Late Roman Army Ranks - Numeri/Limitanei

[jmsilvacross]

Salve commilitones!

I am currently trying to write a novel focusing on a Numerus (specifically, an exploratorum) and I am having some difficulty discerning the hierarchy of one of these late Roman (mid/late 4th century AD) units.

From the research I have done, would I be correct in assuming they could bet anywhere between 200-500 men strong? Right now I have used Comitatus, Fectio and Wikipedia to help me, but while they give me the ranks, they don't tell me specifically how many men each commanded, or what exactly their role was besides their pay grades. I also searched around here, but only found a few old threads that didn't specifically address my needs, unless I missed something.

For example:

• Tiro
  
• Eques or pedes
  
• Semissalis
  
• Circitor
  
• Biarchus
  
• Centenarius
  
• Ducenarius
  
• Senator
  
• Primicerius
  
• Tribunus
  

From this, I have the following questions:

1) If a new Tribunus was appointed, who would be his immediate senior staff, and what would their roles be? 
2) Who is the second in command? The primcerius? 
3) In a unit of say, 400 men, would you have two ducenarius (which I understand command 200 men each) and 4 centenarius? Would either of the ducenarius be a "primus" to indicate seniority?  
4) Would the Vexilarius be counted among senio staff? 
5) What about the praefectus castrorum and the campidoctor, which I know used to be important roles, but are not represented here? What would the "senator" here do?
6) And if I had an attached alae of say, 120 cavalrymen with 4 turmae, would their commander be a praefectus?

At the moment, in a fictitious unit of 400 men, I have 4 centenarius, 1 of which is a primus, two ducenari (one of which is also a primus, and likely the 3rd/4th most senior officer) followed by the primicerius as the senior NCO in command after the tribunus, and also a campidoctor as a drillmaster and praefectus castrorum in charge of fort logistics, repairs and so on. Does this add up? 

I apologise for all the questions, but I couldn't think of a better place to ask. I thank you in advance for your patience, and look forward to hearing your replies!

Vale!

[Flavivs Aetivs]

It's difficult to say what the strength of the "Numerus" was. I calculated Auxilia Palatina numeri at 640 men + supernumerary officers on the basis of various 4th-6th century sources (Zozimus, Olympiodorus, a few others) in my book, but that's not exactly definitive. We have some Papyri giving specific sizes from the reign of Justinian, but we don't know what "standardized" size they're supposed to be relative too. According to the Strategikon and onwards, the two or three Banda making up an Arithmos (Numerus) aren't supposed to be standardized.

1. Under the Tribunus you had the Primicerius, Campidoctor, the Doctor Armorum/Armidoctor, the Protector Domesticus, and the Senator. The Primicerius was second-in-command, and were in charge of day-to-day administrative affairs. The Protector Domesticus was exactly that - a man listed on the muster roles of the Protectores Domestici who has been earmarked for administrative or military office, sent to get his mandatory "military service." In reality they were little more than an adjutant to the Tribunus and Primicerius, and acted as a "chief-of-staff." The senator is speculated to have been a battlefield herald, while the Doctor Armorum/Armidoctor was the fencing master, in charge of teaching skilled recruits who were worth the time how to use various weapons at a high level of expertise. The Campidoctor was the regimental drillmaster and quartermaster. Drill and fencing instruction were two separate roles.
2. Yes. The Primicerius.
3. We don't know. Maybe. Maybe the Ducenarius was the senior centurion of two. Maybe he was supernumerary over two centurions. We don't know.
4. The Vexilarius, Flammularius, Bandoforos, etc. were supernumerary but not senior command staff, no.
5. As stated, the quartermaster and drillmaster role still was held by the Campidoctor. And as stated, we don't know much about the Senator, but it's theorized he was a messenger/herald.
6. I'm not aware of any cavalry alae that small. A half-ala is a Tarantiarchia, which is 256 men (on paper). I would look at some of the smaller or "new-style" regiments in the Notitia (labelled Cuneus/Cunei) to see if there's any indication of what kind of officer commands them.

[Nathan Ross]

By the 4th century, all military units were referred to as numeri, from legions to cavalry vexillationes and scholae. The word meant nothing more than 'unit', (literally 'number', the exact Greek equivalent is arithmos).

So the word did not describe a set number of men. A numerus of auxilia palatina may have been about 500-800 men, a numerus legionum could have been twice that size, and a numerus of limitanei much smaller. There's a note in the Strategikon suggesting that later military units had no set size.

There was an earlier use of numerus, going back to the 2nd century, to describe a (usually) irregular unit commonly stationed in a frontier region. The numeri exploratorum turn up quite early, so they were probably this type of unit. Guessing their size and composition is therefore difficult. 500-800 may be a reasonable assumption, but their numbers may have fluctuated based on the area they had to garrison or patrol.

The rank system of circitor-biarchus-centenarius-ducenarius first appears in the new cavalry units of the later 3rd century, and was then carried over into the scholae guard cavalry and the auxilia palatina. It does not seem to have been used by the legions, or by the older units who later became known as limitanei.

As these older units seem to have retained the principiate rank system, with the centurion renamed ordinarius, this was most likely the system used in the numeri exploratorum as well. The unit commander may have been a tribunus, or perhaps a praepositus on the model of the older irregular numeri from earlier centuries.

[Robert Vermaat]

1) If a new Tribunus was appointed, who would be his immediate senior staff, and what would their roles be? 
2) Who is the second in command? The primcerius? 
3) In a unit of say, 400 men, would you have two ducenarius (which I understand command 200 men each) and 4 centenarius? Would either of the ducenarius be a "primus" to indicate seniority?  
4) Would the Vexilarius be counted among senio staff? 
5) What about the praefectus castrorum and the campidoctor, which I know used to be important roles, but are not represented here? What would the "senator" here do?
6) And if I had an attached alae of say, 120 cavalrymen with 4 turmae, would their commander be a praefectus?

At the moment, in a fictitious unit of 400 men, I have 4 centenarius, 1 of which is a primus, two ducenari (one of which is also a primus, and likely the 3rd/4th most senior officer) followed by the primicerius as the senior NCO in command after the tribunus, and also a campidoctor as a drillmaster and praefectus castrorum in charge of fort logistics, repairs and so on. Does this add up? 

1 - Hard to say because what would the unit be that he commands? Several primicerii, a vicarius, a domesticus, a campidoctor, a draconarius?

2 - The primicerius yes, but sometimes a vicarius (post) was the highest non-commissioned officer and could assume command in absence of a tribunus. Also the campidoctor developed into one of the most important nco’s, exclusive to the infantry. Ranking third behind the tribunus and the primicerius, and on occasion the campidoctor could (like the vicarius) take command of (part of) an infantry unit. According to Maurikios, the campidoctores accompanied the tribunus before the engagement, before taking their place besides the standard in battle. Vegetius as well as Ammianus associated the campidoctores with the classical antesignani (in a non-technical classicising manner), signifying that they fought in the front rank.

3 – Not much is known of the late Roman ducenarius, although he may have commanded two hundred men, which would be logical if the new-style campidoctor commanded part of a unit. However, this may be due to a misunderstanding of Vegetius, who mentioned this rank as a rank between the centurion and the primus pilus of his theoretical ‘legio antiqua’. Vegetius was in all probability wrongly equating ‘ducenti’ into ‘ducentenarius’.

4 – The draconarius, vexillarius etc would not be a rank but a role, and I assume that because they accompany the regimental officers they may belong to the staff as well.

5 – See above and Nathan’s comment. Of the senator we do not know much, other than they earned a bit more than the ducenarius.

6 – Late Roman infantry units had no attached cavalry, which had been reorganised into seperate cavalry units since the later 3rd century.

[Steven James]

By the 4th century, all military units were referred to as numeri, from legions to cavalry vexillationes and scholae. The word meant nothing more than 'unit', (literally 'number', the exact Greek equivalent is arithmos).

So the word did not describe a set number of men. A numerus of auxilia palatina may have been about 500-800 men, a numerus legionum could have been twice that size, and a numerus of limitanei much smaller. There's a note in the Strategikon suggesting that later military units had no set size.

There was an earlier use of numerus, going back to the 2nd century, to describe a (usually) irregular unit commonly stationed in a frontier region. The numeri exploratorum turn up quite early, so they were probably this type of unit. Guessing their size and composition is therefore difficult. 500-800 may be a reasonable assumption, but their numbers may have fluctuated based on the area they had to garrison or patrol.

     

I for sometime tried to follow your outlook that the numerus has no set size, but had to abandon the idea and follow Roman military doctrine that had been practiced since the beginning of the republic. I haven’t found any evidence that the Romans drastically changed their military practices.

 

Just for this example, let’s say a numerus was fixed at 960 infantry, consisting of 800 iuniores and 160 seniores organised into 12 centuries (10 iuniores and 2 seniores) each of 80 infantry. If the 160 seniores are detached, this leaves 800 iuniores consisting of 10 centuries of iuniores. However, what if 2 centuries of iuniores are known as “the reserve” and like at Adrianople, are left to guard the baggage. This leaves 640 iuniores (8 centuries).

 

I have found all Roman units have a fixed size, but the size of the unit changes with the military doctrine being implemented. Most of the varying numbers for legions and units sizes throughout the primary sources are merely indicating a military doctrine being practiced.

[Nathan Ross]

what would the unit be that he commands?

The main problem here is that we don't know what sort of unit a numerus exploratorum might have been by the late Roman era.

It may have been an old-style cavalry unit, with decurions commanding subunits (old-style alae still feature these ranks in late 4th century papyri from Egypt). Or it might have been a new-style cavalry vexillatio or numerus equitum, with the rank system eques-circitor-exarch-centarius-ducenarius. Or it could have been organised as an old-style infantry unit, like the Perge legion, with centurions renamed ordinarii.

The numeri exploratorum on inscriptions from the 2nd-3rd centuries are usually commanded by legion centurions, sometimes given the temporary rank of praepositus.

A couple of inscriptions mention milites in numeri exp, which would suggest infantry ranks, but one has a duplicarius, so either might be possible. Or both?

Late Roman infantry units had no attached cavalry, which had been reorganised into seperate cavalry units since the later 3rd century.

Although the 4th-5th C Perge 'legion' numerus appears to have cavalry veredarii attached. It may be that this is an unusual formation though; the unusual mix of horsemen and infantry on the same roll might have been the reason for the inscription.

Then again, the auxilia palatinae are infantry who use cavalry ranks, and most palatina infantry numeri have 'matching' cavalry, which suggests they may originally have been part of the same combined units... But who knows?

[jmsilvacross]

Thank you all for your replies, and for your patience with my own. Work has been absolutely crazy this week and I have basically had no downtime.

It's difficult to say what the strength of the "Numerus" was. I calculated Auxilia Palatina numeri at 640 men + supernumerary officers on the basis of various 4th-6th century sources (Zozimus, Olympiodorus, a few others) in my book, but that's not exactly definitive. We have some Papyri giving specific sizes from the reign of Justinian, but we don't know what "standardized" size they're supposed to be relative too. According to the Strategikon and onwards, the two or three Banda making up an Arithmos (Numerus) aren't supposed to be standardized.

1. Under the Tribunus you had the Primicerius, Campidoctor, the Doctor Armorum/Armidoctor, the Protector Domesticus, and the Senator. The Primicerius was second-in-command, and were in charge of day-to-day administrative affairs. The Protector Domesticus was exactly that - a man listed on the muster roles of the Protectores Domestici who has been earmarked for administrative or military office, sent to get his mandatory "military service." In reality they were little more than an adjutant to the Tribunus and Primicerius, and acted as a "chief-of-staff." The senator is speculated to have been a battlefield herald, while the Doctor Armorum/Armidoctor was the fencing master, in charge of teaching skilled recruits who were worth the time how to use various weapons at a high level of expertise. The Campidoctor was the regimental drillmaster and quartermaster. Drill and fencing instruction were two separate roles.
2. Yes. The Primicerius.
3. We don't know. Maybe. Maybe the Ducenarius was the senior centurion of two. Maybe he was supernumerary over two centurions. We don't know.
4. The Vexilarius, Flammularius, Bandoforos, etc. were supernumerary but not senior command staff, no.
5. As stated, the quartermaster and drillmaster role still was held by the Campidoctor. And as stated, we don't know much about the Senator, but it's theorized he was a messenger/herald.
6. I'm not aware of any cavalry alae that small. A half-ala is a Tarantiarchia, which is 256 men (on paper). I would look at some of the smaller or "new-style" regiments in the Notitia (labelled Cuneus/Cunei) to see if there's any indication of what kind of officer commands them.

Thanks Evan!

Yes, 400-600 is roughly the number I am going for. I was aiming for something similar to the Cohors Equitata of old, with 480 infantry and 120 cavalry. And yes, when I said "alae" I meant the 4 turma of 30, not an entire 500 strong wing. 

Thank you for clarifying the difference between the Campidoctor and Armidoctor, I had no idea the two roles were distinct. 

By the 4th century, all military units were referred to as numeri, from legions to cavalry vexillationes and scholae. The word meant nothing more than 'unit', (literally 'number', the exact Greek equivalent is arithmos).

So the word did not describe a set number of men. A numerus of auxilia palatina may have been about 500-800 men, a numerus legionum could have been twice that size, and a numerus of limitanei much smaller. There's a note in the Strategikon suggesting that later military units had no set size.

There was an earlier use of numerus, going back to the 2nd century, to describe a (usually) irregular unit commonly stationed in a frontier region. The numeri exploratorum turn up quite early, so they were probably this type of unit. Guessing their size and composition is therefore difficult. 500-800 may be a reasonable assumption, but their numbers may have fluctuated based on the area they had to garrison or patrol.

The rank system of circitor-biarchus-centenarius-ducenarius first appears in the new cavalry units of the later 3rd century, and was then carried over into the scholae guard cavalry and the auxilia palatina. It does not seem to have been used by the legions, or by the older units who later became known as limitanei.

As these older units seem to have retained the principiate rank system, with the centurion renamed ordinarius, this was most likely the system used in the numeri exploratorum as well. The unit commander may have been a tribunus, or perhaps a praepositus on the model of the older irregular numeri from earlier centuries.

Thanks Nathan!

Yep, I'm aware that Numeri are just a late roman word for Unit. I remember vaguely reading somewhere that there was an Auxilia Palatinae somwhere in Germania (Castellum Mattiacorum perhaps?) that was given scouting duties. In my novel, the tribunus/praepositus belong to one of these "elite" units, but has now been sent to Britannia to oversee a Limitanei exploratorum unit. He is something of an innovator and a rogue, so he tries to remodel the ragtag bunch into something more akin to the Auxilia Palatinae he used to command, and also to increase it's size. (Again, something closer to the old Cohors Equitata)

Hmmn, I did not know the Limitanei continued to use the old hierarchy system. So besides the centurion becoming an ordinarius, do we know the rest of the hierarchy?

1 - Hard to say because what would the unit be that he commands? Several primicerii, a vicarius, a domesticus, a campidoctor, a draconarius?

2 - The primicerius yes, but sometimes a vicarius (post) was the highest non-commissioned officer and could assume command in absence of a tribunus. Also the campidoctor developed into one of the most important nco’s, exclusive to the infantry. Ranking third behind the tribunus and the primicerius, and on occasion the campidoctor could (like the vicarius) take command of (part of) an infantry unit. According to Maurikios, the campidoctores accompanied the tribunus before the engagement, before taking their place besides the standard in battle. Vegetius as well as Ammianus associated the campidoctores with the classical antesignani (in a non-technical classicising manner), signifying that they fought in the front rank.

3 – Not much is known of the late Roman ducenarius, although he may have commanded two hundred men, which would be logical if the new-style campidoctor commanded part of a unit. However, this may be due to a misunderstanding of Vegetius, who mentioned this rank as a rank between the centurion and the primus pilus of his theoretical ‘legio antiqua’. Vegetius was in all probability wrongly equating ‘ducenti’ into ‘ducentenarius’.

4 – The draconarius, vexillarius etc would not be a rank but a role, and I assume that because they accompany the regimental officers they may belong to the staff as well.

5 – See above and Nathan’s comment. Of the senator we do not know much, other than they earned a bit more than the ducenarius.

6 – Late Roman infantry units had no attached cavalry, which had been reorganised into seperate cavalry units since the later 3rd century.

Thanks Robert!

The unit I had in mind is a late roman Numeri Exploratorum, or maybe a Superventorum. But a Limitanei unit, not an Auxilia Palatinae or anything elite. 

The information about where a Campidoctor goes in the ranks is super useful to me, thanks for explaining that. 

From what you and Nathan have said, am I right in assuming that the domesticus/protectores domestici were the chief of staff and adjutants to the Tribunus? I thought I read somewhere that protectores domestici were also bodyguards?

As for your last point, how would scouting units cover distance or pass messages, survey, etc? Would there have been no horses at all in exploratorum/superventorum any units stationed on frontiers? 

I for sometime tried to follow your outlook that the numerus has no set size, but had to abandon the idea and follow Roman military doctrine that had been practiced since the beginning of the republic. I haven’t found any evidence that the Romans drastically changed their military practices.

 

Just for this example, let’s say a numerus was fixed at 960 infantry, consisting of 800 iuniores and 160 seniores organised into 12 centuries (10 iuniores and 2 seniores) each of 80 infantry. If the 160 seniores are detached, this leaves 800 iuniores consisting of 10 centuries of iuniores. However, what if 2 centuries of iuniores are known as “the reserve” and like at Adrianople, are left to guard the baggage. This leaves 640 iuniores (8 centuries).

 

I have found all Roman units have a fixed size, but the size of the unit changes with the military doctrine being implemented. Most of the varying numbers for legions and units sizes throughout the primary sources are merely indicating a military doctrine being practiced.

Thank you for your thoughts Steven!

I had no idea the Iuniores/Seniores distinction happened within a unit. I thought that was solely a distinction between east/west. 

I have to say I am going to be somewhat flexible on the exact final numbers. As I've hinted, the guy in command in this unit is not a stickler for rules, has more or less been left to his own devices, and is quite flexible. The old authenticity vs accuracy argument, so I hope you can all forgive me. 

The main problem here is that we don't know what sort of unit a numerus exploratorum might have been by the late Roman era.

It may have been an old-style cavalry unit, with decurions commanding subunits (old-style alae still feature these ranks in late 4th century papyri from Egypt). Or it might have been a new-style cavalry vexillatio or numerus equitum, with the rank system eques-circitor-exarch-centarius-ducenarius. Or it could have been organised as an old-style infantry unit, like the Perge legion, with centurions renamed ordinarii.

The numeri exploratorum on inscriptions from the 2nd-3rd centuries are usually commanded by legion centurions, sometimes given the temporary rank of praepositus.

A couple of inscriptions mention milites in numeri exp, which would suggest infantry ranks, but one has a duplicarius, so either might be possible. Or both?

Although the 4th-5th C Perge 'legion' numerus appears to have cavalry veredarii attached. It may be that this is an unusual formation though; the unusual mix of horsemen and infantry on the same roll might have been the reason for the inscription.

Then again, the auxilia palatinae are infantry who use cavalry ranks, and most palatina infantry numeri have 'matching' cavalry, which suggests they may originally have been part of the same combined units... But who knows?

Yes, this is also why I'm trying to be a bit flexible, but at the end of the day we cannot be fully sure,  correct?

If "both" are possible because there are milites and duplicarii together, would it be within the realms of possibility that a scouting unit had both infantry and cavalry, as per the old Auxiliary units? That would make sense to me, purely from a scouting point of view. 

Once again, thank you all for your replies. You have given me a lot to think on, and even more to ground myself. Thank you so much!

[Nathan Ross]

the difference between the Campidoctor and Armidoctor, I had no idea the two roles were distinct.

'Armidoctores' turn up (I think) only in inscriptions from the Principiate. The later Campidoctor (senior NCO) role was different.

Vegetius mentions 'doctores armorum' training soldiers, which could refer to the same thing. Alternatively he may be thinking of the senior soldier grade of armatura (see below), which might have had something to do with weapon proficiency or training.

So besides the centurion becoming an ordinarius, do we know the rest of the hierarchy?

We do indeed! Based on the inscription from Perge, which details the organisation of a numerus stationed there in c.AD500, and a few other sources, the later 'legion' (plus limitanei) rank hierarchy probably went like this:

Tribune/Praefect/Praepositus - this would be the unit commander. Generally all field army units and most frontier 'cohorts' are commanded by tribunes, while frontier cavalry units and legions, and some 'numeri', are led by Prefects or Praepositi.

Vicarius - deputy to the tribune. Perhaps also called Tribunus Minor. Maybe a temporary rank or post?

Ordinarius - this was the centurion-grade officer of the late legions and limitanei.

Campidoctor - originally a drill master, by the later empire the most senior soldier in the unit. Whether he was one of the Ordinarii, or a separate rank, is unknown.

Augustales and Flaviales - these are senior soldier or NCO grades, and appear in both legions and limitanei units.

Armaturae/Semissales - senior soldier grades, of various sorts.

Besides these men, there was the Optio (who functioned more like a subunit clerk at this date), the signifer (standard bearer, aka draconarius), various musicians, and the munifices, or milites (common soldiers). A clerk called an actuarius turns up in some sources as well. Beneficiarii are listed on the Perge tablet and perhaps acted as aides to the commanding officer.

Things do get confusing when we consider other sources though - the mythical martyr story of the 'Theban Legion' (probably written in the later 4th century) has the legion commanded by a primicerius named Mauricius, together with campidoctor Exuperius and the senator militum Candidus. These appear to be ranks or grades from the auxilia palatina - it may be that the churchman who wrote the story knew no different, but we can't rule out these ranks perhaps crossing over to (some of) the legions and/or other units by this date. A limitanei numerus mentioned in a 6th century papyrus from Patermouthis in Egypt features a primicerius...

Senator is a weird rank, and probably a very late one. It appears among the c.AD400 tomb inscriptions from Concordia among the auxilia palatina, and elsewhere in the schola scutariorum. So it was most likely part of that system of ranks - perhaps a title for the senior ducenarius?

am I right in assuming that the domesticus/protectores domestici were the chief of staff and adjutants to the Tribunus? I thought I read somewhere that protectores domestici were also bodyguards?

The Protectores were originally set up as bodyguards to the emperors, featuring men personally selected from the centurionate. Later they were divided into the Protectores Domestici, a sort of staff college and officer-training corps with a bodyguard function (many of whom were the sons of either barbarian nobles or prominent Romans, like Ammianus Marcellinus), and the ordinary Protectores who fulfilled various independent roles.

The domesticus who appears on some very late army lists was not one of these men - he was apparently a servant to the commanding officer.

I had no idea the Iuniores/Seniores distinction happened within a unit. I thought that was solely a distinction between east/west.

The usual theory is that Seniores and Iuniores were different units, the second being perhaps formed from a cadre or offshoot of the first. Here is a recent discussion of the subject.

would it be within the realms of possibility that a scouting unit had both infantry and cavalry, as per the old Auxiliary units?

I would think that very likely!

Incidentally, you might be interested in a novel called Frontier Wolf by Rosemary Sutcliff - about a legion centurion (I think) sent to mid 4th century North Britain to command a unit of frontier scouts. She uses a melange of late Roman ranks and titles, but the overall effect feels pretty authentic.

[Steven James]

Julian wrote:

Yes, 400-600 is roughly the number I am going for. I was aiming for something similar to the Cohors Equitata of old, with 480 infantry and 120 cavalry.

 

In two incidents Ammianus has 300 picked men taken from each numerus. (20 4 2-3), (31 11 2) Therefore, from a numerus of 400 men, this leaves 100 men, and from a numerus of 600 men, this leaves 300 men. This is deducting 75% of 400 men and 50% of 600 men, which is rather drastic. The numerus has to be larger than 600 men.

 

Julian wrote:

I had no idea the Iuniores/Seniores distinction happened within a unit. I thought that was solely a distinction between east/west.

 

That is solely my conclusion based on my research, and the evidence for this is quite compelling. The Passion of Saint George reports that Diocletian allocated the general Euchios, command of 3,000 soldiers to overthrow the Christian churches in Egypt. The Passion of Saint George also reports that Anastasius, the governor of Palestine was allocated 3,000 soldiers by the emperor Diocletian. Also Zosimus (3 74) has the emperor Julian sail to Sirmium with 3,000 troops.

 

I have found that the 3,000 troops represents a full strength legion and includes the iuniores and seniores, both infantry and cavalry, plus the officers, and then is neatly rounded to 3,000 men.

 

Saint Meletius the Soldier was an officer in the Roman army who with 252 of his soldiers was put to death for being an avowed Christians. The Roman Martyrology (Saint Meletius May 24) Firstly, I am not interesting in the validity of whether this event took place or not. My interest is the source is using the paper strengths of the Roman army. The 252 soldiers includes the officers, and neatly fits into the 3,000 soldiers source.

 

Next, Macarius (311) mentions that 1,104 soldiers were stationed at Melitene. Here I have found the same source from above in play as it also includes the officers. The difference is the 1,104 soldiers also includes cavalry. Like the 252 soldiers, it is a very accurate figure.

 

Next, “The Acts of the Disputation of Archelaus (1-2)” mentions that after the soldiers had attacked the Christians, the tally of Christians consisted of ‘some’ 7,700 prisoners, of which 500 were wounded, and ‘about’ 1,300 Christians were killed. The Second Book of Chronicles (17 11) also uses the number 7,700 for the size of a flock of rams and goats.

 

I have found that the number of Christians killed; wounded and taken prisoner follows Roman military organization. The figure of some 7,200 prisoners is the infantry of the iuniores, part of the iuniores cavalry and all the seniores cavalry. The 500 wounded are the remaining iuniores cavalry and the figure of about 1,300 killed is the infantry of the seniores. When put back into their proper organization, these figures, which do not include the officers, match the organization of the infantry and cavalry of the previous examples. It could be that the original author recognized the similarity to the biblical number of 7,700 rams and goats, and therefore, partition those taken prisoners and wounded to closely recreate that figure.

 

Returning to Ammianus’ comment that 300 picked men were taken from each numerus, this is a common military Roman doctrine. At Ecnomus in 255 BC, the Romans picked the best from the army for the invasion of Africa. Going back to the republic, I have found that each century is organised into a soldiers years of service, spanning from veterans to raw recruits. In the beginning of the republic it was based on how many campaigns a soldier had undertaken, with the veterans undertaking their maximum number of campaign. So those 300 picked troops Ammianus mentions, and following this practice introduced with the start of the republic, those 300 picked troops have been rounded from 320 troops. In the situation Ammianus mentions, the methodology is when picking those troops; the selection officer had to select a specific and equal number of troops of varying military experience. In the republic, this meant an equal number of raw troops, in between troops and veteran troop. Selecting only veteran troops was not how it worked in Ammianus’ example.

 

From the evidence I have uncovered, the seniores were part of a Late Roman legion, and each legion was allocated a specific number of cavalry (iuniores and seniores). This does not mean the cavalry had to always accompany the legion. I will end this by saying that in the Roman army, there is no such thing a unit of no specific size.


Steven James

[Nathan Ross]

The numerus has to be larger than 600 men.

In this instance the numeri in question were units of the field army - auxilia and legions - and so probably did have particular sizes.

But all military units were described as numeri, whether they were field army or limitanei, cavalry or infantry, and some of the limitanei ones were perhaps very small indeed. The word itself did not signify a set number of men.

The original question was about a numerus exploratorum, which may have been a particular kind of unit, or just a designation given to a unit fulfilling a particular function.

[Steven James]

Nathan wrote:

The original question was about a numerus exploratorum, which may have been a particular kind of unit, or just a designation given to a unit fulfilling a particular function.

 

I would recommend looking into Polybius' (6 40 4) extraordinarii. Maybe that is the origin of the numerus exploratorum.

[jmsilvacross]

'Armidoctores' turn up (I think) only in inscriptions from the Principiate. The later Campidoctor (senior NCO) role was different.

Vegetius mentions 'doctores armorum' training soldiers, which could refer to the same thing. Alternatively he may be thinking of the senior soldier grade of armatura (see below), which might have had something to do with weapon proficiency or training.[/quote]

Thank you, I can definitely think of a few moments to bring this to life.

We do indeed! Based on the inscription from Perge, which details the organisation of a numerus stationed there in c.AD500, and a few other sources, the later 'legion' (plus limitanei) rank hierarchy probably went like this:

Tribune/Praefect/Praepositus - this would be the unit commander. Generally all field army units and most frontier 'cohorts' are commanded by tribunes, while frontier cavalry units and legions, and some 'numeri', are led by Prefects or Praepositi.

Vicarius - deputy to the tribune. Perhaps also called Tribunus Minor. Maybe a temporary rank or post?

Ordinarius - this was the centurion-grade officer of the late legions and limitanei.

Campidoctor - originally a drill master, by the later empire the most senior soldier in the unit. Whether he was one of the Ordinarii, or a separate rank, is unknown.

Augustales and Flaviales - these are senior soldier or NCO grades, and appear in both legions and limitanei units.

Armaturae/Semissales - senior soldier grades, of various sorts.

Besides these men, there was the Optio (who functioned more like a subunit clerk at this date), the signifer (standard bearer, aka draconarius), various musicians, and the munifices, or milites (common soldiers). A clerk called an actuarius turns up in some sources as well. Beneficiarii are listed on the Perge tablet and perhaps acted as aides to the commanding officer.

Things do get confusing when we consider other sources though - the mythical martyr story of the 'Theban Legion' (probably written in the later 4th century) has the legion commanded by a primicerius named Mauricius, together with campidoctor Exuperius and the senator militum Candidus. These appear to be ranks or grades from the auxilia palatina - it may be that the churchman who wrote the story knew no different, but we can't rule out these ranks perhaps crossing over to (some of) the legions and/or other units by this date. A limitanei numerus mentioned in a 6th century papyrus from Patermouthis in Egypt features a primicerius...

Senator is a weird rank, and probably a very late one. It appears among the c.AD400 tomb inscriptions from Concordia among the auxilia palatina, and elsewhere in the schola scutariorum. So it was most likely part of that system of ranks - perhaps a title for the senior ducenarius?

Thank you! This is exactly what I wanted. This is very good to know! I find it fascinating that they started called centurions "ordinarius" and now in English and quite a lot of latin derived languages (Spanish, Portuguese) the word just means ordinary. Wonder how that evolved?

The primicerius potentially being in the limitanei too is quite interesting. I will see if I can somehow try and explain that.

The Protectores were originally set up as bodyguards to the emperors, featuring men personally selected from the centurionate. Later they were divided into the Protectores Domestici, a sort of staff college and officer-training corps with a bodyguard function (many of whom were the sons of either barbarian nobles or prominent Romans, like Ammianus Marcellinus), and the ordinary Protectores who fulfilled various independent roles.

The domesticus who appears on some very late army lists was not one of these men - he was apparently a servant to the commanding officer.

OK, thanks for explaining. Do you think a limitanei unit would have had one of these?

I would think that very likely!

Incidentally, you might be interested in a novel called Frontier Wolf by Rosemary Sutcliff - about a legion centurion (I think) sent to mid 4th century North Britain to command a unit of frontier scouts. She uses a melange of late Roman ranks and titles, but the overall effect feels pretty authentic.

This is great to hear! Yes, she is on my reading list, though that particular title has escaped my attention. Seems exactly like what I want though! So far I've been relying on Gore Vidal's Julian, Wallace Breem's Eagle in the Snow and a handful of Francis Hagan's books for the right sort of inspiration.

Julian wrote:

Yes, 400-600 is roughly the number I am going for. I was aiming for something similar to the Cohors Equitata of old, with 480 infantry and 120 cavalry.

 

In two incidents Ammianus has 300 picked men taken from each numerus. (20 4 2-3), (31 11 2) Therefore, from a numerus of 400 men, this leaves 100 men, and from a numerus of 600 men, this leaves 300 men. This is deducting 75% of 400 men and 50% of 600 men, which is rather drastic. The numerus has to be larger than 600 men.

 

Julian wrote:

I had no idea the Iuniores/Seniores distinction happened within a unit. I thought that was solely a distinction between east/west.

 

That is solely my conclusion based on my research, and the evidence for this is quite compelling. The Passion of Saint George reports that Diocletian allocated the general Euchios, command of 3,000 soldiers to overthrow the Christian churches in Egypt. The Passion of Saint George also reports that Anastasius, the governor of Palestine was allocated 3,000 soldiers by the emperor Diocletian. Also Zosimus (3 74) has the emperor Julian sail to Sirmium with 3,000 troops.

 

I have found that the 3,000 troops represents a full strength legion and includes the iuniores and seniores, both infantry and cavalry, plus the officers, and then is neatly rounded to 3,000 men.

 

Saint Meletius the Soldier was an officer in the Roman army who with 252 of his soldiers was put to death for being an avowed Christians. The Roman Martyrology (Saint Meletius May 24) Firstly, I am not interesting in the validity of whether this event took place or not. My interest is the source is using the paper strengths of the Roman army. The 252 soldiers includes the officers, and neatly fits into the 3,000 soldiers source.

 

Next, Macarius (311) mentions that 1,104 soldiers were stationed at Melitene. Here I have found the same source from above in play as it also includes the officers. The difference is the 1,104 soldiers also includes cavalry. Like the 252 soldiers, it is a very accurate figure.

 

Next, “The Acts of the Disputation of Archelaus (1-2)” mentions that after the soldiers had attacked the Christians, the tally of Christians consisted of ‘some’ 7,700 prisoners, of which 500 were wounded, and ‘about’ 1,300 Christians were killed. The Second Book of Chronicles (17 11) also uses the number 7,700 for the size of a flock of rams and goats.

 

I have found that the number of Christians killed; wounded and taken prisoner follows Roman military organization. The figure of some 7,200 prisoners is the infantry of the iuniores, part of the iuniores cavalry and all the seniores cavalry. The 500 wounded are the remaining iuniores cavalry and the figure of about 1,300 killed is the infantry of the seniores. When put back into their proper organization, these figures, which do not include the officers, match the organization of the infantry and cavalry of the previous examples. It could be that the original author recognized the similarity to the biblical number of 7,700 rams and goats, and therefore, partition those taken prisoners and wounded to closely recreate that figure.

 

Returning to Ammianus’ comment that 300 picked men were taken from each numerus, this is a common military Roman doctrine. At Ecnomus in 255 BC, the Romans picked the best from the army for the invasion of Africa. Going back to the republic, I have found that each century is organised into a soldiers years of service, spanning from veterans to raw recruits. In the beginning of the republic it was based on how many campaigns a soldier had undertaken, with the veterans undertaking their maximum number of campaign. So those 300 picked troops Ammianus mentions, and following this practice introduced with the start of the republic, those 300 picked troops have been rounded from 320 troops. In the situation Ammianus mentions, the methodology is when picking those troops; the selection officer had to select a specific and equal number of troops of varying military experience. In the republic, this meant an equal number of raw troops, in between troops and veteran troop. Selecting only veteran troops was not how it worked in Ammianus’ example.

 

From the evidence I have uncovered, the seniores were part of a Late Roman legion, and each legion was allocated a specific number of cavalry (iuniores and seniores). This does not mean the cavalry had to always accompany the legion. I will end this by saying that in the Roman army, there is no such thing a unit of no specific size.

Steven James

Thank you for these sources Steven! This is really fascinating stuff. I am learning a lot about the late hierarchy and organisation that I had no idea before. This is something I will be able to touch in later books as the roman army proper is sent to Britannia to quell things, with actual legions, auxilia palatinae and other high grade troops.

In this instance the numeri in question were units of the field army - auxilia and legions - and so probably did have particular sizes.

But all military units were described as numeri, whether they were field army or limitanei, cavalry or infantry, and some of the limitanei ones were perhaps very small indeed. The word itself did not signify a set number of men.

The original question was about a numerus exploratorum, which may have been a particular kind of unit, or just a designation given to a unit fulfilling a particular function.

Yep, here I am specifically talking about what an exploratorum unit that survived into the late 4th century would have looked like, and I guess it's nice for my creative/artistic license that we don't fully know.

I would recommend looking into Polybius' (6 40 4) extraordinarii. Maybe that is the origin of the numerus exploratorum.

What are the numbers you mention? The 6 40 4? Do you have any books/research you would recommend? I don't know a lot about those kinds of troops.

Thank you all for your amazing replies! It is very much appreciated.

[Steven James]

Nathan wrote:

Senator is a weird rank, and probably a very late one. It appears among the c.AD400 tomb inscriptions from Concordia among the auxilia palatina, and elsewhere in the schola scutariorum. So it was most likely part of that system of ranks - perhaps a title for the senior ducenarius?

 

Just to add more confusion, for the campaign of 446 BC, Livy (3 69) writes that “two senators were put in command of every cohort.”

 

Julian wrote:

What are the numbers you mention? The 6 40 4? Do you have any books/research you would recommend? I don't know a lot about those kinds of troops.

 

In his sixth book, Polybius wrote about the Roman army of the mid republic. In his description of the Roman march order, Polybius mentions a troop type termed “the extraordinarii” as being placed at the head of the march column. The extraordinarii (meaning chosen men that fought beyond the ordinarii of the regular troops), were allied troops both cavalry (equites extraordinarii) and infantry (the pedites extraordinarii), specially selected to form the vanguard of the army while on the march. The extraordinarii were used as a reconnaissance force while on the march and also formed the pickets for the camp. When on the march the allied extraordinarii were to detect ambushes and to hold off the enemy long enough for the main army to deploy. Other functions were to remove obstacles, to occupy points of potential danger and to secure important terrain features such as a ford or defile, while the army was on the march. Polybius reports that one fifth of the allied infantry were detached to serve as extraordinarii. Polybius gives the extraordinarii cavalry at ‘about one third’ of the total number of allied cavalry, and that after the extraordinarii cavalry were deducted, the remaining allied cavalry was double that of the Roman cavalry.


Steven James

[Nathan Ross]

I find it fascinating that they started called centurions "ordinarius"... Wonder how that evolved?

The word comes from the Latin ordo, for a group, rank or company of soldiers - ordines plural. The initial term was centurio ordinarius, which appears on tombstones from the very late 3rd and early 4th centuries - meaning, approximately, a centurion 'in the ranks', or commanding an ordo.

This would be perhaps distinguished from a centurion on a staff appointment or controlling a district (centurio regionarius) or doing some other supernumerary thing - the centurionate greatly expanded its role in the later 3rd century after the decline of the equestrian 'offiicer caste'.

After a while centurio ordinarius just became ordinarius. Although we do occasionally come across references to centurions in the 4th century, and the word carries over into later Greek too, so it didn't entirely die out!

(I wonder whether the 'century' commanded by the ordinarius might actually have been called an ordo - and perhaps might have been rather larger or rather smaller than the centurion's command of the principiate - but that's a different debate! One writer - I think Simon James? - has suggested that the late Roman 'century' might have been called a familia, so who knows?...)

Do you think a limitanei unit would have had one of these?

Perhaps unlikely. In one sense a domesticus could be any servant of a household or retinue - the word just refers, I think, to the domus. But in the military sense of a sort of officer's orderly it doesn't seem to appear until fairly late - 6th century?

[Steven James]

Nathan wrote:

The initial term was centurio ordinarius, which appears on tombstones from the very late 3rd and early 4th centuries - meaning, approximately, a centurion 'in the ranks', or commanding an ordo.

 

Why not both? In his description of the 340 BC legion, Livy (8 8) has an ordo consist of: “three vexilla, and a single vexillum comprised 60 soldiers, two centurions and one vexillarius or standard-bearer, so that altogether there were one 186 men.” The two centurions I have corrected to be one centurion and one optio. The standard bearers I have interpreted to be part of the 180 soldiers. The end result is and ordo amounts to 180 soldiers, 3 centurions and 3 optiones. Each centurion commands 60 soldiers, which for this time frame is a century, but omits the velites or any light infantry. Of those three centurions, the one that commanded the ordo is the centurion ordinarius.

 

At the battle of Turin in 312 AD, between Constantine and Maxentius, Constantine left lanes for the enemy cavalry to pass through. Panegyric 4 (Nazarius 321 AD) Panegyric 12 (Trier, 313 AD). Livy (8 8) tells us that when the hastati retired, they passed through the intervals of the ordines. Later the princeps passed through the intervals of the triarii ordines. From 340 BC to 312 AD, some 652 years, nothing has really changed in the doctrine of the Roman army. It is still doing the same old stuff with the ordo organization creating the intervals. While many hold onto the notion that an ordo is another term for a maniple, there will be no progress.

 

Steven James