Roman Auxilia question

[Centurion Crastinus]

A few question about Roman Auxilia.

1. When did the Romans adopt Auxilia out of Italy?

2. Were Auxilia always a variety of different units pulled from throughout the empire and attatched to each legion, or were they the generic "Western Auxilia" and "Eastern Auxilia" found in EB.

3. If there was "Western" and "Eastern" Auxilia, when did the transformation occur from Auxilia serving through loyalties and treaties from different chieftains in client kingdoms to the more standardized "Western" and "Eastern" Auxilia.

4. What was the length of service for Auxilia?

5. I have read that upon conscription of eastern Legions during the early imperial era that locals would be levied and presented with their citizenship and a new Roman name upon enlistment. If that was the case, then why bother with Auxilia infantry at all?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

A few question about Roman Auxilia.

1. When did the Romans adopt Auxilia out of Italy?

When they left Italy, but the system of formal Auxillary cohorts and alae came into existance during the early Principate, Ceasar's Gallic cavalry were auxillaries but also a little bit mercenary.


2. Were Auxilia always a variety of different units pulled from throughout the empire and attatched to each legion, or were they the generic "Western Auxilia" and "Eastern Auxilia" found in EB.

Even under the Principate auxillary units varried widely, our two types of infantry are a poor representation of this, but we only have so many unit slots.


3. If there was "Western" and "Eastern" Auxilia, when did the transformation occur from Auxilia serving through loyalties and treaties from different chieftains in client kingdoms to the more standardized "Western" and "Eastern" Auxilia.

See above (1)


4. What was the length of service for Auxilia?

25 years vs Legionary 22.


5. I have read that upon conscription of eastern Legions during the early imperial era that locals would be levied and presented with their citizenship and a new Roman name upon enlistment. If that was the case, then why bother with Auxilia infantry at all?

This was not standard practice, generally auxillaries were presented with citizenship upon retirement, in fact they always were unless they were already citizens. In any case Auxillaries were expected to do things legionaries weren't, and they did most of the fighting.

[Centurion Crastinus]

That clears things up, thanks for the post.

[econ21]

Even under the Principate auxillary units varried widely, our two types of infantry are a poor representation of this, but we only have so many unit slots.

Given the constraint on slots, I was wondering why have separate Eastern and Western auxillaries? The stats on the unit cards are identical. I wonder if a light infantry type auxillary might be a better use of the second slot? Less armour, but fights in looser formation with spear and javelins, and with a faster movement rate?

From what I gather, auxiliaries were often deployed as light infantry in more broken terrain and used as a pursuit arm (hence the faster movement rate suggestion).

A post-Marian/Imperial slinger might be nice too.

It's rather jarring to move from a wide variety of light infantry in the Camillan era to almost none in the Imperial one. I know allied troops can serve that role, but I think the auxillaries did it more commonly.

[TWFanatic]

I think they both use the same descr_model_battle entry.

[Watchman]

Not quite; the Eastern one uses the "seleucid" slot of the "hellenistic_infantry_basilikonagema_epikletoihoplitai_easternauxilia" model, the Western one merc-shares a model with the Vigiles.

But as such neither actually takes up a model.