03-09-2006, 04:50 PM
I think that this time, it means that the unit originated in Italy. This does not necessarily mean that the soldiers were from Italy. For example, there were several units of Batavians in the Roman army, which were in the first half of the first century partly made up from Cananafates and Frisiavones. After the reign of Hadrian, recruits were usually found near a unit's base, so the geographical origin of the units no longer coincided with the ethnic origin of the soldiers. For example, British soldiers in a unit called Batavians. (Sometimes I wonder if a "Batavian" is not a technical expression to describe a type of amphibious cavalry; cf. gladiators called Samnites or Thracians.)
It is, in my view, not unlike Arab military units in eighth-century Spain, which had the names of tribes living on the Arabian peninsula, but consisted of Berbers and Spanish converts. The great civil war of the mid-eighth century looks like a tribal conflict, but was essentially a local war.
I served in the Dutch regiment of the Limburgse Jagers ("Limburgian riflemen"); Limburg is a Dutch province, but the soldiers were from everywhere in the country. (I was not trained for a rifle either. :wink: )
It is, in my view, not unlike Arab military units in eighth-century Spain, which had the names of tribes living on the Arabian peninsula, but consisted of Berbers and Spanish converts. The great civil war of the mid-eighth century looks like a tribal conflict, but was essentially a local war.
I served in the Dutch regiment of the Limburgse Jagers ("Limburgian riflemen"); Limburg is a Dutch province, but the soldiers were from everywhere in the country. (I was not trained for a rifle either. :wink: )
