Imperial Roman infantry classification

[nikgaukroger]

For the Imperial Roman period Ammianus certainly supports Close formation and also the ability to fight effectively in terrain. Note also Vegetius on this as he gives a closer formation.

For earlier ones there is a lot of academic (and other) discussion about exactly what Polybios means in the passage you are (indirectly) referring to - not to mention that he is writing about a particular point in time in the development of the Roman infantry - so care is needed.

It is a really interesting rabbit hole to go down. Phil Sabin, Fernando Quesada Sanz and Alexander Zhmodikov have all written some interesting analysis on republican Roman fighting and the use of missiles for example.

Generalisations from the republic through to late antiquity really may not be a good idea.

[accard]

My initial thoughts were more about a tidy up of the current options.

On that basis I think I'd make the Impact Weapons and the Unskilled Javelin (the auxilia) options all/none for one or the other. IMO by the end of the C3rd any previous distinction between legions and auxilia have to all intents (and certainly for MeG classifications) gone and so all should be the same on that basis.

The option for Darts, SSp can stay as is though.

Ammianus' continued use of terms such as "levis armaturae auxilis" and "velitis" through to Julian's reign suggest that the lanciarii option should be available later than it currently is, but maybe restricted to just 1 unit.

A few other cosmetic changes as well - I found a reference to Huns being used in 383 CE for example.

I think some at least some of the auxiliaries should be allowed a lanciarii type option, as Ammianus describes the tribune of the Cornuti leading a body of 'auxiliares velites' across the Rhine. Not sure how much it needs to be limited - I have never seen them in large numbers on the table.

If distinctions between legions and auxilia in the battle line are largely seen to have disappeared, then I think that whatever variation is chosen, shield cover should be considered as a characteristic of that type. Not sure why the short spear/unskilled javelin battle line infantry wouldn't have it in an all or none situation. Otherwise you have the main battle line infantry being shield cover(impact weapon) then  not shield cover/ short spear,  then compulsory shield cover again when they all move to darts in later periods. Not sure why that shield cover would drop away in an all or none situation. Fine maybe for the late 4th century for some troops. I tend to think after Adrianople in the east a fair amount of variation in types should  probably be allowed. 

[nikgaukroger]

I think some at least some of the auxiliaries should be allowed a lanciarii type option, as Ammianus describes the tribune of the Cornuti leading a body of 'auxiliares velites' across the Rhine. Not sure how much it needs to be limited - I have never seen them in large numbers on the table.

There are a number of reference to that sort of thing in battles (I'm discounting "special ops" as MeG isn't really about them) - "levis armaturae auxilis" and "velitis" are used certainly as late as the battles in Julian's invasion of Persia; not sure there are any after that. I'd probably allow as single SUG of lanciarii types to at least 363 CE on that basis.

If distinctions between legions and auxilia in the battle line are largely seen to have disappeared, then I think that whatever variation is chosen, shield cover should be considered as a characteristic of that type. Not sure why the short spear/unskilled javelin battle line infantry wouldn't have it in an all or none situation. Otherwise you have the main battle line infantry being shield cover(impact weapon) then  not shield cover/ short spear,  then compulsory shield cover again when they all move to darts in later periods. Not sure why that shield cover would drop away in an all or none situation. Fine maybe for the late 4th century for some troops. I tend to think after Adrianople in the east a fair amount of variation in types should  probably be allowed.

I'd agree that it should really be all/none classifications other than the option to partly replace one of the all/none options with the Dart armed types.

For the immediate aftermath of Adrianople for eastern armies in Thrace, etc. I see it more as a quality issue than anything else.

[nikgaukroger]

FWIW to summarise where I got to on this, I have suggested to Richard that the Legionaries & Auxilia infantry in the Imperial Roman list are either an option of All Impact Weapon, Shield Cover, optional Melee Expert, or All Short Spear, Shield Cover, Shieldwall, optional Melee Expert.

The option to convert to the Dart armed remains the current numbers by date, but they are Short Spear, Experienced Darts, Shield Cover, Shieldwall.

Also that all the SSp, Darts infantry of the Foederate Roman, Eastern Later Roman, Early Byzantine and Maurikian Byzantine should have Shieldwall as well.