Ethnic makeup of legionaries

[Aemilius Paulus]

And Hellenes in the Bantu kingdoms of the Niger area? They were in Baktria after all, why not in Africa-below-Sahara?

There are no records of Hellenes going beyond Sahara. Even the Ancient Egyptians did not do that in their couple of thousand years of existence. The Phoenician admiral Hanno most likely reached what is now Gulf of Guinea and Mt. Cameroon, right by Nigeria (actually even farther than Nigeria, Mt Cameroon is in Cameroon). That is the farthest the Phoenicians probably ever sailed.

The farthest and the most unbelievable voyage of a Hellene, in my opinion was of the Massalian Greek named Pytheas. According to his account he rounded Spain, proving it was a peninsula, reached Brittany (modern-day France) and eventually the famed Tin Isles themselves, where he was greeted by Celts who showed him the tin mines. Pytheas then proceeded to reach the tip of moder-day Scotland and then sailing North until reaching Thule, which was most likely to be Iceland, according to Pytheas' description ("the ever-shining fire" of the "immense summit" - most likely the volcanoes of Iceland, since there are no active volcanoes on either the Shetland or Faroe Islands). Pytheas described the "midnight sun" as well as the peculiar sea sludge "neither jelly, nor water, nor earth" on which "one could neither walk nor sail" which is a type of ice sludge that forms only near the Poles. After reaching Iceland he sailed by the Scandinavia, near modern-day Norway and landed in Denmark, "the Amber Isle" too. From this point on he took pretty much the same way home. All of this time in 75-100 ton cargo trading ship. He left the "memoirs" of his voyage, titled "The Ocean" but unfortunately it did not survive to our times. His work was however widely quoted, so we are not entirely clueless. Pytheas' accounts were long dismissed as fanciful and false tall-tales until recently.

[Majd il-Romani]

The Phoenician admiral Hanno most likely reached what is now Gulf of Guinea and Mt. Cameroon, right by Nigeria (actually even farther than Nigeria, Mt Cameroon is in Cameroon). That is the farthest the Phoenicians probably ever sailed.

the Phonecians were actually the first ones to circumnavigate Africa.

and I don't think that blackfricans were recruited around Carthage and western North Africa, but I believe that maybe a few Nubians and Ethiopians would be found in a Legion recruited in Southern Egypt...

[Aemilius Paulus]

the Phonecians were actually the first ones to circumnavigate Africa.

Yeah, but that was under the Necho's II orders. Technically it was a Egyptian expedition. The Phoenicians did not do it themselves. They didn't seem to have any significant enough motivations to do so. Just like Vitus Bering was a Danish explorer who discovered Alaska but Russia got all the credit because Bering was at Russia's service at that time.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

There are no records of Hellenes going beyond Sahara. Even the Ancient Egyptians did not do that in their couple of thousand years of existence. The Phoenician admiral Hanno most likely reached what is now Gulf of Guinea and Mt. Cameroon, right by Nigeria (actually even farther than Nigeria, Mt Cameroon is in Cameroon). That is the farthest the Phoenicians probably ever sailed.

The farthest and the most unbelievable voyage of a Hellene, in my opinion was of the Massalian Greek named Pytheas. According to his account he rounded Spian, proving it was a peninsula, reached Brittany (modern-day France) and eventually the famed Tin Isles themselves, where he was greeted by Celts who showed him the tin mines. Pytheas then proceeded to reach the tip of moder-day Scotland and then sailing North until reaching Thule, which was most likely to be Iceland, according to Pytheas' description ("the ever-shining fire" of the "immense summit" - most likely the volcanoes of Iceland, since there are no active volcanoes on either the Shetland or Faroe Islands). Pytheas described the "midnight sun" as well as the peculiar sea sludge "neither jelly, nor water, nor earth" on which "one could neither walk nor sail" which is a type of ice sludge that forms only near the Poles. After reaching Iceland he sailed by the Scandinavia, near modern-day Norway and landed in Denmark, "the Amber Isle" too. From this point on he took pretty much the same way home. All of this time in 75-100 ton cargo trading ship. He left the "memoirs" of his voyage, titled "The Ocean" but unfortunately it did not survive to our times. His work was however widely quoted, so we are not entirely clueless. Pytheas' accounts were long dismissed as fanciful and false tall-tales until recently.

Why was it thought to be fairytales? How can someone of ancient time make this up? I mean this is really scary stuff what he tells and I can't see how someone from Greece should invent the midnight sun...

Also wasn't there a Greek expedition which circumnavigated Africa and told after the return that they had been "so far south that the sun was in the north at midday"?

[Aemilius Paulus]

Why was it thought to be fairytales? How can someone of ancient time make this up? I mean this is really scary stuff what he tells and I can't see how someone from Greece should invent the midnight sun...

Also wasn't there a Greek expedition which circumnavigated Africa and told after the return that they had been "so far south that the sun was in the north at midday"?

Oh trust me, there were plenty of people making up wild stories about far-off lands in the times of Antiquity. Take Herodotus for example. He is my favorite historian and is probably the most accurate as well as the most objective one in all of Classical Greece. His accounts of Persia show virtually no bias against it. On the contrary, the praises them. However, just read his tales of India. Fairy Tales... he talks about various half-men, half-animals as well as other things. It was very common in the ancient times to make things up like that. Not only this, but the ice sludge seemed very odd to the Greek mariners who have seen water for their entire life and never as Pytheas described it. On the other hand, they have never been to India, and were well aware that animals can be very different. They have also heard of half apes, half men living in Africa (gorillas found by Hanno as well as other Phoenicians expeditions), making the fanciful descriptions of Herodutus not so unlikely. The Greeks as well as the other ancient people believed that the Far North was eternally dark because it was almost always winter there, and during winter, the days grow shorter. That is why the Greeks and later the romans as well as Medieval historians did not believe Pytheas.

As for the Greek circumnavigation, I have not heard of Hellenes doing that, but nevertheless it is quite possible, especially during the Ptolemaic rule of Egypt. Since the Phoenicians ad tight control over the Herculean Pillars (Gibraltar), Greeks could no use it (Pytheas slipped by during on of the Punic Wars, second one I believe, when the Phoenician Qarthadastim were busy fighting the Romans), the Red - Mediterranean Sea canal would have been a likely route. When I said Hellenes going beyond Sahara, I meant by land. The Greek circumnavigation of Africa didn't teach the Greeks much about the dry part of Africa very much. That Hellenic expedition had little time to spend on land. They never ventured very far ashore.

[Atilius]

Since the Phoenicians ad tight control over the Herculean Pillars (Gibraltar), Greeks could no use it (Pytheas slipped by during on of the Punic Wars, second one I believe, when the Phoenician Qarthadastim were busy fighting the Romans)

No, Pytheas' voyage is placed in the late 4th century.

[Aemilius Paulus]

No, Pytheas' voyage is placed in the late 4th century.

Funny, I checked Wikipedia, and it confirmed your statement. However, the book where I have read the story of Pytheas say it happened around 240 BC. I have it right in front of em. I'm guessing the book had outdated information since it was written in 1980.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

Thanks for the explanation, Aemilius Paulus.

[Michiel de Ruyter]

Well,

discussing the ethnic make up of legionaries, going back to the original topic is WAY to broad a question, largely depending on the time-frame you one is discussing.

Serving in the legions was only open to those who held Roman citizenship. That means that up until the Social Wars (in the early 1st century B.C.) the legions (in theory) primarily consisted of those living around Rome and (perhaps) in Latium. The other units were still formally speaking allies, although they probably were indistinguishable from the legions proper in uniform, training and deployment. After the Social War the legions were (at least nominally) raised in Italy and thus in theory all legions had the same ethnic make-up as that of Italy.

As with much Roman policies, this would be theory. One problem has already been mentioned: non-Italians having been granted Roman citizenship. Most notably those serving in the auxilia that had fulfilled their obligations, and the local elite (who usually had been granted Roman citizenship upon conquest, to bind them to the Romans), or those who had alligned them with powerful Roman families. Also, IIRC some cities were granted Roman citizenship (the colonia) and thus their citizens received Roman citizenship as well.
Second is that army units (probably) recruited locally, and that it was not only the auxilia which did so. To my knowledge there is evidence for legislation ordering purges of the legions (those inelegible which served should be thrown out and punished). One of the solutions to the legal issues was granting citizenship upon enlistment to those who were not yet Roman citizens. Secondly, Gaul and the Balkans became favorite recruiting grounds for the army (up to the point where it became a topos), and it is unlikely that none of these recruits went to the legions. And of course in times of crisis all regulations were waived. Then even slaves could be admitted to service (and granted freedom and citizenship upon entry). So it is likely that if legions stayed in one region for a long time, that their compisition started to reflect that of the region it was stationed in. Even more so if some how the soldiers who had formed relationships with local women were able to get the marriage legalized, and citizenship rights also granted to their sons (who could have followed in their father's footsteps).
The auxilia were of course recruited among the non-Roman citizens, often their name reflecting the original recruiting ground. And, alledgedly, recruiting of locals into them (as either new units or replacements) started quickly upon arrival. One of the interpretations to one of the Vindolanda tablets (the one mentioning the Brittunculi (little Brittons)) is that it discussed the fighting qualities of the Brittons with the purpose of local recruiting in mind. It is dated within 2 decades (originally within a decade) of the arrival of the Romans on the site. So they probably reflected the the ethnic make-up of their local station quite quicky.
Probable exception to this are the "elite" or "guard" units. The soldiers in the former probably were continuously recruited in Italy. The latter were (at least until the early second century) primarily recruited among Germans of the Lower-Rhine (judging by the (horse-)guard grave stones found in Rome) and from then on from the Balkans, although riders from other regular units did filter through.

After the grant of universal citizenship by Caracalla the legions and the army could and did recruit everywhere (although the Balkans did remain a favorite recruiting ground). The auxilia probably were more and more a mix from people recruited from outside the empire, or barbarian prisoners pressed into service. Also, paradoxically, the auxilia had become more prestigious than the legions by that time.

[Michiel de Ruyter]

There are no records of Hellenes going beyond Sahara. Even the Ancient Egyptians did not do that in their couple of thousand years of existence. The Phoenician admiral Hanno most likely reached what is now Gulf of Guinea and Mt. Cameroon, right by Nigeria (actually even farther than Nigeria, Mt Cameroon is in Cameroon). That is the farthest the Phoenicians probably ever sailed.

I think there is the chance that the odd Greek trader sailed the Red Sea and up along the east coast of Africa. It is generally accepted that there was naval trade from via the Red Sea to India, and presumably the same (in smaller intensity) along the east coast of Africa (the land of Punt and IIRC the queen Sheba legends are located there). In fact it was much of this trade that Alexandria's wealth was based on, especially under the Ptolemies.
It has to be said though that to my knowledge the Red Sea was never intensively sailed by the Greeks themselves (unlike of course the Mediterranean), and there alwas was more of a fascination among the Greeks and Romans with the territories to the north (where all those relentless invading barbarians came from to rape and pillage in civilized Greek (and Roman) territory) and east than the territories to the south.

[Olaf The Great]

Wow, I did not know a Greek was the first one to (possibly) discover Iceland.

I just wish I lived in a time when Explorers still existed(Astronauts don't count) I would love to sail the seas, finding new places.

[Megas Methuselah]

Also, paradoxically, the auxilia had become more prestigious than the legions by that time.

That's interesting. Can you enlighten me?

[SwissBarbar]

I'm definately American. ^^

I prefer to use black American or black African...
"African-American" kinda implies that American blacks are recent immigrants to a country that they've dwelt in for close to 400 years now. No one uses "European-American" for white Americans...

That's one thing about us Americans...if we're not politically correct, we're branded as racist and some type of scandal ensures. *sighs*

we're talking about black skinned people in a roman army about 500 - 800 years before the skandinavians or 1100 - 1400 years before columbus discovered "america" , so using a term that consists anything that is connected to the word "america" is placed worse than a hedgehogs in a balloonfactory.

btw: roman legionnaires did not say "SIR YES SIR" and "YES DRILL SERGEANT"



to the topic:

a great empire like the roman can not be defended and expanded by only using troops recruited in Roma itself. OF COURSE they did recruit legionnaires from other Regions, they had to. Thats the roman way of civilise the known world, make them romans and of course let them join the army when ready.

So if ever romans got in touch with black american ^^ people, they could join the legions if they obtained roman citizenship.

[Michiel de Ruyter]

That's interesting. Can you enlighten me?

Well,

I have to slightly modify my statement. Going by the Notitua Dignitatum (a late 4th century list oof offices and military commands), the legiones palatinae (the legions in the central field armies) are formally still the most more prestigeous (followed by the auxilia palatinae and then the regional field armies) by law and formalities. Which probably has more to do with tradition and conservatism than anything else

Yet judging by numbers involved in the palatinae field-armies (that is more or less what could be considered the central reserve), and usually commanded by either the emperor or the central magister militiae the auxilia are in reality the more important and most valued. There are 65 auxilia in the West vs only 12 legions. On a similar note, when asking for reinforcements from the Caesar Julian the emperor Constantius he primarily asks for auxiliae, not legions.

What the reason was/is? Probably fighting prowess, in combination with demographic and economic problems within the empire. Even when taking the literary topoi in consideration, it seems that in general the best troops were those recruited among the Germanic peoples (Goths, Alamanni, Franks), and those fighting them. As an illustration, it seems that at Mursa (a battle in one of the civil wars) the western army was outnumbered almost 2:1 by the eastern army but alledgedly inflicted far more casualties on its opponent (IIRC something like 50% more). I am not completely certain, but in the depictions of Constantine storming the Milvian bridge on his arch, it is the auxilia which are shown as his crack troops.
Another issue might be in recruiting and enlistment conditions (i.e. stipulations where the soldiers would serve), with many Roman citizen recruited units more and more being tied to their base/local area. Another is that probably in the legions there were additional tasks not forced upon the auxilia. IIRC there are stipulations known that specifically [B]ban[B] Roman citizens from enlisting in the auxilia.