty -years ago; I have, I hope, been diligent in collecting the evidence -which has since accumulated, but I have found little to induce me to -leave the path indicated by the founder of the scientific study of the -Roman Empire. I owe much to Professor A. von Domaszewski’s ingenious -and comprehensive work, _Die Rangordnung des römischen Heeres_, and -feel my obligation to its learning and suggestiveness none the less -that I have sometimes been compelled to differ from the conclusions -stated in it. I am also deeply indebted to Professor Haverfield for -constant encouragement and much valuable criticism, and can only wish -that this essay were a more adequate testimony to the value of his -influence upon the study of Roman history at Oxford. I desire also -to express my gratitude to my colleague, Mr. N. Whatley, of Hertford -College, for reading this essay in manuscript, and making many valuable -suggestions. - -G. L. CHEESMAN. - -NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD. - - - - -CONTENTS - - - PAGE - - INTRODUCTION - THE MILITARY REFORMS OF AUGUSTUS 7 - - - THE AUXILIA DURING THE FIRST TWO CENTURIES A.D. - - SECTION I. THE STRENGTH AND ORGANIZATION - OF THE AUXILIARY REGIMENTS 21 - - SECTION II. RECRUITING AND DISTRIBUTION 57 - - SECTION III. THE USE OF THE AUXILIA FOR - WAR AND FRONTIER DEFENCE 102 - - SECTION IV. ARMS AND ARMOUR 124 - - - CONCLUSION - - THE BREAK-UP OF THE AUGUSTAN SYSTEM 133 - - - APPENDIX I 145 - - APPENDIX II 170 - - INDEX 191 - - - - - ILLUSTRATION - - - TOMBSTONE OF C. ROMANIUS OF THE ALA NORICORUM - (by kind permission of the authorities of the - Stadtmuseum, Mainz) _Frontispiece_ - - - - -LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS EMPLOYED - - -The _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_ is referred to simply by the -numbers of the volumes without any prefix. - -The military diplomata (D) are referred to by the revised numbering -given in the supplement to the third volume of the _Corpus_. - -_Eph. Ep._ = _Ephemeris Epigraphica._ - -_A. E._ = _L’année épigraphique_, edited by MM. Cagnat and Besnier. - -_I. G. R. R._ = _Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes_, -edited by Cagnat. - -_B. J. B._ = _Bonner Jahrbücher_, the periodical of the _Verein von -Altertumsfreunden im Rheinlande_. - -_W. D. Z._ = _Westdeutsche Zeitschrift._ - -_B. G. U._ = _Ägyptische Urkunden aus den königlichen Museen zu Berlin._ - -Mommsen _Conscriptionsordnung_ = Mommsen, _Die Conscriptionsordnung -der römischen Kaiserzeit_, published in volume vi of the _Gesammelte -Schriften_. - -von Dom. _Rangordnung_ = A. von Domaszewski, _Die Rangordnung des -römischen Heeres_, Bonn, 1907. - -von Dom. _Sold_ = A. von Domaszewski, _Der Truppensold der Kaiserzeit_, -in volume x of the _Neue Heidelberger Jahrbücher_. - -_J. R. S._ = _The Journal of Roman Studies._ - - - - -INTRODUCTION - -THE MILITARY REFORMS OF AUGUSTUS - - -An essay on the Roman auxilia might seem merely to be one of the many -monographs in which students of the military system of the Roman Empire -are patiently arranging material for some future scholar to utilize -in a more comprehensive work. But while much space must necessarily -be devoted to details of military organization, the subject opens up -social and political questions of wider range. The extent to which -a ruling race can safely use the military resources of its subjects -and the effect on both parties of such a relation, the advantages and -dangers of a defensive or an aggressive frontier policy, these are -questions of universal historical interest, on which even an essay of so -limited a scope as this must necessarily touch in passing. - -As a preliminary consideration it must be realized that the use of -troops drawn from the subject races was not an invention of the -imperial government, but goes back to the most flourishing days of -the Republic. The heavy-armed yet mobile infantry which formed the -greater part of the burgess militia of the _cives Romani_ and the -_socii_ constituted an arm which won for Rome the hegemony of Italy, -and triumphed alike over the numbers and courage of Ligurian and Gaul -or the disciplined professional armies of Carthage and the Hellenistic -monarchies. In other branches of the service, however, the republican -armies were less superior. Their cavalry, drawn, as was usual in the -citizen armies of the ancient world, from the wealthier classes, was -not sufficiently numerous and proved no match for its opponents in the -Second Punic War. The light troops came off even worse when engaged -either with mountain tribes fighting on their own ground or with the -skilled archers and slingers of Carthage or Macedon. So early was this -recognized that, in describing an offer made by Hiero of Syracuse to -furnish a thousand archers and slingers in 217 B.C., Livy is able to -make the Syracusans justify the suggestion to Roman pride by asserting -that it was already customary for the Republic to use _externi_ in this -capacity.[1] To make up their notorious deficiency in this respect the -Government could have recourse to three sources of supply. They could, -as in this case, accept or demand contingents from allies outside the -Italian military league, such as Hiero, Masinissa, or the Aetolians; -they could make forced levies among subject tribes, such as the -Ligurians, Gauls, or Spaniards; or, finally, they could imitate their -opponents and raise mercenaries, although they might save their pride -by including such contingents as ‘allies’. In fact all these sources -were freely drawn on during the first half of the second century B.C., -and all troops of this kind were known as _auxilia_, to distinguish -them from the _socii_ of the old organization. This at any rate seems -to be the distinction recognized by the grammarians, and it agrees -generally with the terminology employed by Livy, who may be supposed -in such a matter to be following his sources.[2] A good example both -of republican methods and of the phraseology employed may be found -in Livy’s elaborate description of the measures taken to make up the -army required for the Macedonian campaign of 171 B.C.: ‘P. Licinio -consuli ad exercitum civilem socialemque petenti addita auxilia Ligurum -duo milia, Cretenses sagittarii—incertus numerus, quantum rogati -auxilia Cretenses misissent, Numidae item equites elephantique.’[3] Of -the troops grouped here under the heading of _auxilia_ the Numidians -represent a contingent sent by an independent ally, Masinissa, the -Ligurians were probably obtained by a forced levy, while the Cretans, -nominally allies, may fairly be described as mercenaries. That their -services were hardly disinterested is shown by the fact that in the -following year the Senate found it necessary to issue a sharp warning -to the Cretan states against their habit of supplying contingents to -both sides.[4] The fact that the Roman star was now definitely in the -ascendant probably reconciled the Cretans to this interference with -their national customs, for from this date onward Cretan regiments -regularly form a part of the republican armies; it will be remembered -that the Senate made use of a body of Cretan archers against the -followers of Caius Gracchus, and a similar corps is found serving under -Caesar in his second Gallic campaign.[5] - -The course of the second century saw the auxilia still more firmly -established as an essential part of the republican military system. -Before its close the Roman and Italian cavalry had entirely -disappeared; the changes in the condition of military service, in -particular the tedious and unprofitable Spanish campaigns, made -the members of the upper classes, among whom the cavalry had been -recruited, increasingly reluctant to take their places in the ranks as -private soldiers. After the reforms of Marius the legion had no cavalry -attached to it, and if the Italian contingents still existed they must -likewise have disappeared when, in consequence of the extension of the -franchise in 90 and 89 B.C., the former _socii_ were all enrolled in -the legions. From this moment the Roman generals depended for their -cavalry upon the auxilia alone.[6] In the case of the light-armed -troops the same process took place, although here military rather -than political reasons probably predominated. The last recorded use -of the _velites_, the old national light infantry, is during the war -against Iugurtha, and they were probably abolished by Marius.[7] There -is certainly no instance of any but auxiliaries being employed as -light troops during the following century. From these considerations -it necessarily follows that when, during the last fifty years of the -Republic, a standing army came into existence, a number of auxiliary -regiments formed part of it. When Caesar mentions that he had Cretan -archers, Balearic slingers, and Numidian cavalry under his command so -early as the beginning of his second campaign, we can hardly doubt that -these regiments had formed part of the regular troops which he found in -the province.[8] - -Thus before the end of the Republic we have the chief feature of the -military system of the Empire, the division of the army into the -legions of _cives Romani_ and the auxiliary light troops and cavalry -supplied by the unenfranchised provincials, already in existence. Even -the practice of conferring the _civitas_ upon troops of this class as a -reward for military service was resorted to by the Republic, although -probably only under exceptional conditions. We possess a document -recording a grant of this nature to some Spanish auxiliaries, members -of a _turma Salluitana_ which had distinguished itself at the siege of -Asculum in 89 B.C.[9] - -There is no evidence, however, that this branch of the service escaped -the effects of the inefficiency in administration which characterized -the last generation of the republican régime. Certainly too few -regiments of this class were kept on a permanent footing, and a -general of the period either had to take the field with far too small -a proportion of cavalry and light infantry, or make up the deficiency -by hasty levies called out in the districts nearest to the scene of -operations. Caesar, for example, started the campaign of 58 B.C. with -a totally insufficient number of regular auxiliaries, and during the -following years was forced to make up his deficiency in cavalry by -demanding contingents, which were often of more than doubtful fidelity, -from the Gallic tribes which successively submitted to his arms. To -supplement these he also raised a corps of German mercenaries and -largely increased it later after the defection of the majority of the -Gallic contingents to Vercingetorix.[10] - -The civil wars saw a large increase in the numbers of the auxilia. -Caesar set the example by leading off thousands of his Gallic cavalry, -with the object, doubtless, of using them as hostages for their -compatriots’ fidelity as well as of increasing his army. Pompeius -followed suit and endeavoured to make up for the loss of the Italian -recruiting ground by enrolling auxilia from the Eastern provinces -in large numbers. The Gallic cavalry proved a great success; in the -campaign of Thapsus they showed marked superiority to the African light -horse, previously accounted supreme in cavalry warfare,[11] and the -death of Caesar found them still serving in large numbers in every part -of the Empire. At least those who are found, together with Lusitanians -and Spaniards, in the army of Brutus and Cassius during the Philippi -campaign must have been stationed either in Macedonia or the East -before hostilities began.[12] - -We can thus see that when the battle of Actium in 31 B.C. placed the -forces of the Roman world in the hands of Augustus, the main lines -on which the military system of the Empire was based were already -clearly marked, and his great work of reorganization, while importing -everywhere order and principle into existing practice, involved no -breach with the military traditions of the past. To say this is in no -sense to minimize his achievement. It must be remembered that while -individual generals, such as Lucullus, Pompeius, or Caesar, had brought -their armies to a high pitch of efficiency, the general military -administration of the late republic had been chaotic in the extreme. -Here, as elsewhere, the real issues were resolutely evaded, and in case -of need a crisis had to be met by hasty and inefficient improvisation. -Although a standing army had existed in practice for fifty years it -was never accepted in principle, and no attempt was made to assess the -military requirements of the state and see that an efficient force of -the proper strength was maintained. With similar lack of foresight -the Senate refused to admit the principle of granting a donative on -discharge, while repeatedly granting it under pressure, thus weakening -the control of the central government over troops in the field and -increasing the chances of a military _pronunciamento_. In consequence, -the wars of this period almost invariably begin with disasters in the -field, owing to the inadequacy of the standing army both in numbers -and efficiency,[13] and end with a political crisis of greater or -less magnitude over the donative grievance, which naturally gave an -ambitious general an opportunity of using the support of his troops to -further his own ends. The work of Augustus in bringing order out of -this chaos, providing forces adequate to the needs of the state, and -re-establishing over them the control of the central government, is not -the least of his administrative triumphs. - -As a preliminary he accepted, as was perhaps inevitable, the principle -of a standing army of professional soldiers. This step has of late been -severely criticized, especially by admirers of the Continental system, -but it is difficult to see how short-service levies could have proved -adequate to the defence of frontiers which were, for all practical -purposes, more distant from Rome than Peshawur is from Aldershot. The -other alternative, to entrust the provincials with the defence of -their own borders, was not in harmony with his general policy, nor, it -may be said, was the time ripe for such a step. The words which the -third-century historian and administrator, Dio Cassius, puts into the -mouth of Maecenas in dealing with this question were written doubtless -with reference to the conditions of his own time, but they may -certainly be applied to the earlier period, and in essence they still -hold good to-day. - -‘You will be wise to maintain a permanent force (στρατιώτας ἀθανάτους) -raised from the citizens, the subjects, and the allies distributed -throughout all the provinces in larger or smaller bodies, as necessity -requires. These troops must always remain in arms and be drilled -constantly; at the most suitable points they must prepare themselves -winter quarters, and they must serve for a fixed period calculated to -allow them a little freedom after their discharge before old age comes -on. For we can no longer rely upon forces called out for the occasion, -owing to the distance which separates us from the borders of our Empire -and the enemies which we have upon every side. If we allow all our -subjects who are of military age to possess arms and undergo a military -training, there will be a continual series of riots and civil wars, -while if, on the other hand, we check all military activity on their -part, we shall run the risk of finding nothing but raw and untrained -troops when we need a contingent for our assistance.’[14] - -The solution which Augustus found for this problem was then to revise -the military system so that, while using as much as possible of the -available material, he did not disturb the political conditions on -which the equilibrium of the State depended. For it was no part -of his intention materially to alter the structure of the Empire -as an aggregate of states possessed of greater or less powers of -self-government, held together by their subordination to Rome and -withheld by their position from any independent external policy. -Whatever possibilities he may have contemplated for the future he made -himself few attempts to further the process of unification either by -reducing the inhabitants of the privileged states to a lower grade -or by the more generous policy of making wide extensions of the -franchise and creating by this means a new imperial citizenship. This -difference of status among the inhabitants of the Empire was naturally -reflected in the military system. The _cives Romani_—that is to say, -the inhabitants of Italy and of the few enfranchised communities among -the provinces—furnished the new Household Troops, and the greater -part, at any rate, of the recruits for the legions, and paid for their -superior position as the ruling race by contributing much more heavily -in proportion to their numbers than any other class in the population. -The nominally independent monarchs of the client kingdoms were allowed -and encouraged to maintain armies, often of considerable size, under -their own control, and frequently led in person the contingents which -they were called upon to bring to the aid of the regular troops when -hostilities were taking place near their borders. These contingents -were often numerous and capable of rendering valuable service. Thus -Rhoemetalces of Thrace assisted in the suppression of the dangerous -Pannonian revolt of 6-9, and Ptolemaeus of Mauretania was publicly -honoured for his loyal co-operation against the African rebel -Tacfarinas.[15] Along the eastern frontier, kingdoms of this type, the -wreckage of the old Hellenistic system, were more numerous and played -a more important part. Thus Antiochus III of Commagene, Agrippa II, -Sohaemus of Emesa, and Malchus of Damascus contributed 15,000 men to -the army which Vespasian led into Palestine in the spring of 67.[16] -Even the more autonomous city states seem to have retained a militia -which was occasionally made use of. So late as the reign of Hadrian, -in the army which Arrian led against the Alani, we find a contingent -from the ‘free’ city of Trapezus, which is reckoned among the σύμμαχοι -as opposed to the regular imperial troops.[17] A similar freedom from -the direct control of Roman officers was permitted to the chiefs of -some of the border tribes, who were allowed to lead their own clansmen -to battle. To this type of militia belong the _tumultuariae catervae -Germanorum cis Rhenum colentium_, including the Batavians under their -_dux_ Chariovalda, who serve in the campaigns of Germanicus,[18] and -the levies of the Dalmatian clans who started the rebellion of 6.[19] - -Last come the permanently embodied regiments raised from the subject -communities, the auxilia properly so called, who form the subject -of this treatise. Here, probably more than in any other department -of the military system of the Empire, we can trace the results of -Augustus’s own activity. Regiments of this kind had, as we have seen, -existed under the Republic, but they had probably been few in number -and the incidence of the levy had been uneven and capricious. Under -Augustus not only was the number of regiments largely increased—we -hear of no less than fourteen alae and seventy cohorts taking part in -the Pannonian War of 6-9[20]—but the inscriptions show us that, with -the exception of Greece, always the spoiled child of Roman sentiment, -every quarter of the Empire contributed its quota. Details respecting -the incidence of this levy on different provinces, and the methods -of organization and recruiting, will be found in later sections. It -will be sufficient to say here that while the subject communities -had probably more reason than any other class to complain of the -military demands of the state, the burden was at least more equitably -distributed than under the Republic and the total contribution -required, in most cases at any rate, not excessive. It is natural to -suppose that the fixing of the quota supplied by each community was -connected with the drawing up of the census, which placed the taxation -of the Empire for the first time on an organized basis, and it seems -probable that more evidence might show a reciprocal variation between -the two forms of contribution required. We know, for instance, that -the Batavians were altogether excused from the payment of tribute on -account of the size and value of their contingent, and this case was -probably not exceptional.[21] - -In all this it is easy to see how much Augustus owes to the -institutions of the Republic, and when we come to consider details his -debt becomes even more apparent. A standing army consisting of legions -of _cives Romani_ and smaller units of _peregrini_, supported in the -field by contingents from allied and nominally independent states, was -already in existence. His task was merely to introduce such changes as -might obviate the mistakes and failures of the past, and to establish -principles which should make for permanence and stability. For in -accepting the principle of maintaining a standing army Augustus could -not have been blind to the political dangers which this institution -brought with it. He endeavoured to meet them by fixing the conditions -of service, in particular the sum which a soldier might claim at his -discharge, and by establishing a special treasury from which those -claims might be satisfied, thus accustoming the troops to look to the -central government, not to their generals, for rewards due to them. -Moreover, in this department of the state even Augustus allowed no -respect for constitutional forms to veil or weaken his authority. -When in 69 the legions on the Upper Rhine tore down the _imagines_ of -Galba and swore allegiance to the _oblitterata iam nomina senatus -populique Romani_ it was a manifest sign that after a century of peace -a new period of anarchy had begun.[22] - -Since this military system, with its division of the troops into -categories differing from each other in status and prestige, reflected -the general conditions prevalent in the Empire, so it was inevitable -that a change in these conditions should have its effect also upon the -army. How far the political developments of the first century were -foreseen or intended by Augustus it is perhaps impossible to say; -it is certain, at any rate, that his system was capable of adapting -itself to them. One of these developments was a steady increase in the -power of the central government and a disappearance of all forms of -local autonomy which involved a division of authority. By the reign of -Vespasian almost all the great client kingdoms had been more or less -peaceably absorbed into the ordinary provincial system. Cappadocia -was annexed in 17, Mauretania in 39, Thrace in 46, Pontus in 63, and -Commagene in 73. The troops which these kingdoms had maintained were -naturally taken into the Roman service, transformed into auxiliary -regiments, and lost the privilege which attached to their former -condition of serving only in local campaigns. One instance of such a -transference, in the case of a regiment which had been in the service -of the kings of Pontus, is mentioned in Tacitus,[23] and we also meet -with Hemeseni on the Danube,[24] Commageni in Africa and Noricum,[25] -and the successors of one of Herod’s old Samaritan regiments in -Mauretania.[26] The resentment with which the new conditions of -service were sometimes received is an instructive comment on the wisdom -of Augustus’s policy in not enforcing their universal applicability -at an earlier date. The Thracians, for example, rose in open revolt -when they were first summoned to supply a contingent for service at -a distance from their own borders.[27] Somewhat similar was the fate -of the border militia on the Rhine and Danube. On the latter frontier -the revolt of 6-9 showed at an early date the dangers of the system. -After its suppression the clan chiefs seem, in many cases at any rate, -to have been deposed and replaced by Roman officials,[28] regiments -of Pannonians and Dalmatians were raised and transferred to other -provinces, and a garrison was imported from outside to control the -country.[29] On the Rhine the process was a more gradual one. The -Batavi, for example, whom we have noticed serving in the campaigns -of Germanicus as a clan levy under their _dux_ Chariovalda, seem to -have been organized in regular auxiliary regiments by the middle -of the first century,[30] although they still retained, in common -with many other corps of Rhenish auxilia, their clan chiefs as their -_praefecti_.[31] In the year 69 we also find the Helvetii still -responsible for maintaining the garrison of a fort within their -borders, and a militia existing in Raetia capable of supplementing -the garrison of regular auxilia.[32] Some even of the Gallic states, -which were more distant from the frontier, sent contingents to support -Vitellius, which were not, however, regarded as a very sensible -addition to his forces.[33] - -Probably these last vestiges of independent organization and control -were swept away at the time of the reorganization of the Rhine army in -70, after the rebellion of Civilis. From this date onward there are at -any rate few traces here or elsewhere of any use of irregulars of this -type by the military authorities. This militia, which might have proved -invaluable in the days to come as a national reserve, fell a victim, -together with the local autonomy on which it was based, to the growing -tendency towards centralization which marks the first and second -centuries. The supersession of local officials by the agents of a -centralized bureaucracy in the civil administration coincides with the -complete transference of the burden of the defence of the state to the -shoulders of a professional army. It is the purpose of the following -chapters to discuss one part of this army, the auxilia, to trace its -organization and the part which it played in frontier defence, and to -illustrate from this study the lines on which the military system of -the Empire developed and the causes of its failure. - - -Footnotes: - -[1] Livy, xxii. 37 ‘Milite atque equite scire nisi Romano Latinique -nominis non uti populum Romanum: levium armorum auxilia etiam externa -vidisse in castris Romanis’. Cf. Polybius, iii. 75. - -[2] Cf. Varro, _De Lat. ling._ v. 90 ‘auxilium appellatum ab auctu, -quum accesserant ei qui adiumento essent alienigenae’. Festus, _Epit._ -17 ‘auxiliares dicuntur in bello socii Romanorum exterarum nationum’. - -[3] Livy, xlii. 35. - -[4] Livy, xliii. 7. - -[5] Plutarch, _Vit. C. Gracchi_ 16; Caesar, _Bell. Gall._ ii. 7. - -[6] The famous occasion when Caesar, distrusting his auxiliaries, -mounted some of the tenth legion, proves conclusively that he had then -no citizen cavalry in his army. Caesar, _Bell. Gall._ i. 42. - -[7] Sallust, _Bell. Iug._ 46. - -[8] Caesar, _Bell. Gall._ ii. 7. - -[9] See Dr. T. Ashby’s article in the _Classical Review_ for August -1909, and _A. E._ 1911, n. 126, for a further fragment of the text. - -[10] Cf. Caesar, _Bell. Gall._ vii. 13 ‘Germanos equites circiter CCCC -summittit, quos ab initio habere secum instituerat’, and c. 65 of the -same book. - -[11] _Auct. de bell. Afr._ 6 ‘Accidit res incredibilis, ut equites -minus xxx Galli Maurorum equitum duo milia loco pellerent’. - -[12] Appian, _Bell. Civ._ iv. 88. - -[13] The First Mithridatic War is a very good example. - -[14] Dio Cassius, lii. 27. - -[15] Velleius, ii. 112; Tac. _Ann._ iv. 24. - -[16] Josephus, _Bell. Iud._ iii. 4. 2. - -[17] Arrian, _Ect._ 7. - -[18] Tac. _Ann._ i. 56; ii. 11. - -[19] Dio Cassius, lv. 29. - -[20] Velleius, ii. 113. - -[21] Tac. _Hist._ iv. 12, _Germ._ 29. - -[22] Tac. _Hist._ i. 55. - -[23] Tac. _Hist._ iii. 47 ‘Caesa ibi (at Trapezus) cohors, regium -auxilium olim; mox donati civitate Romana signa armaque in nostrum -modum, desidiam licentiamque Graecorum retinebant’. - -[24] D. lviii (138-46). - -[25] viii. 18042 (Hadrian’s speech) and D. civ (106) for Noricum. - -[26] viii. 9358, 9359, 21039. - -[27] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 46 ‘Causa motus super hominum ingenium, quod pati -dilectus et validissimum quemque militiae nostrae dare aspernabantur, -ne regibus quidem parere nisi ex libidine soliti, aut si mitterent -auxilia, suos ductores praeficere nec nisi adversum accolas -belligerare’. - -[28] The _praefecti civitatium_, usually ex-centurions, who are -mentioned on many inscriptions. Cf. v. 1838, ix. 2564. - -[29] The question how far this practice was maintained will be found -discussed in a later section. - -[30] They undoubtedly furnished the _octo auxiliarium cohortibus_ sent -to Britain by Nero in 61. Cf. Tac. _Ann._ xiv. 38, and _Hist._ iv. 12. - -[31] Tac. _Hist._ iv. 12 ‘cohortibus quas vetere instituto nobilissimi -popularium regebant’. - -[32] For the Helvetii see Tac. _Hist._ i. 67 ‘castelli quod olim -Helvetii suis militibus ac stipendiis tuebantur’. The Raetian militia -are mentioned in the following chapter: ‘Raeticae alae cohortesque et -ipsorum Raetorum iuventus, sueta armis et more militiae exercita.’ It -is quite clear that there were in the province (_a_) regular auxiliary -regiments; (_b_) a native militia. I do not understand Professor Reid’s -statement (_The Municipalities of the Roman Empire_, p. 203) that ‘the -troops maintained there were not Roman legions with regular auxiliaries -but contingents of allied forces’. - -[33] Tac. _Hist._ ii. 69 ‘reddita civitatibus Gallorum auxilia, ingens -numerus et prima statim defectione inter inania belli adsumptus’. - - - - -THE AUXILIA DURING THE FIRST TWO CENTURIES A.D. - - - - -SECTION I - -THE STRENGTH AND ORGANIZATION OF THE AUXILIARY REGIMENTS - - -From the death of Augustus to the period when the frontier defences -first began to collapse under the strain of the barbarian invasions, -more than two centuries later, the imperial army presents a picture of -military conservatism unrivalled in history. Not only does the original -distinction between the legions of _cives Romani_ and the auxilia of -_peregrini_ remain throughout the basis of its organization, but even -individual corps show a marvellous power of vitality. Dio Cassius, -writing at the beginning of the third century, notes that, of the -twenty-five legions in existence in 14, eighteen still survived in his -own day, and epigraphical evidence shows that scores even of the more -easily destructible auxiliary regiments could claim as long a record. -In appearance, indeed, the only considerable change introduced into -the organization of the auxilia during this period was the addition of -the _numeri_ in the second century to the _alae_ and _cohortes_ which -had previously been the only units employed. It is true, of course, -that this conservatism was in some respects rather superficial, and -that, while administrative forms and nomenclature remained unaltered, -in more essential matters the army had been deeply affected by the -tendencies of the age. It is still, however, possible, while paying due -attention to these changes, to treat the two centuries which follow -the death of Augustus as a single period in the history of the auxilia; -it is only amid the confusion caused by the barbarian invasions of the -third century and the subsequent attempts at reorganization that we -definitely lose sight of our old landmarks. - -Leaving out of account for the moment the _numeri_, which, as late -creations with a special significance, are reserved for future -discussion, let us commence with the _alae_ and _cohortes_, which -remained throughout this period the units of auxiliary cavalry and -infantry respectively. - -Both these terms, although their history is widely different, originate -in the military terminology of the Republic. The term _cohors_ had been -originally applied to the infantry contingents of the Italian _socii_, -which were not united in legions after the model of the levies of -_cives Romani_, and it was naturally retained after the disappearance -of the _socii_ to describe the similar tactical units of provincial -auxilia. - -The term _ala_ originated as a metaphorical description of the two -divisions into which the contingents of _socii_ were formed, which -were stationed in the normal republican order of battle on either -flank of the legions. After the disappearance of the _socii_ the term -was applied in a more restricted sense to the two flanking divisions -in which the average Roman general massed all his available cavalry. -This use of the word continued down to the last days of the Republic. -When, for instance, the author of the _De bello Africo_ writes, ‘Caesar -_alteram_ alam mittit qui satagentibus celeriter occurreret,’[34] -or Cicero says of his son in the _De Officiis_, ‘Quo tamen in bello -cum te Pompeius _alteri_ alae praefecisset, magnam laudem et a summo -viro, et ab exercitu consequebare equitando, iaculando …’[35] -the word is clearly being used in this sense, and does not refer to -a regiment of any fixed size. In fact the cavalry of the _socii_ -never seem to have been organized in larger units than _turmae_, and -the auxiliary levies naturally adopted the same formation. It has -already been noticed that some of the Spanish auxiliaries who served -in the Social War are officially described as belonging to a _turma -Salluitana_. Occasional phrases in Livy, such as the statement that -the Aetolian cavalry contingent, in the campaign of 171 B.C., was -_alae unius instar_, do not seem to prove anything more than that the -historian used the technical terms of his own age to make his narrative -clearer.[36] This usage, however, shows that Livy was familiar with -the restricted meaning of the word—that is to say, the ala must have -been a recognized institution in the reign of Augustus, and we may add -that Velleius states that fourteen alae were employed in the Pannonian -campaigns of 6-9 in which he himself had served. - -It is improbable, however, that the ala was a creation of Augustus, -although he may have determined its exact size and organization. In -Caesar’s account of his Gallic campaigns we find frequent mention -of contingents of tribal cavalry serving as independent units under -officers bearing the title of _praefecti equitum_,[37] and these units -must have been much larger than _turmae_. The organization of these -regiments, originally of a purely temporary kind, must have been placed -on a more permanent basis when many of them were taken out of their own -country to serve in the Civil Wars, and it would have been natural that -a new term should be used to describe them.[38] - -Evidence in support of this conjecture, which is, as we have seen, -lacking in the writings of Caesar and his continuators, has been -sought for elsewhere. The majority of Caesar’s _praefecti equitum_ -seem to have been tribal chiefs; one may cite, for example, the Aeduan -Dumnorix,[39] the heroic veteran Vertiscus,[40] and the two treacherous -Allobroges, Roucillus and Egus, the sons of Adbucillus.[41] On the -other hand, when we meet with an ala Scaevae on an early inscription, -it is difficult to avoid agreeing with Mommsen that it was called -after Caesar’s well-known officer of that name.[42] Many other cavalry -regiments, which are shown by epigraphical evidence to have existed -at an early date and to have been Gallic in composition, bear titles -similarly formed from personal names.[43] It is suggested that -these corps, or at any rate the majority of them, represent tribal -contingents embodied by Caesar at the time of the Civil Wars under the -title of _alae_ and placed under his veteran officers. Thus during -this period the use of the term _ala_ in the restricted sense would -be already known, although only the older and wider use appears in -literature. How slowly the new expression won favour is shown by the -fact that during the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius the officers -commanding these regiments were usually described on inscriptions -simply as _praefectus equitum_, and it was not until after this that -the title _praefectus alae_ came to be generally adopted.[44] - -Curiously enough, we find very few cohorts with titles which suggest a -similar history.[45] Probably in this case Augustus’s reorganization -was more thorough and the existing regiments had not, like some of -Caesar’s corps of Gallic cavalry, a record of individual achievement -which might exempt them from its scope. - -_Size of regiments._ In discussing the size of the auxiliary regiments -we have two questions to settle, the numbers of the establishment and -the actual strength at which the regiments were maintained. As regards -the first question, the evidence of Hyginus[46] and the inscriptions -shows us that both _alae_ and _cohortes_ were known as _miliariae_ or -_quingenariae_—that is to say, they contained, roughly speaking, 500 -or 1,000 men each. The smaller unit seems to have been preferred in the -first century, while the larger predominates among the corps raised -by Trajan and his successors. The exact theoretical size, both of -the regiments themselves and of the centuries and _turmae_ into which -they were divided, is more difficult to determine. Hyginus states that -an _ala quingenaria_ was divided into sixteen _turmae_, and an _ala -miliaria_ into twenty-four.[47] He does not state the number of men -in a _turma_ in either case, and it seems impossible to arrive at any -certainty on the basis of figures found elsewhere in his treatise. -Turning to epigraphical evidence we find an inscription from Coptos -which describes the composition of a _vexillatio_ drawn from three alae -and seven cohorts, as: ‘_Alarum III: dec(uriones) V, dupl(icarius) -I, sesquiplic(arii) IIII, equites CCCCXXIIII. Cohortium VII: -centuriones X, eq(uites) LXI, mil(ites) DCCLXXXIIX_’.[48] Von -Domaszewski suggests that the cavalry in this detachment are to be -divided into ten _turmae_ of 42 men, each commanded by a _decurio_, a -_duplicarius_, or a _sesquiplicarius_, and that this figure represents -the theoretical strength of the _turma_ in an _ala miliaria_.[49] In an -_ala quingenaria_, on the other hand, the _turma_ probably contained -only 30 men. - -This seems to be as near certainty as we are likely to arrive in the -present state of our evidence, unless indeed we take literally a -statement of Arrian that an _ala_ contained 512 men, a total which -would presumably give 32 men to the _turma_.[50] Arrian is, of course, -the best authority on the imperial army whom we possess, but the -remark in question is a parenthesis inserted into an account of the -ideal establishment of a Hellenistic army, and he may have meant no -more than that the unit under discussion corresponded roughly with a -Roman _ala quingenaria_. More satisfactory and conclusive evidence will -perhaps be found when the barracks of an ala in a frontier fort have -been accurately planned.[51] - -The size of the auxiliary cohorts is a matter of even greater -difficulty. Hyginus states, and there seems no reason to doubt his -statement, that a _cohors miliaria_ was divided into ten centuries, a -_cohors quingenaria_ into six.[52] Archaeological evidence supports -this statement and suggests further that the centuries were in each -case of the same size, since the centurial barracks in the fort at -Housesteads, in Northumberland, which was occupied by a _cohors -miliaria_, offer almost precisely the same accommodation as those -in the Scottish fort at Newstead, which are clearly designed to -accommodate two _cohortes quingenariae_. The question to be decided is -whether these centuries contained 80 or 100 men each. In either case, -one of the titles must be a misnomer, since six centuries of 100 would -make a _cohors quingenaria_ consist of 600 men, while ten centuries -of 80 would only give 800 men for a _cohors miliaria_. On the whole, -although Hyginus suggests the higher figure, the lower is probably to -be preferred. Certainly the Coptos inscription cited above, which is -probably the most valuable evidence which we possess, clearly indicates -centuries of 80. The most important evidence on the other side is that -of Josephus, who describes some cohorts which belonged to the Syrian -army in 67 A.D. as containing ἀνὰ χιλίους πεζούς.[53] His succeeding -statement, however, that other cohorts, by which _cohortes equitatae -quingenariae_ are apparently meant, contained 600 infantry and 120 -cavalry, suggests that he may be basing his reckoning simply on the -number of centuries. Few would defend his calculation in the second -instance, and he may be equally wrong in the first. On the whole, -therefore, it seems safer to assume establishments of 480 and 800 men -for _cohortes quingenariae_ and _miliariae_ respectively, although it -remains, of course, possible that the size of the cohorts was altered -between the Jewish war of 66-70 and the period of the erection of those -frontier forts upon which we have been relying for our evidence. - -The last question to be settled in this connexion is that of the -_cohortes equitatae_, in which a proportion of the men were mounted, -which form a peculiar and interesting feature of the imperial army. -Corps in which infantry and cavalry fought together had of course -always been common,[54] but the idea was probably revived by the Romans -from observing the practice of the German tribes, from whom Julius -obtained a contingent accustomed to fight in this manner.[55] It is -certainly significant that one of the earliest of these regiments -known to us from inscriptions is a _cohors Ubiorum_.[56] There is, -however, no later evidence for the employment of these tactics, and the -continued use of _cohortes equitatae_ is due rather to the necessity -of having detachments of mounted men at as many frontier stations as -possible. The _equites cohortales_ should be reckoned rather as mounted -infantry than cavalry, since we learn from a fragment of Hadrian’s -address to the army in Africa that they were worse mounted than the -_equites alares_, and less skilled in cavalry manœuvres.[57] As -regards the strength of these regiments and the proportion of mounted -to unmounted men, Hyginus states that the _cohors miliaria equitata_ -contained 760 infantry and 240 cavalry, while the _cohors quingenaria_ -contained six centuries, and in other respects, ‘_in dimidio eandem -rationem continet_’—that is to say, it apparently had 380 infantry and -120 cavalry.[58] The figures for the mounted men are probably correct, -and, since we learn from an inscription that there were four decurions -to a _cohors quingenaria_, we may presume that the _turmae_ were 30 -strong.[59] This agrees very well with the Egyptian vexillation cited -above, which included 61 _equites cohortales_—that is to say, 2 -_turmae_. On the other hand, there is considerable reason for supposing -that the figures for the infantry are schematic and incorrect. It is -sufficient here to remark that centuries of 76 could not be divided -into _contubernia_ of either 8 or 10, and that the 380 men of Hyginus’s -_cohors quingenaria_ could not even be divided evenly among six -centuries. The question cannot be settled with certainty until forts -occupied by regiments of this class have been planned, but it seems -probable that while the number of the centuries remained unaltered the -complement of each was reduced from 80 to 60, or possibly to 64, if -it was thought desirable to retain the division into _contubernia_ of -8.[60] - -Having endeavoured to determine the theoretical establishment of the -auxiliary regiments, it remains to discover how far this corresponded -to the actual strength at which they were maintained, and here our -evidence is scanty, and likely to remain so. Fortunately, the discovery -in Egypt of some of the official papers of the Cohors I Augusta -Praetoria Lusitanorum has thrown some light on the question. On January -1, 156, this regiment had on its books 6 centurions, 3 decurions, 114 -mounted infantry, 19 camel-riders (_dromedarii_), and 363 infantry, -making, with the _praefectus_, a total of 506 men. Between January -and May, 18 recruits were enrolled, 15 infantry, an _eques_, a -_dromedarius_, and a decurion.[61] These figures agree fairly well -with the arrangement suggested above, although the _dromedarii_ are an -additional complication, and the regiment appears even to have exceeded -its ‘paper-strength’. This, however, may be easily accounted for if we -imagine that a number of men had served their term and were about to be -discharged. Unfortunately, this document remains isolated, and further -evidence is not likely to be forthcoming. - -_Conditions of service._ Questions concerning the method of enlistment -for the auxiliary regiments are reserved, on account of their connexion -with the broader issues raised by the whole recruiting system, for -discussion in a later section. For the present it will be sufficient -to discuss the conditions of service in this branch of the army, as -they are laid down in the so-called _diplomata militaria_.[62] These -documents, of which we possess some 70 or 80 examples dealing with the -auxilia, are small bronze tablets, issued originally to individual -soldiers, recording the privileges granted to them either after their -discharge or after they had completed a term of 25 years. The reason -for this variation seems to be that while the _praemia militiae_ -were always conferred after the regulation number of years had been -served, it was often the practice to retain the men with the colours -for some years longer before finally discharging them. This practice, -which we hear of in the early empire as a standing grievance of the -legionaries,[63] seems to have prevailed also among the auxilia during -the first century.[64] After 107, however, we have no instances of the -_praemia_ unpreceded by discharge, a change which is probably due to -the perfection of organization, and can be traced also in the legions. - -Previous to the reign of Antoninus Pius, the privileges granted to -the recipient of a diploma include citizenship for himself, the full -legalization of any matrimonial union into which he has entered or -shall enter in the future (_conubium_), and civic rights for his wife, -children, and descendants. If he already possessed a family, the -names of his wife and children follow his own on the diploma, and the -frequency of this occurrence shows the extent to which the military -authorities permitted the soldiers to form family ties while on active -service.[65] The significance of this fact and its effect on the -character of the army will be discussed in a later section. - -At the beginning of the reign of Antoninus Pius, a change takes place -in that part of the formula which concerns the grant of citizenship. -In place of the words _ipsis liberis posterisque eorum civitatem dedit -et conubium cum uxoribus_, &c., we read in all the later examples, -_civitatem Romanam, qui eorum non haberent, dedit et conubium cum -uxoribus_, &c.[66] The first inference to be drawn from this alteration -is that there now existed a numerous group of auxiliary soldiers who -possessed the _civitas_ before their discharge, and we are probably -justified in the further inference that many actually possessed it when -they were enrolled. It has been noted, for example, that on a document -dating from the reign of Trajan, six recruits accepted for the Cohors -III Ituraeorum all have the _tria nomina_.[67] In this change, then, -we have a clear instance of the extent to which the franchise was now -diffused throughout the Empire. - -The omission of the phrase _liberis posterisque eorum_, on the other -hand, suggests the opposite tendency. It cannot, of course, mean that -children born after their father’s discharge would not be _cives_, for -their status would be secured by the grant of _conubium_, but it seems -clear that those born before it no longer acquired the citizenship -with him. This is supported not only by the absence of all mention -of children on the later diplomata,[68] but by the phraseology of an -Egyptian document dealing with an ἐπίκρισις of the year 148 which -distinguishes two classes of veterans, ~ἔνειοι~ μὲν ἐπιτυχόντες σὺν -τέκνοις καὶ ἐγγόνοις, ~ἕτεροι~ μόνοι τῆς Ῥωμαίων ποτειτείας (_sic_) -καὶ ἐπιγαμίας πρὸς γυναῖκας ἃς τότε εἶχον, ὅτε τούτοις ἡ πολιτεία -ἐδόθη,[69] &c. Clearly we have here a translation of both types of -formula, and the translator gave to the second the same meaning as -that suggested above. Clearly, too, the change was considered an -important one since the veterans discharged before and after it are -thus divided into two groups. In view of the prevailing policy of the -imperial government with respect to the extension of the _civitas_ this -step has a curiously retrograde appearance, and it is difficult to see -the motives which suggested it. Possibly it was merely desired to get -rid of an anomalous situation by which the auxiliaries had previously -occupied a more privileged position than the Household Troops.[70] In -any case, even after this restriction, there can be little doubt that -the grant of the _civitas_ with the improvement in civil status which -it brought to the recipient, and the increased possibilities which it -offered to his children, must have done much to popularize the service. -We have seen that the idea of such a reward did not originate with the -Empire, but it was probably not until the reorganization of the army -by Augustus that it was regularly conferred and the years of service -required to earn it definitely fixed.[71] - -We do not know whether at the time of their discharge the auxiliaries -also received, like the legionaries, a grant of money or land in lieu -of a pension. It seems certain that their status excluded them from -a share in the _donativa_, which the emperors distributed among -the troops at their accession, and on other special occasions, and -that they could only receive the _dona militaria_ after a special -preliminary grant of the civitas.[72] That such grants were made, even -to whole regiments at a time, is shown by the number of cohorts which -commemorate the receipt of this honour by employing the title _civium -Romanorum_. - -On the still more important matter of the ordinary pay of the auxiliary -regiments an almost equal uncertainty prevails. Our only two pieces of -evidence on the subject, a passage in Tacitus and a phrase in Hadrian’s -address to the garrison of Africa,[73] tell us nothing more than that -the _equites cohortales_ were paid on a higher scale than the infantry, -but received in their turn less than the _equites alares_, a preference -in favour of the mounted men, which is not so great as appears at first -sight, since it is clear that they were responsible for the upkeep -of their own horses. The chief defect of these passages is that they -do not mention the amount of the pay in any of the three cases. Our -only basis for calculation is the fact that a legionary considered it -promotion to be made _duplicarius alae_; hence the pay of an ordinary -cavalryman must have been more than half that of a legionary. On _a -priori_ considerations it can hardly have been less, if, as Hadrian’s -speech suggests, he paid for his own arms and mount, and if he also, -like the legionaries, had the cost of his rations deducted from his -pay. On the whole, however, it seems best to defer speculation until -further evidence is forthcoming.[74] - -_Internal organization._ As is only natural in the case of a -professional army with so long a term of service, the internal -organization of the auxiliary regiments reveals a far more complicated -system of grades and promotions than anything which the ancient world -had yet known. The epigraphical evidence is abundant, and the efforts -of modern scholars, particularly von Domaszewski in his monumental -treatise, _Die Rangordnung des römischen Heeres_, have done much to -make the main lines of the system clear. Difficulties in detail still -remain, but we may hope for their ultimate solution. - -The commanding officer of an _ala quingenaria_ or _miliaria_, or of -a _cohors quingenaria_ bore the title of _praefectus_. _Cohortes -miliariae_ and the _cohortes civium Romanorum_, which occupied -an exceptional position,[75] were commanded by _tribuni_. Early -inscriptions also mention a _subpraefectus alae_ and a _subpraefectus -cohortis_, but these posts seem later to have been abandoned.[76] In -later times in case of the absence of the _praefectus_, his place seems -to have been filled by an officer placed temporarily in charge with the -title of _praepositus_ or _curator_. Questions concerning the order of -precedence among the _praefecti_ and _tribuni_, and their place in the -military hierarchy generally, are so closely connected with the method -of selection and appointment of these officers at different periods, -that they are best left for future discussion.[77] It is only important -here to note that they usually entered the service with this rank, and -that it is very rare to find the regular commander either of an ala or -cohort drawn from among the lower officers. - -The remaining ‘commissioned officers’, as we should call them, are -represented by the troop and company commanders, the decurions who -commanded the _turmae_ of the ala, and the centurions and decurions -of the cohorts. The senior officer in each class was styled _decurio -princeps_ or _centurio princeps_,[78] but apart from this we cannot -trace any regular order of precedence with fixed titles such as is -found among the legionary centurions. As regards the respective -position of infantry and cavalry officers, the _decurio alae_ ranked -highest. This is shown clearly, as von Domaszewski has pointed out, by -the frequent employment of this officer as _praepositus cohortis_.[79] -On the other hand, among the officers of the cohorts the centurions -ranked above the decurions who commanded the mounted men, where such -existed. In one inscription, which seems to have included all the -officers of a _cohors equitata_, the centurions come first on the list, -and in the Coptos inscription, so often cited, the officers of the 61 -_equites cohortales_ are not mentioned at all.[80] The difference in -rank cannot, however, have been very great since all these officers -could be promoted to the post of legionary centurion without any -intervening step, although this distinction seems to have been -conferred most freely upon the decurions of the alae. In these cases it -was of course necessary for the auxiliary officer to have acquired the -_civitas_ either by serving his full time or by a special grant before -his promotion. - -Throughout the period these posts seem usually to have been filled by -promotion from the lower ranks, although we also find instances of -legionaries being given commissioned rank in the auxiliary regiments, -and it is officers of this class who seem most frequently to have -secured further promotion to the legionary centurionate.[81] Von -Domaszewski wishes to consider that these transfers were especially -characteristic of the early days of the imperial army, and that a -deliberate attempt was then made to provide every auxiliary regiment -with a staff of ex-legionaries. With this suggestion, however, it is -difficult to agree; not only is the epigraphical evidence insufficient -to prove such a wholesale use of imported officers, but the cases known -to us are by no means confined to the first fifty years of the Empire. -Further, as will be shown later, the arrangement does not harmonize -with the general character of the early _auxilia_. - -The holders of subordinate posts, who ranked below the centurion or -decurion, may be divided, following the arrangement adopted by von -Domaszewski, into two groups.[82] The members of the first group -practically correspond to our non-commissioned officers, and are able -to command small detachments or to take the place, if necessary, of -the company officers. These alone, and the holders of certain higher -administrative posts, to which the _taktische Chargen_ gave access,[83] -have a legitimate claim to the title of _principales_. The members of -the second group did not, strictly speaking, rank above the privates, -but they were granted freedom from certain routine duties in return -for special services which they discharged, and were distinguished in -consequence by the title of _immunes_. - -It is of course often difficult to ascertain whether a particular post -falls into the higher or lower group, and this is especially the case -with the standard-bearers, who occupy a position of peculiar importance -in the military system. In the ala each troop had its own flag -carried by the _signifer turmae_, but there seems also to have been a -regimental standard, the bearer of which was known as the _vexillarius -alae_.[84] A few inscriptions also mention an _imaginifer_, but it -is not clear whether this officer always or at all periods found a -place on the staff.[85] In a cohort, on the other hand, each century -seems to have had its _signifer_, and each turma of mounted men its -_vexillarius_, but it does not appear that there was a regimental -standard, any more than there existed at this date a standard for -each cohort of a legion. This at least is implied by Tacitus in his -description of the entry of the Vitellian army into Rome, when he -mentions the _alarum signa_ by the side of the _legionum aquilae_, -but says nothing of the ensigns of the cohorts.[86] We must suppose, -then, that the _imaginifer cohortis_, who is mentioned on inscriptions, -was not regarded as the regimental standard-bearer any more than the -_imaginifer legionis_.[87] - -In consequence of this difference in organization the company and troop -standard-bearers of the cohorts rank among the _principales_, while in -the alae only the regimental standard-bearer is included in the higher -group, and the _signiferi turmae_ sink to the position of _immunes_. - -Returning, then, to the ala we may place at the head of the -_principales_ the _vexillarius_, and next to him the _imaginifer_, -when this officer existed. Other members of this class were the -non-commissioned officers of every turma, the _duplicarius_ and -_sesquiplicarius_,[88] who derived their titles from the fact that -they were paid twice and one and a half times the private’s pay -respectively, an institution found in the Hellenistic military -system from which it was probably borrowed.[89] Lastly we should -perhaps add the _optio_, who commanded the escort of the _praefectus_ -(_singulares_).[90] - -To the lower group, the _immunes_, belong the _signifer_, -_custos armorum_, and _curator_ attached to every turma,[91] the -_cornicularius_,[92] _actarius_,[93] _strator_,[94] _stator_,[95] -_librarius_,[96] and _beneficiarius_,[97] who form the clerical -and administrative staff of the _praefectus_, and his escort, the -_singulares_.[98] In determining the position of the holders of these -posts among the _immunes_ we are supported by the analogy of the -Equites Singulares Imperatoris, a corps modelled upon and to a certain -extent recruited from the auxiliary cavalry. The list of a _turma_ of -this regiment contained on a Roman inscription gives the following -arrangement:[99] - -nomina turmae - - Iul(ius) Mascel(lus) dec(urio) - Nonius Severus dup(licarius) - Iul(ius) Victorinus sesq(uiplicarius) - Aur(elius) Mucatral - Aur(elius) Lucius - Ael(ius) Crescens sig(nifer) - Aur(elius) Victor arm(orum custos) - Aur(elius) Atero cur(ator) - Ael(ius) Victor bf (beneficiarius) - Cl(audius) Victorinus lib(rarius) - Iul(ius) Vindex bf (beneficiarius) - 17 names of equites follow. - -The fact that two privates occupy the fourth and fifth places shows -clearly that the holders of all the posts mentioned lower in the list -belong to the _immunes_. Had it not been for this piece of evidence we -might have been tempted to place the _signifer turmae_ in the higher -category. The analogy of the Equites Singulares also suggests that -we may include the _bucinator_ and _tubicen_ among the _immunes_ of -the ala,[100] and we have also to add the _medicus_, whose somewhat -exceptional position is discussed later.[101] - -A distinction between the _principales_ and _immunes_ of the cohorts -may be based partly upon the principles already adopted for the ala, -partly upon the analogy of the legion, the organization of which was -clearly followed in several respects. On these grounds we may class as -_principales_ the _imaginifer cohortis_, the _signifer_, _optio_, and -_tesserarius_ of each century, and the _optio_ and _vexillarius_ of -each turma in the _cohortes equitatae_. The case of the _optio_, who -commanded, if necessary, in the place of the centurion or decurion, -may be taken for granted. It may also be noted that both _optio_ and -_vexillarius_ could be promoted to the position of decurion without any -intervening step.[102] The _tesserarius_, whose main duty consisted -in receiving from the centurion the orders and password for the day -and transmitting them to the men, is found in charge of a detachment -on special duty,[103] as is also the _imaginifer cohortis_.[104] The -_signifer_,[105] lastly, can hardly have had a position inferior to -that of the _vexillarius_ or _tesserarius_, and would indeed rank -higher than the latter if the analogy of the legions holds good. As -regards the _immunes_, the officer commanding a cohort possessed a -smaller administrative staff than the _praefectus alae_, including -only the _cornicularius_,[106] _actarius_,[107] _librarius_,[108] -and _beneficiarius_.[109] The musicians possibly include the -_cornicen_[110] as well as the _tubicen_[111] and the _bucinator_[112], -and the post of _mensor_ seems to be confined to the cohorts.[113] At -least no inscription has yet mentioned one among the _immunes_ of the -ala. - -Finally, as regards the position of the _medici_, who were attached -to the cohorts as well as to the alae, a few special remarks seem -necessary. On a British inscription one of these army doctors is -described as _medicus ordinarius_[114], which would naturally mean -that he served in the ranks, and a passage in the _Digest_ confirms -this by ranking the _medici_ among the _immunes_.[115] On the other -hand, M. Ulpius Sporus, who is described in an inscription erected by -his freedmen at Ferentinum in Etruria as _medicus alae Indianae et -tertiae Astorum_ (sic)[116], seems to be on rather a higher level, -as also M. Rubrius Zosimus of Ostia, who was doctor to the Cohors IV -Aquitanorum in Germania Superior in the second century.[117] Both -these men are apparently Greeks, and can hardly have reached their -regiments by the ordinary recruiting channels.[118] It has been noticed -also that the _medici_ appear to have a special position in some -inscriptions of the Praetorian cohorts.[119] Probably, then, one may -infer two classes of _medici_, the common soldier who possessed some -elementary qualifications (first aid and blood-letting) and was given -the position of an _immunis_, and the fully-trained professional doctor -who was attached to a regiment but held no actual military rank. It -was probably to distinguish himself from the latter class that the -_medicus_ of the Tungrian cohort added the word _ordinarius_ to his -title. - -As regards the rate and method of promotion, and the order of -precedence of the various posts within the two groups of _principales_ -and _immunes_, we know practically nothing. There is nothing to show -that it was customary to hold several posts in a regular order,[120] -or to become an _immunis_ before entering the _principales_. It was -doubtless usual for a man not to receive commissioned rank without -first holding some subordinate post, but we do not know that any such -preliminary qualification was essential.[121] Owing to the length of -service promotion was probably not rapid, but on the other hand the -number of posts available was very large. In an _ala quingenaria_, -for example, there were 16 decurions, 34 _principales_, and probably -over 100 _immunes_.[122] Thus every soldier must have felt confident -of obtaining sooner or later a position of greater ease and profit, -and this, together with the fact that the ladder of promotion led to -commissioned rank, and even to the coveted legionary centurionate, must -have increased the attractions of the profession. - -_Titles of the regiments._ The titles of the auxiliary regiments were -as various in form as those of the legions, and it is unnecessary to -give a complete list of them. The alae which bear a title derived from -a personal name, presumably that of their original commander, have been -mentioned already. The majority of them were probably raised during -Caesar’s Gallic campaigns or the Civil Wars, and there are few to which -a later date can be assigned with any certainty.[123] The few cohorts -known to have borne such titles are more difficult to explain, but -have perhaps a similar origin.[124] Regiments raised under the Empire, -on the other hand, were usually called by the name of the tribe or -district from which they were raised, and distinguished by a number -from other corps of the same origin.[125] In course of time these -ethnical titles were in many cases supplemented by others, some of -which were granted as marks of distinction and rewards for meritorious -service, while others were purely descriptive. Examples of the former -class are the title _civium Romanorum_, which indicates that on some -occasion all the members of a corps received the franchise before their -discharge,[126] and honorary epithets, such as _pia_, _fidelis_, or -_fida_.[127] The title _Augusta_ seems also to have been granted at -all periods _honoris causa_, although some of the regiments bearing -it may date back to the beginning of the Empire.[128] Titles derived -from the names of later emperors, on the other hand, while they were -doubtless granted occasionally as marks of distinction, seem often -to indicate nothing more than the reign during which a regiment was -raised. Finally, from the time of Severus Antoninus onwards, every -regiment employs a secondary title, derived from the name of the -reigning emperor. A remarkable series of dedicatory inscriptions of the -Cohors I Aelia Dacorum, which was stationed during the third century -at Birdoswald (Amboglanna), on the British frontier, shows us this -regiment successively assuming the titles _Antoniniana_, _Gordiana_, -_Postumiana,_ and _Tetriciana_.[129] - -Purely descriptive titles might be derived either from the size -of the regiment (_miliaria_, _quingenaria_), its composition -(_equitata_, _gemina_),[130] its weapons (_scutata_, _contariorum_, -_sagittariorum_), or the name of the province in which it was or had -been stationed (_Syriaca_, _Moesiaca_). A frequent motive for the -assumption and accumulation of such secondary descriptive titles seems -to have been the desire of a regiment to distinguish itself from -another unit bearing the same number and ethnical title, and stationed -in the same province. This was probably the origin of the title -_veterana_ or _veteranorum_, which was borne by five alae and five -cohorts,[131] although its interpretation is much disputed. According -to von Domaszewski, these regiments were so called because they were -originally formed of discharged veterans recalled to active service -in time of war.[132] Cichorius suggests that a regiment assumed this -name when another corps bearing the same number and ethnical title, -but of more recent origin, was stationed in the same province.[133] -This certainly furnishes the best explanation in the case of the -Cohors III Thracum c. R., and the Cohors III Thracum veteranorum, -which appear together in the Raetian diplomata for 107 and 166.[134] -On von Domaszewski’s theory it is difficult to see why a regiment of -recalled veterans should bear the number III, and his explanation that -‘the numbers borne by these corps are connected with the numbering -of the auxilia in the province to which they were attached after -their formation from _missicii_’ does not make matters much clearer. -Cichorius’s suggestion would also account satisfactorily for the Cohors -I Aquitanorum and the Cohors I Aquitanorum veterana, which appear -together in Germania Superior in 74,[135] and the Cohors I Claudia -Sugambrorum and the Cohors I Sugambrorum veterana which were stationed -together in Moesia Inferior.[136] The latter would be identical with -the regiment mentioned by Tacitus as forming part of the garrison -of the province in the reign of Tiberius.[137] In other cases where -similar duplication cannot be proved it must be remembered that our -evidence is very imperfect, and that a regiment after assuming this -title may have continued to use it when the reason for doing so had -disappeared. - -These descriptive and honorary epithets, although sometimes borne -alone,[138] were usually employed to supplement the original ethnical -title, with the result that after a hundred years of meritorious -service the ‘full style’ of a second-century regiment might be almost -as long and imposing as that of the emperors whom it served. As an -example, one may cite the Cohors I Breucorum quingenaria Valeria -Victrix bis torquata ob virtutem appellata equitata, which formed part -of the garrison of Raetia.[139] - -_Relation of the auxilia to the legions._ It is perhaps relevant to -discuss here a point affecting the auxilia as a whole, namely, their -relation to the legions in the general scheme of military organization. -It is generally supposed that in those frontier armies which included -both classes of troops, a group of auxiliary regiments was definitely -attached to each legion, and such phrases as ‘a legion with its -attendant auxiliaries’ are common in writers on the military system -of the Roman Empire. Evidence as to the exact nature and even the -existence of such a connexion is, however, somewhat difficult to find. -Tacitus does, it is true, refer to the eight Batavian cohorts, who -play such an important part in the events of 69, as _auxilia quartae -decimae legionis_, but no other passage can be quoted in the same -sense, and the connexion in this case was obviously neither close -nor durable.[140] In the comparatively detailed account of the first -campaign of Bedriacum, which rests at any rate upon a good military -source, there is no suggestion that the auxilia marched or manœuvred in -separate groups, each connected with a particular legion. Certainly in -the normal order of battle throughout the first century the available -auxilia were all massed together either as a first line, or in two -flanking divisions to the right and left of the legionaries, and the -auxilia of the army which crossed the Rhine in 73 were not divided -among the legionary _legati_, but had a commander of their own.[141] - -Supporters of the legionary connexion also refer to the two diplomata -issued in the same year and on the same day (August 14, 99) to two -different groups of auxiliary regiments stationed in Moesia Inferior, -and suggest that this curious arrangement can best be explained on -the supposition that each diploma refers only to the auxilia of one -legion.[142] A similar explanation suggests itself for the fact that -only one regiment is common to the two British diplomata of 103 and -105.[143] It seems impossible, however, to interpret all the diplomata -in this manner. The British diploma of 124, for example, which was -issued to men from six alae and twenty-one cohorts, can hardly be -supposed to contain the auxilia of only one of the three legions then -stationed in the province.[144] In Pannonia Superior also so many -regiments are common to the five complete second-century diplomata -which we possess that we must, on this theory, refer them all to the -auxilia of one and the same legion.[145] How, then, do we account for -the fact that the inscriptions of the province hardly mention any -regiments but those contained in these diplomata? In other words, -why should all our evidence refer to the auxilia of one legion, and -those attached to the other two, then stationed in the province, have -entirely disappeared? - -A stronger argument is perhaps to be found in inscriptions which -contain the phrase _legio … et auxilia eius_.[146] It could be -wished that these texts were more numerous and more precise, but they -support the supposition that some connexion existed between each legion -and a definite group of auxiliary regiments better than any evidence -previously adduced. The connexion, however, must have been very slight -and easily broken. Dr. Hardy has pointed out that although three out -of the four legions stationed in Germania Superior in 70 left the -province for good during the following thirty-five years, there is -abundant evidence that nothing like the same proportion of the auxilia -stationed in the province accompanied them.[147] It is also clear that, -in the second century at any rate, the number of auxilia attached to -any legion was not fixed in accordance with any general principle, but -depended upon the exigencies of the local situation on each frontier. A -reference to the list of provincial garrisons contained in the appendix -will show that whereas there are not likely to have been more than -three thousand auxilia apiece to each of the three legions of Pannonia -Superior, there were probably thirty thousand to be divided among the -three legions of Britain, while in Dacia there was only one legion with -something approaching twenty-five thousand auxilia. Still, with these -reservations, it seems possible enough that the auxilia were always -considered as in some sense dependent on the legions, and that where -several legions were stationed in the same province, an arrangement was -made dividing the auxilia into a corresponding number of groups, each -of which was for certain purposes attached to a particular legion.[148] - -_Total number of the auxilia._ This section should naturally conclude -with some statement of the total number of auxilia in the imperial -service. Unfortunately, no clear and direct evidence can be obtained -on this point either from literary or epigraphical sources. Tacitus, -in his survey of the military resources of the Empire in the reign of -Tiberius, after enumerating the legions in detail, contents himself -with a vague sentence suggesting that the auxiliaries were as numerous -as the legionaries and Household Troops.[149] This phrase is perhaps -accurate enough for the period to which he is referring, but it is -obviously not meant to be precise, and must certainly not be taken -to express any principle habitually followed in the composition of -the imperial army. If we endeavour to check the statement from other -sources we have the remark of Velleius that in 6, at the time of the -great Pannonian revolt, the ten legions concentrated under Tiberius’s -command were accompanied by 70 cohorts and 14 alae.[150] If we allow -for a few regiments being _miliariae_, this would represent a little -over 50,000 men, a number about equivalent to that of the legionaries. -If we may assume a similar ratio in other provinces, the total for -the auxilia at this period would amount to 150,000 men.[151] It must -be remembered, however, that at this date and throughout the whole -pre-Flavian period the government relied upon the troops of the client -kingdoms and levies of border militia to supplement the imperial -troops. With the gradual elimination of these secondary forces, -which has already been described, the number of regular units was -proportionately increased. More than twenty regiments were raised in -the old kingdom of Thrace after its annexation in 46, and five alae -and nineteen cohorts are found in 69 garrisoning the two provinces -which had been formed from the kingdom of Mauretania.[152] We need not, -then, be surprised if the figures supplied by Tacitus and Josephus show -that so early as 69 the number of the auxiliaries considerably exceeds -the figure suggested for the end of the reign of Augustus. According -to Josephus, Vespasian entered Judaea in 67 with at least 20,000 -auxiliaries, which probably represents two-thirds of the total number -available in the Eastern provinces.[153] In the Danubian provinces in -69 there were, according to Tacitus, sixteen alae.[154] On the basis of -the information given in the diplomata, we can safely reckon that there -would be at least three cohorts to every ala, and that one regiment in -four would be _miliaria_. Some 40,000 auxiliaries, therefore, must have -been stationed in the Danubian provinces at this period. In the same -year Vitellius entered Rome with twelve alae and thirty-four cohorts, -that is to say some 30,000 men, which represented probably two-thirds -of the auxilia in the Rhine armies and Raetia.[155] The garrison of the -two Mauretanias, to which allusion has already been made, would amount -to about 15,000 men. We thus arrive at the following totals for the -auxilia at this period: - - The Eastern provinces 30,000 men - The Danubian provinces 40,000 „ - Germany and Raetia 45,000 „ - The two Mauretanias 15,000 „ - ------- - 130,000 „ - ------- - -To this at least another 50,000 men must be added for the auxilia of -Britain, Spain, Africa, Noricum, and the small garrisons of the inland -provinces, making a grand total of 180,000 men. The next forty years -saw the figure mount even higher. The remaining client kingdoms in the -East, which were still strong enough to furnish 15,000 men for the -Jewish war in 67, were annexed, and the appearance of several new units -with the titles _Flavia_ or _Ulpia_ shows that more than this number of -regular auxilia was raised in their place.[156] Even Hadrian seems to -have made a few additions to the list, since his foreign policy, though -essentially pacific, was based upon a system of frontier defence to -which the auxilia were more than ever essential.[157] In Appendix I, -where the evidence as to the strength and distribution of the auxilia -in the second century is discussed in detail, it is suggested that by -the middle of the second century the force may have amounted to some -220,000 men, and that even this figure was probably exceeded sixty -years later. - - -Footnotes: - -[34] _De Bell. Afr._ 78. - -[35] Cicero, _De Off._ ii. 13. 45. - -[36] In a note to the French translation of Mommsen and Marquardt -(xi. 105) von Domaszewski declares decidedly against the possibility -that the _equites sociorum_ were organized in _alae_. Writing in -Pauly-Wissowa (s.v. _Auxilia_), he seems to consider that the auxiliary -cavalry had adopted the formation before the close of the Republic, -although the passages to which he refers, those from Cicero and the -author of the _Bell. Afr._ which are given above, seem at least to be -susceptible of a different interpretation. - -[37] For _praefecti equitum_ cf. Caesar, _Bell. Gall._ iii. 26; iv. 11. -They are not to be thought of as merely commanding _turmae_, since we -have a decurion mentioned in _Bell. Gall._ i. 23. - -[38] This organization cannot have taken place earlier since it is -obvious from Caesar’s narrative that during the Gallic campaigns no -attempt was made to reduce the tribal contingents to units of a fixed -size. - -[39] Caesar, _Bell. Gall._ i. 18. - -[40] [Caesar,] _Bell. Gall._ viii. 12. He is described as _principe -civitatis, praefecto equitum_. - -[41] Caesar, _Bell. Civ._ iii. 59. - -[42] See _Eph. Ep._ v. 142, n. 1. The _ala_ is only known from x. 6011. - -[43] The alae Flaviana, Petriana, Proculeiana, Tauriana, and Sebosiana -all bear ‘Gallorum’ as a secondary title, and the alae Agrippiana, -Longiniana, Picentiana, Pomponiana, and Rusonis seem to have been -recruited in Gaul in the first century. The Gallic origin of the ala -Atectorigiana is even more obvious. The ala Gallorum Indiana may -possibly have a later origin, cf. Tac. _Ann._ iii. 42. The theory given -above as to the origin of these regiments is unhesitatingly affirmed -by von Domaszewski (_Rangordnung_, pp. 122, 123), but a little more -evidence would certainly be advantageous. - -[44] Cf. v. 3366, x. 6309. - -[45] See below, p. 46. - -[46] Von Domaszewski, in his edition, puts the treatise _De munitione -castrorum_ into the reign of Trajan. It is difficult to regard -the evidence as decisive, but there can be little doubt that the -information contained in the work is in any case applicable to the -period under discussion. - -[47] Hyginus, 16. An Egyptian inscription, iii. 6581, also gives -sixteen as the number of decurions in an ala. - -[48] iii. 6627. - -[49] Von Dom. _Rangordnung_, p. 35, and also p. 52 of the same writer’s -commentary on Hyginus. - -[50] Arrian, _Tactica_, 18 αἱ δὲ δύο ταραντιναρχίαι ἱππαρχία, δώδεκα -καὶ πεντακοσίων ἱππέων, ἥντινα Ῥωμαῖοι ἴλην καλοῦσιν. It is perhaps -worth noting that Vegetius (ii. 14) gives 32 as the strength of a -_turma_ of his _equites legionis_. - -[51] The question will probably be found to turn on the strength of the -_contubernium_. 30 and 42 suggest _contubernia_ of 6. A small _turma_ -of 32 would suggest _contubernia_ of 8 or 4 and a large _turma_ of 40. - -[52] Hyginus, 28 ‘Cohors peditata miliaria habet centurias X … item -peditata quingenaria habet centurias VI, reliqua ut supra’. This refers -to the description of the _cohortes equitatae_ in the preceding section -in which it is stated that ‘Cohors equitata quingenaria habet centurias -VI, reliqua pro parte dimidia’. - -[53] Josephus, Bell. _Iud._ iii. 67 τῶν δὲ σπειρῶν αἱ δέκα μὲν εἶχον -ἀνὰ χιλίους πεζούς, αἱ δὲ λοιπαὶ τρισκαίδεκα ἀν’ ἑξακοσίους μὲν πεζούς, -ἱππεῖς δ’ ἑκατὸν εἴκοσι. Nissen, who accepts the authenticity of these -figures, assumes that both types of cohort mentioned had 120 cavalry -attached to them, but it seems impossible to get this meaning from -the Greek. See his article on the history of Novaesium in _B. J. B._ -cxi-cxii. 41. - -[54] Thuc. v. 57. - -[55] Caesar, _Bell. Gall._ vii. 65 ‘trans Rhenum in Germaniam mittit -ad eas civitates quas superioribus annis pacaverat equitesque ab -his arcessit et levis armaturae pedites, qui inter eos proeliari -consuerant’. - -[56] x. 4862: ‘… praef(ecto) cohort(is) Ubiorum peditum et equitum …’ -The inscription dates from the end of the reign of Augustus. - -[57] viii. 2532, 18042: ‘Eq(uites) coh(ortis) Commagenorum. Difficile -est cohortales equites etiam per se placere, difficilius post alarem -exercitationem non displicere: alia spatia campi, alius iaculantium -numerus … equorum forma, armorum cultus pro stipendi modo.’ - -[58] Hyginus, 25-7. - -[59] iii. 6760 with Mommsen’s note. Cf. also the roll of the Cohors I -Lusitanorum cited below. - -[60] Hyginus, 1, gives this as the size of a legionary _contubernium_, -and the ‘four quaternions’ of Acts xii. 4 suggest that the same system -prevailed among the troops of the client kingdom of Palestine. - -[61] For text and discussion see Mommsen in _Eph. Ep._ vii. 456-67. -He considers that the papyrus supports 60 as the normal strength of a -century in these _cohortes equitatae_. - -[62] The name is incorrect but convenient. Excluding D. xc, which is of -an exceptional character, the diplomata cover the period from the reign -of Nero (D. ci is the earliest, being apparently issued before 60) to -178 (D. lxxvi). - -[63] Tac. _Ann._ i. 17. - -[64] For example, the _praemia_ are granted to soldiers who are not yet -discharged in diplomata for 60 (ii), 74 (xi), 83 (xv), 84 (xvi), and 86 -(xix). The latest example is dated in 105 (xxxiv). - -[65] e.g. a diploma for 114 (xxxix) mentions a wife, two sons, and a -daughter, another for 134 (xlviii) four sons and two daughters. - -[66] The first to give the new wording for the auxiliaries is a British -diploma of 146 (lvii), and it is universal after this date. - -[67] _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, vii. 1022. Given with commentary by Wilcken -and Mitteis in _Papyruskunde_, no. 453. Cf. also iii. 14632. The two -recruits described on the roll of the Cohors I Lusitanorum as _accepti -ex legione II Traiana_ may have been transferred as a punishment, -the _militiae mutatio_ prescribed in the _Digest_, xlix. 16, as the -appropriate penalty for various military offences. - -[68] The last diploma to mention children is dated 138 (cviii). - -[69] Wilcken and Mitteis, _Papyruskunde_, no. 459. I have assumed -the correctness of Wilcken’s restorations of the text, which is very -corrupt in places. - -[70] The phraseology of the diplomata issued to the Praetorians ‘ut -etiam si peregrini iuris feminas matrimonio suo iunxerint, proinde -liberos tollant ac si ex duobus civibus Romanis natos’—D. xii -(76)—shows that in their case children born before their father’s -discharge had always suffered under the disabilities created for the -auxiliaries in the second century. The position of the legionaries is -still uncertain. - -[71] Such regulations would be covered by the general statement of -Suetonius, _Vit. Aug._ 49 ‘Quidquid autem ubique militum esset, ad -certam stipendiorum praemiorumque formulam adstrinxit, definitis pro -gradu cuiusque et temporibus militiae et commodis missionum’. The -number of the diplomata seems to tell decisively against the suggestion -that they were only issued to troops who had distinguished themselves -by exceptional conduct in the field. - -[72] Von Dom. _Sold_, p. 226; id. _Rangordnung_, p. 68. - -[73] Tac. _Hist._ iv. 19. The Batavian cohorts demand ‘duplex -stipendium, augeri equitum numerum’. Cf. viii. 18042, where the -emperor gives as a reason for the superiority of the cavalry over the -mounted infantry of the cohorts, ‘equorum forma, armorum cultus pro -stipendi modo.’ I do not see how von Domaszewski concludes from the -first passage that the pay of the infantry was one-third that of the -legionaries, i.e. 75 _denarii_ a year. _Sold_, p. 225. - -[74] I am assuming that the _duplicarius_ really did receive twice the -pay of the private, as his name implies, which is probable since he -maintained two horses (Hyginus, 16). For the promotion of legionaries -to this post cf. viii. 2354 cited below. - -[75] See below, pp. 65-7. - -[76] xii. 2231 ‘[D] Decmanio Capro sub praef(ecto) equit(um) alae -Agrippian(ae)’; v. _Suppl._ 185 ‘Ti. Iulio C. f., Fab(ia) Viatori -subpraef(ecto) cohortis III Lusitanorum …’. The origin of this -post may be due to Augustus’s practice of giving auxiliary regiments -two _praefecti_, although this measure was primarily designed in the -interest of officers of senatorial rank. Cf. Suet. _Vit. Aug._ 38 -‘binos plerumque laticlavios praeposuit singulis alis’. Von Domaszewski -prefers to connect it with the early system of brigading several -auxiliary regiments together under one commander; _Rangordnung_, p. 119. - -[77] See below, pp. 90-101. - -[78] At any rate among the cohorts. _A. E._ 1892. 137 ‘C. Cassio -Pal(atina) Blaesiano dec(urioni) coh(ortis) Ligurum principi equitum’. -_I. G. R. R._ ii. 894 κεντυρίων ὁ καὶ πρίνκιψ σπείρας θρακῶν. There is -no certain inscription of a _decurio princeps alae_. - -[79] Cf. viii. 10949, 21560; von Dom. _Rangordnung_, p. 63. For the -following section I am deeply indebted to his discussion of the -officers of the _auxilia_ on pp. 53-61 of this work. - -[80] iii. 6627, 6760. - -[81] iii. 11213 ‘T. Calidius P. (filius) Cam(ilia) Sever(us) eq(ues), -item optio, decur(io) coh(ortis) I Alpin(orum), item (centurio) -leg(ionis) XV Apoll(inaris) annor(um) LVIII stip(endiorum) XXXIIII …’ -is a good example of a man who rose from the ranks to the legionary -centurionate. - -viii. 2354 ‘… mil(itis) leg(ionis) III Aug(ustae), duplic(arii) alae -Pann(oniorum), dec(urionis) al(ae) eiusdem, (centurionis) leg(ionis) -III Aug(ustae)’ gives the career of a promoted legionary. D. xv, xxxii, -xxxiv, xc, were granted to centurions and decurions, who must therefore -have been of the same status as the men if they had not actually risen -from the ranks. - -[82] For the line of demarcation between _principales_ and _immunes_ -see von Dom. _Rangordnung_, pp. 1-4. It must be admitted that, although -this distinction existed, it is not always recognizable on inscriptions. - -[83] These do not concern us here since their rank depended upon that -of the officer to which they were attached, and the commander of an -auxiliary regiment did not stand sufficiently high for his clerks and -orderlies to be ranked among the _principales_. - -[84] I accept, although with some hesitation, the view of Lehner in -_B. J. B._ cxvii against that of von Dom. _Rangordnung_, p. 55. It is -accepted also by Max Mayer, _Vexillum und vexillarius_, Strassburg, -1910. For instances of the title _vexillarius alae_ cf. iii. 4834, -11081. The standard of the Ala Longiniana, discussed by Lehner, was -a _vexillum_ bearing as its device a Celtic religious emblem, the -three-horned bull. The _signum_ of a _turma_ of the Ala Petriana shown -on a sepulchral monument was a radiated head in a medallion. See _J. R. -S._ ii (1912), Fig. 8. Another _signum_ on a Mainz tombstone shows four -ivy leaves hanging from a cross-bar. Cf. _B. J. B._ cxiv-cxv, Pl. I, n. -3. - -[85] _A. E._ 1906. 119. - -[86] Tac. _Hist._ ii. 89 ‘Quattuor legionum aquilae per frontem -totidemque circa e legionibus aliis vexilla, mox duodecim alarum signa -et post peditum ordines eques; dein quattuor et triginta cohortes, ut -nomina gentium aut species armorum forent, discretae’. - -[87] On one of the inscriptions which mentions this officer, iii. 3256, -he is ranked among the mounted men of a _cohors equitata_. - -[88] For the position of these officers cf. viii. 21567. - -[89] Arrian, _Anab._ vii. 23. - -[90] iii. 11911. - -[91] viii. 2094 ‘… C. Iulius Dexter vet(eranus), mil(itavit) in ala -eq(ues), cur(ator) turmae, armor(um) custos, signifer tur(mae) …’. - -[92] iii. 7651. - -[93] iii. 3392. - -[94] _I. G. R. R._ iii. 1094. - -[95] iii. 4369. - -[96] iii. 13441. - -[97] iii. 11811. There were of course several of these, and also of the -preceding officers. - -[98] iii. 12356. - -[99] vi. 225. vi. 2408 also shows seven _equites_ preceding the -_signifer turmae_. - -[100] vi. 3179, 32797. Both appear also among the _equites cohortales_, -iii. 3352, 10589. - -[101] xi. 3007. - -[102] iii. 11213, 8762. - -[103] ii. 2553; cf. _A. E._ 1910. 4. A detachment of the Cohors I -Celtiberorum in Lusitania is under the charge of a centurion of the -Cohors I Gallica, a _beneficiarius_ of the procurator, an _imaginifer_ -of Legio VII Gemina, and a _tesserarius_ of the Cohors I Celtiberorum. - -[104] xiii. 7705. - -[105] iii. 10315. - -[106] iii. 10316. - -[107] vii. 458. - -[108] iii. 12602. - -[109] iii. 1808. We should perhaps add to this group the _capsarius_, -_A. E._ 1906. 110. - -[110] xiii. 6572. - -[111] iii. 10589. - -[112] iii. 8522. In xiii. 6503 the musicians are described collectively -as _aeneatores_. - -[113] xiii. 6538. - -[114] vii. 690. He served in the Cohors I Tungrorum. - -[115] _Dig._ l. 6, 7. - -[116] xi. 3007. His cognomen is uncertain. - -[117] xiii. 6621. One might add M. Mucius Hegetor medicus of the Cohors -XXXII Voluntariorum in Pannonia, iii. 10854. - -[118] Lucian mentions a doctor of an auxiliary cohort who wrote a -history of the Parthian war of Marcus and Verus and must have been a -man of some education. Lucian, _de hist. conscrib._ 24. - -[119] Von Dom. _Rangordnung_, p. 26. - -[120] The record of the career of C. Iulius Dexter quoted above is -quite exceptional. Usually only one post is mentioned. - -[121] iii. 11213 gives the sequence _eques-optio-decurio_, and 8762 -that of _eques-vexillarius-decurio_, but such details are rare. - -[122] The _principales_ would be the _vexillarius alae_, the _optio -singularium_, and a _duplicarius_ and _sesquiplicarius_ to each -_turma_. Of the _immunes_ each _turma_ has its _signifer_, _custos -armorum_, and _curator_. The total number of the _beneficiarii_, -&c., we do not know, but the inscription of the Equites Singulares -quoted above suggests an average of three to a _turma_. In a _cohors -quingenaria_ with only 6 commissioned officers and 19 _principales_ -(the _imaginifer cohortis_ and the _signifer_, _optio_, and -_tesserarius_ of each century) the chances of promotion would be less. -This is another reason for the popularity of the cavalry and the desire -of cohorts to become _equitata_. Cf. Tac. _Hist._ iv. 19. - -[123] The Ala Indiana may have been called after the Trevir Iulius -Indus mentioned in Tac. _Ann._ i. 42, the Ala Siliana after C. Silius -the general of Tiberius, and the Ala Pannoniorum Tampiana after Tampius -Flavianus, governor of Pannonia in 69. The last case, however, is -doubted by von Domaszewski, _Rangordnung_, p. 122, n. 6. - -[124] The only cases known at present are the cohorts Lepidiana and -Apuleia civium Romanorum, and a Cohors Flaviana only known from a -_cursus honorum_. - -[125] The name of the tribe was usually in the genitive plural but -might also be in the nominative singular. Thus we find the same -regiment described as Cohors I Alpinorum and Cohors I Alpina. The -question of duplicate numbering, which is connected with the system of -recruiting and distribution, is discussed in the following section. - -[126] The fact that the numerous regiments bearing this title appear -in the diplomata shows that the status of their members was not -permanently raised. One regiment, the Cohors II Tungrorum, bears the -title C(ivium) L(atinorum), _Eph. Ep._ ix. 1228. - -[127] Ritterling has shown that all the auxilia of Germania Inferior -received the titles _pia fidelis Domitiana_ in 89 for their loyalty at -the time of the rebellion of Saturninus; _W. D. Z._ 1893. The title -_fida_ was borne by the Cohors I Vardullorum; vii. 1043. - -[128] It is borne by regiments of Dacians and Britons who cannot have -acquired it during the reign of Augustus; D. xxxix, iii. 10255. - -[129] vii. 818, 819, 820 and 823. - -[130] As in the case of the legions this title was probably borne by -regiments which had been formed by a combination of two previously -existing units. The two Alae Flaviae Geminae, for example, which appear -in Germania Superior at the end of the first century, would represent -the salvage of the old Rhine army which went to pieces in 69. - -[131] The alae Britannica, Gaetulorum, Gallorum, Parthorum, and I -Thracum, and the Cohorts I Aquitanorum, III Brittonum, I Hispanorum, I -Sugambrorum, and III Thracum. - -[132] _Rangordnung_, p. 80. - -[133] In Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encyclopädie_, s.v. _ala_ and _cohors_. -See these articles also for some rarer titles which have not been -mentioned here. - -[134] D. xxxv and lxxiii. - -[135] D. xi. - -[136] D. xxxi (99) and xlviii (134). For proof that two distinct -cohorts are referred to see Cichorius, s.v. - -[137] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 47. - -[138] In these cases an ethnical title may have been dropped, or -omitted on the only inscriptions known to us. - -[139] iii. 11930, 11931 (reign of Pius), 11933 (Commodus). - -[140] Tac. _Hist._ i. 59. - -[141] For the position of the auxilia in the normal order of battle -see below, p. 103. For Domitius Tullus and Domitius Lucanus, who held -in turn the post of _praefectus auxiliorum omnium adversus Germanos_, -probably in 73 and 74, see Dessau, _Inscr. Lat. Sel._ 990, 991, with -notes. - -[142] D. xxx and xxxi. - -[143] D. xxxii and xxxiv. - -[144] D. xliii. - -[145] The diplomata of 133, 138, 148, 149, and 154 (D. xlvii, li, -lx, lxi, and lxv) contain, on an average, ten regiments each. Four -regiments are always present, and five more occur in four diplomata -out of the five. This makes it sufficiently clear that, on the theory -given above, the auxilia of the same legion must always be referred to, -particularly in view of the immobility of the frontier troops in the -second century (see below, pp. 114-16), which forbids the supposition -that the same regiments would appear first attached to one legion, -then, after a few years’ interval, to another. - -[146] The earliest I know of is _legio III Augusta et auxilia eius_, -which dates from 158. viii. 2637. Other instances are a dedication -at Bonn by _legio I Minervia pia fidelis Severiana Alexandriana cum -auxilis_ (xiii. 8017), and a Pannonian inscription of the reign of -Gallienus which mentions _vexillationes legionum Germaniciarum et -Brittanniciarum_ (at least this seems to be intended) _cum auxilis -earum_. iii. 3228. The formula is certainly a rare one. - -[147] _Studies in Roman History_, Second Series, p. 112. - -[148] What exactly this amounted to is difficult to make out. It -would be natural to suppose a system of military districts within -the province. In Britain, for instance, the line between Tyne and -Solway, with the auxilia upon it, might have been divided between -Legio VI Victrix from York and Legio XX Valeria Victrix from Chester. -Unfortunately the epigraphical evidence does not support the idea that -the activity of the two legions was localized in this way. The point is -obscure and would not have been worth such a detailed discussion but -for the unwarrantable facility with which it is usually disposed of. - -[149] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 5 ‘At apud idonea provinciarum sociae triremes -alaeque et auxilia cohortium, neque multo secus in iis virium: sed -persequi incertum fuit, cum ex usu temporis huc illuc mearent, -gliscerent numero et aliquando minuerentur’. The _sociae triremes_, -i.e. the Rhine fleet, &c., counterbalance the Italian fleets at Ravenna -and Misenum. - -[150] Velleius, ii. 113. - -[151] The number of legions existing at this date is not absolutely -certain, but it seems most probable that there were twenty-eight. Cf. -von Domaszewski in the _Römisch-germanisches Korrespondenzblatt_, 1910, -on the date of the creation of legions XXI and XXII. - -[152] Tac. _Hist._ ii. 58. - -[153] Josephus, _Bell. Iud._ iii. 4. 66. Twenty-three cohorts (of which -ten, an unusually high proportion, were _miliariae_) and six alae, of -unspecified size. That the auxilia had been very largely drawn on is -shown by the fact that Titus in 70, although he had a whole additional -legion and detachments from two others, had only twenty cohorts and -eight alae; Tac. _Hist._ v. i. - -[154] Tac. _Hist._ iii. 2. The garrison of Noricum is probably not -included. - -[155] This is on the supposition that the auxilia would have been drawn -upon in the same proportion as the legions. Some of the regiments which -remained behind seem to have been very much weakened, others such as -the Ala Picentiana and the Ala Batavorum probably remained fairly -intact. Tac. _Hist._ ii. 89, iv. 15, 18, 62. Vitellius may have had -some of the British auxilia with him (cf. Tac. _Hist._ ii. 100, iii. -41), but these are more than counterbalanced by the eight Batavian -cohorts which had been sent back. - -[156] For the provenance of these regiments, particularly the large -levies made by Trajan in the Eastern provinces, see the following -section. - -[157] On the other hand, Legio IX Hispana, destroyed in Britain at -the beginning of the reign, and XXII Deiotariana, which was probably -annihilated in Judaea either at the same date or twenty years later, -were not replaced until Marcus raised legions II and III Italica for -the defence of Noricum and Raetia. - - - - -SECTION II - -RECRUITING AND DISTRIBUTION - - -In making a levy for the auxiliary regiments, the imperial government -was under no obligation to be at pains to legalize its position. In -an ancient state it was assumed, as a matter of course, that the -government had the power to call upon every citizen, if need arose, to -take his place in the fighting line. Even the privileged _cives Romani_ -were never freed under the Empire from the legal obligation to military -service, however much they may have been spared in practice, so that -there can have been little doubt about the position of _peregrini_. -Only in the case of the _civitates foederatae_ was the government -theoretically required to limit its demands to the number of men -stipulated in the original _foedus_. - -So much for the position in theory; in practice, of course it was not -to the interests of the government to raise troops without considering -the susceptibilities of its subjects, more particularly since the -inhabitants of those districts which would furnish the best soldiers -would also prove the most dangerous rebels if the demands made upon -them exceeded their endurance. One instance of the conciliatory policy -followed by the early Empire has already been noted; the exemption of -the Batavians from all burdens but military service flattered their -pride and enlisted their clan-spirit effectually on the side of the -Romans. Evidence of a similar policy is apparent in the selection of -the ethnical titles borne by the majority of the auxiliary regiments. -In spite of the obvious convenience of such a step it was unusual for -all the auxilia raised in one province to form a single series with -a uniform designation. Wherever the clan-spirit existed, the name of -the clan was accepted as the official title of the contingent which it -furnished to the imperial forces.[158] In Tarraconensis, for example, -while the more civilized part of the province was represented by the -alae and cohortes Hispanorum, several of the wild tribes of the north -and west, such as the Aravaci, Vardulli, and Vascones gave their name -to the regiments which they supplied.[159] The Gallic levies reveal a -similar policy; while the contingents of the comparatively peaceful -Lugdunensis seem to be covered by the general title of Galli, a list -of the levies of Belgica contains the name of almost every tribe in -that warlike province.[160] Indeed it is probable that during the first -years of the Empire many of these tribal contingents fought, like the -Batavians, as allies rather than as subjects of Rome, and knew little -of Roman training or discipline. - -In the East the historic position of the great city-states of Syria -received similar recognition. Among the numerous regiments of archers -contributed by this province we can distinguish the contingents of -Ascalon, Tyre, Antioch, and Apamea, as well as corps from Chalcis, -Damascus, Hemesa, and Samaria, who represented the incorporated armies -of the old client states. - -The incidence of the levy upon different provinces can best be judged -by a statistical table giving the number of regiments raised in each. -This is not easy to construct owing to the confusion caused by the -duplication of numbering, and the consequent danger of counting the -same corps twice over, or of reckoning two corps as one. There were, -for example, in Pannonia two cohorts, each bearing the title ‘I -Alpinorum’, which can fortunately be distinguished from one another -because they are both mentioned in the same diploma, but there are -scores of similar cases which can only be decided as yet on a balance -of probabilities. This extremely inconvenient system seems to be due -to two causes. In the first place, when new regiments were raised some -time after the original levy they seem to have begun a fresh series -instead of being included in the old ones. This process can be followed -most clearly in the case of regiments raised after 70, which were -distinguished by a title derived from the name of the reigning emperor. -Thus we have cohorts I and II Flavia Brittonum, I Ulpia Brittonum, -I Aelia Brittonum, and I Aurelia Brittonum.[161] Secondly, it seems -probable that when newly-raised regiments were drafted into different -provinces they were numbered in a different series in each province. -This suggestion is supported by the fact that where a regiment bearing -a high number is found, it generally appears that the rest of the -series was originally stationed in the same province, whereas isolated -cohorts generally have a low number. For example, the greater part of -the Gallic levies were originally stationed on the Rhine. Consequently, -we find few duplicate numbers and several series which run up to four -or even higher. The Thracian regiments, on the other hand, on account -of their special utility as archers, were distributed very widely -throughout the Empire during the first century, and of the twenty-seven -corps known to us, seventeen are numbered I or II, and are distributed -over eight provinces. - -Apart from this difficulty the following list contains in any case more -regiments than ever existed at any one time. Fresh regiments must have -been raised to fill the gaps caused by such disasters as the defeat -of Varus and the rebellion of Boudicca, but in only a few cases can -we distinguish the earlier from the later levies. It is only possible -to put in a separate class those regiments which bear a title derived -from the Flavians or later emperors, and were probably raised after 70. -Still, if these limitations are borne in mind, the following table may -serve to show approximately the quota which each province contributed: - - A. Raised before 70. B. Raised after 70. - _Recruiting area._ _Alae._ _Cohorts._ _Alae._ _Cohorts._ - Britain 2 10[162] 0 6 - Belgica 5 45 1 11[163] - Lugdunensis 25[164] 24[165] 0 0 - Aquitania 0 7 0 0 - Narbonensis 2[166] 0 0 0 - Alpes[167] 1 12 0 0 - Raetia 0 18 0 1 - Noricum 1 1 0 0 - Pannonia 5 17 3 1 - Dalmatia 0 7 0 4[168] - Moesia 1 3[169] 1 2[170] - Dacia 0 0 1 6 - Thrace 9 20 0 2 - Macedonia 0 3[171] 0 0 - Galatia 1[172] 0 0 6[173] - Cilicia 0 3 0 1 - Cyprus 0 4 0 0 - Crete 0 1 0 0 - Cyrenaica 0 4 0 0 - Syria 3[174] 15[175] 1 12 - Palestine[176] 2 10 0 0 - Arabia 0 0 1 6 - Egypt 0 2 0 0 - Africa 2 5 3 6 - Mauretania 0 0 0 3[177] - Tarraconensis 11 49[178] 1 4 - Lusitania 0 9 0 0 - Corsica and Sardinia 0 4 0 2 - -The first point to notice in this list is the smallness of the -contingent from the senatorial provinces. So small is it that Mommsen -desired to see here evidence of a constitutional principle.[179] The -auxilia were ‘gewissermassen eine Hausmacht des Kaisers’ and as such -raised only in the provinces governed by his _legati_. Such instances -as were then known of regiments raised in senatorial provinces were, -he thought, susceptible of explanation. The alae Vocontiorum, for -instance, represented a _civitas foederata_ which was not, strictly -speaking, a part of the senatorial province of Narbonensis. It does -not, however, seem possible to maintain this theory. The Cohors I -Cretum[180] is a certain case of a regiment from a senatorial province, -nor can it be really doubted that contingents were also drawn from -Cyprus[181] and Cyrene.[182] Indeed, it is difficult to see what -legal or political obstacle should prevent Augustus and his successors -from utilizing the military material available in the senatorial -provinces. Even if Mommsen is right in believing that conscription, -as opposed to the enrolment of volunteers, could only take place in a -senatorial province with the authority of the Senate (and this theory -is questioned by both Gardthausen and Liebenam),[183] there is no -reason why levies should not have been made for the auxilia under these -conditions when they certainly were made for the legions.[184] In no -case did any military power remain in the hands of the Senate, since -the recruits would immediately be marched away to garrison imperial -provinces. As a matter of fact, the reason for the smallness of the -senatorial contingent seems to have been a practical one. Few auxilia -were raised from Narbonensis and Baetica, because the greater part of -the inhabitants of these provinces had received the franchise and were -consequently eligible for service in the legions. Achaia, Asia, and to -a certain extent Macedonia, were treated as being on the same footing, -partly because Greeks did actually serve in the Eastern legions, partly -because of the Philhellenic policy of the imperial government, which -would not deny to the Greek states, although they were technically -unenfranchised, the privileges enjoyed by the enfranchised urban -communities of the West. Also no doubt the Greek of the period was not -rated highly as a fighting man. On the other hand, from Cyrenaica, -Crete, Cyprus, parts of Macedonia, and Africa[185] useful troops could -be and were obtained. The way in which the system worked is shown by -the case of Noricum, which, although an imperial province, included -many enfranchised communities and contributed recruits to the Rhine -legions in the middle of the first century.[186] Its contribution of -auxilia in consequence is limited to one ala and one cohort, as against -the eighteen regiments furnished by the neighbouring province of Raetia. - -In contrast to Narbonensis, it was upon the remaining three Gallic -provinces that the levy fell most heavily. From this district came more -than a quarter of the auxiliary infantry[187] in the pre-Flavian period -and nearly half the cavalry. The Gallic troopers indeed maintained for -a century the reputation which they had won under Caesar’s command, -and Strabo,[188] writing in the reign of Augustus, places them above -all other cavalry in the imperial army. Arrian,[189] too, notes their -reputation and the number of Celtic words in the cavalry drill-book, -although in his day their position had been taken by the Pannonians, -already prominent in the campaign of 69.[190] Spain sent the largest -contingent after the Gallic provinces, and also contributed a few -words to the drill-book,[191] but we hear nothing of the quality of -the Spanish troops and they soon lost their early importance. The -predominance of the auxilia of Spain and Gaul in the pre-Flavian period -is, however, a clear indication of the determination of Augustus to -base the Empire on its Western provinces. Archers alone, and these in -comparatively small numbers, were drawn from the East,[192] which was -still regarded as the home of dangerous and un-Roman ideals. - -Lastly, a word must be said about a group of regiments which do not -appear in the above lists and are too numerous to be passed over. -These are the cohorts which bear the titles _voluntariorum civium -Romanorum_, _ingenuorum c. R._, _Italica c. R._, and _campestris_.[193] -Collectively these regiments constitute the _cohortes civium -Romanorum_ to the soldiers of which Augustus left by his will a -donative equal to that of the legionaries.[194] From various passages -in the literary authorities it appears that they represent the -result of two levies made by Augustus in Italy, the first during the -Pannonian rising, and the second after the defeat of Varus.[195] When -free-born citizens could not be found in sufficient numbers the levy -was extended to freedmen.[196] This is corroborated by the evidence -of the inscriptions, since the title _ingenuorum_ clearly implies the -existence of regiments whose members could not make this boast.[197] -Originally, as the provisions of the will of Augustus show, these -cohorts occupied a peculiar position, and were practically on a level -with the legionaries, in consequence of which their commanders bear -the title of _tribunus_.[198] The presence, however, of the Cohors VIII -Voluntariorum on the Dalmatian diploma of 93 shows that unenfranchised -recruits had been accepted even during the pre-Flavian period, and in -the following century only their title distinguishes these regiments -from the ordinary auxilia. - -The evidence hitherto considered has mainly served to illustrate -the original distribution of the burden of military service and the -respective quotas furnished by the different provinces to the auxilia -at the time of their organization. To trace the further workings of -this system it is necessary to examine the principles on which the -auxiliary regiments were distributed among the military areas and -to trace the relations between this distribution and the method of -recruiting. - -A casual glance at the military diplomata, which give a fair idea of -the composition of the more important provincial garrisons between -the reign of Vespasian and that of Commodus, suggests that it was the -settled policy of the imperial government to destroy the possibility -of national cohesion and local sympathies among the regiments raised -from their subjects by distributing the contingents of each recruiting -district over as wide an area as possible, and making every frontier -army corps a mosaic of different nationalities. It will be shown -later that this theory, which has been frequently adopted by modern -writers, will not stand before a closer scrutiny of the evidence as an -explanation of the state of things existing in the second century; it -can also be shown that such a principle of distribution was not the -original policy inaugurated by Augustus. - -Our earliest evidence relates to the composition of the garrison of -the Danubian provinces, and the account of the great rising which -took place here in the year A.D. 6 by the contemporary observer -Velleius makes it clear that the strength of the rebels lay in the -training which many had received in the Roman army. His reference to -the military knowledge of the leaders and the discipline of the rank -and file indicates that regular auxiliary regiments, raised locally -and stationed near their homes, had mutinied in sympathy with their -fellow tribesmen.[199] Concerning the state of things on the Rhine -frontier we have more detailed information which points to the same -conclusion. The account in the _Annals_ of the campaigns of Germanicus -mentions cohorts of Raeti, Vindelici, and Gauls in addition to the -_tumultuariae catervae_ of the local militia.[200] Later in the century -we find an Ala Treverorum engaged in putting down a revolt of their own -countrymen in 21,[201] an Ala Canninefatium engaged in the disastrous -expedition of L. Apronius against the Frisii in 28,[202] and Vangiones -and Nemetes helping to repulse a raid of the Chatti in 50.[203] -Finally, when we turn to the narrative contained in the _Histories_ -of the events of the disastrous year 69, we find abundant evidence -that at this date three-fourths of the Rhenish auxilia were drawn -from Gaul proper or the Teutonic tribes of Belgica. The only regiments -mentioned by Tacitus which are not of local origin are (1) Thracians, -who appear on every frontier owing to their special qualifications as -archers;[204] (2) Spaniards, who may have entered the province in 43 -with Legio IV Macedonica, which was transferred from Spain to the Rhine -to replace the troops sent to Britain, and (3) Britons, who probably -began to arrive from the newly conquered areas a few years later.[205] -Epigraphical evidence adds to the list a few regiments from the -Danubian provinces and some corps of oriental archers.[206] - -In other provinces the same policy can be traced, although the evidence -is less abundant. In Africa, for example, the deserter Tacfarinas seems -to have served in his own province,[207] and in Palestine we find -Samaritan regiments garrisoning Caesarea.[208] On the whole there is -sufficient evidence to show that although each of the great frontier -armies contained imported elements, in particular the ubiquitous -Thracian and oriental archers, the original policy of the imperial -government was to draw the auxilia in each case from the nearest -recruiting-areas. - -Both the advantages and the defects of this system are sufficiently -obvious. It saved trouble, a reason which had already commended it to -the administrators of the Republic, and it avoided the dangerous and -widespread discontent which, as the case of the Thracians shows, would -have followed any wholesale attempt to remove the newly organized -regiments to distant provinces.[209] Lastly, the men would be fighting -on ground which they knew against an enemy with whose methods of -fighting they would already be acquainted. On the other hand, there -was of course the obvious danger that in a border war which assumed -the character of a national struggle the local auxilia might desert to -their own countrymen and use the training which they had acquired in -the Roman service to increase the strength of the hostile resistance. -As a set-off to this danger the Romans reckoned with some justice -that tribal enmity was usually stronger than national feeling, and -in fact there were many tribal chiefs like Flavus, the brother of -Arminius, who were well content with the rewards and distinctions -which recompensed their fidelity.[210] Events, however, made it clear -that this confidence was misplaced. A time was to come when the border -tribes would identify themselves readily with the cause of imperial -defence, but the influences which were to bring about this result were -often slow in their operation, and the first century saw on almost -every frontier a more or less serious outbreak of national feeling, -in which the auxilia often participated. Yet even the most serious of -these revolts, that of Civilis in 69, showed how the new leaven was -working. The political conceptions of the mutineers were borrowed from -their conquerors, not from their ancestors, and in the darkest hour of -the revolt a Gallic cavalry regiment, the Ala Picentiana, was the first -to return to its fidelity.[211] - -The first district in which the Augustan policy broke down was the -Danubian provinces, and a glance at the names of the regiments -stationed here in the pre-Flavian period shows that the lesson of the -great rebellion was not thrown away upon the imperial authorities. -In Pannonia a diploma of the year 60[212] shows us the following -seven cohorts, I and II Alpinorum, I Asturum et Callaecorum, I and II -Hispanorum, I Lusitanorum, and V Lucensium et Callaecorum, forming part -of the garrison of the province, and we may add the Ala Aravacorum -on the strength of an early inscription.[213] In Dalmatia early -inscriptions give the following cohorts: - -I Campanorum Voluntariorum civium Romanorum. iii. 8438. - -VIII Voluntariorum civium Romanorum. iii. 1742.[214] - -III Alpinorum. iii. 8491, 8495, 14632. - -I Lucensium. iii. 8486, 8492, 8494, 9834. All these must date before -80, when the regiment appears in Pannonia. - -This list might perhaps be lengthened, but it is sufficient for our -purpose. It is clear that after the rebellion Augustus imported -into the disturbed area a number of regiments from other provinces, -particularly from Spain, where the large garrison maintained during -the earlier part of his reign could now safely be reduced. The -Pannonian and Dalmatian regiments, on the other hand, were transferred -elsewhere—several of them, as we have seen, to the Rhine, where they -served to replace the troops who shared the fate of the legions of -Varus.[215] - -The same sequence of events took place on the Rhine in the years 69 and -70. The temporary success of Civilis was largely due to the wholesale -defection to his standard of the Gallic and Teutonic regiments then -stationed on the Rhine frontier. After the suppression of the rebellion -in the summer of 70 a number of these regiments were disbanded or -sent elsewhere,[216] and their place was taken by the auxilia who had -accompanied the new legions sent into the province by Vespasian. Of the -29 regiments which appear in the Rhine in the second century only 11 -bear titles indicating a local origin, and some of these had probably -not belonged to the pre-Flavian garrison but had only returned to their -native country in 70 after a long stay in other provinces. It has -been noticed, for example, that of the two veterans of the Cohors I -Aquitanorum, to whom the diplomata of 82 (D. xiv) and 90 (D. xxi) were -granted, one is a Thracian, the other a Galatian; further, that one of -these diplomata was found near the site of the later town of Nicopolis -ad Istrum, where the owner had presumably settled after his discharge. -This suggests that the regiment had been stationed in Moesia and only -returned to its native province in 70 with the Moesian legion VIII -Augusta. - -It is on these two frontiers, the Rhine and the Danube, that the -transfer of troops can most easily be traced, because of the importance -of the military events which caused it to take place. In other parts -of the Empire other tendencies were at work during the first century -which produced the same result in less noticeable fashion. One need -only mention the steady drift of troops from the Danube to the East -in the reign of Nero,[217] and from the Rhine to the Danube a little -later,[218] and it is easily intelligible that the second-century army -list shows few traces of the original policy of Augustus. - -If, then, it were correct to assume that the title of an auxiliary -regiment is always a correct index of its composition, it would -certainly be justifiable to comment on the extraordinary mixture -of nationalities in the frontier garrisons of the second century. -Fortunately, however, the frequent mention of the origin of individual -soldiers on diplomata and sepulchral inscriptions[219] gives us the -means of checking this assumption and of working upon a surer basis -of fact. The following lists give the inscriptions of this type from -Pannonia arranged in two groups according to their date, the year -70 being taken as the dividing line; that is to say, the soldiers -mentioned in the first group were _enrolled_ before that date. -Some inscriptions which could not be dated with any certainty have -necessarily been omitted, also others where there was reason to believe -that the soldier mentioned was enrolled when his regiment was in a -different province.[220] To the second group, which illustrates the -recruiting system from the Flavian period onwards, a list of similar -inscriptions from Dacia has been added. In each case the title of the -regiment is followed by the nationality or place of origin of the -soldier, stated in the form given on the inscription, and by the name -of the province from which he was drawn. For reasons which will appear -later the evidence concerning the oriental regiments is omitted. - - -I. SOLDIERS RECRUITED BEFORE 70 AND STATIONED IN PANNONIA. - - Ala II Hispanorum Hispanus Spain iii. 3271. - et Aravacorum[221] - Ala II Hispanorum Sueltrius Narbonensis iii. 3286. - et Aravacorum[221] - Ala Frontoniana Andautonia Pannonia iii. 3679. - Tungrorum[222] - Cohors II Hispanorum Cornacas Pannonia D. ci - (before 60). - Cohors II Hispanorum Varcianus Pannonia D. ii (60). - Cohors I Lusitanorum Iasus Pannonia D. xvii (85). - Cohors I Montanorum Bessus Thrace D. xiii (80). - Cohors I Montanorum Dalmatia Dalmatia D. xvi (84). - - -II. SOLDIERS RECRUITED AFTER 70. - -_II. A. Pannonia Superior._ - - Ala I Ulpia Contariorum Helvetius Germania D. xlvii (133). - Ala I Ulpia Contariorum Bessus Thrace iii. 4378. - Ala I Ulpia Contariorum Siscia Pannonia iii. 13441. - Ala I Hispanorum Azalus Pannonia D. c (150). - Aravacorum - Ala Pannoniorum Apulum Dacia iii. 4372. - Ala I Thracum Boius Pannonia vi. 3308. - Victrix[223] - Cohors II Alpinorum Azalus Pannonia D. lxv (154). - Cohors I Britannica Dobunnus Britain D. xcviii (105). - Cohors V Lucensium Castris Pannonia D. lix (138-46). - et Callaecorum - Cohors V Lucensium Azalus Pannonia D. lxi (149). - et Callaecorum - Cohors I Ulpia Azalus Pannonia D. lx (148). - Pannoniorum - -We may add here a recently discovered inscription from Samaria: - -I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) mil(ites) v[e]xil(larii) coh(ortium) -P(annoniae) sup(erioris) cives Sisc(iani) Varcian(i) et Latobici sacrum -fecerunt. _A. E._ 1909. 235. 1910. p. 6. - -The vexillation had presumably taken part in suppressing one of the -Jewish rebellions in the first half of the second century. - -_II. B. Pannonia Inferior._ - - Ala I Thracum Veterana Eraviscus Pannonia D. lxxiv (167). - Sagittariorum - Cohors I Alpinorum Eraviscus Pannonia D. lxviii - (154-60). - Cohors I Thracum[224] Andautonia Pannonia iii. 4316. - -_II. C. Dacia._ - - Ala I Gallorum et Bessus Thrace D. lxvii (158). - Bosporanorum - Ala I Hispanorum Dacus Dacia vi. 3238. - Campagonum[225] - Ala I Tungrorum Thrace iii. 799. - Frontoniana[226] - Vexillatio equitum Sebasto- Pontus D. xlvi (129). - Illyricorum[227] politanus - Ala I Illyricorum Dacus Dacia vi. 3234. - Cohors I Ulpia Britto Britain D. lxx - Brittonum (145-61). - Cohors III Campestris Scupi Moesia iii. 7289. - Superior - Cohors I Vindelicorum Caesarea Palestine(?) D. lxvi (157?). - -The facts disclosed by these inscriptions are very significant. In the -first list, as is natural, we find traces of the troops transferred -into Pannonia from other provinces after the great rebellion. It is -more important, however, to notice that before the end of the reign -of Tiberius natives of the province were already being accepted for -service in these imported regiments.[228] In fact there is nothing here -to suggest that any attempt was made to preserve the national character -of these Spanish and Alpine corps by obtaining fresh drafts from the -districts in which they were originally raised. Those recruits who do -not come from Pannonia itself are drawn merely from the neighbouring -provinces of Dalmatia and Thrace. - -But it would perhaps be misleading to infer from this evidence alone -that local recruiting was universally adopted in the first century, -although it was certainly common. It is possible that in the Flavian -period, when the memory of the rebellion of Civilis was still fresh, -some attempt was made to check a national cohesion by combining drafts -from different provinces in the same regiment. This at least is -suggested by the nationalities of twenty-one soldiers of an auxiliary -regiment which are recorded on a sepulchral inscription at Tropaeum -Traiani in Moesia Inferior.[229] This monument was erected in memory -of men killed in action during one of the Dacian campaigns either of -Domitian or Trajan, so that its evidence applies to the recruiting of -the Flavian period. Twelve of these men came from the Lower Rhine, two -from Lugdunensis, and three from Spain, while Raetia, Noricum, Britain, -and Africa supply one each.[230] In Pannonia, too, some Spanish -soldiers appear rather mysteriously in an Ala Pannoniorum on two -inscriptions which can hardly be later than the beginning of the second -century.[231] There are even traces of a similar policy having been -pursued in the recruiting for the legions during the same period. In a -list of seventy-six soldiers who were apparently enrolled in Legio III -Augusta towards the end of the first century, we find men from seven -different provinces.[232] In any case, however, no attempt seems to -have been made to preserve any connexion between an auxiliary regiment -and the tribe from which its title was derived. - -When we come to the second century there is no more room for doubt; -for all cohorts and alae on the Pannonian frontier, leaving out of -account, as before, the oriental regiments, local recruiting has become -practically universal. Seventy per cent. of the recruits come from the -two Pannonian provinces, the majority from the Azali and the Eravisci, -tribes which never gave their name to an auxiliary regiment. Even -the Thracian regiments, which might have maintained their original -character without much difficulty, form no exception to the rule. In -Dacia the exceptionally large auxiliary garrison[233] could not be -supported entirely by local levies, but the deficiency was mostly made -up in the nearest available recruiting-grounds of Moesia and Thrace. - -A few examples may be adduced from other provinces to show that the -methods employed on the Danube frontier were not exceptional. In -Germania Superior three soldiers of the Alae I and II Flaviae Geminae -describe themselves as Baetasius, Elvetius, and Secuanus, and the -Raetian diploma of the year 107 was granted to a Boian who had served -in the Ala I Hispanorum Auriana.[234] In Africa a soldier of the -Cohors VII Lusitanorum gives ‘castris’ as his place of origin, as do -the majority of the veterans discharged during the second century from -the African legion III Augusta.[235] Concerning the Eastern provinces -we have very little evidence, but it may be noted that of the large -number of regiments raised by Trajan in this part of the Empire the -majority remained stationed in the East throughout the following -century, and there is no reason to suppose that they were not kept up -by local levies.[236] - -The recruiting of the legions during the second century seems to have -followed the same lines. The high proportion of men of Legio III -Augusta in Africa who give ‘castris’ as their birthplace has already -been noted. Similarly of 39 soldiers discharged from Legio II Traiana -at Alexandria in 194, 22 come from the ‘castra’, 8 from the Greek -towns in Egypt, and only 9 were not born in the province.[237] Of -133 soldiers discharged in the following year from Legio VII Claudia -stationed at Viminacium, 104 come from Upper or Lower Moesia, and -of the remainder all but one come from the Danubian provinces.[238] -Further evidence on the recruiting-area of the auxilia during this -period can be obtained from another source, the inscriptions of the -Equites Singulares Imperatoris. This corps, which seems to have been -raised towards the end of the first century, possibly by Domitian,[239] -formed thenceforward a part of the imperial guard, and was stationed -at Rome. It was recruited mainly from the same area as the auxiliary -alae, and a certain number of the men were selected from them.[240] On -a hundred epitaphs of members of this corps who recorded their place of -origin, the provinces are represented in the following proportions:[241] - - Britain 2 - Germania Inferior 1 - Germania Superior 2 - Belgica 1 - Raetia 10 - Noricum 9 - Pannonia 30[242] - Dalmatia 1 - Thrace 11 - Moesia 4[242] - Dacia 7 - Syria 4 - Africa 2 - Mauretania 3 - -The list shows that this _corps d’élite_ was not representative of -all the cavalry of the Empire; the proportion of orientals is far too -low. It was still upon the Western provinces that the emperors of the -second century relied, and from these, therefore, that the guard was -recruited. As regards these provinces, the composition of the Equites -Singulares reflects fairly accurately the relative importance of each -as a recruiting-ground for the auxiliary cavalry of this period, and -the change which has taken place in the military situation since the -days of Augustus is at once apparent. The Galli[243] and Hispani, who -were then the flower of the imperial cavalry, and continued to give -their names to nearly half the cavalry regiments in the service, have -entirely vanished. Speaking generally, in fact, the inland provinces -no longer contribute, and the recruiting-areas have contracted to the -purely frontier districts. The relative importance of these, too, has -altered since the beginning of the first century. The tribes on the -Lower Rhine are still well represented, but the contingent of the -German provinces is entirely surpassed by that of Pannonia. If we -assume that the honour of serving in the Guards was bestowed upon the -natives of each province in proportion to the size of the contingent -which they supplied to the cavalry of the line, this increased -importance of the Pannonians follows naturally upon the universal -adoption of local recruiting for the frontier armies; since not only -had the balance of military power now definitely shifted from the Rhine -to the Danube,[244] but local conditions required an exceptionally high -proportion of mounted men.[245] - -The preceding survey of the evidence has purposely omitted that -dealing with the oriental regiments, which seemed, on account of its -exceptional character, to merit a special discussion. In Pannonia -and Dacia we find three such regiments, the Ala I Augusta Ituraeorum -and the Cohors I Hemesenorum in Pannonia Inferior, and the Cohors I -Augusta Ituraeorum, stationed in Pannonia during the first century, and -transferred to Dacia at the time of the creation of the province.[246] -Thanks to the recent work of Hungarian archaeologists, the second -of these corps, the Cohors I Hemesenorum Miliaria Equitata Civium -Romanorum Sagittariorum, to give it its full title, is perhaps better -known to us than any other auxiliary regiment.[247] Probably enrolled -in the Roman army at the beginning of the second century, at the time -of the annexation of the small client kingdom from which its name -was derived, this regiment had been transferred to Pannonia by the -beginning of the reign of Antoninus Pius, and certainly remained in the -province until 240.[248] Throughout this period it seems to have been -stationed at Intercisa, where upwards of fifty inscriptions, chiefly -sepulchral, have now been discovered, the majority of the latter -belonging, as the frequent use of the name Aurelius shows, to the end -of the second and the beginning of the third century. Of the five -soldiers whose birthplace is mentioned on their tombstones, three came -from Hemesa itself, one from Samosata, and one from Arethusa,[249] and -the owner of a diploma which dates from between 138 and 146 came from -Syria.[250] It is clear, then, that during its whole stay in Pannonia -this regiment was not recruited, like the majority of the auxilia, -from the neighbouring district, but was constantly in receipt of fresh -drafts from the province in which it was originally raised. As further -proof of the tenacity with which this connexion was maintained, we -find that at the end of the reign of Severus the soldiers dedicated -a temple to their _deus patrius_ Sol Aelagabalus.[251] An examination -of the evidence dealing with the other oriental regiments leads to -the same result. Soldiers discharged in 98 and 110 from the Cohors -I Augusta Ituraeorum and the Ala of the same name, give Cyrrhus in -Syria and Ituraea as their places of origin, and another Ituraean -is mentioned on a sepulchral inscription of the latter regiment in -Pannonia.[252] Oriental regiments, and in particular oriental archers, -appear also on other provinces[253], and although there is a lack of -dated evidence we can hardly doubt that a rule which was maintained -along the whole Danube frontier also held good elsewhere.[254] - -The reason for the adoption of these exceptional methods in the -recruiting of the oriental auxilia was probably the purely military one -that good archers were born in Syria, and could not be made elsewhere, -but the consequent presence in every frontier army of an oriental -element, holding firmly to its own customs and religious beliefs, was -a fact of more than military significance. In particular it must be -remembered that the enfranchised children of these oriental auxiliaries -were qualified and readily accepted for service in the legions. In the -inscriptions of the Cohors I Hemesenorum we have abundant evidence -of this process, which gave oriental ideas an opportunity for wider -penetration.[255] - -The British regiments, too, show a tendency to keep up national -recruiting, although the evidence on this point is still scanty.[256] -In this case the explanation is probably to be found in the intractable -nature of the tribes of North Britain, which made it appear undesirable -to use the contingents which they supplied near at home. Certainly -all the British regiments seem to have been sent abroad, and only one -soldier of British origin is found in the province.[257] It would -appear, in fact, that the army of Britain was maintained largely -by drafts from the Rhine area, but the evidence at present is an -insufficient basis for any general conclusions. In Dacia, too, as -was natural, the auxilia raised immediately after the conquest were -transferred elsewhere. Here, however, there does not seem to have been -the same objection to local recruiting for the troops stationed in the -province, and the practice was certainly, as has been shown, in force -during the second century. - - -_The Numeri._ - -It is clear, then, that in the second century the cohorts and alae of -the Augustan system, with certain definite and limited exceptions, were -recruited locally from the provinces in which they were stationed, -without any general attempt to justify the ethnical titles which they -still bore. At the same moment, however, as this principle seems -definitely established, there begin to appear on inscriptions certain -regiments of a new type which stand outside the prevailing system. -These regiments are given the name _numerus_, which does not seem to -have had any very precise meaning, and for which it is difficult to -find an English equivalent. They also bore tribal titles, a list of -which is given below, together with the names of the provinces in which -_numeri_ of each tribe occur.[258] - -_Brittones._ At least ten _numeri_ in Germania Superior. The earliest -inscriptions date from the reign of Pius, and the theory is generally -accepted that these Brittones were newly conquered tribesmen from the -district lying between the two frontier walls, deported after the -campaigns of Lollius Urbicus. These _numeri_ also bear secondary titles -derived from the names of the districts in which they were stationed, -e.g. Murrenses, clearly connected with the river Murr.[259] - -_Germani._ Dacia.[260] - -_Palmyreni._ Africa,[261] Dacia,[262] and probably Britain.[263] - -_Mauri._ Dacia (as a vexillatio from Mauretania Caesariensis).[264] -Frequently also in the two Mauretanias. - -_Raeti Gaesati_ (i.e. Raetians armed with the _gaesum_, a kind of -heavy spear). Britain.[265] - -_Syri._ Dacia,[266] Mauretania,[267] Moesia Inferior,[268] and possibly -Britain.[269] - -The titles show that these _numeri_ are closely connected with the five -_nationes_, Cantabri, Gaesati,[270] Palmyreni, Daci, and Brittones, who -form part of the army described by Hyginus, and are distinguished from -the cohorts and alae of the regular auxilia. In fact the term _numerus_ -is not invariably found on inscriptions, and for a corps which simply -described itself as ‘Syri sagittarii,’[271] _natio_ may easily have -seemed a convenient term. It is also clear from Hyginus that what -distinguished the _numeri_ from the older formations was their looser -organization and more barbarous character, and their titles show that -they were drawn from the outermost borders of the Empire, or the most -uncivilized districts within it. - -Evidence about the character of these troops is scanty; being the -least civilized part of the army they were not very prone to indulge -in inscriptions. We do not even know the size of a _numerus_, -or, indeed, if these regiments had any definite size at all. The -_nationes_ of Hyginus range from 500 to 900,[272] but the low rank of -the _praepositus numeri_ below the _praefectus cohortis_,[273] and -the smallness of the accommodation arranged for these regiments in -German forts, suggest 200 to 300 as a more probable figure. Smaller -they can hardly have been, since they are divided into centuries and -_turmae_.[274] - -As regards recruiting, the Palmyrenes, at any rate, obtained fresh -drafts, not from the province in which they were stationed, but from -their native home. The numerus Palmyrenorum, which was stationed at -El-Kantara in Africa, has left inscriptions covering the whole period -from the middle of the second to the middle of the third century, which -show clearly what pains were taken to preserve the original character -of the regiment.[275] Similar inscriptions of a numerus Palmyrenorum -in Dacia give evidence of the same principle.[276] Unfortunately, we -cannot tell whether this was the case with all the _numeri_, or whether -the Palmyreni occupied in this respect the same peculiar position as -the oriental regiments among the regular auxilia.[277] - -But whatever the later practice, the original intention of the imperial -government in raising this new class of troops seems to be clear. The -local recruiting of the regular auxilia presupposes a rapid progress of -‘Romanization’ among the provincials and the disappearance of all such -national feeling as had caused the mutiny of the German and Pannonian -auxilia in the first century. From the military point of view, -however, this advance in culture, although it facilitated the raising -of recruits, was by no means an unmixed blessing. The old levies of -wild tribesmen, schooled by centuries of local warfare, who strove to -preserve in the Roman service their local reputation, had qualities -which were lacking to the regiments of civilized Latin-speaking -provincials, in which national methods of fighting[278] had been -replaced by a uniform training and clan feeling by _esprit de corps_. -It was to provide a leaven of the old spirit that the _numeri_ were -raised from the wildest of the border tribes, and not only encouraged -to fight after the manner of their fathers, but even permitted to -continue the use of their native tongues.[279] - -The first experiment of this kind was made by Trajan, when he brought -over Lusius Quietus and his _Mauri gentiles_ for the Dacian war,[280] -but it was probably Hadrian who made the _numeri_ a regular part of -the military system. It is in his reign that they first appear on -inscriptions, and it is to the _numeri_ that we must refer the passage -in Arrian’s _Tactica_, in which the emperor is praised for encouraging -his troops to keep up their national methods of fighting, and even -their national war-cries.[281] The tribes to whom he refers are Κελτοί -(by which Germans are probably meant),[282] Dacians, and Raetians. For -the first and third there is epigraphical evidence, and the last two -appear also among the _nationes_ of Hyginus. It appears, then, that -Hadrian was not, as is sometimes stated, the originator of the system -of local recruiting; rather he found it already in existence, and -sought to correct its defects by utilizing again in the service of the -Empire the clan spirit of uncivilized tribes, which had often proved so -useful in the past. - - -_The Praefecti._ - -The previous discussion of the methods by which the auxilia were -recruited has dealt only with the private soldiers, and, as a natural -corollary, with such officers as were promoted from the ranks. To -the position of _praefectus_, however, the private soldier could -not normally aspire, and he attained it, if at all, only under -exceptionally favourable circumstances.[283] Normally, the commanding -officers of the auxiliary regiments were drawn from an entirely -different social stratum to the men, and although the method of their -appointment varied and the area from which they were drawn shifted -its boundaries at different periods, these changes did not follow the -same lines as those which we have been tracing in connexion with the -recruiting of the rank and file. - -The auxiliary commands are familiar to all students of the Roman Empire -from inscriptions of men who went through the equestrian career, -the first stage of which was formed by the posts of _praefectus -cohortis_, _tribunus legionis_, and _praefectus alae_. It has, however, -been pointed out by von Domaszewski[284] that this system was not -established until the middle of the first century. Under Augustus -and Tiberius, not only was the relative rank of these posts still -undetermined, but they were filled in many cases not by young men -beginning the equestrian _cursus_, but by veteran centurions from the -legions, especially the _primipili_. We have noticed this system in the -army of Caesar, so that here, as elsewhere, Augustus was continuing a -republican practice. The following inscriptions,[285] which are both of -early date, give typical careers of this character. - - 1. C. Pompullius C. f. Hor(atia) prim(us) pil(us), trib(unus) - mil(itum), praef(ectus) eq(uitum). - - 2. M. Vergilio M. f. Ter(etina) Gallo Lusio prim(o) pil(o) - leg(ionis) XI, praef(ecto) coh(ortis) Ubiorum peditum et equitum, - donato hastis puris duabus et coronis aureis ab Divo Augusto et Ti: - Caesare Augusto, &c. - -This system is heartily commended by von Domaszewski, on the ground -that the auxilia were thus commanded by more skilful officers, and -were more under Roman (i.e. Italian) control than was the case in the -second century.[286] The assertion, however, seems far too sweeping, -since by no means all the auxiliary regiments were commanded by men -of this class; there were, on the contrary, many _praefecti_ at -this period who came neither from Italy nor even the more Romanized -provinces. The _Histories_ of Tacitus show clearly that at the end of -the pre-Flavian period a number of auxiliary regiments, particularly -those drawn from the more independent border tribes, were commanded -by their own chiefs. This practice had not sprung up during the reign -of Nero, but was a natural consequence of the development of these -corps from contingents supplied by states nominally ‘in alliance’ -with Rome.[287] The eight Batavian cohorts who play such an important -rôle in the rebellion of 69 were so commanded,[288] as well as an -ala of the same tribe.[289] Iulius Civilis himself was a _praefectus -cohortis_,[290] and two Treveri, Alpinius Montanus and Iulius -Classicus, commanded a cohort and ala respectively.[291] All these -officers, as their names show, had doubtless received the franchise, -but they were employed in their capacity as tribal chiefs, not as -Roman citizens, and are to be distinguished from the _praefecti_, who -were drawn at this period from the Romanized districts of Spain and -from Gallia Narbonensis. It is chiefly as commanders of cohorts that -officers of this type appear, since many of the alae dated back, as we -have seen, to the period of the civil wars, and had long lost their -original character as tribal regiments. This explains the fact that -among Italian officers of this period, the title _praefectus alae_ -or _praefectus equitum_ appears far more frequently than _praefectus -cohortis_, although the cohorts were of course more numerous than the -alae. - -During the first half of the first century, therefore, we have a system -which differs widely from that revealed by the equestrian _cursus -honorum_. The establishment of the equestrian monopoly of the auxiliary -commands was, in fact, only completed by a series of reforms carried -out during the period which began with the administrative activity of -Claudius, and ended with the reorganization of the army by Vespasian -after the disastrous Civil War of 69. - -The first of these changes was that the _praefecti_ ceased to be drawn -as before from among the veteran centurions of the legions. Early in -the reign of Claudius the post of _praefectus alae_ disappeared from -the career of the _primipili_, who were promoted henceforward to the -tribunate of one of the cohorts of Household Troops at Rome.[292] -Centurions of lower rank were still advanced to the command of cohorts -both in this and the succeeding periods, but such cases are very -rare.[293] A trace of the old connexion between the legionary officers -and the _militia equestris_ still survives, however, in the regular use -of a centurion as _praepositus cohortis_—that is to say, as temporary -commander in case of the death or absence of a _praefectus_.[294] The -_numeri_, too, were often placed in charge of an ex-centurion bearing -this title, an arrangement which was probably called for by the -intractable character of these barbarian irregulars.[295] - -The employment of tribal chiefs as _praefecti_ also became less -frequent, as the auxiliary regiments, transferred from one province to -another, and recruited from different nationalities, gradually lost -their original character. The mutinous officers of the Rhine army, who -were doubtless cashiered by Vespasian, were probably the last examples -of _praefecti_ drawn from this class. - -Lastly, the respective rank of the different posts in the _militia -equestris_ was finally determined; and the order _praefectus -cohortis_—_tribunus legionis_—_praefectus alae_ is hardly ever varied -after 70, except that the tribunate of a _cohors miliaria_ sometimes -appears in the second place.[296] - -The result of these changes was that henceforward the auxiliary -officers were practically all of one type, men of equestrian rank -entering upon what was now the accustomed _cursus honorum_ of their -class. That this system was not universally adopted at an earlier date -is not surprising. The equestrian _praefecti_ were young men directly -appointed by the emperor, without any previous military training; -before the auxilia could be entrusted to their charge a certain advance -in civilization and tractability had to be made by the provincials, -and the veteran centurions and tribal chiefs of the Augustan system -were more fitted to deal with the men who composed the auxiliary -levies during the first hundred years of the Empire. As it was, these -regiments contained in the second century far fewer representatives -of the governing class than the native corps in our own Indian army. -With the exception of the _praefectus_, who himself was not necessarily -an Italian, the officers—that is, the centurions and decurions—were -practically all, as we have seen, promoted from the ranks. But to the -Roman Empire, in which rulers and ruled, never separated by any deep -racial or religious gulf, were gradually made closer akin by the bond -of a common civilization, our rule in India affords in this respect no -real parallel. - -The majority of these _praefecti_ were, at the beginning of this -period, of Italian origin, taken from the leading families of the -country towns, the class which formed, under the rule of the Flavian -emperors who were themselves sprung from it, the backbone of the -Roman bureaucracy. The Romanization of the Western provinces led to -an increasing proportion of men from the provincial _municipia_ being -admitted into the imperial service, but until the reign of Marcus the -Italian element still predominated. The _praefecti_ mentioned on five -diplomata from Pannonia Superior and two from Dacia dated 133, 138, -136-46, 148, 149, 157, and 145-61 were natives of Sassina, Bovianum, -Faventia, Suessa, Rome, Hispellum, and Picenum.[297] - -The accession of Septimius Severus possibly accelerated the speed at -which the provincial element was increasing, but there is not, as has -been suggested by von Domaszewski, any sign of a violent and wholesale -exclusion of Italians from this branch of the service. This point may -be illustrated by the following inscriptions of Italian _praefecti_, -which can be dated after 193: - - VIII 9359. Caesarea. M. Popilius Nepos domo Roma, a _praefectus_ - of the Ala Gemina Sebastenorum in Mauretania Caesariensis. The - inscription honours a procurator who is dated by Cagnat to 201-9. - - _A. E._ 1908. 206. Puteoli. T. Caesius Anthianus, a native of this - town, was _praefectus_ of the Cohors II Augusta Thracum at the - beginning of the third century. - -The earliest provincial _praefecti_ came from the thoroughly Romanized -districts of Spain and Gallia Narbonensis, natives of which appear even -in the pre-Flavian period. These were followed in the course of the -second century by representatives of nearly all the Western provinces; -Africa in particular sent _praefecti_ from its many flourishing towns -to almost every frontier during the latter half of the second century, -and the accession of the African Septimius Severus at its close -possibly gave his fellow countrymen a specially favoured position in -the succeeding period. - -Only in Britain and Gallia Lugdunensis do the Celtic chiefs seem to -have made no attempt to maintain in the second century the military -position held by their fathers in the first. It is hardly likely that -their absence from the lists of _praefecti_[298] is due to deliberate -exclusion on the part of the imperial government. It was more probably -a voluntary abstinence, due largely to the fact that these military -commands were now regarded merely as an introduction to the civil -service, not as a career in themselves. The Celtic nobles were not -uninfluenced by the tendencies of the age. But although they might -speak and read Latin with ease, decorate their homes with the material -products of Roman civilization, and employ Greek rhetoricians to tutor -their children, these country gentlemen living in the midst of their -estates preserved a very different outlook to that of the leading -townsmen of the municipalities of Africa or even Narbonensis. The Celt -retained his martial qualities down to the last days of the Empire in -the West, but seems to have found little that was congenial to him in -the prospect of forming part of that great administrative machine, in -the perfection of which almost every other province in the Empire took -its share.[299] - -The Eastern provinces of the Empire occupy, as usual, a somewhat -exceptional position. As in the West, these provinces began to -contribute _praefecti_ in some numbers towards the end of the first -century. A certain C. Julius Demosthenes of Oinoanda went through the -‘_militia equestris_’ in the reign of Trajan, and his son, Julius -Antonius, followed in his footsteps in the succeeding generation.[300] -To a citizen of Caria, L. Aburnius of Alabanda, probably, as his name -shows, the descendant of one of the families of veterans settled -by Augustus in the south of Asia Minor,[301] the wars of Trajan -presented opportunity for a military career of considerable variety -and distinction. This officer was successively _praefectus fabrum_, -_tribunus legionis III Augustae_, _praefectus cohortis III Augustae -Thracum equitatae_, _praefectus cohortis III Thracum Syriacae -equitatae_, _praepositus_[302] _cohortis I Ulpiae Petraeorum_, -_praepositus annonae_[302] on the Euphrates during the Parthian War, -_tribunus legionis VI Ferratae_, during his tenure of which post he was -decorated by Trajan, and _praefectus alae I Ulpiae singularium_.[303] -These cases are not isolated, and it is clear that a military career -was open to the Greeks and the more or less Hellenized orientals who -constituted the equestrian class in the Eastern provinces. But while -the _praefecti_ from the Western provinces were sent indiscriminately -to every frontier, the majority of those drawn from the East seem, -during the first two centuries, to have been confined to service -with the Eastern commands. Aburnius, for example, only left the -East once for service with the Legio III Augusta in Africa, and his -son’s career seems to have been similarly localized.[304] We should -perhaps add Moesia Inferior to the list of provinces in which Eastern -_praefecti_ appear frequently during the second century, since those -mentioned on the diplomata for 134 and 138 came from Palmyra and -Side respectively.[305] But Moesia Inferior was reckoned in other -respects as coming within the Hellenic sphere of influence. These -restrictions are probably due to the low estimate which was placed -throughout the first two centuries on the military qualities of Greeks -and orientals, in spite of the value of the latter as archers.[306] -But we may also see evidence of the unbridgeable gulf which still -existed between the two halves of the Empire, and of the reluctance of -the Hellene to embark upon a career in what he considered to be the -barbarous provinces of the West. It is only with the advent of the -semi-orientalized dynasty of the Severi that _praefecti_ drawn from the -Eastern provinces appear in any numbers on the Western frontiers. - -In all this the course of events is what one would naturally expect. -The spread of uniform culture throughout the Western provinces of the -Empire, the prosperity of the ubiquitous municipalities which were -its material expression, and the general extension of the franchise -which accompanied this development, involved a steady increase in the -class qualified and eager for the equestrian career. The admission -of these provincial _equites_ to the posts for which they were -qualified followed automatically without special encouragement from any -particular emperor,[307] and the diverse origins of the _praefecti_ at -the beginning of the third century are one of the best proofs that can -be adduced of the prosperity and civilization of the provinces at this -period. It is impossible to follow von Domaszewski in concluding from -the evidence that at this date the inhabitants of Italy and the more -civilized areas in the provinces were deliberately excluded from the -_militia equestris_, and that the auxiliary regiments were given into -the hands of barbarians.[308] The army was indeed beginning to suffer -from the introduction of a barbarian element, but it is not among the -officers of the auxilia that this element is most noticeable. The -following list of _praefecti_, who can be dated to the first half of -the third century, does not bear out the accusation: - -vii. 344. Britain.[309] Aemilius Crispinus natus in provincia Africa de -Tusdro (dated 242). - -viii. 2766. Britain. P. Furius Rusticus. Lambaesis. Severus or later. -Britannia Inferior is mentioned. - -xiii. 6658. Germania Superior. Sentius Gemellus. Berytus. Date probably -249. - -xiii. 7441. Germania Superior. Flavius Antiochanus. Caesarea. Date 191 -or 211. - -I. G. R. R. i. 10. Raetia. T. Porcius Porcianus. Massilia. 3rd century. - -iii. 1193. Dacia. C. Julius Corinthianus. Theveste. _circa_ 200. - -C. I. Gr. 3497. Dacia. T. Claudius Alfenus. Asia. _circa_ 200-210. - -These men cannot fairly be called barbarians. Massilia of course speaks -for itself, but in Theveste, Thysdrus, and Lambaesis Roman culture -was no new thing at the beginning of the third century. The same may -be said of Caesarea, if the capital of Mauretania be meant. Berytus, -too, was a colony famous for its Roman character, and Asia was not a -province notorious for its barbarism. The increased oriental element, -which is certainly noticeable among the auxilia of this period, -although not to the same extent as in other branches of the service, is -a more significant fact. But however undesirable one may consider the -influence of oriental religions and ideals to have been, the conflict -cannot be called one between civilization and barbarism. The real -matter at issue is the wisdom of the imperial government in utilizing -the material which the spread of culture and prosperity provided, and -substituting for the old hegemony of Italy a governing class drawn from -all parts of the Empire. It is true that this policy was a failure, and -that the Empire organized on this basis did not succeed in erecting -defences strong enough to resist the external pressure brought to -bear upon them in the third and fourth centuries. But if it was a -failure it was not necessarily a mistake.[310] It is more than doubtful -whether a narrower policy which rigidly maintained the supremacy of the -Italians and denied to the majority of the provincials all share in the -administration would have been more successful: it is certain that, -had the progress of civilization lacked the stimulus which the hope -of political power supplied, the after-effects of the Roman Empire in -Europe would have been less. - - -Footnotes: - -[158] The distinction was not necessarily connected with the position -of _civitas foederata_ in the technical sense. Several important -_civitates foederatae_, such as the Aedui and Remi in Gaul, did not, so -far as we know, give their name to regiments, and many of the tribes -which did were not _civitates foederatae_. - -[159] In Asturia, however, the administrative conventus formed the -recruiting districts; hence the regiments of Astures, Bracaraugustani, -and Lucenses. Mommsen, _Conscriptionsordnung_, p. 47. - -[160] We find regiments of Batavi, Canninefates, Cugerni, Frisii, -Lingones, Menapii, Morini, Nemetes, Nervii, Sunuci, Sugambri, Tungri, -Ubii, Usipi, and Vangiones. In the other Gallic provinces the only -tribal names which occur are the Bituriges and Aquitani from Aquitania -and the Vocontii from Narbonensis. - -[161] A Cohors II Augustia Nervia Pacensis Brittonum is mentioned on a -Pannonian diploma for 114 (D. xxxix) and the name of Cohors I of the -series should probably be restored on the Dacian diploma dated 145-61 -(D. lxx). This title is unintelligible; it does not seem possible to -connect it with the Emperor Nerva. - -[162] For further information as to the evidence on which this table is -based see Appendix II. - -[163] Including one ala and four cohorts of Batavians who replace the -regiments which mutinied under Civilis. - -[164] Including all the alae with titles derived from proper names but -no racial title. Inscriptions show that they were mostly recruited in -Gaul, but some should perhaps be given to Belgica. - -[165] Including all the cohorts which bear the general title Galli. - -[166] The Ala Vocontiorum which appears in Britain is to be -distinguished from the regiment of the same name in Egypt. - -[167] The cohorts of Alpini, Montani, and Ligures, which represent the -contingents of all the little Alpine provinces. - -[168] Four _cohortes miliariae_ which appear late in the second century -and were probably raised at the time of the Marcomannian War. - -[169] The regiments of Bosporani. Some of the auxilia of Moesia are -perhaps included among the regiments of Thracians. - -[170] The Ala Vespasiana Dardanorum and the cohorts I and II Aurelia -Dardanorum. - -[171] A cohors Macedonum E. (_A. E._ 1909. 58), and two regiments of -Cyrrhestici. - -[172] The mysterious Ala VII Phrygum. When this regiment was only -known by one inscription (vi. 1838) the number was naturally emended. -It has, however, been confirmed by the diploma for 139 and a Greek -inscription (_A. E._ 1899. 177). The explanation is still uncertain. It -is incredible that Phrygia really contributed seven alae, six of which -have mysteriously vanished. - -[173] Three cohorts of Paphlagonians and three of Galatians raised by -Trajan. - -[174] Including two alae Parthorum. - -[175] Including the three ‘cohortes sagittariorum’. - -[176] Including the Ituraean regiments. - -[177] There is no reason why these regiments should not have been -raised between 40 and 70, but they do not appear on inscriptions until -much later. - -[178] Some of the cohorts of Hispani may of course have come from -Baetica. - -[179] _Conscriptionsordnung_, p. 56. - -[180] It appears on diplomata of 93 and 103. D. ciii and _A. E._ 1912. -128. - -[181] A cohors IV Cypria is mentioned on the Dacian diploma of 110 -(xxxvii), and a cohors Cypria appears in the Crimea. - -[182] We find on inscriptions Cohors I Cyrenaica, II Augusta Cyrenaica, -III Cyrenaica sagittariorum, and III Augusta Cyrenaica. (See Cichorius -in Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. _cohors_). The difficulty is that _Cyrenaica_ -is sometimes used as a purely descriptive title to indicate previous -residence in the province. It is thus borne by the Cohors II Hispanorum -scutata and the Cohors I Lusitanorum. Arrian, however, had Κυρηναῖοι, -both cavalry and ὁπλῖται, in the army under his command in Cappadocia -in Hadrian’s reign, so that in some cases at any rate Cyrenaica = -Cyrenaeorum, just as Gallica is sometimes used for Gallorum. A levy in -Cyrenaica is mentioned by Tacitus (_Ann._ xiv. 18), but he does not say -whether legionaries or auxiliaries were required. - -[183] Gardthausen, _Augustus_, p. 631. Liebenam in Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. -_dilectus_. - -[184] The crucial passage is of course Tac. _Ann._ xvi. 13 ‘eodem -anno dilectus per Galliam Narbonensem Africamque et Asiam habiti sunt -supplendis Illyrici legionibus’, which appears to come from the _acta -senatus_. But the evidence for imperial control is very strong, and -the Senate may merely have been consulted as a matter of courtesy. -Tiberius used to bring military questions before the Senate in the same -way—‘de legendo vel exauctorando milite ac legionum et auxiliorum -descriptione’, Suet. _Tib._ 30—without giving up his prerogative. - -[185] Later, of course, the franchise became as widely spread in Africa -as in Spain. In the first half of the first century, however, this -was not yet the case, and the example of Tacfarinas (‘natione Numida, -in castris Romanis auxiliaria stipendia meritus’, Tac. _Ann._ ii. 52) -shows that auxilia were recruited in this province while it was still -completely under senatorial control. - -[186] xiii. 6860, 6864. Dio, lxxiv. 2, brackets Italy, Spain, -Macedonia, and Noricum together, as the ‘civilized’ provinces from -which the Praetorians were recruited before the reforms of Severus. - -[187] If the _cohortes voluntariorum_ be excluded from the reckoning. - -[188] Strabo, p. 196 κρείττους δ’ ἱππόται ἢ πεζοί, καὶ ἔστι Ῥωμαίοις -τῆς ἱππείας ἀρίστη παρὰ τούτων. - -[189] _Tactica_, 33. - -[190] See the boastful words of the Gascon Antonius Primus. Tac. -_Hist._ iii. 2 ‘Duae tunc Pannonicae ac Moesicae alae perrupere hostem: -nunc sedecim alarum coniuncta signa pulsu sonituque et nube ipsa -operient ac superfundent oblitos proeliorum equites equosque’. Cf. also -Tac. _Ann._ xv. 10 ‘alaris Pannonios, robur equitatus’. - -[191] Arrian, loc. cit. - -[192] The list shows that the majority of the oriental regiments were -not raised until after 70. - -[193] Two cohorts numbered III and VII bear this title, for which -I can find no explanation. To be distinguished from these is the -Cohors I Campanorum voluntaria (vi. 3520), which was stationed first -in Dalmatia, then in Pannonia. Apparently it really was originally a -regiment of Campanians, since a soldier gives Suessa as his birthplace -(iii. 14246¹). The statement of Cichorius that the Dalmatian Cohors -I Campanorum is identical with the Pannonian Cohors I Campestris is -misleading. On no Pannonian inscription does the title occur otherwise -than in the abbreviated form ‘Camp.’ On the other hand, the Roman -inscription cited above speaks plainly of the _coh(ortis) primae -voluntariae Campanorum in Pannonia Inferiore_. - -[194] Tac. _Ann._ i. 8. - -[195] Dio, lv. 31, lvi. 23; Velleius, ii. 111; Suet. _Aug._ 25. Similar -regiments may have been raised at a later date, e.g. the cohorts I and -II Italica c. R., which seem to form a fresh series and appear only -in the East. Can they represent the remainder of the 4,000 oriental -freedmen whom Tiberius enrolled to put down the brigands in Sardinia -(Tac. _Ann._ ii. 85)? If any survived, the Eastern provinces would have -been the natural place to send them to. - -[196] Cf. the previous passages with Macrobius, _Sat._ i. 11, 32 -‘Caesar Augustus in Germania et Illyrico cohortes libertinorum -complures legit, quas voluntarias appellavit’. - -[197] There were at least thirty-two cohortes voluntariorum, among -which VI is the highest number borne by a _cohors ingenuorum_ (xiii. -8314, 8315). At about this point the supply of free-born recruits -probably gave out, since cohors VIII does not bear this designation. - -[198] Seeck suggests that, as the Western legions were recruited mainly -in Italy at the beginning of the first century, these cohorts represent -the contribution of the enfranchised communities in the provinces. -_Rheinisches Museum_, xlviii. 611. This, however, is not only opposed -to the literary evidence, but inscriptions also show us soldiers of -Italian origin. Cf. iii. 9782 (Cemenelium) and _A. E._ 1909. 130 -(Placentia). - -[199] The original mutineers in Dalmatia seem to have been militia -rather than regulars, cf. Dio, lv. 29 καί τινα καὶ σφεῖς δύναμιν πέμψαι -κελευσθέντες, συνῆλθόν τε ἐπὶ τούτῳ καὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν σφῶν ἀνθοῦσαν -εἶδον, but the phraseology of Velleius (ii. 110) leaves little doubt -that regular auxiliaries were also implicated. - -[200] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 17. - -[201] Ib. iii. 42. - -[202] Ib. iv. 73. - -[203] Ib. xii. 27. - -[204] ‘Immissa cohorte Thraecum,’ Tac. _Hist._ i. 68. - -[205] ‘Praemissis Gallorum Lusitanorumque et Britannorum cohortibus,’ -Ib. i. 70. The regiments referred to are probably the Cohors III -Britannorum and the Cohorts VI and VII Lusitanorum which appear in -Raetia at a later date. Cf. D. lxxiii, _I. G. R. R._ iii. 56. - -[206] Early inscriptions mention Cohorts VII and VIII Breucorum -(xiii. 7801, 8313, 8693), IV Delmatarum (Ib. 7507, 7508, 7509), I -Pannoniorum (Ib. 7510, 7511, 7582), I Ituraeorum (Ib. 7040, 7041, 7042, -7043), I Sagittariorum (Ib. 7512, 7513, 7514), and Silauciensium (Ib. -8593). The last title is unintelligible, and possibly corrupt. The -soldier mentioned is a certain Tib. Iulius Sdebdas from Tyre, so the -regiment clearly came from the East, and its title should perhaps read -Seleuciensium—i.e. from Seleucia. - -[207] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 52. - -[208] Josephus, _Ant._ xx, 6, 1. _Bell. Iud._ ii. 12, 5. The small -garrisons maintained in the _provinciae inermes_ seem also to have -been of local origin; cf. the _Ligurum cohors, vetus loci auxilium_ -stationed in the Alpes Maritimae, Tac. _Hist._ ii. 14. See also D. xx -and xxvi for the composition of the garrison of Sardinia. - -[209] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 46. See above, p. 19. - -[210] ‘Flavus aucta stipendia, torquem et coronam aliaque militaria -dona memorat,’ Tac. _Ann._ ii. 9. - -[211] ‘Non tulit ala Picentiana gaudium insultantis vulgi, spretisque -Sancti promissis aut minis Mogontiacum abeunt,’ Tac. _Hist._ iv. 62. I -follow the diplomata in using the form Picentiana—not Picentina, which -Tacitus preferred. - -[212] D. ii. - -[213] iii. 3271. - -[214] This supports the statement of Macrobius, already cited, that -some of the cohorts _voluntariae_ were stationed in Illyricum. - -[215] The list given above probably does not contain all the regiments -originally sent to the Rhine. A large proportion of the auxilia -stationed in Britain are of Danubian origin, and these troops are -more likely to have come from Germany, than, as has been sometimes -suggested, with Legio IX Hispana from Pannonia. - -[216] It seems that all the eight Batavian cohorts which supported -Civilis were dismissed, and that the Cohorts I and II Batavorum, which -we meet on second-century inscriptions, were new creations. The Alae -Petriana and Sebosiana and two cohorts of Tungrians, which had formed -part of the Rhine army in 69, appear later in Britain. But they had -left the Rhine to take part in the civil war in Italy, and were not -guilty of complicity in the mutiny. - -[217] Legio IV Scythica remained permanently in Syria; V Macedonia and -XV Apollinaris were in the East from 62 and 63 respectively to 70. -Auxiliary regiments probably accompanied these legions, and some in all -likelihood remained with the first named. - -[218] It is true that although five legions (I Adiutrix, X Gemina, XI -Claudia, XIV Gemina, and XXI Rapax) were transferred from the Rhine to -the Danube between 70 and 107 the list of auxilia does not alter so -much as might be expected. Still the transference of some regiments can -be traced, e.g. the Ala Claudia Nova and the Cohors V Hispanorum were -sent to Moesia Inferior between 74 and 82 and remained there. Cf. D. -xi, xiv, and ciii. - -[219] In 1884 Mommsen collected the existing evidence in _Eph. Ep._ v. -pp. 159-249, and stated his conclusions in the _Conscriptionsordnung_. -Later epigraphical discoveries, while clearing up many points of -detail, have left his main argument unaffected, and it forms the basis -of the following discussion. - -[220] e.g. a certain T. Flavius Draccus of the Ala I F(lavia) -D(omitiana) Brit(annica) M(iliaria) c(ivium) R(omanorum) describes -himself as a _civis Sequanus_ (iii. 15197). Now the title D(omitiana) -shows that the inscription must have been erected between 81 and 96, -and Draccus, who had served 22 years, was enrolled, therefore, between -60 and 74. But his regiment, which formed part of the Vitellian army in -69 (Tac. _Hist._ iii. 41), must have been in Germany or Britain before -that date. Probably it was sent in 70 to Germania Inferior, won its -title, like other regiments of that province, for loyalty at the time -of the rebellion of Saturninus in 89, and was transferred to Pannonia -shortly afterwards. - -[221] The regiment was in Moesia Inferior by 99 (D. xxxi) and remained -there. The Pannonian inscriptions therefore probably belong to the -pre-Flavian period, as the soldiers had served 30 and 17 years -respectively. - -[222] This soldier, T. Flavius Bonius, was apparently given the -franchise by one of the Flavian emperors, but might then have been -serving some time. - -[223] _Allectus_ into the Equites Singulares Imperatoris. A date is -indicated by his name Ulpius Titius. - -[224] The soldier bears the name Aurelius, and the style of the -monument suggests a third-century date. See below, p. 128, n. 4. - -[225] _Allectus_ into the Equites Singulares at Rome. - -[226] The soldier has the Thracian name of Mucapor. - -[227] Probably a _corps d’élite_ formed originally for the Dacian War -and placed afterwards on a permanent footing. In the reign of Antoninus -Pius it seems to have been given the title of Ala Illyricorum. - -[228] The Pannonian to whom D. ii belonged cannot have been enrolled -later than 35, and owner of D. ci was probably enrolled earlier still. - -[229] iii. 14214. - -[230] Unfortunately the name of the cohort to which the men belonged -has been lost. The names of some men of the Cohors II Batavorum are -preserved, but without their nationalities. - -[231] iii. 2016, 4227. The regiment may of course have been sent to -Spain and have returned only after a long absence, say with Legio VII -Gemina in 69 (Tac. _Hist._ ii. 11). - -[232] viii. 18084. The majority come from the Eastern provinces. - -[233] There is evidence for a garrison of at least 25,000 men in the -second century, but it probably reached a higher figure. See Appendix I. - -[234] xiii. 7024, 7025, 7579, D. xxxv. - -[235] viii. 3101. For the recruiting of Legio III Augusta cf. Cagnat, -_L’Armée romaine d’Afrique_, 2nd edition, pp. 287-303. - -[236] We find the Ala I Ulpia Dromedariorum, the Cohorts I, III, IV, -V and VI Ulpia Petraeorum, II and III Ulpia Paflagonum, I and II -Ulpia Galatarum, and I Ulpia Sagittariorum all in Cappadocia, Syria, -or Palestine in the second century, and only one of this series of -regiments, the Cohors III Ulpia Galatarum, can be traced elsewhere. - -[237] iii. 6580. The non-Egyptians all come from the Eastern provinces, -except two from Africa. - -[238] iii. 14507. 7 come from Dacia, 7 from Pannonia, 5 from Dalmatia, -3 from Thrace, 6 from Macedonia, and 1 from Pergamum. - -[239] It is impossible to go into this question here. The soldiers -mentioned on vi. 31138, who were discharged in 118, must, if they -served their full time, have been enrolled before Trajan’s accession. -The corps seems to have replaced the old _Germani corporis custodes_, -disbanded by Galba; Suet. _Vit. Gal._ 12. - -[240] In the hundred cases only five men are actually described as -_allecti_ from an ala, but the fact may not always have been mentioned -on the tombstones. - -[241] I have taken the first hundred inscriptions on which nationality -is recorded, beginning with vi. 3173. - -[242] The contingents of the two Pannonian and the two Moesian -provinces cannot be distinguished, because in a large number of cases -the deceased is simply described as Pannonius or Moesus. - -[243] Using this term to apply only to the contingents of Lugdunensis. -The inhabitants of Belgica still appear. - -[244] Between 70 and 107 the garrison of the Danubian provinces was -increased to ten legions, chiefly at the expense of the Rhine army, in -which the legions were reduced from eight to four. - -[245] In 69, when Antonius Primus boasted of the superiority of the -Danubian cavalry, there were, according to Tacitus, sixteen alae in -Pannonia and Moesia (Tac. _Hist._ iii. 2). In the second century -seventeen regiments can be traced in the two Pannonias and Moesia -Inferior, while in Dacia, which covered Moesia Superior, were ten -more. These figures, moreover, are probably below the real total. See -Appendix I. - -[246] It appears in a Pannonian diploma for 98 (D. xxvii) and in the -first Dacian diploma for 110 (D. xxxvii). - -[247] See _Archaelogiai Ertesitö_, 1905 and following, and for the -inscriptions _A. E._ 1906 and following. - -[248] D. lviii (138-46), iii. 3331. - -[249] iii. 10316, 10318. _A. E._ 1906. 110. Ib. 1909. 150. Ib. 1910. -137. - -[250] D. lviii. The name of the town is missing. - -[251] _A. E._ 1910. 141. Cf. 133. - -[252] D. xxvii, xxxvii; iii. 4371. Another inscription (iii. 4368) -mentions a Batavian, but he is a decurion who may have been transferred -on promotion from another corps. - -[253] For orientals on the Rhine, cf. xiii. 7512, 7514. - -[254] Throughout the Empire the archer regiments seem to have been -exclusively Thracians or orientals, but the latter alone preserved -their national character in the second century. - -[255] iii. 10315, 10316. - -[256] The difficulty is to establish clear cases of men who must have -entered a regiment after its original formation. The ‘Britto’ of the -Dacian diploma for 145-61 (lxx) seems to be one. - -[257] ‘Nectovelius natione Brigans’ in the Cohors II Thracum. The -inscription comes from Mumrills and probably dates, therefore, from -between 142 and 180. _Eph. Ep._ ix. 623. - -[258] The _numeri_ have been discussed by Mommsen in the latter part -of the _Conscriptionsordnung_, a discussion which naturally forms the -basis of the following pages. - -[259] xiii. 6526, 6542, 6592, 6622, 6629, 6642, 7749. -Elantienses—6490. Gurvedenses—7343. Murrenses—6471. -Triputienses—6502, 6511, 6514, 6517, 6518, 6599, 6606. - -[260] _A. E._ 1910. 152. - -[261] viii. 2486, 2505, 18007, 18008, 18026, &c. - -[262] iii. 837, 907, 7999, 14216. - -[263] The Palmyrene _vexillarius_, whose tombstone was found at -Corbridge in 1911, is most likely to have belonged to a _numerus_ -formed from his countrymen. _Eph. Ep._ ix. 1153a. - -[264] D. lxvii (158). - -[265] _Eph. Ep._ ix. 1191, where all the references are collected. - -[266] iii. 8032. - -[267] viii. 21015, 21017. - -[268] iii. 7493. - -[269] If Mommsen’s interpretation of _Eph. Ep._ vii. 957 as n(umerus) -m(ilitum) S(urorum) S(agittariorum) be correct. - -[270] Hyginus, 29. Accepting this emendation for the meaningless Getati -of the manuscripts. - -[271] iii. 12601 a and b, 12605. The inscriptions date from the reign -of Hadrian, showing that this usage was an early one. - -[272] Hyginus, 30. - -[273] _Praepositus_ is more usual, and probably the original title. -Later we find the title _praefectus_, and the inclusion of this post at -the bottom of the equestrian census, below the previous three posts, -gave rise to the phrase _a quattuor militiis_. Cf. xiii. 6814 and von -Dom. _Rangordnung_, p. 131. - -[274] Von Dom. _Rangordnung_, pp. 60, 61. - -[275] viii. 2505, 2515. The latest inscription is a dedication to -Malagbel, the native god of Palmyra, for the safety of Gordian III. - -[276] iii. 907, 14216 (Oriental names). - -[277] If the Brittones were really, as has been suggested, transported -wholesale to Germany, these _numeri_ also would have preserved their -national character. - -[278] These disappeared during the period, which came in the history -of almost every regiment, when it contained drafts from different -nationalities. - -[279] This is shown by Hyginus, 43, as von Dom. has pointed out, -_Rangordnung_, p. 60. - -[280] Dio, lxviii. 8 and 32. - -[281] Arrian, _Tactica_, 44. - -[282] The Κελτοὶ ἱππῆς, however, which are mentioned in the _Ectaxis_, -2, are probably, as Ritterling (_Wiener Studien_, xxiv. 127-40) -suggests, cavalry of the Cohors Germanorum M. E. - -[283] The nearest case I know of is xiii. 3177, where we have the order -signifer-centurio-tribunus, but this is in one of the Cohortes civium -Romanorum, which occupy an exceptional position. - -[284] _Rangordnung_, pp. 112-15, 122-30. - -[285] ix. 996, x. 4862. - -[286] _Rangordnung_, pp. 57, 72. He also considers that at this date -the centurions and decurions of the auxiliary regiments were drawn -from the ranks of the legions, a suggestion which has already been -discussed. See above, p. 38. - -[287] See pp. 16-20. - -[288] Tac. _Hist._ iv. 12 ‘(Batavorum) cohortibus quas vetere instituto -nobilissimi popularium regebant’. - -[289] Ib. iv. 18. Its _praefectus_ Claudius Labeo, ‘oppidano certamine -aemulus Civili,’ was clearly a Batavian. - -[290] Ib. iv. 16. - -[291] Ib. iii. 35; ii. 14; iv. 55. To the same class of officers -belonged ‘Chumstinctius et Avectius tribuni ex civitate Nerviorum’, who -played an important part in one of the campaigns of Drusus. Epit. Livy, -cxxxxi. - -[292] v. 7003 is an example of a career of this kind which dated from -the reign of Claudius. - -[293] ix. 2564; _A. E._ 1902. 41. - -[294] Cf. iii. 1918 ‘I. O. M. Sulpicius Calvio c(enturio) leg(ionis) I -Min(erviae) praepositus coh(ortis) I Belgarum’. - -[295] Cf. viii. 18007 ‘… M. Annius Valens leg(ionis) III -Aug(ustae) praepositus n(umeri) Palmyrenorum’; xiii. 6526 ‘… M. -Octavius Severus (centurio) leg(ionis) VIII Aug(ustae) Praeposit(us) -Brit(tonum)’. The office of _praefectus numeri_ does, however, occur; -iii. 1149. See above, p. 87. - -[296] xi. 5669 ‘C. Camurio C. f. Lem(onia) Clementi … praef(ecto) -coh(ortis) VII Raet(orum) equit(atae), trib(uno) mil(itum) coh(ortis) -II Ulpiae Petraeor(um) miliar(iae) equit(atae), praef(ecto) alae -Petrianae …’. - -[297] D. xlvii, li, lix, lx, lxi, lxvi, lxx. - -[298] In a list of over two hundred and fifty _praefecti_ whose place -of origin is known I have not come across one from either of these -provinces. But it is of course impossible to be sure that such a list -is even as complete as the existing evidence permits. - -[299] For the military qualities of the Gauls in the fourth century cf. -Ammianus Marcellinus, xv. 12, xix. 6. - -[300] _A. E._ 1899. 177. - -[301] Such men probably stood a better chance than the Greeks. See my -article on the Caristanii of Pisidian Antioch in _J. R. S._ iii. - -[302] Possibly curator, the Greek being ἐπιμελητής. - -[303] _A. E._ 1911. 161. A son, or other relative, who erected the -inscription was _praefectus cohortis II Hispanorum equitatae, C. R., -tribunus cohortis III Ulpiae Petraeorum_. - -[304] It is true that we do not know where the Cohors III Thracum -Syriaca was stationed, but the other units in the series of four -bearing this title all appear in the East. The Cohors II Hispanorum, in -which his son served, is probably that mentioned on an inscription from -Ancyra. iii. 6760. - -[305] D. xlviii and cviii. - -[306] Cf. Tacitus’s remarks in the _Annals_, xiii. 35, with the account -in Dio Cassius, lxxv. 11-13, of the siege of Hatra by Septimius -Severus, especially τῶν μὲν Εὐρωπαίων, τῶν δυναμένων τι κατεργάσασθαι -and the promise of one of the officers ἐάν γε αὐτῷ δώσῃ πεντακοσίους -καὶ πεντήκοντα μόνους τῶν Εὐρωπαίων στρατιωτῶν, ἄνευ τοῦ τῶν ἄλλων -κινδύνου τὴν πόλιν ἐξαιρήσειν. - -[307] This point has been well made by Dessau in _Hermes_, 1910. The -evidence does, however, suggest that an unusually large proportion of -Africans obtained commands during the reign of Septimius Severus. - -[308] This is put very strongly on pages 133 and 134 of the -_Rangordnung_, ‘die Italiker und die Weströmer sind von der _militia -equestris_ ausgeschlossen.’ - -[309] The first name is that of the province in which the praefectus -was stationed. His place of origin is placed last. - -[310] Its best justification is the solidarity of the Empire in the -fourth century, which appears so markedly in the pages of Ammianus, -and exercised so powerful an influence over the minds of the barbarian -invaders. - - - - -SECTION III - -THE USE OF THE AUXILIA FOR WAR AND FRONTIER DEFENCE - - -A history of the art of war under the Roman Empire has not yet been -written, for the simple reason that we do not possess an account by a -good military historian of a single campaign between that of Thapsus -(46 B.C.) and that of Argentorate (357). Josephus does indeed give a -first-hand account of the Jewish war of 66-70, and took some trouble -over military details, but his subject limited him to siege operations -and street-fighting. The most valuable section in his work is a general -sketch of the Roman army and its organization, and a description of the -arrangement of troops on the march.[311] Tacitus, on the other hand, -who is forced by his subject to describe several campaigns, and remains -in consequence our chief authority, cared nothing for the technical -side of warfare, and does nothing more than record, as a rule correctly -enough, details which he found in his sources.[312] - -With strategy we need not concern ourselves, since the subject lies -beyond the scope of this essay; but tactics require more consideration -on account of the special position assigned to the auxilia in battle -formation. From the scanty information given by our authorities it -appears that in any regular engagement fought during the first two -centuries the legionary infantry were still considered to be the chief -arm and employed to deal the decisive blow.[313] They occupied the -centre of the line, and the light troops and cavalry—that is to say, -the auxilia—were expected to do little more than protect them from a -flank attack. This formation was employed at Idistaviso in 16,[314] -against Tacfarinas in 18,[315] against Tiridates in 58,[316] against -Boudicca in 61,[317] and at the second battle of Bedriacum in 69.[318] -It is also prescribed by Arrian in his ‘Order of Battle against the -Alani’.[319] The only considerable exception is the battle of Issos -in 193, in which the legions on both sides formed the first line and -were supported by the archers, who shot over their heads. Dio, however, -expressly states that this formation was adopted because these armies -were fighting in a narrow space with the sea on one side and mountains -on the other, so that there was no need to detach a force to protect -their flanks.[320] - -There were, however, cases, particularly in warfare against barbarians, -where the enemy would not meet the imperial forces in the open field, -but took up a defensive position on ground where legionaries could not -be employed with success. In these circumstances the auxilia formed the -first line and began the attack, and only if they were driven back and -pursued by the enemy did the legions come into action. The battle of -Mons Graupius, in 84, was conducted on these lines,[321] and similar -tactics seem often to have been employed by Trajan in Dacia.[322] In -general, however, the auxilia play a very secondary rôle; we do not -hear either of the cavalry being used to strike the decisive blow after -the manner of Alexander,[323] or of any such combination of archers and -heavy infantry as we find in mediaeval warfare. - -The subject, however, is still obscure, and it is more satisfactory -to turn to the part played by the auxilia in frontier defence, -concerning which the archaeological research of the past twenty years -has established more certain conclusions. In the frontier policy of -the first two centuries we can trace two opposing tendencies at work, -each of which is reflected in the disposition of the troops and the -duties required of them. At the death of Augustus the Empire had as -yet reached hardly any of its natural boundaries, although by means of -the system of client kingdoms and ‘protected’ tribes it was asserting -its claims and intentions in much the same fashion as the powers of -modern Europe are doing in Africa to-day. The first century therefore -witnessed on almost every frontier a period of expansion of greater -or less duration, in which the sphere of direct administration was -gradually pushed forward until some physical or political obstacle -was reached which necessitated either a halt or a forward policy on -a much larger scale. Throughout this period military operations were -always imminent; in Britain, for example, between 50 and 85, the -garrison marched out almost every spring, either for a campaign or a -military demonstration. In winter, therefore, or in times of peace, the -frontier armies were so disposed as to be able to take the offensive -at a few days’ notice. The legions often lay in pairs, while many of -the auxiliary regiments, instead of being scattered over a wide area, -as was the case later, were concentrated at a few strategic points. -The extent to which this system was adopted varied, of course, with -local conditions, and a few regiments always occupied more isolated -positions, but as a whole the auxilia of a province were far more -easily mobilized than later when each regiment had its own _castellum_. -On the Rhine frontier Haltern and Hofheim furnish examples of these -large _hiberna_, dating from the beginning and the middle of the first -century respectively,[324] and we find the same system continued for -the defence of the Taunus district annexed by Domitian.[325] There is, -indeed, here a chain of forts on the frontier, but they are of small -size, with an average area of only 1½ acres. The bulk of the auxilia -lay some way behind the frontier, in forts which held some two or three -regiments apiece.[326] In Britain we have traces of a similar system -at the same date. The ‘Agricolan’ fort at Barr Hill is a frontier -post which would require some two centuries at most for its defence, -while the early fort at Newstead, which was probably occupied from -about 80 to 100 or later, could accommodate at least 1500 men.[327] -The essentially temporary nature of such _hiberna_ is emphasized by -the character of their defences, which usually consist simply of an -earth wall or palisade, little more elaborate in construction than the -_vallum_ which an army in the field was expected to throw up round its -camp after a day’s march. - -In provinces whence archaeological evidence is not forthcoming, -inscriptions indicate the same system. From Spain, for instance, we -have an early inscription referring to an officer who held command over -four cohorts,[328] and a similar brigade of three cohorts appears at -Syene in Egypt in the reign of Trajan.[329] On the Danube frontier von -Domaszewski has concluded from the epigraphical evidence that Aquincum -and Arrabona each held two alae in the first century.[330] - -This period of expansion may be considered to end with Trajan’s -annexation of Dacia and his failure a few years later to execute a -similar forward move on the Eastern frontier. With the accession -of Hadrian a new policy begins, which advertised by the elaborate -character of its defensive measures that the imperial government was -firmly determined to renounce all further schemes of aggression, a -determination which was adhered to until the power of decision lay no -longer in Roman hands. The outward signs of this new spirit were the -abandonment of the old _hiberna_, and the removal of their garrisons -to stone forts of a new type, each arranged to hold no more than a -single unit, which were placed at more or less regular intervals along -the frontier instead of behind it.[331] The auxilia, that is, were -transformed from a potential field army into a frontier police. - -This policy of passive defence depended, of course, for its success -upon the extent to which the frontier could be made defensible. -Fortunately by this date it lay for the greater part of its length -along positions of great natural strength. The Rhine, Danube, -and Euphrates, when guarded by a continuous line of forts and -watch-towers,[332] and patrolled by flotillas of guard-boats, formed -a serious military obstacle to a raiding force, an obstacle even more -dangerous to its retreat than its advance. The desert frontiers of -Africa and Arabia were more easily defended, since the routes by which -a hostile force could advance were limited in number and the defence -could concentrate upon them, and the same of course holds true of the -southern frontier of Egypt. - -There were, however, districts where such natural obstacles did not -exist, as in the case of the trans-Rhenane territory, which was divided -between Germania Superior and Raetia, and the northern frontier of -Britain, and here Hadrian had recourse to the expedient of erecting -artificial barriers, which he hoped would serve the same purpose.[333] -In the former case the frontier was defended by a palisade and ditch, -which were later supplemented by an earth mound in the German section -and replaced by a stone wall in Raetia.[334] On the British frontier, -between the Tyne and Solway, the existing remains are those of a stone -wall, although there are also traces of a wall of turf, which may have -been an earlier work.[335] A turf wall also defended the more advanced -line between the Firths of Clyde and Forth, which was occupied between -140 and 180.[336] The southern line in Britain in its most perfect form -was guarded by a stone wall seventy-three miles long. This wall was -between six and nine feet thick, and probably stood originally about -twelve feet high. In front of it, except where the precipitous nature -of the ground rendered such an additional defence unnecessary, ran -a wide ∨-shaped ditch. At intervals of about every Roman mile stood -a stone block-house, and between every block-house two towers. The -mile-castles contained barrack accommodation for about fifty men, and -reveal abundant traces of continuous occupation.[337] The garrison of -about eleven thousand men lay in stone forts of the ‘cohort’ size, the -majority of which are actually on the line of the wall, although a few, -which probably belonged originally to an earlier system of defence, -are a short distance behind it. The average interval between the forts -is some six miles, so that it was easily possible for each regiment -to man the adjacent towers and mile-castles and retain a considerable -force at head-quarters. In addition to the troops actually stationed on -the line of the wall, there were other regiments in outpost forts to -the north and in the forts which guarded the three roads leading south -to the legionary fortresses of Chester and York. The ends of the line -were also guarded against flank attacks from the sea by forts at South -Shields and on the Cumberland coast. If, then, we include all troops -within three days’ march of the wall, the total force available for -its defence probably exceeded twenty thousand men. Taking also into -our calculations the natural strength of the position, we may safely -say that this was the strongest and best guarded of all the frontier -barriers. - -The trans-Rhenane frontier, which extends for over three hundred miles -from Rheinbrohl on the Rhine to Eining on the Danube, was defended by -the same methods, although in certain sections the forts were more -widely separated and the garrison was proportionately weaker. There -were also fewer troops within call immediately behind the frontier -line. Here also, between the cohort forts, stone ‘Zwischenkastelle’ and -‘Wachttürme’ furnished additional safeguards.[338] - -This whole system of frontier defence has been much criticized, and -the limitations and possibilities of these artificial barriers must -be carefully determined.[339] To take the negative side first, they -could not, of course, be defended against unexpected attack, like the -walls of a town, unless the assailants were only a small raiding party -numbering some twenty or thirty men. On the other hand, in spite of -the parallel of the ‘Customs Hedge’ in India,[340] it seems unlikely -that fiscal considerations played any large part in determining the -government on their construction. They doubtless acted, when built, as -a check on smuggling, but the expense of their maintenance would have -been quite out of proportion to the value of the trade done with the -German or British tribes. - -The first purpose which they served was to furnish a screen behind -which patrols could march in comparative safety, both by day and -night, and keep the whole line under constant surveillance. Thus the -passing of a hostile force could be instantly reported by messenger -or signal[341] to the nearest _castella_, whence detachments could at -once start in pursuit. Secondly, whereas the defenders nearly always -had a mounted force close at hand drawn either from the _alae_ or the -numerous _cohortes equitatae_, the raiders would probably be unmounted, -since their start would be lost if they delayed to fill up the ditch -and make a gap in the barrier large enough for their horses.[342] -This barrier, too, had to be crossed again in retreat, and presented -a very serious obstacle to a force encumbered with booty. Indeed, the -defenders might reserve the great part of their forces for this moment, -as is recommended by Byzantine military writers describing similar -conditions.[343] - -This sketch of the methods of defence employed applies more -particularly to the German and Raetian frontiers. In Britain, more -particularly on the southern line, it is probable that a more serious -defence was intended. In the first place, the massive stone wall, on -which the defenders could stand, was obviously stronger than anything -on the trans-Rhenane section.[344] Secondly, we have noted that the -garrison was stronger than in Germany, and could be more easily -reinforced. Moreover, even after the final abandonment of Scotland, -forts were still held in front of the southern line. Netherby on the -Esk, and Habitancium (Risingham) and Bremenium (High Rochester) on -Dere Street, were occupied by _cohortes miliariae equitatae_ well -into the third century, and at the last two forts we find a _numerus -exploratorum_ attached to the regular auxilia.[345] These strong -outposts would have been able to check or harass the enemy’s advance -and give warning to the garrison of the wall of any impending attack. - -All these suppositions, however, both as regards Germany and Britain, -are based upon the assumption that a raid would be the sole subject -of the attacking force, and that it would not be too numerous to be -dealt with by the garrisons of three or four _castella_. To a more -serious invasion the resistance offered was much less effective. The -legions, it is true, still remained in reserve, but they formed the -only concentrated force at the disposal of the defending general, for -the majority of the auxilia, scattered as they were along the entire -length of the frontier, could not be quickly concentrated, and a -provincial garrison can rarely have taken the field at anything like -its full strength. The system also created serious difficulties when -it became necessary to send troops from one province to the aid of -another. Three regiments, for example, could not easily be sent from -Germany to Pannonia, because each of them constituted an essential link -in the chain of frontier defence. It became the practice, therefore, -to form out of detachments drawn from several regiments a composite -_vexillatio_ in which efficiency must have been greatly diminished -by lack of _esprit de corps_. A cavalry _vexillatio_ of this type -commanded by a certain Lollianus, probably during the Parthian war of -Trajan, was drawn from no less than five _alae_ and fourteen _cohortes -equitatae_.[346] - -In defence of the system it would probably have been urged that on -every frontier the hostile forces were equally dispersed and far less -easily concentrated, and that a combination of the Celtic or Teutonic -tribes would be heard of long before it was ready for action. The -existence of the league which attacked and for a time broke through -the Danube frontier in the reign of Marcus was certainly known to the -imperial government, and the local governors succeeded in delaying the -crisis until the return of the _vexillationes_ which had been sent to -the eastern frontier, with whose aid they hoped to be able to cope with -the situation.[347] Their calculations were upset by the havoc wrought -in the army by the plague which these troops brought with them. Even -so the danger was eventually surmounted, and the frontiers were on the -whole successfully maintained for nearly a century more. - -But the full consequences of this system cannot be perceived without -some consideration of the changes which it brought about in the -conditions of military life and their effect upon the general morale -and condition of the troops. A very important point to notice is their -immobility. Already in the first century there was, except for the -officers, no regular system of transfers, and only an important change -in the military situation caused troops to be sent from one province -to another. In fact such changes were frequent, and considerable -transfers took place, particularly during the Flavian period and the -wars of Trajan. From the accession of Hadrian onwards, however, such -movements cease almost entirely. During the following hundred and -twenty years hardly a legion changed its position and the auxiliary -regiments remained almost equally stationary.[348] We can trace -regiments which remained literally for centuries in the same province -and for the greater part of the time were in the same _castellum_. Of -the twenty-one cohorts and alae which are mentioned by the _Notitia -Dignitatum_ as forming part of the garrison of Britain, fifteen are -shown by the evidence of diplomata to have been in the province long -before the end of the reign of Hadrian; and two more, which occur in -a diploma of 146, are probably only not mentioned earlier because -they were creations of that emperor and had consequently no veterans -ready for discharge until after his death.[349] Similarly the Cohors -V Lucensium et Callaecorum was in Pannonia at least from 60 to 198, -the Cohors I Hemesenorum from 138/46 to 240, and the Ala III Augusta -Thracum from 148 to 268/71.[350] The best instance, however, is that -of the Cohors II Ituraeorum Felix. This regiment is placed by the -_Notitia_ in Egypt, and other evidence shows it to have been in the -province in 147, 136, 98, 83, and probably 39.[351] As this section of -the _Notitia_ seems to date, at the earliest, from the beginning of the -fifth century the regiment was probably quartered in the same province -for at least three hundred and twenty years.[352] - -Evidence of continued stay in one _castellum_ is naturally more -difficult to find, but the way in which the names Ulpius, Aelius, -and Aurelius follow one another on a series of inscriptions of the -Ala I Ulpia Contariorum from Arrabona in Pannonia Superior suggests -that the regiment remained there throughout the second century, and -the title Antoniniana shows that it had not moved before the reign of -Severus Antoninus.[353] At the fort of Veczel in Dacia the Cohors II -Flavia Commagenorum has left inscriptions dating from the reigns of -Hadrian, Marcus, Septimius Severus, Severus Alexander, and Philip, -which cover practically the whole period during which the province -was in existence.[354] In Britain a remarkable series of dedications -from Amboglanna (Birdoswald), which has already been referred to, shows -that the Cohors I Aelia Dacorum was stationed there from about 211 to -271.[355] - -Had the practice of employing a secondary title derived from the name -of the reigning emperor commenced before the third century it would -probably be easy to prove stays of much longer duration. The figures -given above must certainly be taken as a minimum. A second-century -auxiliary could thus make himself at home in his quarters in the -practical certainty that, with the exception of a few temporary -absences as member of a _vexillatio_, he would spend the whole of his -twenty-five years of service patrolling the frontier on each side of -his _castellum_. - -In considering the life which the frontier guards would lead under -these conditions we must remember that the character of the auxiliary -soldier in the second century had changed considerably since the force -was first organized by Augustus. In the early first century enrolment -in the Roman service had little effect on the levies of wild tribesmen -who composed the greater part of the auxilia at this period. They might -be organized in Roman fashion, but the military qualities which they -displayed and their whole manner of fighting were inherited from their -ancestors. _Promptam ad pericula nec minus cantuum et armorum tumultu -trucem_ is Tacitus’s description of a cohort of Sugambri employed in -Thrace in the reign of Tiberius, and in like fashion the German cohorts -of Caecina’s army shouted their war-songs and rattled their shields -beneath the walls of Cremona.[356] In the second century all this was -changed: the progress of Romanization had raised the majority of the -provincials, even in the frontier districts, to a level of culture -which placed them far above their ancestors of three generations -back, although they might still seem barbarous to a cultured Greek -or Italian.[357] In the conditions of the service there was nothing -to prevent the auxilia from participating in this general advance, -and the soldiers who spent the best years of their lives in these -little frontier stations gathered around them all the amenities of -provincial life which would have been found in any country town in the -neighbourhood. On the sheltered side of the fort a civil settlement, -technically known as the _canabae_, quickly sprang up, and soon -contained as many inhabitants as the fort itself, if not more. It was -here that the soldiers placed their wives and children, that retired -veterans settled near their old comrades, and traders erected their -shops. A bath-house or two and a few small shrines, particularly those -dedicated to the popular military cults of Mithras, ‘the Unconquered -Comrade,’ and Juppiter Dolichenus satisfied the highest material and -spiritual needs.[358] - -At the fort of the Saalburg, where such a settlement has been -carefully explored, an area of something like seventy-five acres was -covered with buildings and gardens. Shrines dedicated to the Mater Deum -and to Silvanus and Diana have been found, as well as those of Mithras -and Juppiter Dolichenus, and two others remain as yet unidentified. On -the outskirts, here as elsewhere, lay the cemetery with its inscribed -sepulchral monuments, the chief source of our information on so many -points of military life.[359] On the British wall no _canabae_ have -been so carefully explored as those on the German limes, which is -the more to be regretted since the buildings are usually in a better -state of preservation; but it is still possible to see near the fort -at Borcovicium (Housesteads) the terraces on which a scanty crop was -raised, while the remains of buildings extend down the hill from the -fort at the top to a small Mithraeum in the valley.[360] At Cilurnum -an elaborate bath-house was erected for the use of the soldiers of the -Ala II Asturum on the banks of the Tyne, and further excavation would -doubtless show that it did not stand alone. Where excavations have not -taken place the existence of these and other buildings is testified -to by inscriptions. At a fort on the Lower Rhine we even find the -_praefectus_ repairing at his own cost the regimental clock.[361] - -The married quarters mentioned above require a few words of -explanation. Numerous critics of the Roman army have assumed not only -that celibacy is a valuable military ideal, but that it was actually -attained until Severus issued his famous edict permitting soldiers -to marry while still on active service.[362] Previous to this it is -assumed that they had no relations with women but those of the least -binding description. Seeck, indeed, has carefully explained that the -‘children of the camp’ could not have been reckoned upon as a valuable -source for recruits, because the rate of mortality is notoriously -higher among illegitimate than legitimate children.[363] This theory -is sufficiently refuted by the fact that, as we have seen, nearly -fifty per cent. of the recruits for the Legio III Augusta in Africa -were giving _castris_ as their birthplace long before the reign of -Severus.[364] A recently discovered edict of Domitian has shown -further that such unions were sufficiently permanent to be officially -recognized by the government during a soldier’s period of service, -although only legalized at his discharge.[365] The effect of Severus’s -edict was merely to anticipate this act and give legal sanction to -existing and perfectly well understood social conditions. Practically -the change was probably of small importance, since it seems fairly -clear that married quarters were not allowed inside the fort walls -after this edict any more than before it, nor were married men allowed -to remain permanently outside. Cagnat has shown that the arrangement of -the internal buildings of the legionary fortress at Lambaesis, which -are proved by epigraphical evidence to have been still existing in the -third century, is entirely opposed to such a supposition, and to the -general theory, which has often been advanced, that from the time of -Severus onwards such a fortress became merely a club-house and exercise -ground for the greater part of the troops.[366] These arguments are -concerned only with the legionaries, but they are worth introducing -because the erroneous views here discussed have often been made to -apply to the army as a whole. In the case of the auxilia, indeed, -there was never any justification for their acceptance. The evidence -of the diplomata was always sufficient to show that even in the first -century the auxiliary soldiers, like the legionaries, formed family -ties during their period of service which were officially recognized -on their discharge.[367] The same picture is given by early sepulchral -inscriptions, of which the following, from the Pannonian fort of -Teutoburgium, may serve as an example: - -‘Ti(berio) Cl(audio) Britti f(ilio) Valerio, dec(urioni) alae II -Aravacorum, domo Hispano, annor(um) L, stip(endiorum) XXX, et -Cl(audiae) Ianuariae coniugi eius et Cl(audiae) Hispanillae filiae -vivis ex testamento Flaccus dec(urio) frater et Hispanilla filia -heredes faciundum curaverunt.’[368] - -This tendency towards matrimony was naturally intensified by the -more settled life of the second-century auxiliary. The systematic -investigation of the cemetery attached to one of these permanent -garrisons reveals as orderly a family life as could be found in -any country town of the peaceful inland provinces. The following -inscriptions, which are drawn from different parts of the Empire, are -but few among many which might be advanced to support this contention. - - xiii. 6270. From Borbetomagus in Germania Superior: - ‘Faustinio Faustino Sennauci Florionis fil(io) mil(iti) - coh(ortis) I F(laviae) D(amascenorum), ped(iti) sing(ulari) - cos(consularis), Gemellinia Faustina mate(r) et Faustinia - Potentina sor(or) her(edes) secundum volumt(atem) testamenti - pos(uerunt). Vixit ann(is) [XX]V, decidit in flore iuvent(utis). - Faciendum curaverunt.’ - - iii. 10257. Teutoburgium in Pannonia Inferior: - ‘M. Ulp(ius) Super dec(urio) alae Praetoriae c(ivium) - R(omanorum), ex s(ingulari) c(onsularis), ann(orum) XXXII, - stip(endiorum) XVI h(ic) s(itus) e(st). M. Ulp(ius) Similis - sesq(uiplicarius) alae I c(ivium) R(omanorum) frater, et Ulpia - Siscia soror, fratri pientissimo iuventutiq(ue) eius,’ &c. - - iii. 10609. From Pannonia Inferior: exact provenance unknown: - ‘D(is) [M(anibus)] Ael(io) Victorino ann(orum) XXX, - stip(endiorum) XIII, dupl(icario) al‹a›e I T(hracum) - v(eteranorum), et Ael(io) Liciniano an(norum) XII, filis - pient(issimis) Ael(ia) Flaviana infelic(issima) mat(er) et sibi - v(iva) p(osuit).’ - - _I. G. R. R._ i. 1350. From Talmis in Egypt: - - τὸ προσκύνημα Γαίου Ἀ[ννέ]ου ἱπέως χώρτης αʹ Θηβ(αίων) ἱππικῆς - τύρμης Ὀππίου, καὶ Οὐαλερᾶτος ἰατροῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, καὶ Ἀρρίου - υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, καὶ Κασσία[ς], καὶ Οὐαλ[ερί]ας, καὶ Ἐπαφρῦτος [καὶ] - …ρᾶτος τοῦ ἵππου [αὐτοῦ].[369] - -These examples alone show how far from reality are Seeck’s licentious -mercenaries and their neglected bastards. In fact the suggestion of -many critics that celibacy is a valuable military ideal, which was -attained, at any rate partially, until the relaxation of discipline by -Septimius Severus, proceeds upon false lines. In a short service army, -like those of modern European states, in which the whole time of the -men is necessarily occupied in learning their military duties, such -an ideal is practical enough. In the Roman Empire the adoption of a -professional army with a service of twenty-five years put it beyond the -power of any government to enforce such monastic conditions, and the -facts of the situation were, as we have seen, never misunderstood by -the imperial authorities. - -This is, of course, far from saying that the resulting state of things -was all that could be desired. The long service system is, on this -account, open to serious objections in principle, and these objections -are intensified when we consider the lines on which this system -developed. The second-century auxiliary, encouraged by the settled -conditions of his service to form matrimonial ties, with his wife and -children comfortably settled just outside the fort walls, is perhaps -a more satisfactory spectacle from the moral than the military point -of view. Military service in the same regiment had not yet become -actually hereditary, because the enfranchised son of the auxiliary was -advanced a step in the social scale and enabled to take service in -the legions. When, however, in 212 the Constitutio Antoniniana swept -away a distinction which had long ceased to have any real basis in a -difference of race or culture, this obstacle was removed.[370] Two -sepulchral inscriptions of the Cohors I Hemesenorum, so often referred -to, illustrate this change. The first is erected to a veteran of this -cohort and to two sons and a grandson who had taken service in the -neighbouring legions I and II Adiutrix, while in the second we find the -son of a veteran from the latter legion who has taken service in the -auxiliary cohort.[371] - -It has already been noticed that the system of frontier defence -organized by Hadrian made it difficult either to concentrate rapidly -the garrison of a province at one point, or to send reinforcements -from one province to another. The more settled the auxiliary regiments -became, and the more local ties they formed, the more difficult did -it become to order any dislocation of troops on a large scale.[372] -In fact when Severus Alexander granted to the frontier garrisons any -adjoining territory which had been captured from the enemy, insisting -at the same time that their heirs could only inherit it on condition -of military service, this act was the natural culmination of a long -process of development which had transformed what had once been the -finest field army in the world into a rural militia.[373] Unfortunately -just as this development was completed and the result stamped with the -seal of official approval, the emperors of the third century found -themselves faced by new military dangers of a type with which the old -system was least fitted to cope. - - -Footnotes: - -[311] Josephus, _Bell. Iud._ iii. 5. - -[312] He was not, however, an ‘unmilitary historian’ in the sense -that, for instance, Ephoros was. Ephoros made elaborate accounts of -military operations an important feature of his work, although he was -quite lacking in military knowledge (Polybius, xii. 25); Tacitus never -pretends to concern himself with more than the moral and social aspects -of war. The same attitude may be observed both in Dio and Herodian (ii. -15, 6). This attitude was perfectly justifiable, since there existed, -as we learn from this passage in Herodian and from Lucian (_De Hist. -Conscrib._), a technical literature which would probably satisfy our -needs. That we do not possess it is the fault, not of Tacitus and Dio, -but of the Middle Ages. - -[313] This was still the case at Argentorate in 357; cf. Ammianus, xvi. -12. - -[314] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 16. - -[315] Tac. _Ann._ ii. 52 ‘Legio medio, leves cohortes duaeque alae in -cornibus locantur’. - -[316] Tac. _Ann._ xiii. 38 ‘Socias cohortes et auxilia regum pro -cornibus, medio sextam legionem constituit’. The defensive formation -described in xiii. 40 is slightly different, since the legions in the -centre formed a square. - -[317] Tac. _Ann._ xiv. 34 ‘Igitur legionarius frequens ordinibus, levis -circum armatura, conglobatus pro cornibus eques adstitit’. - -[318] Tac. _Hist._ iii. 21 ‘Cohortes auxiliorum in cornibus, latera ac -terga equite circumdata’. - -[319] The legionaries were to occupy the centre, the auxiliary infantry -high ground on the wings, the cavalry to wait in the rear. - -[320] Dio, lxxiv. 7. - -[321] Tac. _Agr._ 35 ‘Legiones pro vallo stetere, ingens victoriae -decus citra Romanum sanguinem bellandi, et auxilium, si pellerentur’. -It was not necessary for Tacitus to invent this not very creditable -excuse. The tactics are those adopted with equal success against a -Highland army by the Duke of Cumberland at the battle of Culloden in -1746. The same idea of checking the impetus of a Celtic charge by -successive obstacles has often been suggested as the reason for the -seven ditches which protect the exposed side of the fort at Whitley -Castle, and the _lilia_ at Rough Castle on the Antonine Wall. - -[322] They are particularly noticeable in the battle shown on -Cichorius, _Die Traiansäule_, Pl. 45, and to judge from the column, the -auxilia did more than their usual share of fighting in this war. - -[323] In spite of the boasting of Antonius Primus, the achievements of -the Pannonian cavalry in 69 were limited to a reckless advance followed -by a disorderly retreat. Cf. Tac. _Hist._ iii. 2 with iii. 16. In the -second century, however, we find heavy cavalry, _contarii_, who must -have been intended for shock tactics. - -[324] For Haltern see Schuchhardt, _Führer durch die Ausgrabungen von -Haltern_. It is, however, perhaps incorrect to limit the garrison to -auxiliaries: for Hofheim cf. Ritterling, _Das frührömische Lager bei -Hofheim_, 1912. It was occupied from about 40 to 60. - -[325] See Pelham, _Essays in Roman History_, p. 191. - -[326] e.g. Friedberg has an area of (roughly) 10 acres, Okarben of 14, -Heddernheim of 13, and Kesselstadt of 35. A cohort of 500 infantry was -usually allowed about 5 acres. - -[327] See Macdonald, _The Roman forts at Barr Hill_, pp. 11-15; Curle, -_A Roman Frontier-post_, pp. 29, 349. - -[328] xi. 6344 ‘P. Cornelio P. f. Sab(atina) Cicatriculae prim(o) -pil(o) bis, praefect(o) equit(um), praef(ecto) clas(sis), praef(ecto) -cohortium quattuor civium Romanor(um) in Hispania, trib(uno) mil(itum)’. - -[329] iii. 14147². - -[330] _W. D. Z._ xxi. 186, where this theory of the first-century -frontier system is further developed. - -[331] See Pelham, _op. cit._, p. 199. The forts on the North British -frontier range in area from 2½ to 5½ acres, the largest -(Amboglanna) being designed to hold a _cohors miliaria peditata_. The -German forts seem to have been on a rather larger scale, and ran up -to 15 acres, which is the area allowed at Aalen to an _ala miliaria_. -It is not meant, of course, that forts of this type did not exist in -the first century, but it was not until the reign of Hadrian that the -dispersion of the auxilia in separate units was adopted as a general -policy. - -[332] Cf. iii. 3385 ‘(Commodus) ripam omnem burgis a solo extructis -item praesidis per loca opportuna ad clandestinos latrunculorum -transitus oppositis munivit’. This is from the Danube frontier. - -[333] _Historia Augusta, Vita Hadriani_, 12 ‘In plurimis locis in -quibus barbari non fluminibus sed limitibus dividuntur, stipitibus -magnis in modum muralis saepis funditus iactis atque conexis barbaros -separavit’. - -[334] The best recent account of this frontier in English is Pelham’s -essay, ‘The Roman Frontier in Germany,’ in the work already cited. - -[335] Recent researches have, however, made it very doubtful whether a -turf wall ever preceded the stone wall along the whole line. - -[336] For this wall see the admirable account by Dr. George Macdonald, -_The Roman Wall in Scotland_, Glasgow, 1911. - -[337] The best description of the internal arrangements of a -mile-castle is given by Mr. F. G. Simpson, in the _Transactions of -the Cumberland and Westmoreland Archaeological Society_, vol. xi, New -Series. - -[338] The German Limes-Commission has not yet published its report on -these works and the course of the frontier line in general. On the -Walldürn-Welzheim section, which was built by Pius, the towers are at -intervals of from 250 to 400 metres. Pelham, _op. cit._, p. 204. - -[339] The view with which I find myself in most agreement is that of -Delbrück, _Geschichte der Kriegskunst_, ii. 155-60. - -[340] See Pelham, _op. cit._, p. 201 and appendix. - -[341] The torches which project from the upper stories of the -block-houses represented on the Trajan column have often been noted as -indicating some method of fire-signalling. - -[342] The palisade was not, of course, a board fence which could be -torn down in a few minutes. It was made of oak-trees split in halves -and bedded in a ditch four and a half feet deep. See Pelham, _op. -cit._, p. 200. Some idea of its appearance can be gathered from the -representation at the beginning of the reliefs on the Marcus column. - -[343] Oman, _Art of War in the Middle Ages_, p. 209. He quotes -Nicephorus Περὶ παραδρομῆς πολέμου. - -[344] The stone wall on the Raetian frontier is of very inferior -construction. - -[345] The garrisons were: at Netherby, the Cohors I Aelia Hispanorum -M. E., vii. 954, 963, 964, 965; at Bremenium, the Cohors I Fida -Vardullorum M. E. and exploratores, vii. 1030, 1043; at Habitancium, -the Cohors I Vangionum M. E., exploratores and Raeti Gaesati 1002, -1003. The latest inscription at Netherby dates from the reign of -Severus Alexander; at Bremenium, the most advanced of the Dere Street -forts, from the reign of Gordian III. - -[346] iii. 600. See Appendix. - -[347] Cf. _Historia Augusta, Vita Marci_, 12 ‘Dum Parthicum bellum -geritur, natum est Marcomannicum, quod diu eorum, qui aderant, arte -suspensum est’. - -[348] The only changes which we know of are that Legio V Macedonica -was transferred from Moesia Inferior to Dacia in the reign of Marcus -and that Legio III Augusta was sent by Gordian III as a punishment -from Africa to the Rhine, whence, however, it returned in 253. Cagnat, -_L’Armée romaine d’Afrique_, pp. 156-61. - -[349] The date of this section of the _Notitia_ is disputed, but it can -hardly be earlier than the end of the third century. The diplomata are -xxix (98), xxxii (103), xxxiv (105), xliii (124), lv (_ante_ 138), lvii -(146). - -[350] Cf. D. ii and iii. 3664, D. lviii and iii. 3331, and D. lx and -iii. 11333. These regiments may of course have been temporarily absent, -but the evidence is fairly continuous in each case. The Cohors V -Lucensium et Callaecorum, for example, appears on diplomata for 60, 84, -85, 133, 138/48, 148, 149 and 154. - -[351] _I. G. R. R._ i. 1348, ib. 1363, iii. 14147², D. xv, iii. 14147¹. -In the last, which dates from 39, the number of the cohort is not -given, and possibly another in the same series is meant. - -[352] For the date of the Egyptian section of the _Notitia_ see my -article, _The Garrison of Egypt_, in the account of the excavations at -Karanóg by the Eckley B. Cox Junior Expedition to Nubia published by -the University Museum, Philadelphia. - -[353] iii. 4379 (3 Ulpii, 2 Aelii), 4360 (Aelius), 4369, 4370 -(Aurelii), 11081. - -[354] iii. 1371, 1372, 1374, 1379; _A. E._ 1903. 66. - -[355] vii. 818 (Severus Antoninus), 819 (Gordian III), 820 (Postumus), -823 (Tetricus). Another inscription (808) dates from the reign of -Maximin. - -[356] Tac. _Ann._ iv. 47; id. _Hist._ ii. 22. - -[357] Cf. Dio’s remarks on the impression made by the provincial -legionaries in Rome in the reign of Septimius Severus, lxxiv. 2. The -following sketch applies only to the troops on the Western frontiers, -concerning whose life we have considerable evidence. The locally raised -troops in the East started as a rule at a higher level of culture, -but possibly a similar advance was made by Trajan’s regiments of -Paphlagonians, Galatians, and Arabians, although here Hellenization, -not Romanization, was of course the goal. - -[358] For the importance of Mithras in the army, cf. Cumont, _Les -Mystères de Mithra_. Toutain, _Les Cultes païens dans l’Empire romain_, -cc. ii and iv, gives a classified list of the inscriptions of Mithra -and Dolichenus. - -[359] H. Jacobi, _Führer durch das Römerkastell Saalburg_, 1908, gives -a summary of the latest results. - -[360] Excavations so far have been confined to the fort itself, in -which the buildings were in an exceedingly good state of preservation, -and the Mithraeum. - -[361] xiii. 7800 ‘Petronius Athenodorus prae(fectus) coh(ortis) I -Fl(aviae) horologium ab horis intermissum et vetustate colabsum suis -inpendis restituit’. The date is 218. - -[362] Herodian iii. 8, 5. - -[363] _Rheinisches Museum_, xlviii. 616 ff. - -[364] viii. 18067. - -[365] _A. E._ 1910. 75. - -[366] Cagnat, _L’Armée romaine d’Afrique_, pp. 380-3 and 505-7. - -[367] e.g. D. iii (64), a wife, son, and daughter; D. xcviii (105), a -wife, son, and two daughters; D. xxxvii (110), three sons. See above, -p. 32. - -[368] iii. 3271. The approximate date of the inscription is -sufficiently indicated by the names employed. - -[369] This very comprehensive dedication comes from the shrine of -Mandoulis, the source of many military inscriptions. - -[370] The possibility that cives had already been admitted into the -auxiliary regiments before this date has already been discussed. See -above, p. 33. - -[371] iii. 10316 and _A. E._ 1910. 144. - -[372] The campaigns between Severus and his rivals (193-7) -were fought out by vexillations; hence at the end of the war we find -all the regiments on both sides, so far as they can be traced, in their -old quarters. - -[373] _Historia Augusta, Vita Alex. Sev._ 58 ‘Sola, quae de -hostibus capta sunt, limitaneis ducibus et militibus donavit, ita ut -eorum essent, si heredes eorum militarent, nec umquam ad privatos -pertinerent, dicens attentius eos militaturos, si etiam sua rura -defenderent’. The theory of the self-sufficiency of each provincial -garrison could not be more clearly expressed. - - - - -SECTION IV - -ARMS AND ARMOUR - - -The chief sources of information are the sculptured reliefs on the -sepulchral monuments of the soldiers themselves and on the columns of -Trajan and Marcus. Excavations have also yielded specimens, very badly -damaged in most cases, of the weapons and armour in use at different -periods. The literary authorities contain little that is valuable, with -the exception of Arrian’s description of cavalry uniform and equipment -in his own day.[374] - -On sepulchral monuments of cavalry soldiers dating from the first -century[375] the deceased is usually represented on horseback in -the act of spearing a fallen enemy. It may be assumed, therefore, -that the armour and weapons represented are those actually used in -warfare, in other words that these men are in ‘service uniform’. -At this period the cavalry uniform consisted of a tunic, breeches -reaching a little below the knee, both probably of leather, and -the _caligae_ or military boots. Over the tunic was worn a leather -breastplate with extra shoulder-pieces to guard against a down cut. -Metal breastplates however, although rare, are not unknown. Scale -armour is worn by a trooper of the Ala Longiniana represented on an -early Rhenish relief,[376] and also appears on two African reliefs of -early date representing equites of the Cohors VI Dalmatarum.[377] The -shield is usually an oblong with the longer sides slightly curved, -but occasionally an angle in these longer sides transforms it into an -elongated hexagon. This shield was borrowed from the Celtic or Teutonic -tribes, as is shown by its frequent appearance on the reliefs in the -hands of the fallen barbarian. To judge from these reliefs it measured -about one foot by three, and was probably of wood covered with leather. - -The helmet, which was of metal, had a projection behind to cover the -neck in the manner of the English cavalry helmet of the seventeenth -century. It was also furnished with an extra band of metal or a peak in -front to protect the forehead and large cheek-pieces which clasped over -the chin. On the monument of a trooper of the Ala Noricorum,[378] a -very good example of this class, the cheek-pieces are highly ornamented -and the top of the helmet is ridged to represent hair. The crest does -not appear, probably because it was not worn on active service.[379] -It is equally absent from the battle-scenes of the Trajan column, -although the ring to which it was fastened is shown. Some fine plumes -are, however, represented on the helmet of a standard-bearer of the Ala -Petriana on a British relief, which probably dates from the end of the -first century.[380] - -The long broadsword or _spatha_, the characteristic weapon of the -auxiliaries,[381] which was probably, like the shield, of Celtic -origin,[382] was worn on the right side suspended from the left -shoulder by a sword belt (_balteus_). The hilt ended in a large -knob-shaped pommel, and the sheath was often highly ornamented. - -The lance with which the soldier strikes his prostrate adversary -appears to have had a shaft about six feet long and a broad head. Two -more spears often appear on these sepulchral reliefs in the hands of -an attendant in the background. These are probably the throwing spears -which were carried, according to Josephus,[383] in a quiver on the -back, and could not therefore, owing to the position of the rider, -be represented in their proper place. Concerning the horses one can -say little except that they can hardly have been so small as they are -represented. The saddle has a high pommel and cantle and is sometimes -covered with a fringed cloth, and the junctures of the harness are -ornamented with metal plates (_phalerae_). Like all ancient cavalry the -auxiliaries rode without stirrups. - -From these reliefs, therefore, we can construct a fairly complete -picture of the auxiliary cavalryman of the pre-Flavian period. His -equipment as he appears on the column of Trajan is essentially the -same, except that he now wears a shirt of chain-mail over his tunic -instead of the leather breastplate, and that his shield has changed -from an oblong to a narrow oval.[384] It is hardly necessary now -to defend the accuracy of the column in matters of detail, but it -may be mentioned that there is further testimony for each of these -changes.[385] - -Chain-mail appears on the Adam Klissi reliefs and is mentioned by -Arrian,[386] and the oval shield is shown on a Rhenish relief dating -from the end of the first century.[387] The varied scenes represented -on the column enable one also to notice further points, such as the -manner in which the shield is slung at the side of the saddle when -troops are on the march,[388] and the use of the military cloak -(_sagum_) which hung down the back and could not therefore appear on -the sepulchral reliefs.[389] - -In addition to this service uniform there was, as Arrian’s description -shows, a sort of parade uniform in which the mail shirts were replaced -by brightly coloured tunics, and lighter shields and spears were -carried than those used in war.[390] It was with this uniform and on -ceremonial occasions that some of the soldiers wore those curious -helmets with a mask decorating the face of which several specimens have -been found.[391] The fine scale armour which has been found at Newstead -and elsewhere probably also formed part of this parade uniform. It is, -indeed, always worn by the Praetorians on the Marcus column, but the -auxilia still appear in chain-mail as on the column of Trajan.[392] -Specially elaborate suits of this armour were, however, worn by the -regiments of catafractarii who appear in the army list in the second -century.[393] The last change which we can trace was the alteration of -the shape of the shield from oval to round, which probably took place -in the third century. An _eques_ of the Cohors I Thracum is represented -on a Danubian sepulchral monument with a shield of this form,[394] and -the contemporary reliefs on the arch of Constantine show that it was -practically universal a century later. - -The equipment described above was worn by the majority of the auxiliary -cavalry, but it was by no means universal. The horse archers, if one -may judge by a soldier of the Ala I Augusta Ituraeorum represented on -a Danubian relief, carried no shield, and possibly no body armour, and -wore a leather cap in place of a helmet.[395] Arrian also mentions that -some regiments carried a specially heavy spear (κοντός), and devoted -themselves to shock tactics.[396] The _numeri_, too, did not adopt -the Roman uniform, but kept to their own dress and weapons. The Moors -of Lusius Quietus are represented on the column wearing nothing but -a short tunic; their weapons consist of a spear and a small round -buckler (_cetra_), and they ride their horses without saddle or bridle, -guiding them simply by a halter round the neck.[397] The regiments -of Sarmatae enrolled by Marcus also presumably wore their national -costume, which is perhaps represented in a fragmentary relief in the -Chester Museum.[398] - -The equipment of the auxiliary infantry in the first century is more -difficult to determine. Not only did the soldiers of the cohorts erect -fewer sculptured monuments than the cavalry troopers, but on these -reliefs the deceased is not represented in the act of fighting, so -that we cannot be certain that he appears in full service uniform. One -of the best of the early monuments is the tombstone of a soldier of -Cohors IV Dalmatarum from the Rhine.[399] The deceased is dressed in -a short tunic, which is looped up at the sides so as to hang down in -front in a series of folds. The _sagum_ covers his shoulders and hangs -down his back. A long _spatha_ and a short dagger are suspended from -two waist-belts (_cingula_) at his right and left side respectively. -He has no body armour except a kind of sporran composed of strips of -metal which extends from the middle of his belt to the bottom of his -tunic. His legs are bare, and he wears no helmet. In his right hand he -holds two long spears and in his left an oblong rectangular shield, -which is not curved like the legionary _scutum_ but flat as a board. -On two other reliefs a soldier of the Cohors I Pannoniorum[400] and an -archer of the Cohors I Sagittariorum[401] are represented in a similar -costume, except that the Pannonian wears the _paenula_ instead of the -_sagum_, and that the archer carries a bow and arrows in place of the -shield and spears. - -If these soldiers are fully equipped they have surprisingly little -defensive armour, but on other monuments, notably those of a private -of the Cohors II Raetorum,[402] and a standard-bearer of the Cohors V -Asturum,[403] a leather breastplate appears similar to that worn by -the cavalry at this period. On the Trajan column too, the auxiliary -infantry are furnished like the cavalry with metal helmet and -chain-mail shirt and wear the short tunic and _bracae_.[404] Professor -von Domaszewski would like to see in all this a development of the -auxiliaries from light into heavy infantry,[405] and it is true that in -his account of the German campaigns in the reign of Tiberius, Tacitus -emphasizes their character as light-armed troops.[406] But even on the -Trajan column they are still lighter armed than the legionaries, and -the evidence of the monuments is far from decisive. The tombstones -of legionaries of the same period represent them wearing a leather -breastplate, although there is no reason to suppose that the so-called -_lorica segmentata_ was not yet in use. On the whole it seems safer -to fall back on the hypothesis that on some of these monuments the -deceased is represented in a parade uniform with which, as in the case -of that described by Arrian, the breastplate was not worn. The tunic -with its elaborate folds may also form part of this costume, since -we know from the cavalry reliefs that the short leather tunics and -_bracae_ were already in use. - -The Trajanic reliefs show several varieties of uniforms in addition to -the ordinary type described above. The flying column which the emperor -leads down the Danube includes men who wear, instead of the ordinary -helmet, an animal’s skin arranged over the head and shoulders in the -manner usually confined to standard-bearers, and others whose helmets -are of a curious Teutonic pattern.[407] These may belong to regular -cohorts which had been allowed to retain something of their national -costume, but a barbarian who appears in this scene and elsewhere clad -only in long loose breeches and a _sagum_, and whose chief weapon is -a knotted club, must represent a _numerus_. Others of these irregular -regiments are probably represented by the archers clad in long tunics -and pointed caps or wearing helmet and shirt of scale armour who appear -in one or two scenes.[408] They are certainly to be distinguished from -the archers of the _cohortes sagittariorum_, who appear in a uniform -which only differs from that of the ordinary auxiliary infantry in -the absence of the shield.[409] The most exceptional uniform is that -of the slingers, who are dressed simply in tunics with no armour -but a shield.[410] Cichorius[411] wishes to recognize in them men -from the Balearic Islands, but although the Baleares were employed -by the Republic we have no inscriptions of a Cohors Balearum under -the Empire. Moreover, if there existed cohorts of slingers with this -distinctive uniform we should expect to find _cohortes funditorum_ -or _libritorum_ on the analogy of the _cohortes sagittariorum_. It -appears, on the contrary, from a passage in Hadrian’s speech to the -African army that slinging formed part of the general training of -all the auxilia.[412] Like the cavalry, the auxiliary infantry are -represented on the Marcus column in a uniform essentially the same as -that worn eighty years previously, and no further developments can be -traced. The most striking fact which emerges from this inquiry is the -general uniformity of the equipment of nine-tenths of the auxiliary -regiments in the second century. We learn from casual references in -Tacitus that this uniformity had always been the ideal of the Roman War -Office,[413] and from the military point of view there was doubtless -much to recommend it. - -It has, however, more significance if we regard it as one phase in that -extension of a uniform material culture through at any rate the western -half of the Empire which marks the first and second centuries. - - -Footnotes: - -[374] Arrian, _Tactica_, 4 and 34-41. - -[375] The chronology of the Rhenish reliefs has been worked out by -Weynand (_B. J. B._ 108/9), and the Danubian monuments have been -similarly treated by Hofman (_Sonderschrift des Oesterreichischen -Archäologischen Institutes in Wien_, Band v, 1905). - -[376] Figured by Lehner in the first part of his illustrated catalogue -of the Bonn Museum, Plate vii, no. 3. - -[377] Figured by Cagnat, _L’Armée romaine d’Afrique_, p. 238. - -[378] Frontispiece. - -[379] It may also be omitted on the reliefs from considerations of -space, which are also probably the cause of the frequent omission of -the helmet. - -[380] _J. R. S._ ii. (1912) Fig. 8. As it was found at Hexham, and -probably comes from Corbridge, it cannot well have been erected before -about 85. - -[381] See Tac. _Ann._ xii. 35 (describing an engagement with Caratacus) -‘et si auxiliaribus resisterent, gladiis ac pilis legionariorum, si huc -verterent, spathis et hastis auxiliarium sternebantur’. - -[382] Professor Baldwin Brown considers it to be a development of the -iron broadsword of the La Tène period (_Arts and Crafts of our Teutonic -Forefathers_, p. 118). - -[383] Josephus, _Bell. Iud._ iii. 5, 6. - -[384] The best representation of cavalry is Cichorius, Pl. 28. - -[385] I do not mean to imply that the details are correctly represented -in every case. The swords, for instance, are often omitted, -particularly in the earlier scenes. Doubtless several artists were -employed, and all were not equally conscientious. - -[386] Arrian, _Tactica_, 4 θώρακα πεπλεγμένον, 41 θώραξι σιδηροῖς. - -[387] _B. J. B._ lxxxi. 104. The soldier’s name, T. Flavius Bassus, -gives a _terminus post quem_ for the dating of the relief. - -[388] Cichorius, Pl. 65 (_equites singulares_). - -[389] It is sometimes replaced by the scarf (_focale_). - -[390] Arrian, _op. cit._ 34. - -[391] I agree with Mr. Curle that the passage in Arrian (ἴσα πάντη τοῖς -προσώποις πεποίηται τῶν ἱππέων) refers to helmets of this kind. See his -discussion of the Newstead example, _A Roman Frontier-post_, Pl. 24, -27, 29, 30. - -[392] Von Domaszewski and Petersen, _Die Marcussäule_, Pl. 27, 52. - -[393] An Ala Gallorum et Pannoniorum catafractata existed in the reign -of Hadrian, xi. 5632. - -[394] Hofman, Fig. 46. (Cf. iii. 4316.) He assigns it to the third -century. - -[395] Hofman, Fig. 23. The deceased is represented shooting very -dexterously at a target. - -[396] Arrian, _Tactica_, 4. It appears from this passage that in the -reign of Hadrian the cavalry did not carry spears of two sizes for -thrusting and throwing in the time of Josephus (see above), but one -or more of medium length suitable for both purposes. The _contarii_ -were a special class of regiments; the best known of which was the Ala -contariorum miliaria stationed in Pannonia (see Appendix). - -[397] Cichorius, Pl. 44, 45. - -[398] Haverfield, _Catalogue of Inscribed Stones in Grosvenor Museum_, -no. 137. - -[399] Lehner, Pl. v, no. 3. - -[400] Lindenschmidt, _Tracht und Bewaffnung des römischen Heeres_, Pl. -vi, no. 2. - -[401] Lehner, Pl. no. 2. - -[402] Lehner, Pl. vi, no. 3. This monument may be slightly later in -date than the others, since the soldier carries an oval shield. - -[403] Lehner, Pl. vi, no. 4. - -[404] The details are brought out most clearly on Cichorius, Pl. 52. - -[405] _Rangordnung_, p. 59: ‘Sie (the numeri) dienen zur Ergänzung der -zur schweren Infanterie umgeschaffenen Auxiliarcohorten.’ - -[406] Tac. _Ann._ i. 51 ‘leves cohortes’, ii. 52 ‘legio medio leves -cohortes duaeque alae in cornibus locantur’. Similarly iii. 39, iv. 73. - -[407] Cichorius, Pl. 27. For the helmet with metal ribs see Baldwin -Brown, _Arts and Crafts_, Pl. xxx, Fig. 118. For the skins of animals -worn by German auxiliaries see Tac. _Hist._ ii. 88. - -[408] Cichorius, Pl. 47, 50 and 80. They carry the Asiatic παλίντονα -τόξα and may well be Palmyreni. Cichorius decides that those who wear -scale armour are probably Iazyges, but his reasons seem insufficient. - -[409] Cichorius, Pl. 19. - -[410] Cichorius, Pl. 47, 50. - -[411] Cichorius, ii. 311. - -[412] viii. 18042 ‘Addidistis ut et lapides fundis mitteretis et -missilibus confligeretis’. This is addressed to the ‘equites cohortis -VI Commagenorum’. - -[413] Cf. Tac. _Ann._ xii. 16 ‘Bosporani … nostris in armis’, with -_Hist._ iii. 47. - - - - -CONCLUSION - -THE BREAK-UP OF THE AUGUSTAN SYSTEM - - -In the preceding pages we have traced the history of the auxilia -through the two centuries which followed the death of Augustus. At -the end of this period, as at the beginning, the distinction between -legions and auxilia still appears as one of the fundamental principles -of the military system of the Empire. But during it the growth of -certain tendencies, operative not only in the army but through the -Empire as a whole, had profoundly altered the original scheme by which -levies of uncivilized provincials, drawn from every province, were -to support the contingents of the ruling race. Before a century had -elapsed the legionaries were no longer Italians nor the auxiliaries -barbarians. As a result, among other things, of the steady extension -of civic rights, the legionaries were drawn from the provinces, and -as a peaceful civilization developed, the recruiting-area for legions -and auxilia alike gradually contracted to the frontier districts. -Finally, at the close of the period, the distinction between _civis_ -and _peregrinus_ was swept away by the legislation of 212. - -From the military point of view also the character of the army had -undergone a no less fundamental change. The concentrated striking -force of the days of Augustus, which was ready to plunge year after -year into the heart of Germany, had been transformed into a frontier -guard, scattered over a wide front and accustomed to act permanently -on the defensive, every unit of which was fixed immovably, generation -after generation, in the same position. This system, exposed, it is -only fair to say, to a strain far more severe than its designers had -ever contemplated, broke down completely during the course of the -third century, and although, after fifty years of anarchy, the Empire -rid itself temporarily of internal and external enemies, the military -organization was never restored on the old lines. It is our business in -this concluding section to trace the stages in this collapse, and to -suggest reasons for the change in military policy traceable in the work -of Diocletian and his successors. - -It has already been noted that the frontier system adopted in the -second century had obvious defects. - -It can easily be seen that if the strongly guarded frontier line were -broken through at any point the internal provinces were exposed to the -greatest danger. In themselves they possessed no means of making a -stand against an invader. Their garrisons were small, cut down in fact -to the minimum quantity required for police duty, and the provincial -militia, which we hear of during the first century, seems no longer -to have existed except in Mauretania. In fact, now that the army was -recruited almost entirely in the frontier provinces, the profession -of arms must have been more unfamiliar to the inhabitants of Western -Europe and Asia Minor than it has ever been since, and many a citizen -of the prosperous little towns of Gaul, Africa, or the Hellenized -districts of the East can never have set eyes on the imperial uniform. -The situation was clearly a dangerous one, and the lesson of the -Marcomannian War must have made it clear that this system could only -continue if the frontier troops were supported by a strong and mobile -striking force, ready to move at a moment’s notice to any threatened -point. - -In the second century the only available regiments not occupied in -frontier defence or police duty consisted of the Household Troops at -Rome, i.e. the ten Praetorian cohorts and the Equites Singulares. -The Guards were in fact employed by Domitian, Trajan, and Marcus on -the Danube frontier, but their numbers were small, their duties were -not calculated to increase their military efficiency, and they were -rightly looked down upon by the trained veterans of the frontiers.[414] -The gravity of the situation was grasped by Septimius Severus, who -took advantage of the discredit in which the Praetorians were involved -by their support of Didius Julianus to disband the old cohorts, which -had been recruited in Italy and the ‘civilized’ provinces of Noricum, -Macedonia, and Spain, and replace them by a _corps d’élite_ selected -from the legions.[415] - -This force, still too small to be effective, was further strengthened -by an increase in the number of the Equites Singulares,[416] and -the addition of one of Severus’s new legions, the Secunda Parthica, -which was henceforth stationed at Alba.[417] His successors continued -the same policy: under Severus Alexander we find an officer of the -Household Troops bearing the title _praepositus equitum itemque peditum -iuniorum Maurorum_,[418] a title which implies the existence of at -least two regiments of this character, and the _Osroeni sagittarii_, -who were among this emperor’s following at the time of his murder, were -so numerous that they attempted to set up a rival to Maximin and were -temporarily disbanded.[419] - -Had the construction of a field army on these lines proceeded in -time of peace, it would necessarily have involved a reorganization of -the whole system to meet the increase in expenditure. As it was, the -fifty years of civil war and barbarian invasion which followed the -accession of Maximin saw the old order irreparably ruined. The great -Illyrian emperors who saved civilization for another century, and -spent themselves in marching ceaselessly from province to province, -cutting down the hydra heads of revolt and striving to repel the -recurring assaults of Goth or Persian, could neither hope to maintain -the old frontier lines nor spare time to collect vexillations after -the second-century manner when each new danger threatened. Sweeping -together Household Troops and fragments of the broken frontier armies -and enlisting thousands of barbarian mercenaries, they strove to keep -a concentrated force at their disposal which they moved constantly -backwards and forwards across the Empire as each internal or external -crisis demanded. It was this field army which shared in the imperial -triumphs and received such rewards as the exhausted finances could -bestow. In comparison with it such units of the old frontier troops, -legions and auxilia alike, as maintained their old positions (and we -shall see that many did so) sank steadily in prestige and importance. -When finally the barbarian fury had temporarily spent its force, and -a cessation of internal warfare granted Diocletian and Constantine -breathing space in which to reorganize the civil and military -administration of the Empire, the provisional reconstruction brought -into being by these fifty years of stress and disaster was formally -recognized and incorporated in the new order. The distinction between -first and second class troops is no longer between legions and auxilia -as in the days of Augustus, but between the Palatini and Comitatenses -on the one hand, who followed in war the emperor himself and the new -heads of the military hierarchy, the _magistri peditum_ and _equitum_, -and were kept concentrated at strategic points within the Empire in -time of peace, and on the other the Limitanei or Ripenses, who formed, -under the _duces limitum_, a territorial frontier guard, membership in -which was now hereditary in law as well as practice.[420] - -At this point we might legitimately take leave of our subject, for -although the names of many of the old auxiliary regiments still appear -in the fourth and fifth centuries among the Limitanei, there is nothing -in either character or status to distinguish them from such of the old -legions as had survived in a similar capacity. The title ‘auxilia’, on -the other hand, is now applied to corps of new creation and barbarian -origin which figure on the roll of the field army. - -But the very fact that so many of the old corps still figure on the -army list tempts us to consider the circumstances under which they -survived and to take a brief survey of the changed conditions under -which they continued their existence. It is fortunate that for the -history of the Roman army during the fourth century we possess two -authorities of considerable merit, the historian Ammianus Marcellinus -and the _Notitia Dignitatum_. Ammianus, himself a soldier, is -practically the first historian of the Empire since Josephus to give -us a first-hand account of military operations.[421] The _Notitia -Dignitatum_ purports to give us, what we do not possess for any earlier -period, a complete list of the regiments composing the imperial army. -It is true that this list appears to be a compilation drawing from -evidence of very different dates, but there can be no doubt that it -represents for most provinces the general state of things prevailing in -the fourth century. - -The most significant fact which strikes us in these authorities is the -barbaric character of both troops and officers. The majority of the -officers mentioned by Ammianus, even those of highest rank, are of -Teutonic origin, many being drawn even from the Franks, who are usually -reckoned among the more uncivilized of the Empire’s assailants. The -same picture is presented by the _Notitia_. Corps which must at any -rate have been originally raised from barbarian tribes, who normally -dwelt beyond the frontier, abound among the Palatini and Comitatenses, -and are to be found in smaller number among the Limitanei. Thus -barbarian Atecotti from Caledonia figure as _auxilia palatina_ in -the field armies of Illyricum, Italy, and Gaul;[422] cavalry drawn -from the Alani appear as a _vexillatio palatina_ in Italy,[423] and -Marcomanni as a _vexillatio comitatensis_ among the troops assigned -to the _comes Africae_.[424] Among the troops of the second class we -find in the garrison of Egypt Vandals, Iuthungi, and Quadi from the -Danube, Franks and Chamavi from the Lower Rhine, Tzanni and Abasgi from -the Caucasus,[425] and much the same elements appear in the garrison -of Phoenicia.[426] In regard to these troops it may be urged that, -since they are organized in cohorts and alae after the old model, they -seem to have been incorporated at latest towards the end of the third -century, and that such corps, since they can hardly have obtained fresh -drafts from their original recruiting-grounds, may have undergone the -same transformation as the regiments of Spaniards and Gauls which were -sent to Egypt and Syria in the first century. In the case in question -this argument may possibly hold good,[427] but in other parts of the -Empire it was no longer necessary to send recruiting agents beyond -the borders to find barbarian troops. In recording the presence of a -_praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium_ in almost every considerable town in -North Italy,[428] and of similar officers commanding German _laeti_ -in all the provinces of Gaul, the _Notitia_[429] is but confirming -the abundant evidence of other authorities as to the settlement of -barbarians within the Empire during the third and fourth centuries.[430] - -This wholesale use of barbarians was largely due to the hasty -constructive measures which the stress of the third-century invasions -demanded. The normal recruiting-grounds of the army were the first to -be desolated, and after a costly campaign it was easier to fill the -depleted ranks by enlisting barbarian prisoners than to raise and train -levies from the unwarlike provinces of the interior. In the same way it -seemed statesmanlike to settle other prisoners on the deserted fields, -who, secure themselves in their tenure, might aid in repelling their -successors. Thus the number of barbarian contingents was constantly -increasing, and behind the banners of Aurelian or Probus the Teutonic -war-band marched side by side with regiments which could claim a -record extending back to the reign of Augustus. The only considerable -levies made within the Empire after 250 were carried out in the -Illyrian provinces of which most of the emperors were natives, and are -represented by the fifty or sixty regiments of Dalmatian cavalry which -appear in the _Notitia_ stationed in almost every province.[431] - -But side by side with the new creations, such as the Felices Honoriani -and the Comites Taifali, the names of many of the old corps still -figure on the fourth-century army list. The legions had naturally come -off best; the most determined barbarian raid seldom took a legionary -fortress, and if it did, a detachment serving with the field army would -probably survive to keep the name of the corps in existence. It is -not surprising, therefore, to find that of the thirty legions which -existed before the reign of Severus, twenty-seven still appear in the -_Notitia_.[432] From the way in which they are mentioned, however, -we can gather many evidences of the storm through which the army had -passed. Many detachments, severed from the main body on some special -service, were never able to regain it, and are found where the fortunes -of war had stranded them. Thus Legio VII Gemina not only appears in -its proper place, divided between the field army and the territorial -forces of Spain, but is also mentioned as a _Legio Comitatensis_ in -the field army of the East, and a _Legio Pseudo-comitatensis_ in -Gaul.[433] The old Dacian legion, XIII Gemina, is represented by -several detachments guarding that part of the Danube which was allotted -to the new province of Dacia Ripensis, but appears also in Egypt.[434] -Legio II Italica, which had guarded Noricum since the days of Marcus, -is included also as a _Legio Comitatensis_ in the field army of -Africa.[435] - -The auxiliary regiments naturally did not fare so well. The small -detachments drafted off for service in the field army probably -soon lost their identity, and the _castella_, which contained the -regimental head-quarters, must have often been taken and destroyed. -Still, as the appendix shows, over fifty regiments survived long -enough to be included in the _Notitia_. Naturally the chances of -surviving had varied on different frontiers. The section of the -_Notitia_ which deals with the northern frontier of Britain contains -so many names of pre-Diocletianic regiments that it has sometimes -been thought to represent the earliest stratum in the whole work. -There seems, however, no reason to doubt that the original garrison, -although in attenuated numbers, succeeded in maintaining itself -until well into the fourth century. We know from archaeological -evidence that even the mile-castles were not abandoned until the -reign of Constantine.[436] An almost equally large proportion of -old regiments is present in the garrison of Cappadocia, which had -been spared the full force of the Persian attack.[437] In Egypt, too, -most of the old regiments still survive, although they are largely -outnumbered by recent formations.[438] The garrison of this important -corn-producing province, more essential than ever since the foundation -of Constantinople, had evidently been increased to guard against -renewed attacks from the Blemmyes on the Upper Nile, who had raided it -successfully in the third century. The Rhine frontier, on the other -hand, seems to have been swept of its old garrison from end to end. Two -of its legions have disappeared, and the other two, which are included -in the field army, probably only survive thanks to their names being -preserved by detachments which were absent when the fortresses were -stormed.[439] It is not until we reach Raetia and the protection of the -Upper Danube that any of the old auxiliary regiments appear. On the -Middle and Lower Danube, however, the scene of repeated invasions and -civil wars during the third century, few of the old troops survived. -The struggle was probably a long one: we know from epigraphical -evidence that several forts were still holding out towards the end -of the century, and excavation may show that many barbarian raids -retired without doing any serious damage. But the attack was constantly -renewed, and it is not surprising to find that three new cavalry -formations have replaced the Cohors Hemesenorum at Intercisa,[440] -and that detachments of Equites Dalmatae are now responsible for -practically the whole stretch of frontier between Belgrade and -Buda-Pesth.[441] Only the Cohors I Thracum C. R. and the Cohors III -Alpinorum, the latter of the old Dalmatian army, remain to remind us -of the corps which defended this frontier in the second century.[442] -On the Lower Danube, where the Goths had crossed in force, and in the -oriental provinces which had felt the heavy hand of Persian invader and -Palmyrene usurper, we are only greeted by similar survivals.[443] The -section dealing with Cyrenaica is lost, so that we know as little of -its garrison now as in the previous period. In Africa the frontier had -been reorganized in a number of small districts, each under an officer -styled _praepositus limitis_, and although we have a list of these -districts, we are not told by what troops they were guarded.[444] Only -for Tingitana are we given a slightly fuller schedule in which a few -old names appear.[445] - -The isolation of these remnants of the old imperial army among the -flood of Teutonic and other barbarian immigrants shows that the new -régime inaugurated by Diocletian was foredoomed to failure. The Empire -had trusted to a professional army recruited from a comparatively small -section of its inhabitants, and when this army succumbed to the strain -of civil war and foreign invasion, and the old recruiting-grounds were -wasted, few of the provinces of the interior, which for nearly two -centuries had practically ceased to furnish soldiers, held any reserve -of military material. By admitting this and calling upon the barbarian -to occupy and defend the wasted frontier lands, the civilization of -the ancient world showed that it had lost the vitality which might -have assimilated these new elements as Gaul, Spaniard, and African -had been assimilated in the past. A succession of able rulers and the -overpowering prestige of the past kept the framework intact for a -century after Diocletian’s death. Then when the final catastrophe came, -and the Western provinces sank into the Dark Ages, a national revival -headed by the still virile races of Asia Minor saved the once despised -provinces of the East from being involved in a common ruin. It is with -Zeno the Isaurian, not with Diocletian, that the true renascence of the -Empire begins. - -But the auxiliary regiments which survived into the fourth century -need not only suggest to us, by the smallness of their numbers and -their isolation among their barbarian comrades, the nearness of the -end. The reflection that many of these regiments had held the position -assigned to them and preserved a continuous military record for over -three hundred years may serve also to remind us of the greatness -of the services rendered by the army of the Empire to the cause of -civilization. - - -Footnotes: - -[414] For the feelings of legionaries and Praetorians towards one -another cf. Tac. _Hist._ ii. 21 ‘illi ut segnem et desidem et circo ac -theatris corruptum militem, hi peregrinum et externum increpabant’. - -[415] Dio, lxxiv. 2. - -[416] See Liebenam, s.v. _Equites Singulares_, in Pauly-Wissowa. Cf. -Herodian iii. 13, 4. - -[417] Herodian viii. 5, 8; _Hist. Aug. Vit. Caracalli_, 2; Dio, lv. 24. - -[418] viii. 20996. He held this post between the command of an Urban -and that of a Praetorian Cohort. - -[419] Herodian, vii. 1, 9. - -[420] Codex Theodosianus vii. 22, Esp. 22. 9, issued in 380: ‘Sciantque -veterani liberos suos quos militaribus aptos muneribus insitum robur -ostendat, aut offerendos esse militiae aut obnoxios nostrae legis -laqueis iam futuros.’ - -[421] Ammianus served in his youth in the Protectores Domestici, was on -the staff of Ursicinus in the Persian War of Constantius, and survived, -and has given us a brilliant description of, the siege of Amida in 359. - -[422] _Not. Dign. Or._ ix. 29. _Not. Dign. Occ._ vii. 24, 74, 78. - -[423] _Not. Dign. Occ._ vii. 163. - -[424] _Not. Dign. Occ._ vii. 183. - -[425] _Not. Dign. Or._ xxviii and xxxi. - -[426] _Not. Dign. Or._ xxxii. - -[427] For traces of a ‘nationalist’ feeling in the Egyptian army at the -end of the fourth century see my remarks in Karanóg. (See above, p. -115.) - -[428] _Not. Dign. Occ._ xiii. 46-63. There are also a few Sarmatae in -Gaul. - -[429] _Not. Dign. Occ._ xiii. 33-42. - -[430] The practice was started by Marcus, who sent 8,000 Iazyges -to different parts of the Empire (5,500 to Britain) during the -Marcomannian War. Dio, lxxi. 16. - -[431] For the organization of these Dalmatian cavalry in the third -century and their subsequent importance see Ritterling in the -_Festschrift_ for O. Hirschfeld. - -[432] Those missing are the British Legio XX Valeria Victrix, and I -Minervia and XXII Primigenia from the Rhine. It is possible, however, -that the ‘Primani’ who form part of the British field army (_Not. Dign. -Occ._ vii. 155) represent Legio I Minervia. A ‘primanorum legio’ also -appears at the battle of Argentorate. Ammianus, xvi. 12, 49. - -[433] Cf. _Not. Dign. Occ._ vii. 132 and xlii. 26 with _Not. Dign. Or._ -vii. 41 and _Not. Dign. Occ._ vii. 103. - -[434] _Not. Dign. Or._ xlii. 34-8, xxviii. 15. - -[435] _Not. Dign. Occ._ vii. 144, xxxiv. 37-9. - -[436] For Britain see _Not. Dign. Occ._ xxviii and xl. The occupation -of the mile-castles seems to have been interrupted at the end of the -third century, probably at the time of the usurpation of Carausius, but -further excavation will be necessary to determine the exact bearing of -this evidence. - -[437] For Cappadocia see _Not. Dign. Or._ xxxviii and Appendix. - -[438] For Egypt see _Not. Dign. Or._ xxviii and xxxi and my discussion -of these sections in Karanóg. (See above, p. 115.) - -[439] For Legg. VIII Augusta and XXX Ulpia Victrix see _Not. Dign. -Occ._ v. 153, vii. 28 and 108. It must be remembered, however, that -possibly Legio I Minervia was still in existence (see above, p. 140) -and that we have not in the _Notitia_ a complete list of the Rhine -garrison. - -[440] The garrison consists of a _cuneus equitum Dalmatarum_, a _cuneus -equitum Constantianorum_, and some _equites sagittarii_. _Not. Dign. -Occ._ xxxiii. 25, 26, and 38. - -[441] Twelve of these regiments appear in _Not. Dign. Occ._ xxxiii -(Valeria) and eight in xxxii (Pannonia Secunda). - -[442] _Not. Dign. Occ._ xxxii. 57 and 59. Probably, however, in xxxiii -the names of regiments have been omitted after the title _tribunus -cohortis_, which occurs six times at the end of the list, and some of -these might have been old formations. - -[443] e.g. the Cohors II Galatarum in Palestine and the Cohors I Ulpia -Dacorum in Syria. _Not. Dign. Or._ xxxiv. 44 and xxxiii. 33. - -[444] _Not. Dign. Occ._ xxv (Africa), xxx (Mauretania), and xxxi -(Tripolitana). - -[445] _Not. Dign. Occ._ xxvi. - - - - -APPENDIX I - - -During the course of this essay an attempt was made to estimate -roughly the total number of auxiliary troops in existence during -the first century, but the evidence for this period was too scanty -to permit of discussing further the size and composition of the -various provincial garrisons.[446] In the second century, however, -the evidence of ‘diplomata’ and dated inscriptions becomes relatively -copious, and it has seemed possible to draw up something like an ‘army -list’, giving the names of the regiments stationed in every province -during this period so far as they are known. Such a list cannot, of -course, make any pretensions to completeness, but it is hoped that -the main conclusions which it suggests will not be found incorrect, -and that it may be of service to future workers in the same field. -The period to which the list is intended to apply extends from the -death of Trajan, in 117, to the accession of Marcus, in 161, during -which no hostilities on a large scale took place, so that in view of -the general character of the military system we may safely assume -that few regiments were transferred from one province to another. In -drawing up the list the following principles have been observed. In -the first place, all regiments have been included which are assigned -to a particular province by a ‘diploma’ or inscription dated within -the limits of the period. Secondly, those regiments are included which -can be shown to have existed before and after the period, since they -must obviously also have been in existence during it, although their -allocation to a particular province is of course not so certain. To -this category belong those regiments which, while only mentioned in -later inscriptions or the _Notitia Dignitatum_, bear evidence in the -titles ‘Claudia’, ‘Flavia’, ‘Ulpia’, or ‘Aelia’ that they were created -at an earlier date. - -These canons have not, however, been rigidly adhered to in every case. -In estimating the garrison of Mauretania Caesariensis; for example, -where evidence is particularly scanty, it seemed foolish to exclude -that afforded by the diploma of 107, the only one yet found in the -province. In this and other doubtful cases a summary of the evidence -used is appended to the name of the regiment, so that the reader -may judge of its value for himself. When the facts seem certain the -epigraphical evidence is not cited in full, although to illustrate -certain arguments used in the text a reference is given to every -‘diploma’ in which each regiment is mentioned and also to the _Notitia -Dignitatum_.[447] In calculating the strength of the various provincial -garrisons the cohorts and alae are reckoned at 500 or 1,000 men each, -the mounted infantry of a _cohors equitata_ being estimated at 25 per -cent. of the total establishment. For the _numeri_, which probably -varied in size, an average strength of 200 men has been taken. - - -I. BRITAIN.[448] - -Diplomata xxix (98), xxxii (103), xxxiv (105), xliii (124), lv (_ante_ -138), lvii (146). - -_Alae._ - - I Asturum 98 (?), 124, 146. _Not. - Dign. Occ._ xl. 35. - II Asturum Several inscriptions. _Eph. Ep._ - ix. 1171 dates from _c._ 180. - (Cf. Dio, lxxii. 8). _Not. Dign. - Occ._ xl. 38. - Augusta Gallorum 98 (?), 124. Not. Dign. - Petriana M. C. R. Occ. xl. 45. - Augusta Gallorum 98 (?), _ante_ 138, 146. - Proculeiana - II Gallorum Sebosiana 103, inscription of the third - century (vii. 287). - Picentiana 124. - I Qu//ru (? Cugernorum) 124. - Sabiniana vii. 571. _Not. Dign. Occ._ - xl. 37.[449] - Tungrorum 98, 105, 145-80 (vii. 1090).[450] - Hispanorum Vettonum C. R. 103, 197 (vii. 273). - Augusta Vocontiorum 145-80 (vii. 1080).[451] - -_Cohorts._ - - I Aquitanorum 124, 158 (_Eph. Ep._ ix. 1108). - I Asturum 260 (viii. 9047).[452] - II Asturum 105 (?), 124. _Not. Dign. Occ._ - xl. 42.[453] - I Baetasiorum C. R. 103, 124. _Not. Dign. Occ._ - xxviii. 18. - I Batavorum 124. _Not. Dign. Occ._ xl. 39. - III Bracaraugustanorum 103, 124, 146. _Eph. Ep._ - ix. 1277. - IV Breucorum vii. 458, 1231. _Eph. Ep._ vii. - 1127. The only one of these - which can be dated belongs to - the third century, but the - cohort doubtless formed part of - the early series, which can be - traced in several provinces. - I Celtiberorum 105, 146. - I Aelia Classica 146. _Not. Dign. Occ._ xl. 51. - I Ulpia Traiana Cugernorum C. R. 103, 124. - I Aelia Dacorum M. 146. _Not. Dign. Occ._ xl. 44. - I Dalmatarum 124. - II Dalmatarum 105 (?). _Not. Dign. Occ._ - xl. 43. - II Dongonum 124. - I Frisiavonum 105, 124. _Not. Dign. Occ._ xl. - 36.[454] - II Gallorum E. 146. - IV Gallorum E. 146. _Not. Dign. Occ._ xl. 41. - V Gallorum 145-80 (vii. 1083). 222 (_Eph. - Ep._ ix. 1140). - I Nervana Germanorum M. E. Second-century inscriptions - (vii. 1063, 1066).[455] - I Hamiorum S. 124, 136-8 (vii. 748). - I Aelia Hispanorum M. E. 222 (vii. 965). - I Hispanorum E. 98, 103, 105, 124, 146. _Not. - Dign. Occ._ xl. 49. - I Lingonum E. 105, c. 142 (vii. 1041). - II Lingonum E. 98, 124. _Not. Dign. Occ._ - xl. 48. - IV Lingonum E. 103, 146. _Not. Dign. Occ._ - xl. 33. - I Menapiorum 124. - I Morinorum 103. _Not. Dign. Occ._ xl. 52. - II Nerviorum 98, 124, 146. - III Nerviorum C. R. 124. _Not. Dign. Occ._ xl. 53. - VI Nerviorum C. R. 124, 146. _Not. Dign. Occ._ - xl. 56. - II Pannoniorum 105 (?). Still existing in the - reign of Hadrian (ix. 1619). - III Pannoniorum _ante_ 138.[456] - I Sunucorum 124. - I Thracum 117-38 (vii. 275),[457] 193-7 - (vii. 273). - II Thracum E. 103, 145-80 (vii. 1091). _Not. - Dign. Occ._ xl. 50. - I Tungrorum M. 103, 124. _Not. Dign._ xl. 40. - II Tungrorum M. E. C. L.[458] 158. _Eph. Ep._ ix. 1230. - I Vangionum M. E. 103, 124. - I Fida Vardullorum M. E. C. R. 98, 105, 124, 146. - - 6,000 cavalry, 2,125 mounted infantry, 20,875 infantry. - Total 29,000. - -Legions in the province: II Augusta, VI Victrix, XX Valeria Victrix. - - -II. GERMANIA INFERIOR. - -Diploma 78. _I Bericht über die Fortschritte der römisch-germanischen -Forschung_, p. 99. - -_Alae._ - - Afrorum 78. One inscription, which is - apparently second century - (xiii. 8806).[459] - Noricorum 78, 138-61 (xiii. 8517). - Sulpicia 78, 187 (xiii. 8185). - -_Cohorts._ - - I Flavia E. 205 (xiii. 7797), 250 (xiii. 7786). - II Hispanorum P. F. E. 158 (xiii. 7796). - VI Ingenuorum C. R. xiii. 8315. Still existing in - third century. _A. E._ - 1911. 107. - XV Voluntariorum C. R. Early third-century inscriptions - (xiii. 8824, 8826).[460] - -1,500 cavalry, 250 mounted infantry, 1,750 infantry. Total 3,500. - -Legions in the province: I Minervia, XXX Ulpia Victrix. - - -III. GERMANIA SUPERIOR.[461] - -Diplomata xi (74), xiv (82), xxi (90), xl (116), l (134). - -_Alae._ - - I Flavia Gemina 74, 82, 90, 116. - Indiana Gallorum 134. - Scubulorum 74, 82, 90, 116. - -_Cohorts._ - - I Aquitanorum Veterana E. 74, 82, 90, 116, 134. - I Aquitanorum Biturigum 74, 90, 116 (?), 134. - III Aquitanorum E. C. R. 74, 82, 90, 134. - IV Aquitanorum E. C. R. 74, 82, 90, 116, 134. - I Asturum E. 82, 90, 134. - II Augusta Cyrenaica E. 74, 82, 90, 116, 134. - I Flavia Damascenorum M. E. S. 90, 116, 134. - III Dalmatarum 90, 116, 134. - V Dalmatarum 74, 90, 116, 134. - I Germanorum C. R. 82, 116, 134. - I Helvetiorum 148 (xiii. 6472). - I Ligurum et Hispanorum C. R. 116, 134. - II Raetorum C. R. 82, 90, 116, 134. - VII Raetorum E. 74, 82, 90, 116, 134. - I Sequanorum et Rauracorum E. 191 (xiii. 6604).[462] - IV Vindelicorum 74, 90, 116 (?), 134. - I C. R. 116, 134. - XXIV Voluntariorum C. R. Inscriptions at Murrhardt on - outer limes (xiii. 6530-33). - XXX Voluntariorum C. R. Placed in the province by a late - second-century C. H.(iii. 6758). - -_Numeri._ - - Brittonum Elantiensium 145-61 (xiii. 6490). - Brittonum Triputiensium 145 (xiii. 6517).[463] - -1,500 cavalry, 1,125 mounted infantry, 9,275 infantry. Total 11,900. - -Legions in the province: VIII Augusta, XXII Primigenia. - - -IV. RAETIA. - -Diplomata iii (64), xxxv (107), lxxix (_post_ 145), lxiv (153), cxi -(162), lxxiii (166). - -_Alae._ - - Hispanorum Auriana 107, 166 (?), 153 (iii. 11911) - I Flavia Singularium C. R. P. F. 107, 162 (?), 166. - I Flavia Fidelis M. P. F. 162. - I Flavia Gemelliana 64,[464] 166. - II Flavia P. F. M. 153. - -_Cohorts._ - - II Aquitanorum E. 162, 166.[465] - IX Batavorum M. E. 166. _Not. Dign. Occ._ xxxv. 24. - III Bracaraugustanorum 107, 166. - V Bracaraugustanorum 107, 166. - I Breucorum E. 107, 166, 138-61 (iii. 11930, - 11931). - III Britannorum 107, _post_ 145, 166.[465] _Not. - Dign. Occ._ xxxv. 25. - I Flavia Canathenorum M. 162, 166. - IV Gallorum 107, 166. - I C. R. Ingenuorum[466] First-century Raetian inscription - (v. 3936). Post-Hadrianic C. H. - (ix. 5362). - VI Lusitanorum Placed in Raetia by a C. H. which - is probably second century - (_I. G. R. R._ iii. 56). - VII Lusitanorum 107 (?), 166. - I Raetorum 107, 166.[467] - II Raetorum 107, _post_ 145, 162,[468] - 166.[469] - VI Raetorum Cf. iii. 5202 with _Not. Dign. - Occ._ xxxv. 27. - III Thracum Veterana 107, 145, 166 (secondary title - only in last). - III Thracum C. R. 107, 166. - -3,500 cavalry, 500 mounted infantry, 8,500 infantry. Total 12,500. - -No legion in the province before the end of the reign of Marcus. - - -V. NORICUM. - -Diploma civ (106). - -_Alae._ - - I Commagenorum 106. _Not. Dign. Occ._ - xxxiv. 36.[470] - I Augusta Thracum 140-4 (iii. 5654). - -_Cohorts._ - - I Asturum 106. Several inscriptions - (iii. 4839, 5330, 5539, 11508, - 11708; vi. 3588). - V Breucorum Inscriptions in Noricum - (iii. 5086, 5472). Probably - second century C.H. (x. 6102). - I Aelia Brittonum M. 238 (iii. 4812). - I Flavia Brittonum M. 267 (cf. iii. 4811 with 11504). - -1,000 cavalry, 3,000 infantry. Total 4,000. - - No legion in the province before the end of the reign of Marcus. - - -VI. PANNONIA SUPERIOR. - -Diplomata for the undivided provinces, ci (_ante_ 60), ii (60), xiii -(80), xvi (84), xvii (85), xxvii (98), xcviii (105). - -Diplomata for Pannonia Superior, cv (116), xlvii (133), li (138), lix -(138-48), lx (148), lxi (149), c (150), lxv (154). - -_Alae._ - - Canninefatium 116, 133, 138, 148, 149, 154. - I Ulpia Contariorum M. C. R. 133, 148, 154. - I Hispanorum Aravacorum 80, 84, 85, 133, 138, 148, - 149, 150. - Pannoniorum Several inscriptions; iii. 3252, - 4372 are certainly second - century. - I Thracum Victrix C. R. 133, 138, 148, 149, 154. - III Augusta Thracum S. 148, 149, 150, 154. - -_Cohorts._ - - II Alpinorum E. 60, 84, 133, 148, 149, 154. - I Bosporiana 116. - V Lucensium et Callaecoram E. 60, 84, 85, 133, 138-48, 148, - 149, 154. - I Ulpia Pannoniorum M. E. 133, 138, 148, 149, 154. - I Aelia Sagittariorum M. E. 133 (?), 148, 149. - I Thracum C. R. E. 133, 138, 148, 149, 154. - _Not. Dign. Occ._ xxxii. 59. - IV Voluntariorum C. R. 148, 149. - XVIII Voluntariorum C. R. 138, 148, 149, 154. - -3,500 cavalry, 875 mounted infantry, 4,125 infantry. Total 8,500. - -Legions in the province: I Adiutrix, X Gemina, XIV Gemina Martia -Victrix. - - -VII. PANNONIA INFERIOR. - -Diplomata xxxix (114), lviii (138-46), c (150), lxviii (145-60), lxxiv -(167). - -_Alae._ - - Augusta C. R. 145-60. - Flavia Augusta Britannica 150, 145-60, 167. - M. C. R. - I C. R. Veterana 80, 84, 85, 145-60. - I Flavia Gaetulorum 114, 145-60 (?).[471] - I Augusta Ituraeorum S. 98, 150, 167. - I Thracum Veterana S. 150, 145-60, 167. - -_Cohorts._ - - I Alpinorum Peditata 80, 85, 114, 167. - I Alpinorum E. 80, 85, 114, 154-60.[472] - II Asturum et Callaecorum 80, 85, 145-60, 167. - III Batavorum M. E. 138-46, 145-60. - VII Breucorum C. R. E. 85, 167. - II Augusta Nervia Pacensis 114, 145-60.[473] - Brittonum M. - II Augusta Dacorum P. F. M. E. iii. 10255 probably dates from - the second century. - I Hemesenorum M. E. C. R. S. 138-46. - I Lusitanorum 60, 80, 84, 85, 98, 114, - 145-60, 167. - III Lusitanorum E. 114, 145-60, 167. - Maurorum M. E. Several inscriptions; iii. 3545 - probably second century. - I Montanorum C. R. 80, 84, 85, 98, 114, 167. - I Noricorum E. 80, 84, 85, 138-46 (?), 167. - Cohors I Thracum E. 145-60. - Cohors I Augusta Thracum E. 167. - Cohors II Augusta Thracum E. 167. - Cohors I Campanorum Voluntariorum Third-century inscription - (iii. 3237). - -3,500 cavalry, 1,875 mounted infantry, 9,125 infantry. Total 14,500. - -Legion in the province: II Adiutrix. - - -VIII. DALMATIA. - -Diploma xxiii (93). - -_Cohorts._ - - III Alpinorum E. 93. Numerous inscriptions; - third-century C. H. (_A. E._ - 1911. 107); placed by - _Not. Dign. Occ._ xxxii. 53 - in Pannonia. - I Belgarum E. Numerous inscriptions, one of - 173 (iii. 8484). - VIII Voluntariorum C. R. 93, 197 (iii. 8336). - -250 mounted infantry, 1,250 infantry. Total 1,500. - - -IX. MOESIA SUPERIOR. - -Diplomata, ciii (93); _A. E._ 1912. 128 (103).[474] - -_Alae._ - - Claudia Nova 93, 103. - -_Cohorts._ - - I Antiochensium 93, 103. - I Cisipadensium 93, 103, 235-8 (iii. 14429). - I Cretum 93, 103. Mentioned in a Dacian - C. H. (iii. 1163).[475] - V Gallorum 93, 103. Second-century inscription - (iii. 14216⁴). - V Hispanorum E. 93, 103. Inscription probably of - second or early third century - (viii. 4416).[476] - IV Raetorum 93, 103. Existing at time of - Marcomannian War (viii. 17900). - I Thracum Syriaca E. 93, 103. Several inscriptions at - Timacum minus (iii. 8261, 8262, - 14575, 14579). - -500 cavalry, 250 mounted infantry, 3,250 infantry. Total 4,000. - -Legions in the province: IV Flavia, VII Claudia. - - -X. MOESIA INFERIOR. - -Diplomata xiv (82), xxx (99a), xxxi (99b), xxxiii (105), xxxviii -(98-114), xlviii (134), cviii (138).[477] - -_Alae._ - - Atectorigiana A second-century inscription - places the ala in Moesia - Inferior (_Notigia degli Scavi_, - 1889. 340). Inscription from - Tomi of 222-35 (iii-6154).[478] - Gallorum Flaviana 99b, 105. Second-century C. H. - (_Eph. Ep._ v. 994). - II Hispanorum et Aravacorum 99b, 138. - Augusta Early inscription at Arlec (iii. - 12347), which is still a cavalry - station with the name Augusta in - _Not. Dign. Or._ xiii. 7. - I Vespasiana Dardanorum 99a, 105, 98-114, 134. - -_Cohorts._ - - I Bracaraugustanorum 99b, 98-114, 134. - II Flavia Brittonum E. 99a, 230 (iii. 7473). - II Chalcidenorum 99a, 134. - I Cilicum M. 134. - IV Gallorum 105. _Not. Dign. Or._ xl. 46. - II Lucensium 105, 98-114, 199 (iii. 12337). - I Lusitanorum Cyrenaica E. 99a, 105, 138. - II Mattiacorum 99b, 134, 138. - -2,500 cavalry, 250 mounted infantry, 4,250 infantry. Total 7,000. - - Legions in the province: I Italica, V Macedonica, XI Claudia. - - -XI. DACIA.[479] - -Diplomata, xxxvii (110);[480] for Dacia Inferior xlvi (129); for Dacia -Superior lxvi (157?), lxvii (158); uncertain lxx (145-61). - -_Alae._ - - I Asturum 200 (iii. 1393). Tiles iii. - 8074¹ᵃ⋅ᵇ. - I Batavorum M. 158. - Bosporanorum[481] iii. 1197, 1344, 7888. Tiles - 8074³. - Gallorum et Bosporanorum 158. - Gallorum et Pannoniorum 145-61. - I Hispanorum 129. - I Hispanorum Campagonum 157, 158. - II Pannoniorum 144 (_A. E._ 1906. 112). - Siliana C. R. torquata iii. 845, 847, 7651. - I Tungrorum Frontoniana In Pannonia Inferior till 114. - In Dacia probably in 145-61,[482] - 213 (iii. 795). - Vexillatio equitum Illyricorum 129. (Afterwards became an ala, - and is reckoned as such.) - -_Cohorts._ - - I Alpinorum E. 205 (iii. 1343). Also iii. 1183, - and on tiles 1633²³, 8074⁸. - I Batavorum M. iii. 839, 13760. - II Flavia Bessorum 129. - I Britannica M. C. R.[483] 110. iii. 7634 is not earlier than - Marcus and Verus. - I Brittonum M. E. In Pannonia in 85. In Dacia in 191 - (iii. 1193). - I Augusta Nervia Pacensis 145-61. - Brittonum M.[484] - I Ulpia Brittonum M. 145-61. - II Brittonum M. C. R. P. F.[485] In Moesia Superior in 103. - Tiles iii. 8074¹¹. - III Brittonum[485] In Moesia Superior in 103. - Tiles iii. 8074¹². - III Campestris C. R. 110. Inscriptions at Drobetae, iii. - 14216⁸, 14216¹⁰. - I Flavia Commagenorum 157. iii. 14216²⁶. - II Flavia Commagenorum E. 119-38 (iii. 1371). - III Commagenorum iii. 7221, 13767. - I Gallorum Dacica 157. - II Gallorum Macedonica E. 110. Described as being in Dacia in - ii. 3230. - III Gallorum 129. - I Flavia Ulpia Hispanorum 110, 145-61. - M. E. C. R. - I Hispanorum Veterana 145-61. (Probably is the Cohors I - Hispanorum of this diploma.) - II Hispanorum Scutata 145-61. - Cyrenaica E. - IV Hispanorum E. 158. - I Augusta Ituraeorum S. 110, 158. - V Lingonum 215 (iii. 7638). But the cohort - existed earlier; _A. E._ - 1890. 151. - II Flavia Numidarum 129. - I Aelia Gaesatorum M. 145-61.[486] - I Thracum S. 157, 158. - VI Thracum 145-61. - I Ubiorum 157. - I Vindelicorum M. 157. - -_Numeri._ - - Burgariorum et veredariorum 138 (iii. 13795). - Pedites singulares Britannici 110, 157. - Palmyrenorum[487] Some inscriptions (iii. 907, - 14216) are probably as early - as this period. - -6,000 cavalry, 1,125 mounted infantry, 18,175 infantry. Total 25,300. - -Legion in the province: XIII Gemina. - - -XII. MACEDONIA. - -A new diploma (_A. E._ 1909. 105) shows that the Cohors I Flavia -Bessorum was stationed in the province in 120. Total 500 infantry. - - -XIII. CAPPADOCIA. - -No diplomata: the basis of this section is Arrian’s ‘Order of battle -against the Alani’, which gives the state of the garrison at the end of -the reign of Hadrian.[488] - -_Alae._ - - II Ulpia Auriana Arrian, 1. Full title, - iii. 6743. _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxxviii. 23. - I Augusta Gemina Colonorum Arrian, 1. Full title, viii. - 8934. _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxxviii. 21. - II Gallorum Arrian, 9. Cf. _I. G. R. R._ iii. - 272; _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxxviii. 24. - I Ulpia Dacorum Arrian, 8. _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxxviii. 23. -_Cohorts._ - - Apuleia C. R. Arrian, 7 and 14. _Not. Dign. - Or._ xxxviii. 34. - Bosporiana M. S. Arrian, 3 and 18. _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxxviii. 29. - I Claudia E. _Not. Dign. Or._ xxxviii. 36. - Cyrenaica S. E. Arrian, 1 and 14. - I Germanorum M. E. Arrian, 2. Cf. _I. G. R. R._ i. - 623; _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxxviii. 30. - II Hispanorum E. Cf. iii. 6760, ix. 2649; _A. E._ - 1911. 161.[489] - II Italica C. R. S. M. E. Arrian, 3, 9, and 13. Cf. xi. - 6117.[490] - Ituraeorum E. Arrian, 1. - I Lepidiana E. C. R. In Moesia Inferior in 98-114.[491] - _Not. Dign. Or._ xxxviii. 35. - I Flavia Numidarum M. E. S.[492] Arrian, 3 and 18. Cf. D. lxxvi - (178) for Lycia-Pamphylia. - III Ulpia Petraeorum M. E. S. Arrian, 1. _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxxviii. 27. - I Raetorum E. Arrian, 1. - IV Raetorum E. Arrian, 1. - -2,000 cavalry, 1,875 mounted infantry, 7,125 infantry. Total 11,000. - -Legions in the province: XII Fulminata, XV Apollinaris. - - -XIV. SYRIA. - -Diploma cx (157). The cavalry vexillatio described in iii. 600 seems -to have been drawn almost entirely from regiments stationed in the -Eastern provinces.[493] This inscription, therefore, which probably -dates from the end of Trajan’s reign, may be reckoned as a diploma, and -the regiments mentioned in it placed in Syria if they cannot be traced -elsewhere. - -_Alae._ - - II Flavia Agrippiana iii. 600. Cf. _C. I. G._ iii. - 3497 for full titles. - Augusta Syriaca iii. 600 (from Egypt). - I Ulpia Dromedariorum M. 157. - I Praetoria C. R. iii. 600. _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxxviii. 26 (in Armenia). - III Thracum Cf. ii. 4251 (_praefectus alae - III Thracum in Syria_) with vi. - 1449, which shows that the - regiment was existing in the - middle of the second century. - Thracum Herculania M. iii. 600, 157. - I Ulpia Singularium iii. 600, 157. - -_Cohorts._ - - I Ascalonitanorum S. E. iii. 600, 157. - I Flavia Chalcidenorum S. E. 157. - V Chalcidenorum E. iii. 600. - II Classica S. 157. - I Ulpia Dacorum 157. _Not. Dign. Or._ xxxiii. - 33 (Syria). - III Dacorum E. iii. 600. - II Equitum[494] iii. 600. - VII Gallorum 157. - I Lucensium E. iii. 600 (from Dalmatia). - IV Lucensium E. iii. 600. - II Ulpia Paflagonum E. iii. 600, 157. - III Ulpia Paflagonum E. iii. 600, 157. - I Ulpia Petraeorum M. E.[495] iii. 600, 157. - V Ulpia Petraeorum M. E.[495] iii. 600, 157. - I Ulpia Sagittariorum E. iii. 600. - I Claudia Sugambrorum 157. - I Sugambrorum E.[496] iii. 600 (from Moesia). - II Thracum Syriaca E. 157. - III Augusta Thracum E. 157. - III Thracum Syriaca E.[497] _A. E._ 1911. 161. - IV Thracum Syriaca E.[497] Mentioned on a C. H. of the second - century (ii. 1970). - II Ulpia E. C. R. iii. 600, 157. - -4,500 cavalry, 2,375 mounted infantry, 9,625 infantry. Total 16,500. - -Legions in the province: III Gallica, IV Scythica, XVI Flavia. - - -XV. SYRIA PALAESTINA. - -Diplomata, xix (86), cix (139). - -_Alae._ - - Gallorum et Thracum 139. - Anton … Gallorum 139. Probably the εἴλη - Ἀντωνινιανὴ Γαλική of - _B. G. U._ 614 (dated 217). - VII Phrygum 139. - -_Cohorts._ - - III Bracarum 139. - IV Breucorum 139. - I Damascenorum 139. - I Flavia C. R. E. iii. 600, 139. _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxxiv. 45. - I Ulpia Galatarum 139. - II Ulpia Galatarum 139. _Not. Dign. Or._ xxxiv. 44. - V Gemina C. R. 139. - I Montanorum 139. - IV Ulpia Petraeorum[498] 139. - VI Ulpia Petraeorum[498] 139. - I Sebastenorum M. 139. - I Thracum M. 139. _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxxvii. 31 (Arabia). - -1,500 cavalry, 125 mounted infantry, 6,875 infantry. Total 8,500. - -Legions in the province: VI Ferrata, X Fretensis. - - -XVI. ARABIA. - -Auxilia as yet unknown. Legio III Cyrenaica was stationed in the -province. - - -XVII. EGYPT. - -Diploma xv (83). - -_Alae._ - - Apriana 83, 170 (iii. 49). _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxviii. 32. - II Ulpia Afrorum[499] _Not. Dign. Or._ xxviii. 38. - Gallorum Veterana 199 (iii. 6581). Unlikely to be a - late creation. _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxviii. 28. - I Thracum Mauretana 154-5 (_B. G. U._ 447), 156 - (_Eph. Ep._ vii. p. 457).[500] - Vocontiorum 134 (_B. G. U._ 114). - -_Cohorts._ - - I Ulpia Afrorum E. 177 (_B. G. U._ 241). - I Apamenorum S. E. 145 (_Brit. Mus. Pap._ 178). - _Not. Dign. Or._ xxxi. 60. - I Flavia Cilicum E. 140 (iii. 6025). - III Cilicum 217-18 (_A. E._ 1905. 54), but - it belonged presumably to the - early series. - III Galatarum _Not. Dign. Or._ xxviii. 35, but - belonging probably to the - series raised by Trajan. - II Hispanorum 134 (_B. G. U._ 114). - II Ituraeorum Felix E. 147 (_I. G. R. R._ i. 1348). - _Not. Dign. Or._ xxviii. 44. - III Ituraeorum 103 (_Pap. Ox._ vii. 1022). A - second-century C. H. - (viii. 17904). - Augusta Praetoria Lusitanorum E. 156 (_Eph. Ep._ vii. p. 456). - _Not. Dign. Or._ xxxi. 58. - I Augusta Pannoniorum 83. _Not. Dign. Or._ xxviii. 41. - Scutata C. R. 143 (_B. G. U._ 141). Cf. iii. - 12069 and _Not. Dign. Or._ - xxxi. 59. - I Thebaeorum E. 114 (_B. G. U._ 114). - II Thracum 167 (Wilcken, _Ostraka_, 927). - -_Numeri._ - - Palmyreni Hadriani Sagittarii 216 (_I. G. R. R._ i. 1169). - -2,500 cavalry, 750 mounted infantry, 5,950 infantry. Total 9,200. - -Legion in the province: II Traiana Fortis. - - -XVIII. CYRENAICA. - -Garrison unknown. - - -XIX. AFRICA. - -_Alae._ - - Flavia 174 (viii. 21567). - I Augusta Pannoniorum 128. Addressed by Hadrian - (_A. E._ 1900. 33). -_Cohorts._ - - II Flavia Afrorum 198 (_A. E._ 1909. 104). - I Chalcidenorum E. 164 (viii. 17587). - VI Commagenorum E. 128. Addressed by Hadrian - (viii. 18042). - I Flavia E. 128. Addressed by Hadrian - (viii. 18042). - II Hispanorum E. 128. Addressed by Hadrian - (viii. 18042). - II Maurorum 208 (viii. 4323). - -_Numeri._ - - Palmyrenorum 211-17 (viii. 18007).[501] - -1,000 cavalry, 500 mounted infantry, 2,700 infantry. Total 4,200. - -Legion in the province: III Augusta. - - -XX. MAURETANIA CAESARIENSIS - -Diploma xxxvi (107). - -_Alae._ - - Brittonum V. Second-century inscription (viii. - 9764). Cf. 5936. - Miliaria Several inscriptions (viii. 9389, - 21029, 21036, 21568, 21618). - Existed in second century (xii. - 672). - I Nerviana Augusta Fidelis M. 107. - I Augusta Parthorum 107, 201 (viii. 9827). - Flavia Gemina Sebastenorum 234 (viii. 21039). A _praefectus_ - of the reign of Marcus - (_Eph. Ep._ 699). - II Augusta Thracum P. F. 107, 209-11 (viii. 9370). - -_Cohorts._ - - II Breucorum E. 107, 243 (viii. 21560). - II Brittonum 107. - I Corsorum C. R. 107. Post-Hadrianic C. H. - (ix. 2853). - II Gallorum 107. - I Flavia Hispanorum 107, 201 (viii. 9360). - I Flavia Musulamiorum 107. - I Augusta Nerviana Velox 107. - I Nurritanorum 107. Later inscriptions (xi. 6010; - viii. 4292). - I Pannoniorum E. 107, 201 (viii. 22602). - II Sardorum 208 (viii. 21721). Also - first-century inscriptions. - I Aelia Singularium 260 (viii. 9047). Cf. 20753. - IV Sugambrorum 107, 255 (viii. 9045). - -_Numeri._ - - Gaesatorum 150 (viii. 2728). - -4,000 cavalry, 250 mounted infantry, 5,950 infantry. Total 10,200. - -Third-century inscriptions also show the existence of a large force of -Moorish irregular cavalry, perhaps a sort of territorial militia. It is -impossible, however, to estimate their number, or to ascertain whether -they were already in existence in the second century. Cf. Cagnat, -_L’armée romaine d’Afrique_, pp. 261-73. - - -XXI. MAURETANIA TINGITANA. - -_Alae._ - - Hamiorum A second-century inscription - (viii. 21814 a). Cf. _A. E._ - 1906. 119. -_Cohorts._ - - I Asturum et Callaecorum M.[502] C. H. of reign of Trajan - (ii. 4211). Cf. viii. 21820; - vi. 3654. - III Asturum C. R. E. Late second-century C. H. (xi. - 4371). Placed in Mauretania by - a Greek inscription (Waddington, - 104) and _Not. Dign. Occ._ xxvi. - 19. - -500 cavalry, 125 mounted infantry, 1,375 infantry. Total 2,000. - - -XXII. HISPANIA TARRACONENSIS. - -_Alae._ - - II Flavia Hispanorum C. R. 184 (cf. _A. E._ 1910. 5; - ii. 2600). - I Lemavorum 161-7 or later (ii. 2103).[503] - -_Cohorts._ - - I Celtiberorum Baetica E. 163 (ii. 2552; cf. _A. E._ - 1910. 3). - III Celtiberorum 167 (_A. E._ 1910. 4). - I Gallica E. _A. E._ 1910. 4. _Not. Dign. - Occ._ xlii. 32. - II Gallica _Not. Dign. Occ._ xlii. 28. It - is stationed at ‘Cohors - Gallica.’ - III Lucensium Inscriptions ii. 2584, 4132. - Cf. _Not. Dign. Occ._ - xlii. 29. - -1,000 cavalry, 250 mounted infantry, 2,250 infantry. Total 3,500. - -Legion in the province: VII Gemina. - -To this list we may add the following regiments, which can be shown to -have existed in the second century, although they cannot be assigned to -any particular province: - -_Alae._ - - III Asturum xi. 3007 (the name Ulpius occurs). - I Flavia Gallorum Tauriana viii. 2394, 2395 (Trajan at - earliest). -_Cohorts._ - - Aelia Expedita viii. 9358. - II Bracarum vi. 1838 (Trajan). - III Breucorum ix. 4753 (Trajan); x. 3847 - (probably middle of second - century). - VI Brittonum ii. 2424 (Trajan). - III Augusta Cyrenaica _Römische Mitteilungen_, iii. - 77 (Marcus). - VI Gallorum vi. 1449. The career of the - Praefectus Praetorio Macrinius - Vindex, who was killed in 172. - He probably commanded this - cohort about 150. - VI Hispanorum xi. 4376 (Trajan). - III Lingonum E. xi. 5959 (Trajan or later). - Pannoniorum et Dalmatarum x. 5829 (Trajan). - II Ulpia Petraeorum M. E. xi. 5669 (Trajan or Hadrian). - V Raetorum viii. 8934 (Trajan to Hadrian). - -1,000 cavalry, 375 mounted infantry, 5,125 infantry. Total 6,500. - -These calculations show that during the period in question the -auxiliary troops amounted to 47,500 cavalry, 15,375 mounted infantry, -and 129,925 infantry, giving a total establishment of 191,800 men. It -is probable, however, that this puts the proportion of mounted men -too low. Arrian’s _Ectaxis_ shows that nearly every cohort of the -Cappadocian garrison was _equitata_, and although the proportion of -mounted men was doubtless higher on the eastern frontier than on the -Rhine or in Britain, it is probable that if we possessed more documents -similar to the _Ectaxis_ dealing with the other garrisons we should -find a higher proportion of _cohortes equitatae_ than our present -evidence suggests. It is equally probable that the total figure arrived -at falls below the reality. For no province is it likely that the list -is complete; in some cases, such as Mauretania Tingitana and Africa, -the garrison is obviously put far below its real establishment, while -for Arabia and Cyrenaica we have no evidence at all. The deficiency is -certainly too great to be made good by the few regiments of uncertain -habitation which conclude the list. Probably we may reckon on a total -figure of about 220,000 men, of whom at least 80,000 would be mounted. -The twenty-eight legions in existence at this time, if we follow -Suetonius in assigning 5,600 men to a legion,[504] would only have a -total establishment of 156,800, so that clearly in dealing with the -army at this period we must disregard Tacitus’s statement that the -auxilia were approximately equal in number to the legionaries. - -The total military establishment of the Empire at the accession -of Marcus including the Household Troops, that is to say the ten -Praetorian and six Urban[505] cohorts and the Equites Singulares, and -the complement of the fleets in the Mediterranean and the Channel and -on the Rhine, Danube, and Euphrates, must thus have amounted to some -420,000 men. This total, however, was to be still further increased -before the decline began. At the beginning of the third century when -additions had been made to the Household Troops, when the legions had -been increased to thirty-three[506] and scores of _numeri_ added to the -frontier guards, there may have been nearly half a million men serving -with the colours, a larger disciplined force than was at the disposal -of any one state before the nineteenth century, and the largest -professional army which the world has ever seen. - - -Footnotes: - -[446] See above, pp. 53-5. - -[447] Any one desirous of further information on any particular -regiment will find a summary of the evidence, in so far as it was then -available, in Cichorius’s articles in Pauly-Wissowa., s.v. _ala_ and -_cohors_, to which I am deeply indebted. - -[448] A date without an epigraphical reference refers to a ‘diploma’. -The following abbreviations have been used: E(quitata), M(iliaria), -C(ivium) R(omanorum), V(eteranorum), S(agittariorum), P(ia) F(idelis). -C. H. means that the inscription referred to gives the _cursus honorum_ -of an officer. - -[449] The inscription cannot be accurately dated, but the regiment was -presumably raised at an early date like others with similar titles. - -[450] Inscriptions thus referred to come from the area in Scotland only -effectively occupied between these dates. - -[451] The inscription comes from Newstead, which was probably also -occupied from 80 to 100, but the soldier’s name, Aelius, suggests a -later date. - -[452] A C. H. mentioning a _praefectus cohortis I Astyrum provinciae -Britanniae_. The regiment is hardly likely to be a third-century -creation. - -[453] The _Notitia_ mentions the first cohort, but inscriptions suggest -that it was the second which apparently garrisoned the station referred -to. The reference shows, at any rate, that one of the two survived. - -[454] Epigraphical evidence suggests that the Cohors I Frixagorum of -the _Notitia_ is identical with this regiment. - -[455] The inscriptions come from Birrens, which was apparently occupied -in the Antonine period. See Professor Haverfield’s note in _Ephemeris -Epigraphica_, ix. p. 613. - -[456] Assuming that this is the title represented by the III P … of the -‘diploma’. - -[457] The name of the cohort on this inscription is, however, only due -to an emendation of Cichorius, s.v. - -[458] Presumably C(ivium) L(atinorum), a unique distinction. - -[459] The name is M. Traianius. - -[460] Both this and the preceding cohort belong, of course, to early -series. - -[461] Regiments which are last mentioned in the diploma of 116 are -included if they cannot be traced in another province. - -[462] The regiment is hardly likely to have been raised between 167 and -191. - -[463] It can hardly be doubted, however, that several more of the -Numeri Brittonum mentioned on later inscriptions belong to the same -series. See above, p. 86. - -[464] In this diploma, of course, the ala has not yet acquired the -title ‘Flavia’. The titles of the Raetian alae are somewhat puzzling, -but it seems possible to distinguish four alae Flaviae. - -[465] The name of the regiment is given, but the number has been -restored. - -[466] Possibly, however, this is identical with the Cohors I C. R., -stationed in Germania Superior. - -[467] The number of the regiment is given, but the name has been -restored. - -[468] The name of the regiment is given, but the number has been -restored. - -[469] The number of the regiment is given, but the name has been -restored. - -[470] The regiment is not mentioned, but there is a cavalry station -‘Commagena’ in Pannonia Prima. - -[471] Included by an emendation of Cichorius. - -[472] One of these two cohorts is also mentioned on the D. for 60, 84, -138-46. - -[473] The ‘Cohors II Aug….’ of the diploma is either this or II -Augusta Thracum. - -[474] Most of the regiments mentioned in this diploma can be traced in -other provinces during the second century, the others probably remained -in Moesia. - -[475] There is some evidence for placing this cohort in Dacia. - -[476] ‘Aurelio Marco dec(urioni) [coh(ortis)] V Hisp(anorum) provinciae -Moesiae sup(erioris), desiderato in acie, Aur(elio) Suruelio -dup(licario) fratri bene merenti.’ The names suggest the date. - -[477] Several regiments (i.e. Cohorts I Claudia Sugambrorum, I -Chalcidenorum, IV Gallorum, VII Gallorum) appear in Syria in 157 after -appearing in the second-century Moesian diplomata. Probably they were -transferred during the Jewish rebellion at the end of Hadrian’s reign. -All are reckoned under Syria except IV Gallorum, which seems to have -returned. - -[478] For an early inscription of this regiment see Mommsen in -_Hermes_, xxii. 547. - -[479] Any regiment which has left several inscriptions in the province, -and does not appear to be a late formation, is included. - -[480] This ‘diploma’ contains several regiments which were only -temporarily in the province. - -[481] Was possibly incorporated later in the succeeding. - -[482] The name is probably to be restored from ONT of the ‘diploma’. - -[483] The British regiments are very confusing, but it appears possible -to distinguish the following. The titles ‘Britannica’ and ‘Brittonum’ -seem to be used indifferently. - -[484] Restored from the ‘Cohors I Augusta Nervia’ … of the diploma on -the analogy of the Cohors II Augusta Nervia Pacensis M. Brittonum on -the diploma of 114 for Pannonia Inferior. - -[485] As these cohorts are only mentioned on tiles it is possible that -they returned to Moesia soon after the war. - -[486] So Cichorius, comparing AESA∞ of the diploma with tiles from -Sebesvaralja marked CꟼGST and ⅁ƎAIHↃ (iii. 8074¹⁶, 8074²⁶.) - -[487] The distribution of these and other inscriptions suggests that -there were at least two numeri in the province. - -[488] In identifying the various regiments mentioned by Arrian I have -made use of the excellent article by Ritterling in _Wiener Studien_, -xxiv. Cf. also ‘Arrian as Legate of Cappadocia’ in Pelham’s _Essays on -Roman History_. - -[489] The second inscription mentions a Spanish cohort in Cappadocia, -which is probably identical with the Cohors II Hispanorum E. commanded -by the _praefectus_ mentioned in the third, whose career seems to have -lain entirely in the Eastern provinces. He would have commanded it -about 120. - -[490] Mentions the regiment as stationed in Syria, whither it had been -transferred before 157. Cf. D. cx. - -[491] D. xxxviii. - -[492] Arrian certainly mentions a Numidian cohort; it is, however, -merely a conjecture to identify it with the regiment stationed later in -Lycia-Pamphylia. - -[493] Of the nineteen regiments mentioned (taking ‘Augusta Syriaca’ -as the title of one ala, not two), eight are mentioned on the Syrian -diploma of 157, two on the Palestine diplomata of 86 and 139, and -one on the Egyptian diploma of 83. Of the remainder two have left -inscriptions in the East, two seem to have come from the Danube, and -only four are otherwise unknown. - -[494] Should probably be _equestris_, the regiment belonging to the -same series as the Cohors VI Equestris which formed part of the -garrison of Bithynia when Pliny was governor. Cf. Pliny, _Ep._ x. -106. The meaning of the title is obscure, unless _equestris_ simply = -_equitata_. - -[495] Numbers II and III in this series were certainly _miliariae_, as -probably all were. - -[496] I agree with Cichorius in distinguishing the Cohors I Sugambrorum -V. E. from the Cohors I Claudia Sugambrorum. The first is probably -identical with the regiment mentioned by Tacitus as being in Moesia -in A.D. 26 (Tac. _Ann._ iv. 47), the second a later creation -distinguished as such by its secondary title. - -[497] Mentioned in the _cursus honorum_ of a _praefectus_ whose service -lay almost entirely in the Eastern provinces. On this ground and -because Cohorts I and II of this series were certainly in the East the -regiment has been assigned to Syria. This second argument applies to -Cohort IV. Both regiments were in any case in existence at this period. - -[498] The title Ulpia is not given in these cases but presumably -belonged to the whole series. - -[499] Or is this a cohort converted into an ala with the increase of -cavalry in the fourth century? In this case it may be identical with -the Cohors II Ulpia Equitata mentioned below. - -[500] Curiously enough the regiment appears in the Syrian diploma for -157. - -[501] Cagnat, however, considers that the regiment was in the province -as early as 150, relying on viii. 3917, p. 955. - -[502] In the first inscription the regiment is commanded by a -_tribunus_. - -[503] This inscription does not, however, prove conclusively that the -regiment was stationed in Spain. - -[504] Suet. Fr. 278 (_Reiffer._) ‘Legio dicitur virorum electio fortium -vel certus militum numerus, id est V̅ DC.’ - -[505] Four were at Rome, one at Lugudunum, and one at Carthage. - -[506] Marcus added II and III Italica to garrison Raetia and Noricum; -Septimius Severus the three legiones Parthicae, of which I and III were -stationed in Mesopotamia and II at Alba in Italy. - - - - -APPENDIX II - - -This appendix is mainly designed to supplement the table on p. 60, -by giving a list of the auxiliary regiments grouped according to the -provinces in which they were raised. I have also added for the sake -of completeness a further section dealing with the _cohortes civium -Romanorum_, and a few regiments of which we do not know the place of -origin. The list thus contains, or is intended to contain, the names -of all the auxiliary regiments known to us, and includes far more than -existed at any one time. The greater part of this list is, of course, -merely a repetition of that drawn up by Cichorius in his articles on -_ala_ and _cohors_ contributed to Pauly-Wissowa, and in view of the -admirable summary of the evidence there given I have restricted myself -to appending to the title of each regiment the name of the province -in which it was stationed, or, when this is unknown, a reference to -a single inscription mentioning it. Only in cases where I have been -able to add to the list a regiment unknown when Cichorius wrote have I -added a note on the evidence. The whole may, in fact, be described as -a summary of Cichorius’s articles, with a supplement bringing them up -to date, and as such may, I hope, be of some value to students of this -subject. - -As in the list on p. 60, regiments raised before 70 and those of later -date are divided into two groups, distinguished by the letters A and B. - - - BRITAIN. - -_Alae._ - - A. I Flavia Augusta Germania Superior—Pannonia - Britannica M. C. R.[507] Inferior. - Brittonum V. Mauretania Caesariensis. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Britannica M. C. R.[508] Pannonia—Dacia. - I Brittonum M. E. Pannonia—Dacia. - II Brittonum M. C. R. P. F. Dacia. - II Brittonum Mauretania Caesariensis. - III Britannorum Raetia. - III Brittonum Dacia. - III Brittonum V. E. xi. 393. - IV and V Brittonum supposed because of the existence of - VI Brittonum ii. 2424. - - B. I Flavia Brittonum Dalmatia—Noricum. - I Ulpia Brittonum M. Dacia. - I Aelia Brittonum M. Noricum. - I Augusta Nervia Pacensis Dacia. - Brittonum M.[509] - I Aurelia Brittonum M. Dacia. - II Flavia Brittonum Moesia Inferior. - II Augusta Nervia Pacensis Pannonia Inferior. - Brittonum M. - - -BELGICA. - -_Alae._ - - A. Batavorum Germania Inferior. - I Canninefatium C. R. Germania Superior—Pannonia - Superior. - Treverorum Germania Inferior. - Tungrorum Frontoniana Dalmatia—Pannonia—Dacia. - I Tungrorum Britain. - - B. I Batavorum M. Dacia. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Batavorum C. R. Britain. - I-VIII Batavorum M. The regiments which joined the - rebellion of Civilis and were - presumably disbanded. - IX Batavorum M. E. Raetia. - I Belgarum E. Dalmatia. - I Belgica Germania Superior. - Cohortes Canninefatium Joined the rebellion of Civilis - and were presumably disbanded - in consequence. Cf. Tac. - _Hist._ iv. 19. - I Frisiavonum Britain. - I Germanorum C. R. Germania Superior. - I Germanorum M. E. Cappadocia. - I Lingonum E. Britain. - II Lingonum E. Britain. - III Lingonum E. xi. 5959. - IV Lingonum E. Britain. - V Lingonum Dacia. - I Menapiorum Britain. - I Morinorum Britain. - Nemetum Germania Superior. - I Nerviorum Britain. - II Nerviorum Britain. - III Nerviorum C. R. Britain. - IV and V Nerviorum C. R. supposed on account - of the existence of - VI Nerviorum C. R. Britain. - I Sequanorum et Rauracorum E. Germania Superior. - I Sugambrorum V. E. Moesia Inferior—Syria. - I Claudia Sugambrorum Moesia Inferior—Syria.[510] - II and III Sugambrorum supposed on account - of the existence of - IV Sugambrorum Mauretania Caesariensis. - I Sunucorum Britain. - I Tungrorum M. Germania Inferior—Britain. - II Tungrorum M. E. C. L. Germania Inferior—Britain. - Cohortes Ubiorum Germania Inferior, cf. Tac. - _Hist._ iv. 28. - I Ubiorum Moesia Inferior—Dacia. - Usiporum Tac. _Agr._ 28. - I Vangionum M. E. Germania Superior—Britain. - - B. I Batavorum M. Pannonia—Dacia. - I Batavorum Britain. - II Batavorum M. Pannonia. - III Batavorum M. Pannonia Inferior.[511] - I Septimia Belgarum Germania Superior. - I Ulpia Traiana Cugernorum Britain. - I Nervana Germanorum M. Britain. - I Mattiacorum supposed on account of the existence of - II Mattiacorum Moesia Inferior. - I Treverorum supposed on account of the existence of - II Treverorum Germania Superior.[512] - - -LUGDUNENSIS. - -_Alae._ - - A. Gallorum Flaviana Moesia Inferior. - Gallorum Indiana Germania Inferior—Britain - —Germania Superior. - Augusta Gallorum Petriana M. Germania Superior—Britain. - Augusta Gallorum Proculeiana Britain. - Gallorum V. Egypt. - I Flavia Gallorum Gaul. - Tauriana[513] - I Claudia Gallorum Moesia Inferior. - I Gallorum et Bosporanorum Dacia. - I Gallorum et Pannoniorum Moesia Inferior. - II Gallorum Sebosiana Germania Superior—Britain. - II Gallorum Cappadocia. - -The majority of the following regiments, which bear titles derived from -personal names, can be shown to have received recruits from the Gallic -provinces, where it is probable that all were originally raised. - - Agrippiana Germania Superior—Britain. - II Flavia Agrippiana[514] Syria. - Apriana Egypt. - Atectorigiana Moesia Inferior. - Classiana Germania Inferior—Britain. - Longiniana Germania Inferior. - Patrui ix. 733. - Picentiana Germania Superior. - Pomponiani Germania Inferior. - Rusonis Germania Superior. - Sabiniana Britain. - Scaevae x. 6011. - Siliana C. R. Africa—Pannonia. - Sulpicia Germania Inferior. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Gallica C. R. E. Tarraconensis. - II Gallica Tarraconensis. - I Gallorum Aquitania. - I Gallorum Dacica Dacia. - II Gallorum Moesia Inferior. - II Gallorum Macedonica E. Moesia Superior—Dacia. - II Gallorum Mauretania Caesariensis. - II Gallorum E. Britain. - III Gallorum Germania Superior—Moesia Inferior. - III Gallorum Spain. - IV Gallorum Moesia Inferior. - IV Gallorum Raetia. - IV Gallorum Britain. - V Gallorum Pannonia—Moesia Superior. - V Gallorum Britain. - VI Gallorum vi. 1449. - VII Gallorum Moesia Inferior. - VIII, IX, and X Gallorum supposed on account of the existence of - XI Gallorum[515] Dalmatia. - - -AQUITANIA. - -_Alae._ - - None. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Aquitanorum V. E. Germania Superior. - I Aquitanorum Germania Superior—Britain. - II Aquitanorum E. Germania Superior—Raetia. - III Aquitanorum E. C. R. Germania Superior. - IV Aquitanorum E. C. R. Germania Superior. - I Biturigum Germania Superior. - II Biturigum xiii. 6812. - - -NARBONENSIS. - -_Alae._ - - A. Augusta Vocontiorum Germania Inferior—Britain. - Vocontiorum Egypt. - -_Cohorts._ - - None. - - -ALPES. (All the little Alpine provinces.) - -_Alae._ - - A. Vallensium. Germania Superior. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Alpinorum Pannonia Inferior. - I Alpinorum E. Pannonia Inferior. - I Alpinorum E. Dacia. - I Alpinorum Britain. - II Alpinorum E. Pannonia Superior. - III Alpinorum E. Dalmatia. - I Ligurum[516] Alpes Maritimae—Germania - Superior. - II Gemina Ligurum et Corsorum Sardinia. - I Montanorum Noricum—Pannonia—Dacia. - I Montanorum C. R. Pannonia Inferior. - I Montanorum Palestine. - Trumplinorum v. 4910. - - -RAETIA. - -_Alae._ - - None. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Helvetiorum Germania Superior. - I Raetorum Raetia. - I Raetorum E. Cappadocia. - II Raetorum C. R. Germania Superior. - II Raetorum Raetia. - Two cohorts III Raetorum supposed on account of the existence of - IV Raetorum E. Cappadocia. - IV Raetorum Moesia Superior. - V Raetorum viii. 8934. - VI Raetorum Germania Superior. - VII Raetorum E. Germania Superior. - VIII Raetorum C. R. Pannonia—Dacia. - Raetorum et Vindelicorum Germania Superior. - I Vindelicorum M. Dacia. - II and III Vindelicorum supposed on account of the existence of - IV Vindelicorum Germania Superior. - - B. I Aelia Gaesatorum M. Dacia. - - -NORICUM. - -_Alae._ - - A. Noricorum Germania Superior. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Noricorum Pannonia Inferior. - - -PANNONIA. - -_Alae._ - - A. I Pannoniorum Africa. - I Pannoniorum Moesia Inferior. - I Pannoniorum Tampiana Britain. - II Pannoniorum Dacia. - Pannoniorum Pannonia Superior. - - B. I Illyricorum[517] Dacia. - Flavia Pannoniorum[518] Pannonia Inferior. - Sarmatarum[519] Britain. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Breucorum Raetia. - II Breucorum Mauretania Caesariensis. - III Breucorum ix. 4753. - IV Breucorum Britain. - V Breucorum Noricum. - VI Breucorum[520] Moesia Superior. - VII Breucorum Pannonia Inferior. - VIII Breucorum xiii. 7801. - I Pannoniorum Germania Superior—Britain. - I Pannoniorum Mauretania Caesariensis. - I Augusta Pannoniorum Egypt. - I Pannoniorum et Dalmatarum x. 5829. - II Pannoniorum Britain. - III Pannoniorum Britain. - IV Pannoniorum iii. 12631, ix. 3924. - I Varcianorum supposed on account of the existence of - II Varcianorum Germania Inferior. - - B. I Ulpia Pannoniorum M. E. Pannonia Superior. - - -DALMATIA. - -_Alae._ - - None. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Dalmatarum Britain. - II Dalmatarum Britain. - III Dalmatarum Germania Superior. - IV Dalmatarum Germania Superior. - V Dalmatarum Germania Superior. - VI Dalmatarum E. Mauretania Caesariensis. - VII Dalmatarum E. Mauretania Caesariensis. - - B. I Dalmatarum M.[521] Dalmatia. - II Dalmatarum M. Dalmatia. - III Dalmatarum M. E. C. R. Dacia. - IV Dalmatarum M. iii. 1474. - - -MOESIA. - -_Alae._ - - A. Bosporanorum[522] Syria—Dacia. - - B. I Vespasiana Dardanorum Moesia Inferior. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. Bosporanorum M. Cappadocia. - I Bosporiana Pannonia Superior - II Bosporanorum x. 270.[523] - - B. I Aurelia Dardanorum Moesia Superior. - II Aurelia Dardanorum Moesia Superior. - M. E.[524] - - -DACIA. - -_Alae._ - - B. I Ulpia Dacorum Cappadocia. - -_Cohorts._ - - B. I Ulpia Dacorum Syria. - I Aelia Dacorum M. Britain. - II Augusta Dacorum Pannonia. - Dacorum Syria. - I Aurelia Dacorum supposed on account of the existence of - II Aurelia Dacorum Pannonia Superior.[525] - -THRACE. - -_Alae._ - - A. Thracum Herculania Syria. - I Augusta Thracum Raetia. - I Thracum Germania Inferior—Britain. - I Thracum Mauretana Egypt. - I Thracum V. S. Pannonia Inferior. - I Thracum Victrix Pannonia Superior. - II Augusta Thracum[526] Mauretania Caesariensis. - III Augusta Thracum S. Pannonia Superior. - III Thracum Syria. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Augusta Thracum E. Pannonia Inferior. - I Thracum Germanica C. R. E. Germania Superior—Pannonia - Superior. - I Thracum M. Palestine. - I Thracum S. Dacia. - I Thracum E. Pannonia Inferior. - I Thracum Syriaca Palestine—Moesia Superior. - I Thracum Germania Inferior—Britain. - II Augusta Thracum Pannonia Inferior. - II Gemella Thracum Africa. - II Thracum Syriaca Syria. - II Thracum E. Egypt. - II Thracum E. Britain. - III Thracum V. Raetia. - III Thracum C. R. Raetia. - III Augusta Thracum E. Syria. - III Thracum Syriaca[527] Syria. - IV Thracum Syriaca Syria. - IV Thracum E. Germania Superior. - V Thracum supposed on account of the existence of - VI Thracum Germania Superior—Britain— - Pannonia—Dacia. - - B. I Flavia Bessorum[528] Macedonia. - II Flavia Bessorum Moesia Inferior. - - -MACEDONIA. - -_Alae._ - - None. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. Macedonum E.[529] _A. E._ 1908. 58. - I Cyrrhesticorum supposed on account of the existence of - II Cyrrhesticorum[530] Dalmatia. - - -GALATIA. - -_Alae._ - - A. VII Phrygum[531] Syria. - -_Cohorts._ - - B. I Ulpia Galatarum Palestine. - II Ulpia Galatarum Palestine. - III Ulpia Galatarum[532] Egypt. - I Ulpia Paflagonum supposed on account of the existence of - II Ulpia Paflagonum Syria. - III Ulpia Paflagonum Syria. - - -CILICIA. - -_Alae._ - - None. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Cilicum Moesia Inferior. - II Cilicum supposed on account of the existence of - III Cilicum[533] Egypt. - - B. I Flavia Cilicum E. Egypt. - - -CYPRUS. - -_Alae._ - - None. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I, II, and III Cypria[534] supposed on account of the existence of - IV Cypria Dacia. - - -CRETE AND CYRENAICA.[535] - -_Alae._ - - None. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Cretum Moesia Superior. - I Cyrenaica Germania Superior. - II Augusta Cyrenaica Germania Superior. - III Cyrenaica S. _A. E._ 1896. 10. - III Augusta Cyrenaica _Römische Mitteilungen_, - iii. 77.[536] - -SYRIA. - -_Alae._ - - A. Hamiorum[537] Mauretania Tingitana. - I Augusta Parthorum Mauretania Caesariensis. - Parthorum V. xiii. 10024³⁵. - - B. I Commagenorum Egypt—Noricum. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Antiochensium Moesia Superior. - I Apamenorum S. E. Egypt. - I Chalcidenorum E. Africa. - II Chalcidenorum Moesia Inferior. - III and IV Chalcidenorum supposed on account of the existence of - V Chalcidenorum Syria. - I Damascenorum Palestine. - I Hamiorum Britain. - II Hamiorum viii. 10654. - I Hemesenorum M. S. E. C. R. Pannonia Inferior. - I Sagittariorum Germania Superior—Dacia (?). - II Sagittariorum supposed on account of the existence of - III Sagittariorum[538] iii. 335, xiv. 3935. - I Tyriorum[539] Moesia Inferior. - - B. I Flavia Canathenorum M. Raetia. - I Flavia Chalcidenorum S. E. Syria. - I Flavia Commagenorum Dacia. - II Flavia Commagenorum Dacia. - III, IV, and V Commagenorum supposed on account of the existence - of - VI Commagenorum Africa. - I Flavia Damascenorum M. E. Germania Superior. - I Ulpia Sagittariorum E. Syria. - I Aelia Sagittariorum M. E. Pannonia Superior. - I Nova Surorum M. S. Pannonia Inferior. - - -PALESTINE. - -_Alae._ - - A. I Augusta Ituraeorum Pannonia Inferior. - Sebastenorum Palestine—Mauretania Caesariensis. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Ascalonitanorum Felix E. Syria. - I Augusta Ituraeorum S. Pannonia—Dacia. - I Ituraeorum Germania Superior—Dacia. - II Ituraeorum E. Egypt. - III Ituraeorum Egypt. - IV, V, and VI[540] Ituraeorum supposed on account of the - existence of - VII Ituraeorum Egypt. - I Sebastenorum M. Palestine. - - -ARABIA. - -_Alae._ - - B. I Ulpia Dromedariorum M.[541] Syria. - -_Cohorts._ - - B. I Ulpia Petraeorum M. E.[542] Syria. - II Ulpia Petraeorum M. E. xi. 5669. - III Ulpia Petraeorum M. E. Cappadocia. - IV Ulpia Petraeorum[543] Palestine. - V Ulpia Petraeorum E. Syria. - VI Ulpia Petraeorum[543] Palestine. - - -EGYPT. - -_Alae._ - - None. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Thebaeorum E. Egypt. - II Thebaeorum Egypt. - - -AFRICA. - -_Alae._ - - A. Afrorum Germania Inferior. - Gaetulorum V. Palestine. - - B. I Ulpia Afrorum supposed on account of the existence of - II Ulpia Afrorum Egypt. - I Flavia Gaetulorum Moesia Inferior. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Afrorum C. R. E.[544] x. 5841. - I Cirtensium supposed on account of the existence of - II Cirtensium Mauretania Caesariensis. - I Cisipadensium Moesia Superior. - I Gaetulorum viii. 7039. - - B. I Flavia Afrorum supposed on account of the existence of - II Flavia Afrorum[545] Africa. - I Ulpia Afrorum E. Egypt. - I Flavia Musulamiorum Mauretania Caesariensis. - I Flavia Numidarum Lycia. - II Flavia Numidarum Dacia. - - -MAURETANIA. - -_Alae._ - - None. - -_Cohorts._[546] - - B. Maurorum M. Africa. - Maurorum M. Pannonia Inferior. - Maurorum Quingenaria Pannonia Inferior. - - -TARRACONENSIS.[547] - -_Alae._ - - A. I Arvacorum Pannonia Superior. - II Arvacorum Moesia Inferior. - I Asturum Britain. - I Asturum Moesia Inferior. - II Asturum Britain. - III Asturum xi. 3007. - I Hispanorum Campagonum Dacia. - I Hispanorum Germania Superior—Dacia. - I Hispanorum Auriana Noricum. - I Lemavorum Tarraconensis. - I Hispanorum Vettonum C. R. Britain. - - B. II Flavia Hispanorum Spain. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Asturum Germania Superior—Britain. - I Asturum Noricum. - II Asturum Germania Inferior—Britain. - III Asturum Mauretania Tingitana. - IV Asturum supposed on account of the existence of - V Asturum Germania Inferior. - VI Asturum ii. 2637. - I Asturum et Callaecorum[548] Mauretania Tingitana. - II Asturum et Callaecorum Pannonia Inferior. - I Ausetanorum ii. 1181. - I Bracaraugustanorum Moesia Inferior. - II Bracaraugustanorum vi. 1838. - III Bracaraugustanorum Britain. - III Bracaraugustanorum Raetia. - III Bracaraugustanorum[549] Palestine. - IV Bracaraugustanorum Palestine. - V Bracaraugustanorum Raetia. - I Cantabrorum supposed on account of the existence of - II Cantabrorum Palestine. - Carietum et Veniaesum v. 4373. - I Celtiberorum Spain. - I Celtiberorum Britain. - II Celtiberorum supposed on account of the existence of - III Celtiberorum Spain. - I Hispanorum Dacia. - I Hispanorum V. E. Moesia Inferior. - I Hispanorum E. Britain. - I Hispanorum E. Egypt. - II Hispanorum Germania Superior. - II Hispanorum Scutata Dacia. - Cyrenaica - II Hispanorum E. Africa. - II Hispanorum E. Cappadocia. - III Hispanorum Germania Superior. - IV Hispanorum Dacia. - V Hispanorum Germania Superior—Moesia Superior. - VI Hispanorum xi. 4376. - I Lucensium E. Dalmatia—Syria. - I Lucensium Hispanorum Germania Inferior. - II Lucensium Moesia Inferior. - III Lucensium Spain. - IV Lucensium Syria. - V Lucensium et Callaecorum Pannonia Superior. - I Fida Vardullorum M. E. C. R. Britain. - I Vasconum supposed on account of the existence of - II Hispanorum Vasconum Britain. - C. R. E. - - B. I Flavia Hispanorum Mauretania Caesariensis. - I Flavia Hispanorum M. E. Moesia Superior. - I Flavia Ulpia Hispanorum - M. E. C. R.[550] Dacia. - I Aelia Hispanorum M. E. Britain. - - -LUSITANIA. - -_Alae._ - - None. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Augusta Praetoria Egypt. - Lusitanorum E. - I Lusitanorum Pannonia Inferior. - I Lusitanorum Cyrenaica Moesia Inferior. - II Lusitanorum E. Egypt. - III Lusitanorum E. Germania Inferior—Pannonia - Inferior. - IV and V Lusitanorum supposed on account of the existence of - VI Lusitanorum[551] Raetia. - VII Lusitanorum E. Africa—Raetia. - - -SARDINIA AND CORSICA. - -_Alae._ - - None. - -_Cohorts._ - - A. I Corsorum C. R. Mauretania Caesariensis. - I Corsorum Sardinia. - I Sardorum Sardinia. - II Sardorum E. Mauretania Caesariensis. - - B. I Gemina Sardorum et Corsorum Sardinia. - II Gemina Ligurum et Corsorum Sardinia. - -These last two regiments seem to have been formed by amalgamating the -cohorts I Corsorum, I Sardorum, and I Ligurum, which appear in Sardinia -in the pre-Flavian period, but not later. - - -COHORTES VOLUNTARIORUM AND OTHER REGIMENTS OF ROMAN CITIZENS. - -The character of these regiments has already been discussed on pp. -65-7, where the origin of the greater number, at any rate, was traced -to the exceptional levies made during the Pannonian revolt of 6-9, and -after the defeat of Varus in the latter year. This levy included not -only free-born Roman citizens, _ingenui_, but also freedmen enrolled -in _cohortes voluntariorum_. The latter form a series numbered up to -thirty-two, which may have included the _cohortes ingenuorum_. The -latter may, however, have been numbered separately, and it must be -admitted that the presence of a Cohors IV Voluntariorum is rather -against the hypothesis, previously advanced, that the first six -numbers of the series were reserved for the _ingenui_. It is impossible -to argue from the fact that a _cohors voluntariorum_ and a _cohors -ingenuorum_ never appear bearing the same numbers, since the series has -many gaps, and only the following regiments can be traced: - - - I Ingenuorum C. R.[552] v. 3936. - IV Voluntariorum C. R. Pannonia Superior. - VI Ingenuorum C. R. Germania Inferior. - VIII Voluntariorum C. R. Dalmatia. - XIII Voluntariorum C. R. iii. 6321. - XV Voluntariorum C. R. Germania Inferior. - XVIII Voluntariorum C. R. Pannonia Superior. - XIX Voluntariorum C. R. vii. 383. - XXIII Voluntariorum C. R. Pannonia Superior. - XXIV Voluntariorum C. R. Germania Superior. - XXVI Voluntariorum C. R.[553] Germania Superior. - XXX Voluntariorum C. R. Germania Superior. - XXXII Voluntariorum C. R. Germania Superior. - -The following regiments seem to have a similar character, although we -know nothing concerning the occasion of their creation: - - I Italica Voluntariorum C. R. xiv. 171. - II Italica Voluntariorum C. R. M. Cappadocia. - I Campanorum Voluntariorum Dalmatia—Pannonia Inferior. - C. R.[554] - -Lastly, a series of at least seven regiments bearing the inexplicable -title of Campestris, of which only the following have left traces: - - III Campestris Dacia. - VII Campestris Syria. - -The following three regiments should perhaps be included in the same -category: - - Ala I C. R. Pannonia Inferior. - Cohors Apuleia C. R. Cappadocia. - Cohors I Lepidiana C. R. Moesia Inferior. - -In a final section I have grouped together regiments which bear -non-ethnical titles, and a few cases of ethnical titles which are at -present inexplicable, owing to our ignorance of the situation of the -tribes referred to. In the former case it must, however, be remembered -that many of these regiments may have had ethnical titles which are not -mentioned in the only references to them which we possess. - -_Alae._ - - Augusta Noricum. - Augusta[555] Moesia Inferior. - Augusta[556] Egypt. - Augusta C. R. Pannonia Inferior. - Augusta Germanica Pisidia.[557] - Augusta Moesica Germania Inferior. - Augusta Syriaca Syria. - Augusta ob virtutem appellata[558] Britain. - Claudia Nova Dalmatia—Germania Superior—Moesia - Inferior. - I Augusta Gemina Colonorum Cappadocia. - Constantium[559] _A. E._ 1911. 107. - I Ulpia Contariorum M. C. R. Pannonia Superior. - Flavia Africa. - I Flavia Fidelis M. Raetia. - I Flavia Gemelliana Raetia. - I Flavia Gemina Germania Superior. - I Flavia Singularium C. R. Raetia. - II Flavia M. Raetia. - Miliaria Mauretania Caesariensis. - Miliaria Dacia. - I Augusta Nerviana M. Mauretania Caesariensis. - I Praetoria C. R. Syria. - Scubulorum Germania Superior. - I Ulpia Singularium Syria. - Tautorum Victrix Tarraconensis. - II Ulpia Auriana[560] Cappadocia. - -_Cohorts._ - - Aelia Expedita viii. 9358. - I Augusta Syria. - II Augusta supposed on account of the existence of - III Augusta[561] vi. 3508. - Baetica v. 5127. - I Classica Germania Inferior. - I Aelia Classica Britain. - II Classica Syria. - Claudia E. Cappadocia. - III Coll… Moesia Inferior. - I Dongonum supposed on account of the existence of - II Dongonum Britain. - -The Lollianus inscription (iii. 600) mentions a mysteriously named -Cohors II Equitum, which seems also to be referred to on an Italian -inscription (v. 2841) as Cohors II Equitatum. The Cohors VI Equestris -mentioned by Pliny (_Ep. ad Tra._ 106) may belong to the same series. -The best explanation of these curious titles is to suppose that they -are all varieties of _equitata_. - - I Flavia E. Africa. - I Flavia E. Germania Inferior. - Flaviana[562] _C. I. G._ 3615. - V Gemina Palestine. - I Latabiensium Germania Inferior. - Maritima ii. 2224. - Miliaria Syria. - Naut… Alpes Maritimae. - I Augusta Nerviana Velox Mauretania Caesariensis. - I Nurritanorum Mauretania Caesariensis. - Scutata C. R. Egypt. - I Aelia Singularium Mauretania Caesariensis. - I Ulpia supposed on account of the existence of - II Ulpia E. C. R. Syria. - -This last section completes our survey of the auxiliary forces of the -Empire so far as they are known to us, and it is some satisfaction to -feel that so far as the mere names of the regiments go our knowledge is -now approaching completion. The recently discovered diploma for Moesia -Superior (_A. E._ 1912. 128), which gave the names of twenty-four -regiments which were stationed in the province in 103, did not mention -one previously unknown to us, and a glance at the _Année Épigraphique_ -for the past ten years will show how rarely a fresh name appears among -the numerous inscriptions dealing with the auxilia. This knowledge -does not, of course, carry us very far; while so many regiments are -merely known to us by name from one or two casual inscriptions, we can -tell neither the total number of auxilia maintained at any one time -nor the relative strength of the frontier garrisons, and a host of -minor problems are even further from solution. The very fact, however, -that new evidence is now so slow to accumulate seemed to justify the -attempt to utilize the available material and state summarily such -conclusions as are at present attainable on a subject of some interest -and importance to all students of the Roman Empire. - - -Footnotes: - -[507] Seems to be identical with the regiment mentioned in Tac. _Hist._ -iii. 41, and was therefore in existence before the Flavian period. - -[508] It does not seem possible to make any distinction, chronological -or otherwise, between the titles Britannica, Britannorum, and Brittonum. - -[509] Not recognized by Cichorius, but see above, p. 158, n. 1. The -meaning of the title is obscure, but such an elaborate form is not -likely to be early. - -[510] On the reason for distinguishing between these two regiments see -above, p. 162, n. 2. - -[511] See above, p. 60, n. 2. - -[512] Apparently a late creation, possibly raised by Severus Antoninus. -Cf. xiii. 7616, and Cichorius s.v. - -[513] Was in existence before the Flavian period. Cf. Tac. _Hist._ i. -59. - -[514] Assuming, as seems most probable, that this regiment was raised, -like the others, at an early date and only acquired the title Flavia as -an honorary distinction. - -[515] As four Gallic cohorts bear the number II, we may add two others -bearing the number I in addition to the two known to us, and also -another Cohors III to correspond with the third Cohors IV. The total -number of Gallic cohorts raised, including the Cohortes Gallicae, must -have been twenty-four. - -[516] Seems to be identical with the Cohors Ligurum E. which appears in -Sardinia and afterwards formed part of the amalgamated Cohors I Ligurum -et Hispanorum in Germania Superior. - -[517] Developed out of a _vexillatio equitum Illyricorum_. Cf. p. 157. - -[518] Cichorius identifies this with the last ala Pannoniorum, -supposing the title Flavia to have been added as an honorary -distinction. But iii. 3252, which is clearly of second-century date, -mentions an ala Pannoniorum without any additional title. - -[519] Developed out of a _numerus Sarmatarum_ organized from the -Sarmatae deported to Britain by Marcus. Cf. vii. 218 and 229. - -[520] Not included by Cichorius, but now known from _A. E._ 1905. 162. - -[521] See p. 61, n. 3. - -[522] See above, p. 157, n. 3. - -[523] This inscription is certainly interpolated, but Cichorius -believes in the authenticity of this title. - -[524] See _A. E._ 1903. 288. Not mentioned by Cichorius. - -[525] Not mentioned by Cichorius and only known from iii. 15184. - -[526] Another Ala II Thracum may be assumed to have been sometime in -existence, as two regiments bear the number III. - -[527] The only certain mention with full title is in _A. E._ 1911. 161. -For the ascription of this and the following cohort to the garrison of -Syria see above, p. 162, n. 3. - -[528] Not included by Cichorius and only mentioned on the Macedonian -diploma for 124, _A. E._ 1909. 105. - -[529] Not included by Cichorius and only known from this inscription. - -[530] Not included by Cichorius and only known from one inscription, -_A. E._ 1900. 48. The Syrian Cyrrhestis might, of course, be meant, and -the soldier’s birthplace, Beroea, is equally ambiguous, but the fact -that the regiment was in Dalmatia suggests a Macedonian origin. - -[531] For this regiment see above, p. 61, n. 7. - -[532] Only mentioned in _Not. Dign. Or._ xxviii. 35, without the title -Ulpia, but presumably belongs to the same series as cohorts I and II. - -[533] Not included by Cichorius and only known from _A. E._ 1905. 54. - -[534] One of these may be the Cohors Cypria mentioned in _A. E._ 1904. -163, and on an inscription from the Crimea, Latyschew ii. 293. - -[535] See above, p. 62, n. 6. - -[536] One of these two regiments is probably referred to in Arrian, -_Ectaxis_, 1. - -[537] Not included by Cichorius. Cf. viii. 21814 a, _A. E._ 1906. 19. - -[538] Inscriptions of the first of these cohorts (xiii. 7512, 7513) -show that it was recruited in the East, as probably all were. - -[539] If the emendation suggested above, on p. 69, n. 3, be correct, we -should also include a Cohors Seleuciensium. - -[540] Arrian, _Ectaxis_, 18, mentions an Ituraean cohort which may be -identical with one of these. - -[541] This, at least, seems the most likely province for it to have -been raised in. This regiment, not included by Cichorius, is only -mentioned in the Syrian diploma for 157. - -[542] It is not mentioned as _miliaria_, but is conjectured to have -been so on the analogy of cohorts II and III. - -[543] The title Ulpia is not given in these two cases, but the -regiments obviously belonged to the same series and were probably also -_equitatae_. - -[544] Probably identical with the ‘Cohors Afrorum in Dacia’ mentioned -in vi. 3529. - -[545] Not included by Cichorius, and only mentioned in _A. E._ 1909. -104, an inscription dating from the end of the second century. - -[546] There is no reason why these regiments should not have been -raised between 40 and 70, but they do not appear on inscriptions until -much later. - -[547] Some of the cohorts and alae of Hispani may, of course, have been -raised in Baetica. - -[548] On some difficult points connected with this regiment see Cagnat, -_L’armée romaine d’Afrique_, p. 258 (2nd edition). - -[549] From the existence of three cohorts bearing the number III, we -may assume two more with the number I, and two with the number II, of -which as yet no evidence exists. - -[550] This regiment is, however, possibly identical with the preceding. - -[551] Not included by Cichorius, and only mentioned on a Greek -inscription, which is probably of second-century date, _I. G. R. R._ -iii. 56. - -[552] Probably identical with the Cohors I C. R., which appears in -Germania Superior. The Cohors II C. R. which formed part of the -garrison of the same province according to ix. 2958 probably also -belongs to this series. - -[553] xiii. 6306 may refer to Cohors XXV, but it is probable that the -final stroke is omitted, and that Cohors XXVI was meant. - -[554] On this regiment see above, p. 65, n. 6. - -[555] Possibly identical with the Ala Augusta Moesica. - -[556] Possibly identical with the Ala Augusta Syriaca. - -[557] See _J. R. S._ ii. (1912), p. 99. - -[558] This regiment has no early inscriptions, and is probably -identical with one of the other British alae, possibly the Ala -Petriana, which renounced its original title in favour of this -honorific appellation. - -[559] Not included by Cichorius. This regiment is probably either a -late formation, or possessed also an ethnical title omitted on this -inscription. - -[560] The title is probably connected in some way with that of the Ala -I Hispanorum Auriana which was stationed in Raetia. - -[561] Here again, however, an ethnical title may well have been omitted. - -[562] Possibly a Gallic regiment on the analogy of the Ala Gallorum -Flaviana. - - - - -INDEX - - - _Actarius_, - in an ala, 41; - in a cohort, 43. - - _Aeneatores_, 43, n. 11. - - African officers, 96. - - Ala, - origin of term, 22-5; - titles of, 24, 45; - size of, 26; - officers of, 40. - - Archers, 84, 103, 128. - - _Augusta_, used as title of auxiliary regiments, 47. - - Augustus, military reforms, 13 et seqq. - - - Balearic slingers, 10, 131. - - Barbarization of Roman army, 99, 138. - - Barr Hill, fort at, 106. - - Batavians, 16, 19, 35, 49, 57, 72. - - _Beneficiarius_, - in an ala, 41; - in a cohort, 43. - - Breastplates, 124. - - Britain, frontier defences, 109, 112, 141. - - British regiments, recruiting, 85. - - _Bucinator_, - in an ala, 42; - in a cohort, 43. - - - _Canabae_, 117. - - _Capsarius_, 43, n. 8. - - _Catafractarii_, 128. - - Cavalry, - use of, 104; - superior pay of, 35. - - Celtic officers, 96. - - Centurions, 37. - - Chain armour, 126, 130. - - Civilis, 20. - - _Civitas_, granted to auxiliaries, 31 et seqq. - - _Civitates foederatae_, 57. - - _Civium Romanorum_, used as a title of auxiliary regiments, 46. - - _Cohortes equitatae_, 28, 29. - - „ _miliariae_, 28. - - „ _quingenariae_, 28. - - „ _voluntariorum_, 65 et seqq., 187. - - Cohorts, - size of, 27; - officers of, 43; - titles of, 46 et seqq. - - _Constitutio Antoniniana_, 122. - - _Contarii_, 104. - - _Cornicen_, 43. - - _Cornicularius_, - in an ala, 41; - in a cohort, 43. - - Cretans, 9, 62. - - _Curator turmae_, 41. - - „ _alae_ or _cohortis_, 37. - - _Custos armorum_, 41. - - - Dacia, recruiting of garrison, 77. - - Decurio, - in an ala, 37; - in a cohort, 38. - - Diocletian, military reforms, 136. - - _Diplomata militaria_, 31 et seqq. - - _Dromedarii_, 30. - - _Duplicarius_, 41. - - - _Equites Singulares Imperatoris_, 41 et seqq., 135; - recruiting, 81. - - - Face-masks, 127. - - Frontier defences, 107 et seqq. - - - Gaesati, 86. - - Gallic regiments, importance of, 64, 81. - - _Gemina_, used as a title of auxiliary regiments, 47. - - German frontier, 108. - - Greek officers, 97. - - - Hadrian, - military reforms, 90, 107; - speech to army in Africa, 29, 35, 132. - - Haltern, fort at, 105. - - Helmets, 125. - - Hofheim, fort at, 105. - - Housesteads, fort at, 27, 118. - - - _Imaginifer_, - in an ala, 41; - in a cohort, 42. - - _Immunes_, 39 et seqq. - - Isaurians, 144. - - Italian officers, 95. - - - Josephus, value of, 102. - - - Legionaries serving as officers in auxilia, 38. - - Legions, - recruiting of, 78, 80; - connexion of, with auxilia, 49-51. - - _Librarius_, - in an ala, 41; - in a cohort, 43. - - - Married soldiers, position of, 119. - - Mauri, 89, 128, 135. - - _Medicus_, - in an ala, 42; - in a cohort, 43. - - _Medicus ordinarius_, 43. - - _Mensor_, 43. - - Mounted Infantry, 29. - - - Newstead, fort at, 27, 106, 127. - - _Notitia Dignitatum_, 138. - - _Numeri_, 85 et seqq., 128, 131. - - Numidians, 10. - - - _Optio_, - in an ala, 41; - in a cohort, 42. - - Oriental regiments, recruiting of, 82 et seqq. - - Osroeni, 135. - - - Palmyreni, 88. - - Pannonia, recruiting of garrison, 71, 75 et seqq. - - Pay, 35. - - _Praefecti_, 91 et seqq. - - _Praefectus alae_, 36. - - „ _cohortis_, 36. - - „ _equitum_, 23, 24. - - „ _numeri_, 87. - - _Praepositus_, 37. - - Praetorians, 34, 135. - - _Principales_, 39 et seqq. - - - Roman citizens serving auxilia, 33. - - Romanization, 117. - - - Saalburg, fort at, 117. - - _Salluitana turma_, 11, 23. - - Scale-armour, 124, 127. - - _Sesquiplicarius_, 41. - - Shields, 125, 126, 129. - - Signalling, 111. - - _Signifer_, - in an ala, 39, 41; - in a cohort, 42. - - _Singulares_, 41. - - Slingers, 132. - - Spears, 126, 129. - - _Stator_, 41. - - _Strator_, 41. - - _Subpraefectus_, - in an ala, 36; - in a cohort, 36. - - Sugambrians, 48, 116. - - Swords, 126, 129. - - - Tacitus, value of, 102. - - _Tesserarius_, 42. - - _Tribunus cohortis_, 36, 94. - - _Tubicen_, 42. - - - _Velites_, 10. - - _Veteranorum cohortes_, 48. - - _Vexillarius_, - in an ala, 10; - in a cohort, 42. - - _Vexillationes_, 113. - - -Oxford: Horace Hart M.A. Printer to the University - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Auxilia of the Roman Imperial Army, by -George Leonard Cheesman - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE AUXILIA OF THE ROMAN *** - -***** This file should be named 51769-0.txt or 51769-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/1/7/6/51769/ - -Produced by Brian Wilcox and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive) - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. |