Roman Legionary AD 284-337: The age of Diocletian and Constantine the Great (Warrior, 175)

Roman Legionary AD 284-337 covers the roman army under two of its best emperors. The equipment and battle formation is covered in detail also the chronological history of the battles under the two emperors is also covered. Many color drawings gives this book an added plus. Easy to read and enjoyable

Excellent book on a rather murky and confusing time period for the Legions, not well known among enthusiasts like myself that tend to gravitate toward the Romans Legions between Caesar and the middle of the 3rd century. Definitely recommend

A good handling in a short form of a period that I had little specific information on. It builds on Osprey's other books concerning the Roman Army.

Great outline of an often overlooked era.

It was a gift. The package arrived quickly and well padded. I'm very pleased with the purchase.

This is an interesting – and even sometimes fascinating – little booklet which, despite some surprising limitations, is well worth reading. The most interesting feature is the author’s approach, which, although also used in some of his previous Osprey titles on the Roman Legionary, is developed more systematically in this one. Essentially, the late Third to early Fourth Legionary (AD 284 to AD 337), corresponding to the reigns of Diocletian and Constantine, is examined largely through epigraphic evidence – funerary steles and triumphal arches – plus archaeological remains of Roman equipment and legions’ brick stamps that can be found on various remains.This approach is a very interesting one that yields a number of significant benefits. It also breaks with a more “traditional” historical approach that relies on written sources as the starting point and uses what used to be called (with sometimes slightly disparaging undertones) “the auxiliary sciences”, including archaeology, epigraphy and numismatics. In this title, Ross Cowan has chosen the exact opposite approach: the “hard evidence” – whether in stone or metal – is the starting point and the written sources, with all their potential biases, hidden (or not so hidden) agendas and otherwise limited evidence seems to be used mostly to corroborate it.The major set of benefits when using the inscriptions of gravestones of Roman legionaries of the period under review is that it allows the author to identify who they were, what their careers were like and how they represented themselves. Because the various legions in which they served during their careers are listed, it is also often possible to pinpoint the location of various Legions at certain times, and even to estimate how long the soldier may have served in each of them. The point here is that the author’s interesting approach is particularly useful and informative about a legionary’s “daily life”, the various types and roles of soldiers (in particular, there are some very interesting pieces on trainers) and, more generally, what could be termed a legion’s “sociology”.However, the author’s choices also lead to several problems with this title.One set of limitations is that you get the impression (or, to be more accurate, I had the impression) that the author tended to over-rely on this sort of information, at the expense of the written sources. This is not necessarily better than what I have termed the “traditional” approach since it can be just as misleading and faulty. Both approaches can also lead to systematically privileging some sources of information over others, precisely because these “others” are only used as confirmations.The second set of limitations is that, given the very limited format that the author has to comply with, this title ends up by not being as comprehensive as it could have been and as I, at least, expected it to be. In particular, there is very little as to how, why and to what extent the equipment of the Roman legionary evolved and/or changed. All you get are presentations of the equipment adopted and used such as the lancea, tela and plumbata missiles, instead of the old pila, for instance, and some passing and somewhat dismissive remarks at times, just as the one about the spatha being supposedly just a longer gladius, i.e. the same thing given a different name. This was rather unsatisfying, regardless of whether the author happens to be correct or not.A related limitation is that, having “spent” so much space presenting funerary steles of specific individuals and used this information to draw conclusions about military life, cross posting and promotion within the legions, for instance, the author is left with little space to deal with the evolving organisation, command and deployment of legions even if, admittedly, these topics are covered in other existing titles 8which the author does not mention). He also has absolutely nothing to say about their interactions with auxiliary horse and foot forces which are traditionally (and perhaps simplistically) described as growing in military importance at the expense the “traditional” legionary. He even states right at the beginning of this book that this period “marks the climax of the traditional legionary system.” In doing so, he is flatly contradicting the traditional view which tends to see the Third century as that of the “Legions in crisis”, to paraphrase a recent title from Paul Elliot. The problem with this statement from Ross Cowan is not so much about whether it is correct or not. Rather, it is that he does not provide any evidence or case in this title to support such a sweeping statement. At times, he even gave me the impression that he could not be bothered to do so, an attitude that I found mildly annoying.The sections on campaigns, battles and “after the battle” are relatively good and make up some twenty pages altogether (plates included). One remarkable point is to show to what extent “Constantine’s legend” (and propaganda!) has quite deliberately obscured the fact that Maxentius nor Licinius were far from being incompetent and that, in both cases, Constantine’s victories were not easy and no walk-overs. A second point which I found excellent was to show that much had to do with differences in morale between the two sides (and probably little with differences in religion) and that Constantine’s victories may also have been brought by his personal charisma and his “leading from the front” in Alexander the Great style. However, I was not “carried way” by the plates which I found to be rather average. I was also a little bit frustrated by the author’s inability (due to lack of space, of course) to explain exactly what happened in the various encounters. It is, for instance, only with the Battle of the Milvian Bridge – the most well-known of all – that the explanations as to why one side won and the other lost are both clear and comprehensive.A final limit and perhaps one of the worst in my view because it prevents the so-called “general reader” from accessing the full range of sources, is the very short and very limited bibliography. Much to my surprise, only the excellent but over fifty years old two-volume from AHM Jones seems to be worth mentioning among general works in the author’s eyes. None of the general works on the Roman army are listed and not even those on the Late Roman Army or on the Roman army of the fourth century make it to the bibliography. Some titles, such as Nicasie’s “Twilight of Empire. The Roman army from the reign of Diocletian until the battle of Adrianople”, would at least have merited to be mentioned, regardless of whether the author happened to agree with their contents.Three stars

Cowan continues his history of the roman legionary through its history. The previous installments covered a larger chronological period, but it makes sense that this book covers a comparatively smaller period. It was a time of change, politically, religiously and also militarily speaking.Although some things kept their traits, such as a solid infantry, in the sources the main driver of the battles are frequently the cavalry! Both Maxentius Clibanarii and the cataphracts of Constantine are mentioned and several battles are decided by the cavalry forces. Even so, the author is focusing on the roman legionaries, and they were still a major force in the roman army.Like in the previous books in the series the author focus on archeological and epigraphical finds, analyzing them and putting those finds in context. He doesn’t disregards the written sources, but the main juice of this book is definitively the stories of individual soldiers through their tombstones and other sources; we can find major details on battles, the location of legions, the beliefs and spirituality of the soldiers, etc.The author provides solid information regarding the equipment, recruitment, length of service, training, the warrior ethos, among other details. He also describe summarily Constantine’s campaign against Maxentius.The art by Seán Ó'Brógáin is variable; occasionally very good, other times rushed. Technically competent while stationary and visually appealing, the images always respect archeological findings; they include the following plates: Mounted Legionary Lanciarius with a thoracomachus (AD 284); Training formations in open and closed battle order; Missile weapons and butt spikes; Combat techniques with sword, lancea, stones and plumbata; Licimiu's prayer before the battle of campus Ergenus (30th April AD 313); Detail of a Clibanarius being clubbed by Constantine's legionary's in the battle of Turin; The battle of Adrianople, showing the river Hebrus being crossed by Constantine's cavalry; Legionary Commander and several helmets (AD 337). The photographs includes details of funerary monuments and tombstones, wall paintings, coins, weapons and armour (including pieces of lorica segmentata in 4th century contexts), etc.This book also includes a useful glossary and a rather complete chronology that summarizes the main events.

Not much content, basically a full book of sited sources. So dry as to be unreadable.

Very good overview of the Roman army in the third and forth centuries A.D. Covers armour, weapons and ancillary equipment in reasonable detail, certainly enough to give a clear view of the equipment and style of fighting. Also discusses the changes of equipment brought about by the army encountering the different fighting styles of a changing group of enemies.

Well researched, written and illustrated history of a relatively unknown period of Roman history. Ross Cowan's effort is worth adding to the library for those interested in the Roman renaissance of the Third and Fourth century. The book covers the period when the Later Roman Empire began the enormous task of transformation and adaptation to the challenge posed by massive migration of peoples beyond the boundaries of the Empire known collectively as the "Barbarians". The founding of the new military aristocracy by Diocletian and the formal Christianization of the Later Roman Empire by Constantine marked a critical juncture in Roman and ultimately European history. Highly recommend.

Good read. Lots of helpful information.

great item

An interesting and useful introduction to an sea of Roman military history that is finally getting some well deserved attention.