03-24-2014, 09:15 PM
Quote:Surely though Michael the Lanciarii and the Mattiarii were heavy infantry because both Ammianus and the Notitia lists them as Legiones? I have seen their units names translated by others as 'The Spear-bearers' and 'The Mattock wielders'. I think most people know believe that the unit titles actually have nothing at all to do with the weapons, armour, clothing or fighting-styles implied by the unit names. They are more a nick-name if anything.That might be so, if the legions of the Late Roman army were the same as those of the Republic and the Principate - but were they? Remember Vegetius' complaint that the legions of his day were legions in name only. Of course, there are a variety of ways in which a legion of the period could have acquired its title and nick-name is one of them; Petulantes comes to mind. Nevertheless, nick-names were nothing new; think, for example, of Fulminata, Ferrata and Rapax. I see nothing wrong with legions taking their names from the weapons in which they had particular expertise. In fact, specialist legions make a lot of sense in a time when the Empire faced multiple enemies. Detachments could be drawn from them and added to an army for a particular campaign, yet still leaving others available for action elsewhere, if required.
Michael King Macdona
And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)
And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)