Named legions and Legio Armatus(SP?)

[raphael]

Hi all, i noticed that when the campaign begins, there are legions that have names like those in RSII is there a way to recruit them or we can only retrain them.

Also what is the difference between Legio Comitatensis and Legio Armatus and Legio Palatinae and Domesti...(sp?) the 1nes u can recruit in Rome

And since there are Legio Palatinae and Auxillia Palatinae, what was the reason that the Romans did not make Auxillia Comitatensis?

[First Citizen Gallienus]

Legio Armatus, Legio Armatus Ripenses, Auxila Cohortes Limitanei, etc., are essentially the auxilia for the Comitatenses. The Comitatenses are the regular legions, while the Palatinae grade of troops are "elites." To recruit each type you'll need a Comitatenses Barracks or a Palatinae Barracks, you can't recruit both types at the same time, and only a handful of specific cities recruit comitatenses and higher.

[Pompeius Magnus]

what was the reason that the Romans did not make Auxillia Comitatensis?

Oh, the question is fair and was discussed many times.
Authors like Seek or Robert Grosse are quite sure that they served for a certain time within the field armies before they were "promoted" to the Palatinae.

Also, please don't forget that Comitatenses and Palatinae were not 2 different groups at the beginning of that new system. The Palatinae were officially classified as Comitatenses also. They were basically just a "preferred" group within the regular field army - analytically speaking.

Furthermore, and this is the most surprinsingly aspect, Robert Grosse describes (Römische Militärgeschichte ; chapter III page 91) with some good examples that some of the Pseudocomtitatenses (Legions) of the field armies were promoted as Auxilium into the imperial (Palatinae) field army.
Those Pseudocomitatenses were originally perhaps Auxillaries from the frontier army (respectively Cohors or Alae).
His analogies and the following analysis can easily followed through examples of the Notitia Dignitatum.
This descriptions and the check of sources is still ongoing from my side - therefore I cannot say too much at the moment about this exciting topic.

[Julianus Flavius]

Well I suppose the pusedlcomitiatus units would be 'auxillia comitatenses'

[Pompeius Magnus]

I have checked the lists of Otto Seeck and compared part V and VII of the original ND.
The suspicion is correct. Some detachments of Pseudo Comitatenses were indeed promoted to regular Legions - moreover, some were also promoted to Auxilia Palatinae.
Otto Seeck writes that the units at the end of the list in part V are mixed - but after a careful check I must disaffirm that statement.
Also this list is well written and differs between the high grade Vexillationes on top (cavalry), followed by legiones palatinae, then followed by auxilia palatinae, then by regular legiones comitatenses ...and finally by Pseudo-Comitatenes. The latter group had always the lowest status within the field armies.

ND Occ.
V. Insignia viri illustris magistri peditumIntra Italiam cum viri illustris magistri peditum
1.Marcomanni
2.Placidi Valentinianici felices
3.Tertia Iulia

All 3 units are classified as Pseudo Comitatenses
and now compare with:

VII. Qui numeri ex praedictis per infrascriptas provincias habeantur.
1.Honoriani Marcomanni seniores = classified as Aux Pal
1.Honoriani Marcomanni iuniores = classified as Aux Pal
2.Felices Valentinianenses (also Felices iuniores Gallicani are possible) = both classified as Aux Pal
3.Tertia Iulia Alpina = classified as Legio

2 units are numbered with the no#1
The reason is because I'm not sure which unit exactly derives from the Marcomanni of part V (probably just one of them; probably both).
No#2: 2 units are possible (see note in clamps); however that's not important since both units are Aux Pal in part VII.
No#3 is clear so far.


As said, I have just checked 2 parts of the ND. I fear we can find several other examples for "promoted" units.
The important message based on this research is that the question about armament and weaponry becomes somewhat obsoltete. At least concerning the question of some Auxilia.
If former Legions (respectively Pseudocomitatenses) were promoted - even some of them as Auxilium - then we can suggest that they were still equipped in the same way as before and fighting in a closed roman order.
Even if some Pseudo-Comitatenes were barbarian Cohors before (e.g. 2nd and 3rd century) we may suggest that those units were completely romanized.

Close to my home here in Frankfurt we have the famous Limitanei Castle of a Roman Cohors (Saalburg). Grave stones suggest that a good proportion of the serving men were of german origin. However, the complete castle, weapons and organization was 100% Roman. There was actually no difference between them and a Legion - deployed in Italy.

[Diocle]

Sorry Pompeius, for the intrusion, but this tread became very interesting, and I have some questions:

Limitanei? If some units of Limitanei were promoted to Comitatenses, they weren't reequipped?

[Pompeius Magnus]

Hello Diocle
Yes, the thesis seems to be daring.
However, it is a certainty if you have been actively engaged with the Codex Theodosianus and the Notitia Dignitatum.

Sorry Pompeius, for the intrusion, but this tread became very interesting, and I have some questions:

-When you tell us that the question about armament and weaponery becomes somewhat obsolete, you are speaking about field armies of Palatinae and Comitatenses units, composed by eventually promoted Auxilia and Legiones, in other words you are saying that we cannot see a great difference in the field armies, but for the Limitanei? If some units of Limitanei were promoted to Comitatenses, they weren't reequipped? If I understand correctly your suggestions: they mantained their Limitaneus equipment?!?

You have to differ between new deployed Auxillaries which fought for sure in their native (whatever that means in the 4th century) equipment. This is also suggested by Ammianus several times.
The problem is that we have some relief depictions which are not clear about the shown units.
That Limitanei (Legions) and mobile Comitatenses (Legions) were per se different in armament and equipment during the first half of the 4th century is by far not proven and in my opinion a fairy tale - partially based on a certain "self interpretation" of the Codex Theodosianus and its laws - which are indeed clearly differentiating between mobile and static forces and its payment. But not about their weapons! And exactly this is the point.

But the natural evolution which resulted in an irreversible change between farmer-soldiers and mobile troops on the other hand was not accomplished during the 350s or 360s. Especially because the term "Limitanei" appears very late the first time in a law of the Codex Theod. of the year 365AD (if I remember well). Therefore I'm not sure if the difference concerning quality, equipment and armament was whished by the emperors during the 4th century. I would say that it was the result of a certain progress within a transition periode.
The Riparienses are mentioned more early, however they are referred to the units stationed nearby rivers.

When we take a closer look at the Pseudo Comitatenses round about 400AD we can be sure that the equipment of frontier forces and mobile forces was probably different in many ways. At least chainmails or other protections were for sure more common in the field armies.
In this case it is possible that even Pseudo-Comitatenses get access to those types of protection after their "promotion". The question remains to what degree they were equipped and if it was really necessary to give them a complete new set of equiment during the middle of the 4th century (also a matter of available money)
Pure speculation.

But I go even further: I say that there was probably little difference between Legio Palatinae and Legio Comitatenses during the first half of the 4th century and even beyond - since both groups belonged to the regular Comitatenses - and the Palatinae were just a preferred group.
But that's something we can of course discuss.

The quintessence of my research is that Pseudo Comitatenses were occasionally promoted to Legions - or even promoted to the higher graded Auxilia (which is indeed a surprise).
In this case it is possible that we see Legions on certain reliefs - actually showing an Auxilium.
And this is probably the reason why it is so difficult to answer the question about the armament, equipment and mail-protection of the Auxilium - simply because this kind of troop had so many origins:
namely promoted Pseudo-Comitatenses, 3rd century Numeri (re-organized as Auxilium), new deployed Auxillaries of gallic and/or german origin.

It seems to be that each unit must be considered individually concerning the question of its equipment.
When was it deployed? Where is it coming from? Which people served in that unit? And very important: the time frame! Did we speak about an Auxilium of 320AD or 410AD or 450AD? Especially during the latter time frame there was probably no difference anymore between a Legion and an Auxilium - which resulted in the fact that all available units were already called Numerus.

Also important:
The Limitanei forces were by far not just composed by former legions. Also Auxlillaries and Cohors were part of them. #But that's the reason why I gave the example of the Castrum of Saalburg in my last post.
The Cohors stationed here belonged to the so called 2nd and 3rd century auxillaries - and they were not noteworthy different regarding equipment and internal organization compared to a Legion.
So, even if we consider that some of my promoted Pseudo-Comitanteses were orginally "just" semi-barbarian Cohors we can suggest that their equipement had a certain degree of quality and was by far not inferior.

But in this way we should assert that there wasn't any real difference between Limitanei Static field units and Comitatenses/Paltinae units, in terms of weaponery and armament?!?

As said above - this depends on the time frame and the origin of the units. This must be considered individually.
The question of the general equipment of the Auxilium is obsolete - simply because you cannot give an answer which is valid "pars pro toto" for all units of the 4th and early 5th century. The reason is because the Auxilium was a widely diversified military unit.
That a good proportion of the old barbarian Numeri of the 3rd century were classfied as Auxilium during the reign of Diocletian and/or Constantin was well known to me. Now we see that even some Legions were classified (or promoted) like that. And even if the number of promoted Legions (promoted to an Auxilium) was probably very low, it is for me however another issue we have to consider.

Maybe your suggestion is that, if they chose a Limitaneus/Pseudo-Comitatensis Lego/Auxilia Unit from the Borders Garrisons, this unit must already have sufficent armor/equipment to be mixed with the other Field Army Units, in other words they chose from the borders only units already well equipped?!?

I think that a certain status or quality was essential and crucial for the transfer of a Legio limitaneorum into the field army (then serving as Pseudo Comitatenses).
Furthermore it is well known that just 500-1000 men (a detachment) was taken or transferred into the field army. I'm sure that a border Legion of 4000 men (or even more) was able to equip such a detachment.
But as said, during the first half of the 4th century (320s 330s 340s) I cannot see the often cited "huge gap". There was of course a difference, even during that time, but it was probably not so big or noteworthy as some think.


edit:
to give some more examples of the list of ND Occ. part V and VII we can add the unit of the Gratianenses as well.

part V lists them as Pseudo-Comitatenses
part VII lists the Gratianenses iuniores + seniores as Auxilia Palatinae.

if we consider that a Legion of the borders (classified as Limitanei) was probably still 3000 or even 4000 strong between 350 and 370 AD it is not impossible that 2 detachments (+/- 2x 500 men= 1000 total) was removed from the mother Legion - transferred to the mobile field army - and then promoted as Auxilium.

Seeck means that they were an Auxilium in part V as well - however, this cannot be correct because they are listed at the very end between all the other Pseudo-Comitatenses - and the list is strictly hierarchically.
Of course, even the ND can be wrong "here and there" - but meanwhile I found so many examples of promoted units (from a border Legion to an Auxilium of a field army) that I don't believe that's it's wrong.

without starting a comprehensive research about the east - but I found the same promoting procedure in the east as well:

Or. IX.
Insignia viri illustris magistri militum per Illyricum
Felices Theodosiani iuniores - Pseudo Com

Or. VI
Insignia viri illustris magistri militum praesentalis.
Felices Theodosiani - Aux Pal

back to the west:

not entirely sure - but even this units are probably the same (or had the same mother Legion before):
Or. VII.
Qui numeri ex praedictis per infrascriptas provincias habeantur
Insidatores (classified as Pseudo Comitatenses)

Occ. XXXIII.
Dux provinciae Valeriae.
Auxilia insidiatorum (as the name implies: an Auxilium)

[Diocle]

Thanks .

[Pompeius Magnus]

Oh... so many different topics.

the main issue of this thread was the Auxilia and its usage.
For more info about the history of the Legion and the mobile armies (including the New-Legion) please check my essay about it in the AoD-forum:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=353621

...or perhaps somebody else want go into detail.
But a post to answer your question becomes probably too long.
Therefore I will only write an answer on your question regarding the auxillaries

we cannot find a general rule for this kind of trasformations. From this work are emerging, for me, quite revolutionary descoveries..

I think this (your) sentence is the most important.
When you study the ND carefully you will notice that it wasn't redacted (edited) after a certain plan or schedule.
The reason is because the "reform" was not done ad-hoc (from one day to another, so to speak). It was a fluent transition starting with Gallienus (his reforms can be observed in the ND) - the restauration of the East by Aurelianus (can be observed very well due to the units from Illyria, now garrisoned in the East) - and the transition periode after Adrianople-the time of Theodosius-and the periode after 408AD.

All those time spans left their individually footprints in the troop-lists and their home bases of the ND

Three question:
-At this point what the difference between Auxilia and Legiones Palatine if they could be formed by the same kinds of units. The Romans (and their Language) were a quite sinthetic and utilitarian people, why call the same kind of unit with two different names, if there weren't real differences, in tactical role or equipment/armament or recruitment between Auxilia Palatina and Legiones Palatina?
..

To avoid misunderstandings:
!! I never said that the Comitatenses Palatinae and the (barbarian) Auxilium was the same regarding quality and internal structure !!

I'm quite sure (and this can be supported by many tales and reports of contemporary witnesses) that the Legions of the 4th century, esp those of the mobile field armies, had a very high quality. I also don't think that it was per se a disadvantage that here and there germans or other gentiles served in those units.
And due to the close contact to the royal court it is likely that after 360/370 at least the Palatina Legions get always the best equipment.
Therefore it is for many historians, including Seeck or Grosse, still a mystery why the service within the Auxilium was so preferred. It was more than one time suggested (but that's just a theory) that the service within the Auxilia was just focused on the war and the fight (and therefore well paid) - while on the other hand a Legion had more traditionally hard jobs like constructing camps, repair brigdes if needed, repair walls if required etc etc.

At the beginning of that new system the Palatina Legions were just a preferred group, evidenced the first time after 365AD(!), within the mobile armies of the Comitatenes. Insofar I'm absolutely sure that the differences between Palatina Legions and regular Legions of the field armies were actually just marginal during the first half of the 4th century. When we suggest that the general organization of the Full-Legions of the borders (Limitanei) had a minumum of its former power and structure left in 300/310/320AD - then I'm sure that the differences were also little between them and the field armies. That a certain "gap" occured during the following years is a normal procedure - since those units were specialized on denfense and smaller operations only - while on the other hand the mobile armies were equipped and drilled for the open battle field.
There were most likely bigger differences between the Illyrian Palatina Legions and the normal ones - since the Illyrian units had a special status since Aurelian and Diocletian. But we are just speaking about exceptions.

I also said very clear in my upper post that the new deployed Auxilia and and the former Numeri (some of them promoted to the new Auxilium) fought for sure in their native equipment and warfare.
This is mentioned several times by Ammianus (I can also give the sources if wished. He also calles some of them "born gauls").

The result of my research is that some of the Limitanei were transferred to the field armies - and then serving as Pseudo-Comitatenses (a fact which no surprise for all of us).
A certain number of those troops were promoted and classified as higher graded Legion or even as Auxilium - and this is indeed new - since historians like Mommsen and Otto Seeck never made a consequentially deep research about it.

Limitanei were Legions, Cohors as well as pre-diocletianic auxillaries.

This research has begun by the historian Robert Grosse many years ago - but he has just adumbrated (like Mommsen and Seeck) that there is a possibility of such "promotions".
The Thesis was picked up by other historians "here and there" - as well. But still not clear definied.

But the way: I also observed that some units were downgraded or degraded as well. But this is another story. But it seems that promotions and degrations were proceeded in both directions. Research is still ongoing.


....
If a Limitanei Cohors or a Limitanei Legion was promoted to the Auxilia we can suggest that their internal structure and weaponry was similar (I don't say that it was the same) to that of the Legio Comitatenses -and this is valid at least until +/-340/350AD (or even beyond??).

That means we cannot give a clear answer on the question: "What was the equipment of the Auxilium during the 4th century?" - we cannot give an answer because the Auxilium was not a homogen group like the Legion.
The Auxilium was a tactical unit (a very coveted one) - and many elements of that group had different origins (former Numeri, new deployed auxillaries, promoted Legions, promoted Cohors).

Therefore it is impossible to give a clear answer on that question regarding their equipment and armament.... an answer which is valid for all Auxilia cannot be given.
All units should be checked individually - as mentioned in my previous post.

This situation changed during the very late 4th and 5th century. From this time on it is very possible (even if not evidenced!) that all Auxilia had basically the same equipment like Legions or any other kind of regular line-troops.

In the Codex Iustinianus (written round about 540AD) we can still read the terms Cohors, Legio, Auxilia etc. Insofar we can suggest that all old terms were still valid offially and survived to some degree during the 6th century. But all infantry regiments were collectively called "Numerus" and classified as Numeri. Therefore there was probably no difference anymore between Stratiotai (=Comitatenses; including former Auxilia e.g. Reges=Regii) - independently to what group they originally belonged to.

-There were Auxilia Comitatenses?

You will find Auxilia Palatina in the regional field armies as well. So, In the first moment you think that Auxilia Palatina were also a "normal" part of them.

But:
Comes Illyricum (all listed units classified as Auxilia)
1.Sagittarii Tungri
2.Iovii iuniores
3.Sequani
4.Raeti
5.Sagittarii venatores
6.Latini
7.Valentinianenses felices
8.Honoriani victores
9.Seguntienses
10.Tungri
11.Mauri Honoriani seniores
12.Mattiarii Honoriani Gallicani

But then compare the list with that of the Magister Peditum (the royal Praesentalis army)
all of the upper listed Auxilia are serving nominally under the Mag.Peditum.
Simply spoken - they are borrowed to the Comes. Actually they were always subordinated under the standards of the Mag.Ped.

However, some units (esp in the ERE) are of course serving in the regional field army. In the army of the Magister Militum per Orientem (MMpO) you find the
Felices Arcadiani seniores
Felices Honoriani seniores

in the army of the MMpI
Ascarii seniores
Ascarii iuniores
Petulantes iuniores
Sagittarii lecti
Invicti iuniores
Atecotti

Those ERE-units are fixed part of the upper mentioned armies and just serving there.
Compared to Robert Grosse and Seeck I think that those units were Comitatensian auxillaries. But the question remains unanswered if those units served from the beginning of their existence in those armies, or if they were degraded, or if they were transferred officially due to special cicumstances concerning a war.
Otherwise I cannot explain why they still had worn the appendix "Palatina". In my opinion Auxilia Palatina - which were serving in the regional armies - were just an exception.

-Am I correct saying that there were
o kinds of Auxiliary troops, one similar to the Old Diocletian Auxilium, and one new, with the same name, but now a totally different high status unit: the Auxilia Palatina?

you will find several troops like the Pseudo Comitatenses "Timacenses auxiliarii"
We can suggest that former 3rd century auxillaries (Numeri or just referred as auxilaribus) or Cohors (composed by foreigners) - that they were transferred and pressed into the new system to a certain degree. That some units still had the appendix "auxiliarii" is an indication for that statement.
The New-Auxilia was a name for a new tactical unit.

Pure barbarian units, without any or just little roman structures, were of course still operating. Now called Milites, or even Numeri are still attested as a mixed undefinied unit during the 4th century, or just called auxiliarii plus the appendage of their origin e.g. auxilaribus sarmatorum.

Just take a look at the auxillaries of Aetius. He had thousands of hunnic auxillaries - but it would be completely abstruse to think that they were classified into one of the existing roman unit organizations - and for sure they never belonged to the Auxilium Palatina.

[Diocle]

Again thanks, for the quick reply!