the return of the Gallic comitatus

[AntonioHundangir]

Well i dont agree. About identity i mean. but here we shouldnt speak of politic. But of games. (i never do it in that environment. Thats why i speak happily with people that have ideas so much diverse from me. ) .about bagaidae, what i can say...a group of rednecks even, pushed by someone to rebellion. But i dont like their romantic vision. I think i wouldnt like people like they. now the angles of deira attack a border city -.- i cannot send an army. But nextly i ll destroy they and all british petty kings that would be indpensent (i m the concilium. The only legitime roman authority on britannia. No one will escape the longa manusnof the warlord. Ahahah).

[Diocle]

OK Anto, I'm sure that even though you don't like Bagaudae, you love King Arthur, don't you? Well, stretching the matter, we could consider King Arthur a shining example of Celtic Revival, and the values of the Celtic Revival are at roots of the political phenomenon known as Bagaudae, bands of irregulars (Brigands? Partisans? Poor Christs having nothing to lose for they had already lost all?) plaguing Gaul for two centuries at least.

The point is: did it ever exist a common political identity for the Gallo-Roman citizens living in Gaul during the troublesome last centuries of Roman presence in Gaul? And: at the end of Roman rule, was this identity Gallic or Roman? Or Gallo-Roman? Or Romano-Germanic? Or Gallo-Germanic?
If it existed a common Roman or Gallo-Roman political identity, was it so strong to push the warbands, serving Northern warlords such as the mysterious Aegidius, to display on the battlefield Roman Vexilla and/or Signa, making them looking like regular Roman units?
Was it so strong this common political identity, to force the men of towns and villages in Northern Gaul, to keep alive the traditions and symbols of the ancient units in which they had served their grandfathers and great-grandfathers a hundred years earlier?
Sorry but, in absence of even the smallest evidence, my answer was, is and always will be:

NO, there was not any regular Roman unit in Northern Gaul after the Fall of Rome and during the VI cent AD., displaying Roman insigna of any kind.

In any case I ask you, believers in Atlantis, to prove I'm wrong and to show me the proofs that your Atlantis did exist somewhere out of the mind of Plato.


Side note for believers, about Egidius and Atlantis:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Have you ever considered, my beloved and esteemed Atlantis believers, that between Aegidius (died in 464 AD?) and the Greek-Gothic Wars (535-553) it runs more or less one century?

Now follow me please:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

try to imagine during WW2 .. .. a British soldier dressed in this way:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

.. what do you think it would have happened to the poor man?

Or try this:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

imagine a French officer at Marengo, .. .. reporting for duty in presence of Bonaparte, dressed in this way:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

.. I don't know you but I can see Napolen's face as if I was there!

[Majorien]

NO, there was not any regular Roman unit in Northern Gaul after the Fall of Rome and during the VI cent AD., displaying Roman insigna of any kind.

Roman soldiers once parked at the borders of the pole to mount guard. And these soldiers no longer had the means to return to Rome and did not want to alliers their enemis who were Arians (the Visigoths), gave themselves, with their banners and territories they had kept to the Romans, Arborychi (Armoricans) and Germans (the Franks). Even today, they are clearly recognized as belonging to the legions which they were assigned when they once served and still carry their own banners in battle and still follow the customs of their ancestors. They preserve the habit of the Romans in every detail, including shoes.
Procopius, in 550.
Zozimus, who wrote in the sixth century, about units created by Cesar Julianus (!!) : The Caesar Julian enlisted Salian, part of the Quads and many of those who were in the island of Batavia, in units which have been preserved until today.

End of the Game ;-)

[Diocle]

Roman soldiers once parked at the borders of the pole to mount guard. And these soldiers no longer had the means to return to Rome and did not want to alliers their enemis who were Arians (the Visigoths), gave themselves, with their banners and territories they had kept to the Romans, Arborychi (Armoricans) and Germans (the Franks). Even today, they are clearly recognized as belonging to the legions which they were assigned when they once served and still carry their own banners in battle and still follow the customs of their ancestors. They preserve the habit of the Romans in chque detail, including shoes.
Procopius, in 550.
Zozimus, who wrote in the sixth century, about units created by Cesar Julianus : The Caesar Julian enlisted Salian, part of the Quads and many of those who were in the island of Batavia, in units which have been preserved until today.

End of the Game ;-)

No, it's not. Instead it should be just the beginning for you, my most beloved friend and Atlantis * believer. This your beginning should be articulated in three parts:

1. Realizing that Procopius is not enough to demonstrate anything, especially because, for his explicit admission, he is only reporting rumors and he never visited the Northern places he quotes, you should search for other historical sources supporting the mithologic tale invented by Procopius for political reasons.
2. Then you should find some at least one (1) material proofs, supporting the Procopius' tale, I mean some archaeological find, some archaeological site, some material proof clearly proving that Roman troops in Northern Gaul were still displaying on the medieval battlefields of the VI century AD, the ancient standards of their ancestors.
3. Then, to finish your job, you should associate beyond any doubt this proof/s with the tale of Procopius, showing us that the material proofs you have MUST be related to the place and the time in which Procopius set his invented tale.

So, at work my dear friend, your trip won't be short nor easy but .. with some good luck you might even find your personal island of Atlantis! In this case I will be more than glad to celebrate with you the event with the best cup of the most expensive bottle of the best Barolo I can hope to find on the market, here where that nectar is produced and I'm living now, more or less in the place where Desaix has fallen! Until that moment comes, sadly, I must repeat once again what I'm writing for many years now:

There was not any regular Roman unit in Northern Gaul after the Fall of Rome and during the VI cent AD, displaying Roman insigna of any kind.




* About the use of written sources, let me advance this old, always working example:

"Timaeus", Plato, 360 BC:
"Many great and wonderful deeds are recorded of your state in our histories. But one of them exceeds all the rest in greatness and valour. For these histories tell of a mighty power which unprovoked made an expedition against the whole of Europe and Asia, and to which your city put an end. This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent. Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent, and, furthermore, the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia. This vast power, gathered into one, endeavoured to subdue at a blow our country and yours and the whole of the region within the straits; and then, Solon, your country shone forth, in the excellence of her virtue and strength, among all mankind. She was pre-eminent in courage and military skill, and was the leader of the Hellenes. And when the rest fell off from her, being compelled to stand alone, after having undergone the very extremity of danger, she defeated and triumphed over the invaders, and preserved from slavery those who were not yet subjugated, and generously liberated all the rest of us who dwell within the pillars. But afterwards there occurred violent earthquakes and floods; and in a single day and night of misfortune all your warlike men in a body sank into the earth, and the island of Atlantis in like manner disappeared in the depths of the sea. For which reason the sea in those parts is impassable and impenetrable, because there is a shoal of mud in the way; and this was caused by the subsidence of the island."

Now, Plato is for sure a reliable source (possibly even more reliable than Procopius the Byz), he states that the mithological island of Atlantis existed somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean, have we to believe him? Or have we to analyze the historical source constituted by the Plato's Timaeus, to find some proof about the Plato's tale? Sadly for you, my dear friend, you are in this condition, you have to find some proof supporting a tale you would like to believe in. This is not a tragedy, indeed it might be the beginning of a wonderful adventure if your faith in the mith is so strong to push you to do what Schliemann did two centuries ago, finally discovering the ancient mithological town of Troy.
Once again, good luck, I love dreamers and IMO you need a lot of good luck in your search!

[Majorien]

seriously, you asking me to believe my Friend Diocle writing from La Spinëta in 2016 instead of Procopius and Zozimus, two almost-reliable historians from the sixth century ? come on, it is impossible.
I could stop here, but i want to go further.

1. Unfortunately, material proofs aren't always available. When you discover one, yes, you know that what was written is reliable. But let me ask a question with the Diocle's style : so the battle between Attila and Aetius never occured ? When have ZERO "material proof" of it, not even a single spatha !! For a battle wich has been fought by at least tens thousand of men !!!

2. A real historian (and i'm not one) could tell you that Procopius is too specific for inventing a tale, and most important, he had no hidden agenda in writing it. Why do you doubt ? Because he hasn't seen it himself ? Come on, 99% of the history we know has been written by undirect witnesses. Except Ammien Marcellin, who really lived some of what he dealed (Amida for instance), but not all : so for instance Diocle, you won't believe that he wrote on Adrianopolis ? Come on !! (again)

3. Correct me if i'm wrong, no vexillum from ALL the Empire, republic, and obviously kingdom of Rome came threw the ages to our museums... But regular units existed my friend ! :-)

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

The Bacaudae were not freedom fighters, they were local Romans being exploited by the local aristocracy/bureaucracy instead of the central aristocracy/bureaucracy. They traded one center of power for another.

The freedom fighter perspective of the Bacaudae is a relic of 19th century Marxist views.

[Diocle]

seriously, you asking me to believe my Friend Diocle writing from La Spinëta in 2016 instead of Procopius and Zozimus, two almost-reliable historians from the sixth century ? come on, it is impossible.
I could stop here, but i want to go further.

1. Unfortunately, material proofs aren't always available. When you discover one, yes, you know that what was written is reliable. But let me ask a question with the Diocle's style : so the battle between Attila and Aetius never occured ? When have ZERO "material proof" of it, not even a single spatha !! For a battle wich has been fought by at least tens thousand of men !!!

2. A real historian (and i'm not one) could tell you that Procopius is too specific for inventing a tale, and most important, he had no hidden agenda in writing it. Why do you doubt ? Because he hasn't seen it himself ? Come on, 99% of the history we know has been written by undirect witnesses. Except Ammien Marcellin, who really lived some of what he dealed (Amida for instance), but not all : so for instance Diocle, you won't believe that he wrote on Adrianopolis ? Come on !! (again)

3. Correct me if i'm wrong, no vexillum from ALL the Empire, republic, and obviously kingdom of Rome came threw the ages to our museums... But regular units existed my friend ! :-)

I don't ask you to believe me, instead I ask you to become more .. unbeliever. The difference between Procopius and me (apart the self evident fact that he was a great artist and I'm nothing) it's that Procopius asks you to believe, instead I ask you not to believe. Can you see the difference?


1 - Actually the name of the place (close, just close .. to the place from which I'm writing) is Spinetta Marengo (Togli l'oscena dieresi e metti la doppia "t", in nome di Dio! Questa è Italia non il Barbaricum, Cristo Santo!*), any French and Italian citizen should know it. There, Glory, after having knelt down before the corpse of a thirty years old Hero, offered the imperial laurels to Napoleon Bonaparte. Ave Imperator!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Spinetta Marengo, 14 June 1800, shortly before 5:00 pm.: " This battle is lost," Desaix told Napoleon, " But there is still time to win another."

Arc de Triomphe, Paris:


The name of the place is Spinetta Marengo, but actually Desaix died in a place very close to Spinetta not exactly in the village but on the road between Spinetta and San Giuliano Vecchio, possibly in a place called Vigna Santa.

Here in Italy there is still someone who remembers his sacrifice carrying flowers to forget not the man who won an Empire for Bonaparte ..



Actually I don't know if it's possible to find a better example of absolute dedication, of loyalty, of courage, of honour and of spirit of self sacrifice beyond what normally can be expected from a human being.



Louis Charles Antoine Desaix, général de division, tué à la bataille de Marengo, né le 17 août 1768 au château d’Ayat à Saint-Hilaire d’Ayat – mort le 14 juin 1800 à Marengo. Il apparaît sur la 23e colonne.

Catalaunian Fields? Are you sure it ever existed a battlefield on which Attila the Hun was defeated by a guy named Aetius? I'm not! Think that there are serious historians writing that the battle of Zama could be an invention of the Roman propaganda ... watch the video and dismiss once for all your fideistic mental attitude! History is magistra vitae but she's also a cruel master ..



2 - The point is, my dear friend, that both Procopius and Zosimus are referring rumors. Just rumors (in my opinion very useful rumors to justify the demented invasion of Western Europe), actually Procopius never went North of Milan, and Zosimus is reporting the same rumors. Try again!
Consider that those were the years in which the Byzzies were producing in state manifacturies fake "Holy relics" to dupe European Romano-Germanic yokels! While the Papacy in Italy two centuries later, forged the best historical fake of history: The Donation of Constantine. This was the cultural atmosphere of the Early Middle Age, maybe not exactly Dark Ages but at least Misty Ages for sure.

3 - Sorry but, the republican and imperial vexilla and signa can be seen in many representations (frescos, bas reiefs, coins) instead I'm asking you (in vain and for the third time now) to show me some artistic source, some depiction in which we can see these Medieval regular Roman Vexilla in all their splendour.
Forgetting: you don't need to ask me to correct you, I hate correcting people, I hate doing it so much that even the sound of the verb "To Correct" (Italian: Correggere; Latin: Corrigere) has an emetic effect on me. I don't correct anybody here or elsewhere, I just try to explain what I think as best I can.






So once again I write:
They never existed regular Roman units in Northern Gaul during the Middle Age (VI century) carrying Roman insigna.
And once again I ask:
Please, show me some proof/s that your fantasy tale is not just a fantasy tale.




* Transl.: "Remove the obscene umlauts and add the double "t",for god's sake! This is Italy not the Barbaricum, Holy Jesus!"

[AntonioHundangir]

I think the true is in middle. I guess is happened something like in britannia (former soldiers, petty kings, etc romano british "sarmatian cavalry" is an example: early possibly they was former auxoliaries from military colonies remained in britannia like the others for personal reasons. Later their sons, and romano british continued to fight in their style like a carbon copy.). About bacaudae, i think they was people pushed to rebellion by several reasons (taxes, deserters, criminals, barbarians, assassins, there are gloomy stories about bagaudia.... Someone was only unlucky. Others were ferocious assassins if not mad people. Possibly. Often they re been exploited by local aristocrats, usurpers, etc sometime they fought also against barbarians, other times they maked alliance with barbarians, in 3rd xentury and with attila too in 5 century. Others fought with aetius against attila instead (aetius and litorius and their lieutenants brutally suppressed bagaudians revolts, and i should say that also in ib 2 cb with roman empire and romano british dominions they re annoying, but some aetius officer like majorian tried to not use these methods, and they remembered that, for that someone fought with aetius against attila, the majority i guess. While their boss and few others guided attila (and several barbarian robbers in past...) on the biggest objectives, ville, towns, etc. So the.romantic vision of bagaudae is wrong. (i m not speaking about diocle s post. I mean generally.). Ending someone was poor and unlucky (like ikko ikki in japan...) others were criminals, barbarians, deserters, assassins, brigands etc good for execution. I ll say 50/50. And too often they re been exploited by uusurprers in primis, and more rarely by barbarian robbers (but sometime they fought barbarians with success like during probus rule) , and also by local landholders (same that mafia in sicily but more "warlike"....the usurpers bonoso, proculo, and maybe also gallic empire usurpers, and so on were all allied with bandits. Especially around lugdunum, rodano, and massilia areas...). Thats my word about bagaudia. Not romantic. But not even a trial. They was the product of their social situation, of theyr.masters, of the crisis of the state, etc everyone do his own. Ofx if you was the state (emperor, generals, soldiers, officers, civil officers) you should beat these people without pity. But after you beat they, you should eliminate the social conditions and other that pushed they to revolt. (at least the unlucky. The criminals there sre ever. But you.shouldnt add soldiers to their cause.).
In the virtual world,is diverse: in my roman campaign of ib2cb, there are several bagaudiae. Simply i loose my mastiffs (hunnic horse archers and alan missile cataphracts ) on their tracks: barbarians like franks and alemanni are scared by.my scythian mercenaries, realize bagaudae... A system of watch towers delay every band loot my streets, once spotted and killed, proceed to besiege their villages and towns and limitanei numera and foederati do the rest. Money. A new province that pay taxes (and my army of mercenaries) and a population scared by the massacre, thay will not revolt to his new master. And so i resolve bagaudae problems in m2tw. For the happiness of landholders like sidonius. (that govern rotomagus for me.). The tyeant roman warlord north of loire. Xd

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

Chalons happened. I know it happened because I know where it took place, but nobody would ever give me the funding to go prove it.

[Diocle]

Chalons happened. I know it happened because I know where it took place, but nobody would ever give me the funding to go prove it.

Not joking: this is the same spirit of those who built the great country in which you live. God bless USA! .. aaand God bless MMFA! Nunc et semper. Amen!

About crowdfunding your dreams: it's the the test bench of the strength of your character and of your ideas, for what it's worth: if I had few millions Euros, you would get my money (NOT JOKING) to solve once for all the mystery, but, as inter omnes constat, Diocle is a dangerous mad!

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

M. Girard proposed the battle location in 1887. Simon MacDowall brought it back to light. Having reviewed the evidence, I agree with them both. The battle took place near the town of Montgueux about 8km southwest of Troyes.

[Diocle]

M. Girard proposed the battle location in 1887. Simon MacDowall brought it back to light. Having reviewed the evidence, I agree with them both. The battle took place near the town of Montgueux about 8km southwest of Troyes.

The only thing that doesn't fully match with the factual truth of Chalons, it's what followed the battle, .. it's a weird political situation for the Huns, for the Romans and for the Visigoths, nobody acts as we would expect, after Chalons Attila behavior becomes for the first time less .. less .. how can I say? Less logic? Less understandable? Less rational maybe? The fact is that in light of Catalaunian Fields, the behavior of the main characters of the tragedy becomes .. obscure, not completely explainable, at least for me.

I mean that after Adrianople all goes as we would expect, instead after Chalons .. it's all strange and misty .. what did actually happen during that long summer of 451 AD?

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

A lot of the account of the battle is badly distorted to fit the narrative of Herodotus. Attila's actions after the battle are twisted to fit the description of Turnus in the Aeneid. The fact of the matter is that Jordanes is a author.

[Majorien]

i just realized it is been a while i haven't updated that thread with my last additions to my gallic comitatus.

if i remember well, the last unit i told you about was the irregular buccellarii.
Since, i've made two limitanei units located on the Hadrian wall :
milites dalmati, with a lot of conversions (the utlimate step of miniatures )
First cohort of batavii

And four cavalry units
the mighty taifali
their brother in arms honoriani seniores
the mounted bowmen of the equites secundo sagitariii
and the equites octavo dalmatae

and, after the little burgus, i'm starting with fortifications.

Enjoy, and don't be shy with feedbacks !

[Majorien]

and now, an arthurian warband !!

[Diocle]

and now, an arthurian warband !!

FANTASTIC UNITS!

Constantinus III, Ambrosius, Riothamus, all those roman generals prooved that Britannia never was undefended : it is just the contrary, with armies coming from the island and fighting on the continent, despite some many units recalls.

and it was Glory! .. at least while it lasted.


".. E come tutte le più belle cose,
vivesti solo un giorno come le rose."

('.. And as all the most beautiful things,
you lived just one day as the roses')


Fabrizio De Andrè - "La Canzone di Marinella"

[Majorien]

I'm interested in the source on Rotomagus.

Penny Macgeorge, lagte roman warlords, page 76.
Roman warlordism was so important that every important city had its warlord, often the praepositus or tribuni of the local roman unit.
Penny Mac george deals about a certain Comes Hubaldus in Rotomagus (a pagan tyrant); a Ionnes, comes Castrodnenis (modern chateaudun), married With the daughter of the comes Blaesensis (modern Blois) : it is obviously the beginning of the feudality.

[Majorien]

FANTASTIC UNITS!



and it was Glory! .. at least while it lasted.


".. E come tutte le più belle cose,
vivesti solo un giorno come le rose."

('.. And as all the most beautiful things,
you lived just one day as the roses')


Fabrizio De Andrè - "La Canzone di Marinella"

Thank you my friend !!
And just for you, my last unit : the flavia victrix constantina !

[Diocle]

You're making a fantastic work, Majorien! Just a small question: I've read in your interesting article that this legion was founded by some Constantinian heir, so it should be the Legio I Flavia Constantia founded by Constantius II, not the Legio I Flavia Gallicana Constantia founded by Constantius Chlorus, nor the Secunda Flavia Constantia founded by Diocletianus, am I right?

Side note: I'm always amazed watching the way the Late Roman emperors, from the times of Severus, managed to usurp ancient family names for their dubious political constructs. This show us two things, I suppose: History is an immense battlefield and our collective memory as our traditions have a great value, if even a name can be considered as spoils of war and political objective.

[Majorien]

Hello diocle, to be honest i don't know if the legion has been raised by Constantinian heirs or just renamed. The more i read on roman army, the more i understand (i mean, i think! ) the way the roman think in a military perspective. As always, Roman were very conservatives, trying to mantain theirs customs and routines unchanged. But they were very pragmatic people too, always trying to improve, "stealing" ideas from other cultures without any problem.
concerning the name of the units, i think (and many scholars prooved it) that very few new (regular) units were raised, the romans always prefered use an old one with its martial traditions, "recreating" it in a political perspective. As you very wisely pointed it out, a name, in a roman world, but in our to (just think of the power of Kennedy in the USA, for instance : any redhead with that name could run for president, even if he's stupid as a cow), was very important.
Giving to a unit the name of your dinasty helps to maintain its loyalty, or at the contrary is a gift for taking side of an emperor/usurper.
Sometimes units are way too linked with its "sponsor", and they are not renamed, but send in "exile". The story of the two elite units of the Magnentiaci and decentiaci is very intersting (and tragic). They were units raised by usurpers Magnentius and Decencius, who have been crushed by Constantius II. It seems that both were not simple units, but a kind of imperial guard, composed by germanic and gallic Laeti, like Magnentius. So when Constantius II retook control of Gaul, he send the two units unrenamed in the farest place : Amida ! During the siege of Shapur, they were trapped in and the gallic guard prooved its valor but obviously has been wipped out at the end.

Back to your question, yes, i presume you are right, but it's just a guess ! ;-)