"Re: Auxilia in your Legions - What proportion?" Topic

Ancient gamers love the Romans, and those who love the Romans love the Legions, me included

While there is nothing like a line of legionaries in lorica segmentum, scutum raised high and pilia flying, it seems to me that a good part of Rome's army – in fact, by the 2nd century the majority – were in fact auxilia; yet the unglorious but hard-worker auxilia seem to me to be under-represented on the gaming table. I am no exception; I have six auxilia units and 10 cohorts of legionaries

So – for those of you who game Ancients – what is the percentage of Auxilia in your Roman armies

A – Zero! Romanus civitis sum

B – About 25% – after all, someone has to be able to shoot a bow

C – About 50% – having extra hands to soak up those barbarian warbands is all good

D – 75% or more – no glory boys for me! I work for a living

E – Don't have any Romans

Roma delenda est.

Bieber delenda est

As little as the rules allow. Ill take as many boys in red as possible

"As little as the rules allow. Ill take as many boys in red as possible"

That is the general consensus among our local group as well

There were no Auxilia in the Legions.

C – But I don't have legions and legions of Romans (just a few hundred), and I like locals, conscripts, and civilians in fighting forces of all stripe.

E- and when I do get around to Romans, it will probably be Republican.

A – Nil! Civis Romanus sum.

This is both the answer, as MajorB has already pointed out, and an edit for the answer.

Rick

My armies are almost entirely auxilia. Let us remember our Tacitus:
"his victory would be vastly more glorious if won without the loss of Roman blood"

I have a late Patrician Roman army. The Auxiliaries outnumber the legions 6 – 1. My Republican Roman army has no Auxiliaries at all.

I thought that Auxilla were formed into their own legion style formations.

My late Republican armies have a unit or two of auxiliaries for each legion, so at most 25%.

For an Early Empire army I feel anything less than 50% of your troops being auxiliaries is army list min-maxing cheesey gamesmanship.

Someday I'd like to do a 28mm force that is 90% auxilia!

I thought that Auxilla were formed into their own legion style formations.

Yes, but I believe the intent of the inquiry (the way I answered it, at least) is in the OP (auxilia in your armies) not the title (auxilia in your legions) which is a little different. Also, uneditable later.

I have about twice the Auxilia as Legio, so it falls in between C and D on your scale.

Rob

Enough Auxilia that I can field the numbers required for both historical battles and the requirements of various army lists.

Overall approx twice as many legionary stands as Auxilia, excluding light troops, artillery and cavalry. Hairy barbarians can also be pressed into service if required.

"I thought that Auxilla were formed into their own legion style formations."

The Italian _allies_ in the Republican armies were formed into their own legion-style units. But they are not, technically, "auxilia". Imperial-period auxilia were in cohort-sized units, not amalgamated into anything legion-sized.

Good point! I certainly meant Roman armies, not Legions – not place in the Legions for anyone but proper Romans

As noted, auxila were formed into cohorts, most of which were classical infantry cohorts. There were specialized cohorts of archers and of course the cavalry

In the back of Shipway's book The Imperial Governor he provides an Order of Battle for the Army of Britain – four legions and a number of infantry cohorts and cavalry units. In the text, it is noted that the Army of Britain was unusual in that the legionaries outnumber the auxilia

I obey the army list, so it's about 50/50.

Sorry, I didn't get the message that we were supposed to buy legionaries. I'm doing skirmish level on one of the frontiers, where the auxilia are holding the borderline while the legions are deployed some distance behind the auxilia as strategic reserves. So, I would have to say D.

Grelber