sullafelix Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 Little help here please I am currently using Polybius' figures at 2.24 to do some population calculations for Italy. I realise that this is in itself a risky business, however, my question is this. I have a set of figures that apparently represent allied manpower. Polybius talks of men of the correct age, so presumably iuniores. This being the case what I was wondering is what was the upper age limit for a man to be enlisted in the allied section of the Roman army...anyone know? Very gratefully Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 Little help here please I am currently using Polybius' figures at 2.24 to do some population calculations for Italy. I realise that this is in itself a risky business, however, my question is this. I have a set of figures that apparently represent allied manpower. Polybius talks of men of the correct age, so presumably iuniores. This being the case what I was wondering is what was the upper age limit for a man to be enlisted in the allied section of the Roman army...anyone know? Very gratefully Now that is truly a difficult question. We can assume there was a basic standard, not only as a matter of fitness, but possibly to deny giving benefits to the descendents of a man who was already too old to give quality lengthy service. (though this is not so much an issue in the Punic War era as the later imperial age) I am not aware of a defined upper limit though, especially when talking about the Polybian age where the legions still lacked some uniformity. Even Vegetius doesn't give an upper limit for legionary recruits in the later imperial army, but rather simply extolls the virtues of recruiting young men. Polybius gets fairly detailed in his book 6, but even regarding the recruitment of actual citizen soldiers as Hastatii, Principes and Triarii, etc. he doesn't give exact ages but describes them in relative terms such as youngest, next in seniority, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullafelix Posted April 11, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 Little help here please I am currently using Polybius' figures at 2.24 to do some population calculations for Italy. I realise that this is in itself a risky business, however, my question is this. I have a set of figures that apparently represent allied manpower. Polybius talks of men of the correct age, so presumably iuniores. This being the case what I was wondering is what was the upper age limit for a man to be enlisted in the allied section of the Roman army...anyone know? Very gratefully Now that is truly a difficult question. We can assume there was a basic standard, not only as a matter of fitness, but possibly to deny giving benefits to the descendents of a man who was already too old to give quality lengthy service. (though this is not so much an issue in the Punic War era as the later imperial age) I am not aware of a defined upper limit though, especially when talking about the Polybian age where the legions still lacked some uniformity. Even Vegetius doesn't give an upper limit for legionary recruits in the later imperial army, but rather simply extolls the virtues of recruiting young men. Polybius gets fairly detailed in his book 6, but even regarding the recruitment of actual citizen soldiers as Hastatii, Principes and Triarii, etc. he doesn't give exact ages but describes them in relative terms such as youngest, next in seniority, etc. Cheers for that, I thought it might be abit of a thorny one. I am going with Morley's estimation of iuniores making up 30% of the population at the moment. Problem is I am getting a population figure of 600,000 give or take for Italy (not including Rome, Campania, Cures and Magna Graecia - I am working on getting figures for those). Bit of a B***ger though! I am currently carving holes in Brunt's Italian Manpower...which is a lot less fun than it sounds! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 Cheers for that, I thought it might be abit of a thorny one. I am going with Morley's estimation of iuniores making up 30% of the population at the moment. Problem is I am getting a population figure of 600,000 give or take for Italy (not including Rome, Campania, Cures and Magna Graecia - I am working on getting figures for those). Bit of a B***ger though! I am currently carving holes in Brunt's Italian Manpower...which is a lot less fun than it sounds! This was irritating me greatly and I continued to look... I don't know how I missed it the first time, but its the very first couple of lines in Ploybius Book VI on the Military. As for the rest, a cavalry soldier must serve for ten years in all and an infantry soldier for sixteen years before reaching the age of forty-six, with the exception of those whose census is under four hundred drachmae, all of whom are employed in naval service. In case of pressing danger twenty years' service is demanded from the infantry. At any rate Livy also gives the age limit as roughly 17 to 46. Of course this is for the citizen legionary, but it makes practical sense for allied and auxilia as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullafelix Posted April 11, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 Hey got it! For your information, I have just found something in Aulus Gellius (Iwas that desperate!) Book X.XXVIII the age classifications worked like this possibly.... pueri less than 17 iuniores 17-46 seniores 46 + Thanks for your help though. I realise that Gellius referring to the time of King Servius Tullius is not neccessarily reliable...buts its all we have! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 Hey got it! For your information, I have just found something in Aulus Gellius (Iwas that desperate!) Book X.XXVIII the age classifications worked like this possibly.... pueri less than 17 iuniores 17-46 seniores 46 + Thanks for your help though. I realise that Gellius referring to the time of King Servius Tullius is not neccessarily reliable...buts its all we have! LOL, indeed I just saw the Gellius line courtesy of the William Smith dictionary. Isn't it nice when things come together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullafelix Posted April 11, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 Blimey how did I miss the rest of that...I shall hang my head in shame...thanks for that...two heads are indeed better than one. In fact any addition to my own brain power is usually welcomed!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.