Caesarian Roman Cavalry

[FriedlandUK]

As a newcomer to ancients wargaming, I just have a quick question regarding  Caesarian Cavalry.

Was auxiliary cavalry the same in dress and equipment under the late Republican period as it was in the Imperial period?

I have the Warlord 28mm Caesarian Cavalry box, but wanted to know if I need to buy any others if I wanted auxiliary units (manufacturers that supply these in 28mm would be useful too!)

Thanks in advance.

[aligern]

Sadly no it s not the same. In Caesarian armies you would find Gallic, German, Spanish, Greek , Numidian, Syrian and other allied contingents of horsemen. Caesar hires Gauls and Germans in Gaul , There is a list of Pompeian allies at Pharsalus, including some horse archers and in Africa Caesar's enemies use Germans  and Numidians  and inbSpain they use Spaniards, possibly bith light and heavy.

I do wonder if they might have had a greater degree of uniformity than the original tribal cavalry after they had served with Rome for a few years. That is to say I doubt if they would have limed hair and blue woad decorations or fought bare chested and after a while equipment would tend to become uniform, with all similar shaped shields and similar mail shirt and helmet types within a unit.

Roy

[FriedlandUK]

Thanks Aligern.

That's what I needed to confirm. I'd heard something along similar lines, and that these units had later become absorbed into the Roman army (which is when their equipment became standardized).

I think I'm going to go for a couple of Gallic units, but with the edition of just some Roman equipment. This should make them slightly more distinct from the enemy units.

[Mark G]

Didn't Adrian Goldsworthy do a bit in slingshot a few years ago on a caesarian army for wab?

I recall he used only gallic or German cavalry, for those reasons

[Swampster]

The Warlord figures look like they have been designed as if the unit has picked up items from a wide range of sources, especially the helmets. I think they would be best for a unit in the Med or Asia, though perhaps something like Gauls who have been with the Romans for a while, picking up sundry items of headwear, giving up on trousers for comfort and acquiring the Roman habit of shaving.

[Patrick Waterson]

The early Imperial period saw a formalisation and regularisation of auxiliaries, or in plain English they became regulars in standing units and were paid by Rome whereas previously they had been raised from 'allied' peoples and often maintained by those peoples.  Perhaps not coincidentally, the last independent auxiliaries (i.e. those from a territory not directly ruled by Rome) during the Imperial period were the Batavians, who spearheaded Civilis' revolt in AD 69.  Even though still independent, they seem to have been equipped and paid by Rome like everyone else.

Rome also fielded during this period - notably in the east - contingents supplied by client kings, e.g. the Commagenians during the Jewish Revolt.  These, as with the traditional Republican auxilia, were supplied, equipped and maintained by the power concerned and cooperated under Roman command as opposed to being under Roman control.  The same would probably have occurred if the Romans had seriously tried to conquer Germany post-Tiberius, as they would have enlisted subdued tribes to hep fight those still resisting.  In this connection, the trigger event for changing auxilia from 'free' ethnic contingents to paid Roman-controlled regulars was probably Arminius' revolt of AD 9.  If anything, Civilis' revolt in AD 69 would have confirmed Roman resolution about not letting auxilia be anything other than under direct Roman control, including officering.

[Duncan Head]

The Warrior of Vacheres - http://www.kelticos.org/gallery/main.php?g2_itemId=872 - is sometimes identified as a Gallic auxiliary officer in Roman service. Vacheres is in Provence and would have been Roman from somewhen around the 120s BC. Note the combination of Gallic clothing, torc and sword with Romanised short hair and shaved upper lip, and a mailshirt that could be either.

Somewhere I also have an article that mentions two Italian-made bronze Montefortino helmets from a Gallic burial that are thought to have been Roman issue to auxiliaries.

[Patrick Waterson]

Yes, apologies if I gave the impression that auxiliaries under the Republic never used Roman issue equipment: quite a bit seems to have been acquired by osmosis and some might even have been issued on occasion.

[eques]

Hmmm, would never have thought to look for separate "Caesarian Roman" Cavalry, would always just buy Gauls, Germans, Spaniards etc.  I use Gauls and Germans when playing Caesar, and Italians and Greeks when playing Sulla.

[Andreas Johansson]

Hmmm, would never have thought to look for separate "Caesarian Roman" Cavalry, would always just buy Gauls, Germans, Spaniards etc.  I use Gauls and Germans when playing Caesar, and Italians and Greeks when playing Sulla.

I did the same for my Marians - I've got Gauls, Greeks, and Spaniards.

[aligern]

It would nit be wrong to use the tribal cavalry that manufacturers issue as Gauks, Germans or Spaniards, ir late Thracians, ir Macedonians, because unuts were coearly raused for campaigns. However, after a time they would surely homogenise because kit wears out and you likely do not have the tribal shield maker to replace the item, but the guys travelling with the army and selling stuff made in a factory vack in the province. There is also the question of how you tell Roman troops from the enemy. Easy if you are P. Crassus Gauls against the Oarthians, but t not so clear if you are Germans or Gauls fighting in Germania or Gaul. At Gergovia? the Aeduan infantry wera their cloaks off obe shoulder as a field sign. It would make sense if cavalry painted something on their shields to indicate to the Romans that they were allued auxilia. The process described above would likely result in all shields in a unit being oval or hexagonal, the symmachoi (allues) on Trajan's column have the same shield shape, though I tend to think tribes would have the same shape anyway and lijely the same orimary colours. Duncan makes a good point about helmets. I join the Roman auxilia with others from my tribe, we do well, Zi can now afford a helmet, I go down to the travelling suppliers and the choice is likely Montefortino or Montefortino. 

Perhaps the best way of achieving a suitable effect is to buy figures with separate shields and heads and then kit the unit out with homogenous shields and mostly Montefortinos. Go for mail armour a la Vacheres warrior and oerhaps some variety in the soft clothing to indicate that these are well off members of the aristocracy and their retainers.

[Patrick Waterson]

I can now afford a helmet, I go down to the travelling suppliers and the choice is likely Montefortino or Montefortino. 

And you can have it in any metal, so long as it is bronze.

[Duncan Head]

Somewhere I also have an article that mentions two Italian-made bronze Montefortino helmets from a Gallic burial that are thought to have been Roman issue to auxiliaries.

I lie - they were Coolus helmets: http://gladius.revistas.csic.es/index.php/gladius/article/viewFile/25/26

[aligern]

The early Coolus types are very little different from a Montefortino. Is only later when they develop large flat rear plates and lose the decoration to the rear end of the bowl that the coolus is distinctive at 28mm. Besides,they do co-exist.
Roy

[Duncan Head]

The early Coolus types are very little different from a Montefortino. Is only later when they develop large flat rear plates and lose the decoration to the rear end of the bowl that the coolus is distinctive at 28mm. Besides,they do co-exist.

Biggest difference - at least in these examples - is no crest-knob.