Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
When did cohors equitata milliaria come into existence?
#1
Star 
I've read most of the posts on cohorts and commanders (or lack thereof), I'm curious if there is any idea when this kind unit was organized?
Roger
Reply
#2
(10-12-2020, 11:30 PM)musterion Wrote: I'm curious if there is any idea when this kind unit was organized?

The earliest references I can find are Trajanic. CIL 03, 01627 dates to AD106-7, and I think is the very earliest dateable one mentioning this sort of unit:

Imp(erator) / Caesar Nerva / Traianus Aug(ustus) / Germ(anicus) Dacicus / pontif(ex) maxim(us) / (!) pot(estate) XII co(n)s(ul) V / imp(erator) VI p(ater) p(atriae) fecit / per coh(ortem) I Fl(aviam) Ulp(iam) / Hisp(anam) mil(iariam) c(ivium) R(omanorum) eq(uitatam) / a Potaissa Napo/cam / m(ilia) p(assuum) X


This next guy held his last procuratorial position under Trajan, which might mean that his earlier post as prefect (interestingly, not tribune) of a coh mil eq might predate that emperor, but could still fall within his reign. More interestingly still, he seems to have jumped straight from the equestrian militia secunda to Primus Pilus!

AE 1992, 00979: [P(ublius)] Postumius A(uli) f(ilius) / Pap(iria) Acilianus / [p]raef(ectus) cohort(is) II Hi[sp(anorum) m]iliar(iae) / [eq]uit(atae) prim(us) pil(us) leg(ionis) X[II F]ulm(inatae) / proc(urator) provin[ciae Ach]aiae / procurator / [Im]p(eratoris) Nervae [Traiani Aug(usti)] / [provinciae Baeticae?]


The regular cohors equitata probably date right back to the formation of the auxilia under Augustus (there are one or two very early inscriptions), but really take off from around the mid 1st century. Inscriptions mentioning cohors miliaria date from the Domitian-Trajan era onwards, but may relate to veterans who had served many years already.

So I would say we could probably best place the widespread introduction of cohors equitata to the Nero-Vespasian era, of cohors miliaria to Vespasian-Domitian, and cohors miliaria equitata to Domitian-Trajan.
Nathan Ross
Reply
#3
Thanks,  I was trying to figure out if the chilliarchos (literally, ruler of 1000) in Acts 22 was in command of such a unit.  When Paul was taken to Caesarea he was surrounded by 200 infantry, 70 horseman, 200 spearmen, and I thought the it would have to be a big cohort to have this many.  As I recall, Judea was garrisoned by auxilliaries and not by frontline legions.
Roger
Reply
#4
(10-14-2020, 08:03 PM)musterion Wrote: When Paul was taken to Caesarea he was surrounded by 200 infantry, 70 horseman, 200 spearmen

The '200 spearmen' are actually dexiolaboi, an unclear term - it means men who carry something in their right hand! They're clearly different to the infantry (stratiotoi) though, so could be some kind of militia, or slingers, or light troops of some other kind.

Interestingly, it does seem possible that the Samarian cohorts 'inherited' by Rome from the army of Herod (and which probably formed the initial Roman garrison of the new province) were organised into units of 1000. Several of the Cohortes Sebastenorum - into which they in time evolved - were miliarian in later years.
Nathan Ross
Reply
#5
Yea, I should have looked up "spearman". I'll investigate the "Cohortes Sebastenorum" further. I see there a number of papers in jstoron the subject.

Thanks again.
Roger
Reply
#6
Nathan wrote:
The regular cohors equitata probably date right back to the formation of the auxilia under Augustus (there are one or two very early inscriptions).
 
I am in 100 percent agreement that the cohors equitata date back to the reign of Augustus, amounting to 600 men consisting of 480 infantry organised into six centuries each of 80 infantry and 120 cavalry organised into 15 centuries each of eight cavalrymen.
Reply
#7
Cavalryman were in turmae of 30-32, not centuries of 8...
aka T*O*N*G*A*R
Reply
#8
(10-15-2020, 04:16 PM)Condottiero Magno Wrote: Cavalryman were in turmae of 30-32, not centuries of 8...

Well if you say so. But of interest, four centuries of eight cavalrymen does make 32.
Reply
#9
(10-15-2020, 07:56 PM)Steven James Wrote:
(10-15-2020, 04:16 PM)Condottiero Magno Wrote: Cavalryman were in turmae of 30-32, not centuries of 8...

Well if you say so. But of interest, four centuries of eight cavalrymen does make 32.
There is no such thing as a century of eight...

Even if there was such a thing, 120 isn't divisible by 32 into an even number. The decurion might've been supernumerary, like the centurion, so he would've been the 31st man in a turma and 124 in an ala of 4 turmae or 128 or 132, if the two subordinates are also extras.
aka T*O*N*G*A*R
Reply
#10
Condottiero Magno wrote:
There is no such thing as a century of eight... Even if there was such a thing, 120 isn't divisible by 32 into an even number. The decurion might've been supernumerary, like the centurion, so he would've been the 31st man in a turma and 124 in an ala of 4 turmae or 128 or 132, if the two subordinates are also extras.
 
I never made the claim 120 was divisible by eight. My example was 32 is divisible by eight. And who says 120 has to be divided by 32. 120 can also be divisible by 40, which is eight x five.
 
So let’s agree to disagree.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The last decades of the existence of praetorians comitatus (Marco) 17 5,780 11-23-2012, 11:14 AM
Last Post: Theodosius the Great
  coin confirms the existence of Domitianus AD271? Luca 8 3,912 03-01-2004, 07:54 PM
Last Post: FlaviusCrispus

Forum Jump: