Goths in the Eastern Roman army

[Tim]

In the DBMM and DBM army lists, the Late Imperial Roman army in the East can have Gothic foot graded as auxilia palatina.  I presume these are Ostrogoths.  Do we know if they were equiped in their native style or as other auxilia palatina?  If they changed over, do we have evidence as to when the changeover occurred?  (I have figures for both but want to know whic would be most historically correct circa 396 AD.)

[aligern]

There no Ostrogoths in 395 AD. The Ostrogoths are created from a group that is under Hunnic control and on the far side of the Danube until after 454, It, under Theoderic , absorbs other groups of Goths that had been in the Empire from earlier, but they are not called Ostrogoths until later.

The Goths of 395 are proto Visigoths, from the groups that entered the Empire in 376 and later. If there were two groups of Goths across the Danube in 376 ( and there may well have been more) then both those groups, the Tervingi and the Greutingi will have contributed elements to the Goths in the Empire in 395.
These Goths were recruited into  the imperialmarmy as whole units, recruited as individuals into existing units and served in their own tribal groups as foederati, that is under a service agreement with the Empire under their own leaders.
Given that the Empire suffered a catastrophic defeat in 378 a rational state of equipment would be
1) Goths in individual service in imperial units...same kit as the rest of the unit.
2) Goths in units recruited as regular units into the Roman Army...kitted as Roman regulars, but possibly deficient in some items in so far as the re equipment if the army must have taken time and very likely wearing Gothic style clothing, tunics to below the knee, wide trousers with embroidered strips etc. I would imagine that the light infantry and archer ranks of a unit would get their kit last and that front rank infantry would have fuller armour and everyone with a helmet.
3) Goths in federate groups would have Gothic style clothing with an armixture of Gothic kit and elements of armour and weaponry both made in Gothic style and captured Roman kit. I doubt that the Romans managed to enforce a surrender of the arms and atmour captured in the Adrianple campaign because it is unlikely that Theodosius actually defeated the  Goths and enforced a formal surrender and then reception into the Empire because  the Goths were left semi independent in the Balkans .

I wonder too if you may not be seeing too much homogeneity in how Late Roman Units were equipped. Where they were composed of a tribal group it is entirely possible that the original recruits brought elements of tribal costume and weaponry and that these were maintained for at least a period and even when the original tribal recruits were very diluted by locals after a time, the dress they wore might well have reflected the locality of the units base rather than an overall imperial standard.bThe WrG books tend to the impression of great uniformity  in Roman troops and our concept of the Romans is of them as being like a late nineteenth century armywith a high degree of uniformity, but it is more likely that there were variations of helmet, armour and costume within units and between units.
Roy

[Tim]

Roy

Thank you.  Expands my knowledge.  Looks like I could use either but I probably use my figures painted as Goths and use them in Regular units.  The Goths are a nicer paint job and they get very few uses.

Regards
Tim

[aligern]

Hi Tim, I expect that in both Gothic tribal and Roman units. there is a predictable mix of weaponry, because a unit has tactical tasks and if you are expecting to throw a volley of heavy spears such as bebrae into an opponent before charging. home then enough guys  have to be carrying them rather than bows to enable close order attack.  However, a difference might be in shield designs.m i rather think there is a case for Romans to all have a design within a unit and the Notitia and various artworks bear this ou. This may also ge true if tribal units, but there may well be more personal choice in terms of colour and minor design variation in units of barbarians . I suspect that within the unit/ group clothing is homogenous because the sources are likely to be markets or tribal workers that are designing to a common fashion. The nature of Late Roman milutary jewellery appears to indicate that there are broadly standard styles rather than uniform issues and tribes are likely much the same..

I don't know for certain how  the Piazza Armerina mosaics treat tge differentiation of unitsin their depiction of aroman soldiers hunting and trapping wild animals, but it is worth gaving a look at them because they do show some variations in clothing design and also in the appluque ornamentation that the soldiers wear. Obviously they are an aristic interpretation, but there may be something to be gleaned from them.
Roy

[Duncan Head]

In the DBMM and DBM army lists, the Late Imperial Roman army in the East can have Gothic foot graded as auxilia palatina.  I presume these are Ostrogoths.  Do we know if they were equiped in their native style or as other auxilia palatina?

Phil Barker and others discussed this theory on the Yahoo dbmmlist before the army lists came out, and you may still be able to search the discussion in the group's archive. Or Adrian may remember. But I think that the reference is to units like the Tervingi and Visi of the Notitia, palatine regiments with Gothic tribal names. And no, we don't have any real certainty as to how they were equipped.

There no Ostrogoths in 395 AD

I wouldn't disagree that the main body of the later Ostrogoths, and their leadership, were ex-Attilanic Danubian Goths; but since Claudian uses the name Ostrogothi in 399 AD (the debated Ostrogothis colitur mixtisque Gruthungis from In Eutropiam), the idea that there were no Ostrogoths five years earlier seems unlikely.