Speculator

[hansvl]

I just wanted to point out that some of the praetorian speculatores specifically indicate they were mounted, most of them however just mentioned their function as speculator. Does that mean that the latter are surely infantry? Not necessarily, I think.

Point taken, Hans. But I wonder why some specifically mention eques (as if some maybe were not).

Well, that's my line of thinking too. On the other hand, we have to admit that the inscriptions of praetorian speculatores only give us proof that among them there were (some) cavalrymen (eques, ex equitibus, exercitator equitum speculatorum). There is no specific indication of infantry (because that was the obvious thing, and cavalry the minority?)

The possibility (probability) of the praetorian speculatores being only cavalry, doesn't mean the other speculatores of the legions were by definiton cavalry as well.

I was assuming that, of the 300+ (450?) Praetorian cavalry, some were seconded for service as speculatores. (I assumed some infantry, too -- but that remains speculation.) So the cavalry force would be commensurately reduced. Does that make sense?

Durry thinks that there were 900 equites (les cohortes prétoriennes, p. 99). One turma per manipulus. He states that a praetorian guardsman could become an eques after 4 to 5 years service. Becoming a speculator comes later in the careerstructure. So this could well mean speculatores were seconded cavalrymen. It would reduce the regular cavalry with one third though (assuming the speculatores were 300 strong). Another indication that the praetorian speculatores were a mixed subunit?

Greets,

Hans