Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-ckgrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-08T02:00:17.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ala I and cohors I Britannica*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 November 2011

David Kennedy
David Kennedy
Affiliation:
The University, Sheffield
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his discussion of the nomenclature of auxiliary regiments, G. L. Cheesman stated his belief that the adjectival form of a provincial name such as Cyrenaica, Moesica, or Syriaca implied not original recruitment in those provinces, but recent, perhaps lengthy, service in them. The existence of such units as cohortes II Hispanorum scutata Cyrenaica, I Lusitanorum Cyrenaica, and I–IV Thracum Syriaca lend solid support to his argument. It would have been entirely reasonable for a unit serving on an expedition to be known by the province with which it was usually associated, e.g. ‘the Syrian regiment of Thracians’. This would be especially true where there were a number of other regiments with the same ethnic title and otherwise indistinguishable, e.g. the numerous regiments of Thraci and Hispani. Here, the sense is rather, ‘the Syrian regiment of Thracians’. Subsequently, Cheesman qualified his generalisation when he observed that there must have been occasions when a form such as Cyrenaica would equal Cyrenaeorum? His modification was prompted by difficulties associated with regiments lacking an ethnic title and bearing only an adjectival form of a provincial name. He cites as examples the units simply designated as I–III Augusta Cyrenaica. It is to be assumed that he saw the same argument as applicable when he appended the ala I and the cohors I Britannica to the list of units whose origin he gives as Britain.

Type
Articles
Information
Britannia , Volume 8 , November 1977 , pp. 249 - 255
Copyright
Copyright © David Kennedy 1977. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The Auxilia of the Roman Imperial Army (Oxford, 1914), 47 and 62, n. 6Google Scholar.

2 CIL xvi, no, 45, 22 and 35 (ter.).

3 Op. cit., 62, n. 6.

4 Op. cit., App. II, 170–1.

5 Mann, J. C., Hermes 82 (1954), 502Google Scholar, n. 4 makes the point that ‘a unit made up of native Britons would require Brittones or Britanni…’.

6 The frequency of abbreviation in Latin texts means that in the majority of inscriptions Brittonum, Britannorum, and Britannica can be, and are, rendered variously by Br., Bri., Brit., Britt.; while Brit(t)an(n). can refer to Britannorum or Britannica. It should be noted that Britann. may also be an abbreviation for Britanniciana; see below. Because of this I have omitted from consideration all texts which do not clearly read Brit(t)an(n)ic(a) or which cannot be positively expanded as such.

7 Based on calculated recruitment date; see below.

8 Compare CIL iii, 4368 – Albanus Balvi f.… domo Betavos…

9 Ritterling, E., W.D.Z. xii (1893), 203–42Google Scholar.

10 Op. cit. (note i), 170.

11 Tacitus, , Hist, ii, 57Google Scholar.

12 Ibid., iii, 71.

13 S. S. Frere, Britannia, A History of Roman Britain, 116.

14 CIL xvi, 163 (Dacia); 164 (Pann. inf.).

15 CIL xvi, 161.

16 CIL xvi, 175. In the case of both the ala and cohort I have reconstructed the history to include a return to Britain. There is in fact no evidence for such a move; it is included solely because neither unit can be placed elsewhere in the early Flavian period and it is reasonable to conjecture regiments being returned to their former stations after the war. In. fact, the changes in garrison on the continent in the early Flavian period and the ready acceptance of these unofficial nicknames for the two regiments may be an argument in favour of them never being returned to Britain.

17 CIL xvi, 31; cf. xvi, 54 for A.D. 103/7 possibly indicating recent transfer to Dacia.

18 JRS li (1961), 70Google Scholar (editorial note) interprets COR(I)NON. recut as PANNON. It notes that the soldier's name, though elsewhere unattested, has a termination usually regarded as Illyrian.

19 Tactius Agricola 32.

20 CIL iii, 4785, 4937. 5019, 5368 and 4599.

21 See Note 18 for a diploma where the origo has been changed.

22 I am grateful to Dr J. C. Mann for drawing my attention to this question of the origo following that of the mother where no legal conubium existed.

23 CIL xvi, 49 and 54; (A.D. 57 and 163); and AE (1962), 255.

24 E.g. Tacitus, Hist, i, 43 refers to ‘cohorts’ from Britain.

25 The possibility remains that the ‘British cohorts’ of Tacitus had been made up from auxiliary vexillations and had no particular racial origin.

26 I am indebted to Dr Mann for suggesting possible significance implied by the different nomenclature.