Makeup of the Roman Army

[Gaius Julius Camillus]

Greetings all,

 

I am gathering some initial data for a research project at my university. I need sources, or a push in the right direction by some of the intelligentsia around UNRV. I am anxious to know if anyone (scholar or historian) has ever looked more in depth at the physical makeup of the Roman army. What was the percentage of ethnic roman/italians to the Foederati or barbarian allies?

 

Were there more Romans during the late Republic and Principate, as opposed to the Dominate?

 

Any assistance would be of great help.

 

sincerely,

 

GJC

[sylla]

Greetings all,

 

I am gathering some initial data for a research project at my university. I need sources, or a push in the right direction by some of the intelligentsia around UNRV. I am anxious to know if anyone (scholar or historian) has ever looked more in depth at the physical makeup of the Roman army. What was the percentage of ethnic roman/italians to the Foederati or barbarian allies?

 

Were there more Romans during the late Republic and Principate, as opposed to the Dominate?

 

Any assistance would be of great help.

 

sincerely,

 

GJC

Not so sure about your last statement, but here come my two cents.

 

Your first problem would be the definition of "ethnic Roman/Italians"; I don't think it's possible to get any useful operative criteria. At least since Zama, Rome and Italy had been receiving a massive influx of migrants, both free but especially slaves. For obvious reasons, the immigrants usually pretended to be Italians or, if they weren't able to, at least Greeks; the overwhelming majority of slaves from any province received Greek names. Conversely, we have evidence of huge Italian emigration as early as the beginning of the I century BC (just remember the Asiatic Vespers of 88 BC).

 

Some examples: were the Jews born in Italy after many generations "ethnic Italians"? How would we know how many of them were local converses? The same can be said regarding any other "ethnicity". What about the native Italian Greeks (from Magna Grecia)? Not to talk about the offspring of "mixed" unions. You only have to check on the Imperial biographies; how much of an "ethnic Italian" was Caracalla?

 

On the other hand, it would be almost impossible to obtain hard figures; even for the former period they are quite unreliable; for the Dominate, they are almost absent. In fact, for the late Dominate we lack almost any kind of information; it has been called a Dark Age for a reason. Again, let us check out the emperors; what do we know about Pupianus, Iotapianus or Aureolus?

 

All that said, IMHO the predominant scholar consensus would be an affirmative answer for your original question. Irrespectively on how "ethnic Italians" are defined, there is abundant evidence suggesting that the non-Italian portion of the Army (and Emperors) was constantly increasing.

Edited May 12, 2009 by sylla

[caldrail]

Study of the Notitia Dignitatum, a document from the late empire, might shed some light on that. Translations are available on the web if you do a search.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notitia_Dignitatum

 

As for more definitive work, it's largely down to interpretation and you have to realise that we don't have access to records that tell us what the makeup of legions was. It is therefore something of a best guess based on on what we know. I have heard it said that by the late empire no more than 25% of the legions were Italian in origin (from Goldsworthy). The Romans themselves were becoming less inclined to see the legions as a worthy career, and the availability of foreign allies or mercenaries became more important.

 

Actually this is something I'd loke to know more of but information on the subject seems to be very obscure. Possibly that's because there is considerable room for disagreement?

[Pompieus]

Obviously during the republic all Roman legionaries and Socii or allied contingents were Roman citizens or Italians. Pompieus recruited heavily from the citizen population of Picenum and Caesar from the Po valley (both of which regions included a Celtic element). During the civil wars of 49-31BC citizens resident in the provinces and especially the more Romanized regions such as Southern Spain and Gaul were conscripted for the emergency, and some non-citizens from places like Celtic Galatea, Cappodicia and Africa probably were given citizenship upon being recruited.

 

Auxiliaries, of course, were recruited from non-citizens all over the empire, and their ethnicity is often recorded in the name of the unit.

 

Augustus settled thousands of veterans in colonies all over the empire and the sons of these men provided many recruits to the legions, and the Italian element probably predominated until the Flavian period (70-80's AD) when local recruitment became the norm. This is true of the auxiliariaries as well as the legions. Apparently, with the exception of specialist units of archers from Syria and units in and from Britain, there was no attempt to maintain the ethnic makeup of auxiliary units. The numeri which began to appear in the second century probably represent a move to restore special ethnic character or capabilities since the other Auxiliaries had become standardized.

 

There is no way to know the ethnic character of the recruits but often the home town of a soldier can be found on a tombstone, diploma or other inscription. See H M D Parker, G L Cheeseman, Spaul (if you can find him) , P A Holder, G Webster, L Keppie, G R Watson et al.

 

Studies of epigraphy by these luminaries and others seem to indicate that under Vespasian the legions still had around 70-80% Italians or at least men who were citizens of towns in Italy and the Po Valley. By the time of Hadrian, however, only about 1% claimed such origins.

Edited May 12, 2009 by Pompieus

[Northern Neil]

It depends on what you call a 'Roman'. Technically the Dominate had far more Romans in its armies than the Principate, because all free men from the provinces were citizens from the early 3rd century onwards.

[Gaius Julius Camillus]

Roman, in the context of my question, is an individual from the city itself, or a member of their Latin allies from Italy.

 

And by the way, thanks to all who have replied. Your answers have been most helpful.

Edited May 13, 2009 by Gaius Julius Camillus