Historical Amries of the western and eastern roman empire

[patrick1191]

Can someone please tell me what units make up a historical legion of the western and eastern roman empire? Thanks

[Draco Borealis]

infantry: like varius comittatus, legio palatini, and british legionares, plus some of limitatei, and pseudo comittus. In IB every unit is a legion, not cohort like in vanilla.

[TheSilverKnight]

I have a few types of legions that I use, that I could recommend that you try, for a "historically accurate" type of legion:

First is just the regular Roman Legion -
1 General
10 Legio Comitatenses
2 Legio Lanciarii
2 Legio Plumbatarii
(or if you would prefer instead of this, 4 Legio Pseudocomitatenses)
2 Saggittarii Graves/Archers
2 Equites Promoti (can be replaced with specialised/localised cavalry)
1 Ballistae/Onager/Heavy Onager

For the Legio Palatinae -
1 General
1 Legio Palatinae
9 Legio Comitatenses
4 Auxilia Palatinae
2 Scholae Palatinae
2 Saggittarii Graves
1 Ballistae/Onager/Heavy Onager

These legions can be tweaked from region to region and certain units replaced with localised units.

Either way, hope you enjoy and come up with your own legions
¡Saludos!

[Pompeius Magnus]

The quantity of comitatenses units seems really too high.
I don´t know which kind of sources you have (esp. for the silver knight), but my sources are totally different. At the beginning of the game (410) it is OK to have some comitatenses units in your legion (SOME!!! FEW). But not 10 each!
Esp. in africa or spain. I thing the mod of ramon IBFD7.X should give you a good example at the beginning of the game what was used in that time frame:
Some movement armies with different kinds of comitatenses, localized troops and more and more mounted troops.
Aetius for example (+/- 430) had only some core troops wich were "professionels". Most of his troops were foederati, allies, and local milites.
I will try to write down some exactly numbers (with sources) next few days but now I am in my office (at work).
And by the way, wikipedia is NOT a good source.

[TheSilverKnight]

The quantity of comitatenses units seems really too high.
I don´t know which kind of sources you have (esp. for the silver knight), but my sources are totally different. At the beginning of the game (410) it is OK to have some comitatenses units in your legion (SOME!!! FEW). But not 10 each!
Esp. in africa or spain. I thing the mod of ramon IBFD7.X should give you a good example at the beginning of the game what was used in that time frame:
Some movement armies with different kinds of comitatenses, localized troops and more and more mounted troops.
Aetius for example (+/- 430) had only some core troops wich were "professionels". Most of his troops were foederati, allies, and local milites.
I will try to write down some exactly numbers (with sources) next few days but now I am in my office (at work).
And by the way, wikipedia is NOT a good source.

I never used Wikipedia for my source. I'm going along what I think is the design of the "perfect" legion. It varies of course depending on my money or manpower, but I try to make "Imperial" legions have about that composition.

[Samuel Adams]

Ah, historically a legion in the time period here in IB was incredibly different than a legion in the "standard" 1st-3rd century AD. Not only in the appearance and equipment (which, btw, the modders of IB did a FANTASTIC job that satisfied even a history fanatic like me!), but in the numbers that made up the legion and the legion troop makeup.

So now, 400+/- AD, the Roman Empire had the limitatei (here in this mod they are more specific troop types among them, milites, for instance), border garrisons of troops who lived on their posts and out in the middle of nowhere. It was their job to first stop the enemy who would come in, at least to buy time till the heavy infantry, or Comitatenses, could respond from the major cities they were garrisoned in.

Also, the legion in early times numbered 5000 men; 4500 infantry, 500 cavalry. The legion in this period could number anywhere from 5000 infantry to 1500 infantry; and indeed, some numbered as low as 500 infantry in the darkest moments of the empire! Cavalry was now it's own unit, not attached to a certain legion like it had been in the early days.

Cavalry was by and large much more a part of battle than it had been, although the numbers were by no means as much as they would be with the Franks three hundred years later under Charlemane.

Anyways, that's it in a nutshell.

[patrick1191]

Thanks for the help everyone.

[Samuel Adams]

Magnus,
It's hard in any game to recreate exactly what the legions in any time period were like. In reality, even with unit settings on HUGE RTW doesn't allow for anyone to have a "full" legion. If you wanted to get technical, look at the foederati; each would have been equipped differently (even within the Roman army, there would have been, by 300 AD, a large variety of equipment, clothes, weapons, etc), yet in game they are split into units where each man in the unit is identical.

As far as comitatenses, in the game (IB) you start with very few, and they are, as per history, stationed in large cities with large barrack facilities. The outer stations are held by two milite units and a general. Again, accurate.

Yet, the point of the game is not to be just like the historical ancient Roman empire. Had they not crumbled when they did, would they not have reformed, yet again, their troop types? Or, at least, how they fought, to deal with the newer progressing types of warfare brought on by the Franks, etc? I daresay that various things would have been implemented if the Roman Empire had not fallen when it did. For instance, what if the Romans had pulled out of their outer regions (Gaul, Spain, North Africa, Illyria *maybe*) and fortified italy, using their best troops to keep out the barbarians who were invading?

My point is, A) you will not be able to get a 100% historical makeup of the army; B) If you don't want Rome as an empire to fall, it makes sense, if you have the money, to equip as many soldiers as heavily as possible to deal with the threats that present themselves. Flavius Aetius was the victim of the times; no money, an emperor that used him (who was in turn used by his mother), and pressure at the gates of the empire from a score of barbarian nations and tribes, most notably in his time the Goths and the Huns. His weapon had to be politics, as he used both against the other at some point until his assasination. If he'd had the money, why on earth would he not have raised more troops, armed and armoured them heavily, and used that?

just some of my thoughts, sorry to ramble. I love good history discussions though.

[Pompeius Magnus]

Yes Horton,
I know that. But it is important to tell these facts all the other users and players.
But for me it is possible to get a more or less historical army of that time. I will start another fresh thread to explain something.

And I agree with you that the job of the great Aetius was very hard.