+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: The Origins of the Limitanei (/showthread.php?tid=24540)
Pages:
1
2
The Origins of the Limitanei - Nathan Ross - 12-11-2014
Quote:Riparienses on the Rhine were established when Constantine crossed into Gaul in 312?
Riparienses (or ripenses) are mentioned in the Constantinian sections of the Codex (i.e. 7.13.7, of AD325); there's also a praepositus ripae commanding Galerius's legionary troops at Gamzigrad, so perhaps earlier than that. But riparienses are not quite the same as the later limitanei, I'd say: they're ordinary soldiers, as opposed to the 'elite' troops of the comitatus.
Incidentally, the Deurne helmet inscription probably relates to the uexillario comitatensis Stablesiana VI, making the owner a member of the comitatus troops anyway!
However, this is a different topic...
The Origins of the Limitanei - Flavivs Aetivs - 12-11-2014
But Ripenses and Riparienses are both mentioned as grades of Limitanei (with Castellani and Burgarii) in the Notitia Dignitatum.
Also I will move this to another thread.
The Origins of the Limitanei - Sextus Saturninus - 12-11-2014
I thought that the Limitanei were an evolution of the Ripenses, the Ripenses being the first Limitanei. Some of the units must have held onto their original Constantinian names if Ripenses if they are mentioned in the Notita. Anyway, aren't they considered Limitanei or a troop type of equal status?
The Origins of the Limitanei - Flavivs Aetivs - 12-11-2014
Not much is known about the differences in the four grades. It can be extrapolated from the names that Burgarii manned watchtowers, Castellani manned permanent fortresses, and the Riparienses and Ripenses comes from the roman word for riverbank and we know these were the men stationed on the Rhine and Danube. I've even theorized that "Ripuarii", as in the Riparian Franks, is in fact a misnomer for Roman garrisons staffed by Germanic recruits on this frontier in the 5th century that persisted well into the late 5th-mid 6th century (depending on whether or not you believe some of Procopius' claims).
The Ripenses/Riparienses were established first, under Constantine, that much is certain.
Limitanei and Comitatenses were essentially the same, but Comitatenses were in centralized field armies and had more tax breaks and legal privileges. Although that is somewhat oversimplified.
The Origins of the Limitanei - Robert Vermaat - 12-11-2014
I agree with Evan. Nothing for certain of course but it looks like there was a development from the classical legionary defenses to what we now recognise as a late Roman military system of limitanei and comitatenses.
One could recognise several steps in this development, such as smaller troops being permanently assigned to fortresses (burgarii or castellani, indeed) as well as fixed defenses of the river frontiers. This may have developed into a grand strategy by the early 4th c., with the enitire border region (limes) being defended by one class of troops, and the mobile field army units gradually devloping as the reserve, themselves developing into common army and palatine elite troops.
As to the praepositus ripae, you also occasionally find a dux limitis or a comes limitis, but current knowledge says these titles were not standardised (the Romans being flexible as ever). My favorite officer on the Danube remains the praefectus legionis quartaedecimae geminae militum liburnariorum cohortis quintae partis superior, Carnunto.
The Origins of the Limitanei - Flavivs Aetivs - 12-11-2014
Actually it seems that by the 5th century the Romans finally managed to standardize the titles of Dux and Comes, with a few minor exceptions. Take for example the Comes Tractis Aremoriciani command, which was a limitanei command. In 464 it belonged to Paulinus, a commander under Aegidius whose only record is that he fought alongside Childeric and Odovacar against the Visigoths in 464 (and died). Aegidius, under Aetius, probably held the title of Dux Belgicae Secundae, while Ricimer was probably Comes Foederatorum and Majorian was Magister Militum per Gallias. Aegidius, in 464, had had the title of Magister Militum per Gallias stripped from him and given to Agrippinus, so he probably was Dux Belgicae Secundae, based out of Novidunum (Augusta Suessionem). Paulinus was under his command, which shows an evident structure of the Comes Limitis (not Comes rei Militaris, who commanded the field armies) being under the command of Dux Limities.
Comes rei Militaris, on the other hand, was a separate title of basically equivalent rank to the Dux, but neither the Dux nor the Comes had command over each others' forces really.
BTW, I'm led to believe that Praepositus Ripae might be one of the commands missing from the Notitia.
The Origins of the Limitanei - Nathan Ross - 12-11-2014
Quote:it looks like there was a development from the classical legionary defenses to what we now recognise as a late Roman military system of limitanei and comitatenses.
Yes, that seems clear enough. But I was questioning the chronology of this development.
My original point related to a note in another thread about the Deurne helmet - Evan commented that it may have belonged to a member of the limitanei. As the helmet has a deposit date of c.AD320, I questioned whether the term limitanei would have been in use, or indeed whether such a division of the army was in place at that point.
Riparienses, as we've said, are mentioned in a ruling of AD325 - but what's the earliest use of the term limitanei to indicate a distinct grade of soldier? It doesn't appear in Ammianus or Vegetius. In fact, aside from the Notitia Dignitatum, the only dated reference I can find is NTh 4.1, given in AD438. It could, therefore, be an entirely 5th century expression.
Of course, it could be a new(ish) word for an older system, but isn't that an assumption? Constantine's ruling of AD325 distinguishes riparienses from comitatenses, but this might not have been a strict usage: the troops of the sacro comitatu had been known under Diocletian, and perhaps before that too - there are suggestions of it under the Severans. Imperial retinue troops were an elite, and had special privileges - riparienses could just refer to the ordinary troops of the army, traditionally based on the borders.
Besides, most of the forces in the comitatus at this date appear to have been detachments of frontier legions anyway. When Diocletian wanted to distinguish between grades of the army, he referred to 'legions and vexillations' on the one hand, and 'cohorts' on the other: the latter would be the old-style auxiliary cohorts. Abinnaeus's Ala V Praelectorum in Egypt would have been the same sort of unit.
If there was indeed a strict separation of the army into comitatenses and riparienses (later called limitanei) around this time, I would think it more likely occured when Constantine divided the field armies between his sons and appointed regional Magistri Militum, in the last year or two of his reign.
Quote:Ripenses and Riparienses are both mentioned as grades of Limitanei (with Castellani and Burgarii) in the Notitia Dignitatum.
Yes, but burgarii existed as early as AD138 (ILS8909) - so these sort of terms do not necessarily connote limitanei in the 5th-century sense. The same goes, I would say, for riparienses.
The Origins of the Limitanei - Robert Vermaat - 12-11-2014
Quote:Magister Militum Flavius Aetius post=362599 Wrote:Ripenses and Riparienses are both mentioned as grades of Limitanei (with Castellani and Burgarii) in the Notitia Dignitatum.
Yes, but burgarii existed as early as AD138 (ILS8909) - so these sort of terms do not necessarily connote limitanei in the 5th-century sense. The same goes, I would say, for riparienses.
That's the point exactly. We do not have a full understanding of this termionology, assuming even that there WAS a standard Roman terminilogy for such defense types. It is very much possible (thinking of the mess Roman sources seem to make of how to name a type of weapon) that such a standard did not exist. Another example was, as written here already, the confusion about ranks and grades such as duces or comites. How about the magister militum. Even when we know the full title this got to be abbreviated often enough. Or how about the shift in meaning of what bacaudae were?
Hence:
As my (delightful) example of that Carnuntum commander showed, Romans were I think quite flexible in terminology, which trips up us modern researchers often enoufg. Therefore the ripuarii may have been an earlier class of riverine defence troops, a word which was used later for a river-based border system and perhaps even a precursor of the later limitanei troop class. Even inscriptions which could tell us the use of the word in time could not tell us in which manner it was used I'm afraid - we'd need a Notitia Dignitaum for that - one that was written in 150, in 200, in 250 and so on, to notice the development of the use.
The Origins of the Limitanei - Robert Vermaat - 12-11-2014
Quote:Actually it seems that by the 5th century the Romans finally managed to standardize the titles of Dux and Comes, with a few minor exceptions. Take for example the Comes Tractis Aremoriciani command, which was a limitanei command. In 464 it belonged to Paulinus, a commander under Aegidius whose only record is that he fought alongside Childeric and Odovacar against the Visigoths in 464 (and died). Aegidius, under Aetius, probably held the title of Dux Belgicae Secundae, while Ricimer was probably Comes Foederatorum and Majorian was Magister Militum per Gallias. Aegidius, in 464, had had the title of Magister Militum per Gallias stripped from him and given to Agrippinus, so he probably was Dux Belgicae Secundae, based out of Novidunum (Augusta Suessionem). Paulinus was under his command, which shows an evident structure of the Comes Limitis (not Comes rei Militaris, who commanded the field armies) being under the command of Dux Limities.
Do we even know whether the command of the Tractus Aremoriciani survived to 464? Or how Aegidius reacted to the removal of his MMG command? He might as well have retained it? The territory of Belgica II was almost totally in the hands of Frankish and Alan federates, and any command over it would be purely for the books.
I'm not sure how limitanei would be commanded by comites? It's the Dux who usually holds the tregional commands, and the comites who command field armies? So how exactly would "the Comes Limitis (not Comes rei Militaris, who commanded the field armies) being under the command of Dux Limities"?
The Origins of the Limitanei - Nathan Ross - 12-11-2014
Quote:Romans were I think quite flexible in terminology, which trips up us modern researchers often enoufg. Therefore the ripuarii may have been an earlier class of riverine defence troops, a word which was used later for a river-based border system and perhaps even a precursor of the later limitanei troop class.
Exactly! Are you agreeing with me, Robert, or disagreeing? ;-)
Re. comites: Comes Rei Militaris was a title, strictly speaking, rather than a rank (literally 'Companion in Military Affairs' or something similar). Certain tribunes of the Scholae could hold this title, I believe. So, yes, rather a flexible expression, but in frontier defence terms I would say a comes usually outranked a dux...
The Origins of the Limitanei - Robert Vermaat - 12-11-2014
Quote: My original point related to a note in another thread about the Deurne helmet - Evan commented that it may have belonged to a member of the limitanei. As the helmet has a deposit date of c.AD320, I questioned whether the term limitanei would have been in use, or indeed whether such a division of the army was in place at that point.the dating is ciorrect but I would never ascribe it to a force of limitanei. For one it was not found near the border and more importantly, we know the stablesiani as a mobile force that accompanied the Emperor. The 38 coins found with the helmet possibly show that the owner(s) had been abroad shortly before (all coins were new) and that even speaks against a possibility that the stablesiana had been garrisoned there.
Quote: what's the earliest use of the term limitanei to indicate a distinct grade of soldier? It doesn't appear in Ammianus or Vegetius. In fact, aside from the Notitia Dignitatum, the only dated reference I can find is NTh 4.1, given in AD438. It could, therefore, be an entirely 5th century expression.I'm not sure if a soldier was commonly referred to as 'a limitaneus'. I doubt that. Maybe this changed later, but even into the 5th c. the limitanei units could be 'upgraded' and the descriptions seem to be more of an administrative sort than something that would distinguish one soldier form another.
Quote:Of course, it could be a new(ish) word for an older system, but isn't that an assumption? Constantine's ruling of AD325 distinguishes riparienses from comitatenses, but this might not have been a strict usage: the troops of the sacro comitatu had been known under Diocletian, and perhaps before that too - there are suggestions of it under the Severans. Imperial retinue troops were an elite, and had special privileges - riparienses could just refer to the ordinary troops of the army, traditionally based on the borders.That's entirely possible. It might have been a transitory state for all we know. It's not a common description for the old legions on the border anyway - we'd have to encounter it more often. However this IS the time that we expect to see the new division between statis border troops and mobile field armies. So it may also just be one of the early words to describe what would become the limitanei.
The Origins of the Limitanei - Flavivs Aetivs - 12-11-2014
Let me be a bit more clear about what I was trying to say:
Basically what I'm saying is that the term Comes may not have always been applied to the commander of a field army, which his how commands like the Comes Tractus Aremoriciani appeared. It seems that these Comites were under the command of the local Dux. The Comes Rei Militaris command was completely separate though, and neither the dux nor the comes had control over each other's forces (I.e. the Comes did not command Limitanei, and the Dux did not command Comitatenses).
Now, Paulinus is mentioned as Comes Paulinus, and the only Comes command in that region on the Loire is the Comes Tractus Aremoriciani, hence why I picked that one specifically. You are right that Aegidius did not control much of Belgica Secunda, the region hadn't been secure since Aetius died, and much of it had been acquired by Childeric. Dr. Kim theorizes that Aegidius and Syagrius were in fact essentially vassals of Childeric. However... he can be a bit overzealous in his work. While I'd say Syagirus possibly was under the control of Childeric/Clovis, Aegidius seems to have been independent of their influence.
Aegidius did react to the removal of his Magister Militum command in 461. Agrippinus and Aegidius went to war over it in 462, when Agrippinus paid the Goths to attack Aegidius, which culminated in the battle fought by Paulinus in 464 alongside Childeric and Odovacar (who then all turned on each other, with Childeric coming out on top and Odovacar going back to the Danube finally after 13 years in Gaul).
Quote:It doesn't appear in Ammianus or Vegetius. In fact, aside from the Notitia Dignitatum, the only dated reference I can find is NTh 4.1, given in AD438. It could, therefore, be an entirely 5th century expression.
Can you post the text please? I'd like to read it. I can't find the Novellae Valentiniani and Theodosiani, for some reason.
Also, it appears in several other places; C. Th. 7.1.18, 7.4.14, for instance. The word did not appear in 7.13.7
The Origins of the Limitanei - Nathan Ross - 12-11-2014
Quote:Quote:NTh 4.1, given in AD438
Can you post the text please?
Here it is: Theodosian Code & Novels, p.490
Quote:it appears in several other places; C. Th. 7.1.18, 7.4.14, for instance. The word did not appear in 7.13.7
Sorry, my mistake in the original post - the reference to the AD325 ruling should have been 7.20.4 - 13.7 is some other reference to comitatenses, I think! Note that the 325 ruling lists comitatenses and ripenses as being separate from alares et cohortales - so clearly ripenses cannot be taken as an exact synonym of the later limitanei.
7.1.18 dates to AD400, and refers to comitatensibus ac palatinis numeris and pseudocomitatensibus legionibus seu de ripariensibus castricianis.
7.4.14 is from AD365 and again has riparienses milites.
However, 12.1.56 (dated AD363) mentions militiae limitaneae, which A.D. Lee believes to be the earliest mention of limitanei - it looks to me perhaps like an intermediate term, although I haven't found an English version of this bit of the Code.
8.4.17 draws a distinction between comitatensibus militibus and limitaneis, and dates to c.389
7.4.30 (dated 409) does actually refer to limitanei militis.
So it looks like the word limitanei might have come into use in the later 4th century, perhaps as a collective term to describe various frontier troops previously referred to as ripenses, burgarii etc, although these latter terms also continued in use.
What it does not look like is a sudden and official division of the entire army into comitatenses and limitanei some time around Constantine's reign (which is how it's often presented, I think!)
The Origins of the Limitanei - Flavivs Aetivs - 12-12-2014
Google books won't let me read it :/
I'm glad this discussion came up, because even experts in the field sort of always assume that the Limitanei and Comitatenses division occurred under a formalization by Constantine. It's interesting to note that it was not until the late 4th century that it truly developed.
I can't read Latin right off the bat, but give me a bit and I'll (roughly) translate the passages for you.
The Origins of the Limitanei - Nathan Ross - 12-12-2014
Quote:Google books won't let me read it :/
Strange! It's a long passage, and most of it is quoted in Maas's Readings in Late Antiquity, p.83. The name appears in the heading though, luckily: NE DUCIANI VEL LIMITANEI MILITES AD COMITUM EXHIBEANTUR.
Quote: It's interesting to note that it was not until the late 4th century that it truly developed.
Yes - the Maas quote (above) is prefaced by the note that "border troops... are referred to in the sources primarily as limitanei". Whereas that term, it appears, was rather uncommon until the end of the 4th century. 'Border troops' were more usually referred to as ripenses, it seems, a word which perhaps did not include the old former-auxiliary cohorts and alae.