| Revision as of 14:11, 21 January 2012 edit129.215.149.98 (talk) →Ancient: removing irrelevant sources← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:13, 21 January 2012 edit undo129.215.149.99 (talk) →Organisation: removing speculationTag: section blankingNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| ==Origin== | ==Origin== | ||
| ''Laeti'' may have been groups of migrants drawn from the tribes that lived beyond the Empire's borders. These had been in constant contact and intermittent warfare with the Empire since its northern borders were stabilized in the reign of ] in the early 1st century. In the West, these tribes were primarily ], living beyond the ]. There is no mention in the sources of ''laeti'' in the Eastern section of the Empire.<ref name="Jones 1964 620">Jones (1964) 620</ref> Literary sources mention ''laeti'' only from the late 3rd and 4th centuries. | ''Laeti'' may have been groups of migrants drawn from the tribes that lived beyond the Empire's borders. These had been in constant contact and intermittent warfare with the Empire since its northern borders were stabilized in the reign of ] in the early 1st century. In the West, these tribes were primarily ], living beyond the ]. There is no mention in the sources of ''laeti'' in the Eastern section of the Empire.<ref name="Jones 1964 620">Jones (1964) 620</ref> Literary sources mention ''laeti'' only from the late 3rd and 4th centuries. | ||
| ==Organisation== | |||
| The precise constitutions which regulated ''laeti'' settlements are obscure.<ref name="Jones 1964 620"/> It is possible that their constitutions were standard, or alternatively that the terms varied with each individual settlement.<ref name="Elton 1996 130">Elton (1996) 130</ref> There is also doubt about whether the terms governing ''laeti'' were distinct from those applying to ''gentiles'' or ''dediticii'' (surrendering barbarians) or ''tributarii'' (peoples obliged to pay tribute).<ref name="Elton 1996 130"/> It is possible that these names were used interchangeably. On the other hand, they may refer to juridically distinct types of community, with distinct sets of obligations and privileges for each type. Most likely, the terms ''laeti'' and ''gentiles'' were interchangeable, as they are listed in the same section of the ''Notitia'', and referred to voluntary settlements.<ref name="Jones 1964 620"/> Indeed the term ''laetus'' may derive from the Latin word ''laetus'' meaning "delighted" and may have originally been used to distinguish voluntary settlements of barbarians from ''dediticii'', which were forced settlements of prisoners of war (which may have been on less favourable terms than ''laeti''); and ''tributarii'' were probably not settlements within the empire at all, but tribes beyond the borders that had a client relationship with Rome. | |||
| Reproductively self-sufficient groups of ''laeti'' (i.e. including women and children) would be granted land (''terrae laeticae'') to settle in the empire by the imperial government.<ref name="Jones 1964 620"/>. They appear to form distinct military ], which probably were outside the normal ], since the settlements were under the control of a Roman ''praefectus laetorum'' (or ''praefectus gentilium''), who would be responsible for either individual communities, e.g. the ''praefectus gentilium Sarmatarum Novariae'' ("prefect of the Sarmatian community at ]", N. Italy); or all communities of a particular tribe in a particular region, e.g. the ''praefectus gentilium Sarmatarum Calabriae at Apuliae'' ("prefect of Sarmatians in ] and ]", regions in southern Italy). The ''praefectus'' was clearly a military officer, as he in turn reported to the '']'' (commander of the imperial escort army) in Italy.<ref name="Notitia Occ. XLII">Notitia ''Occ.'' XLII</ref> This officer was, in the late 4th/early 5th centuries, the effective supreme commander of the Western Roman army. | |||
| In return for their privileges of admission to the empire and land grants, the ''laeti'' settlers were under an obligation to supply recruits to the ], presumably in greater proportions than ordinary communities were liable to under the regular ] of the late empire. The treaty granting a ''laeti'' community land might specify a once-and-for-all contribution of recruits.<ref name="Jones 1964 620"/> Or a fixed number of recruits required each year.<ref name="Goldsworthy 2005 208">Goldsworthy (2005) 208</ref> Most likely, this would have been a specified proportion of all ''laeti'' males reaching military age (16 years). The proportion required is unknown, and may have varied. A possible parallel is the treaty with Rome of the ] tribe of ] in the 1st century. It has been calculated that in the ] era, as many as half all Batavi males reaching military age were enlisted in the Roman ].<ref>Birley (2002) 43</ref> | |||
| Also like the Batavi, who were granted the privilege in return for their disproportionate contributions to the military,<ref>Tacitus ''Germ.'' XXIX</ref> it is likely that ''laeti'' settlers enjoyed exemption from ''tributum'' (direct taxation on land and heads). A decree of 409 providing for the settlement of some ] tribespeople stipulates that they must pay taxes and be exempt from military service for 20 years. But this settlement was specifically aimed at increasing agricultural production, and the decree specifically provides that the settlers be known by the title ''coloni'' ("peasants") and no other. The decree probably implies that the requirement to pay taxes and exemption from military service were exceptional.<ref name="Elton 1996 130"/> | |||
| There is considerable dispute about whether ''laeti'' settlements formed their own separate units or were simply part of the general pool of army recruits.<ref>Elton (1996) 130-2</ref> The traditional view is that the ''praefecti laetorum'' or ''gentilium'' mentioned in the ''Notitia'' each were in command of a regiment composed of the ''laeti'' ascribed to them, on the basis that they reported to the ''magister militum praesentalis''. But Elton and Goldsworthy argue that ''laeti'' were normally drafted into existing military units, and only rarely formed their own.<ref name="Elton 1996 131">Elton (1996) 131</ref><ref>Goldsworthy (2003) 208</ref> The main support for this view is a decree of 400 AD in the '']'' which authorises a ''magister militum praesentalis'' to enlist Alamanni and Sarmatian ''laeti'', together with other groups such as the sons of veterans. This probably implies that ''laeti'' were seen as part of the general pool of recruits.<ref name="Elton 1996 131"/> In this case the ''praefecti laetorum/gentilium'' would have had administrative duties only, especially ensuring the full military levy each year. | |||
| Some regiments of ''laeti'' certainly existed. The ''praesentales'' armies in both East and West contained '']'' (elite cavalry units) of ''gentiles'', most likely formed of ''laeti''.<ref>Notitia ''Occ.'' IX & ''Oriens'' XI</ref> There is also a mention of a regular regiment called ''Laeti'' in the clash between emperors ] and ] in 361; and a regiment called ''Felices Laetorum'' in 6th century Italy.<ref name="Elton 1996 131"/> The units ''ala I Sarmatarum'' and ''numerus Hnaufridi'' attested in 3rd century Britain may have been formed of ''laeti''.<ref>, from ''roman-britain.org''</ref> | |||
| ==''Notitia Dignitatum''== | ==''Notitia Dignitatum''== | ||
Revision as of 14:13, 21 January 2012
Laeti, the plural form of laetus, was a term used in the late Roman Empire to denote communities of barbari ("barbarians", literally "babblers" - of outlandish tongues - i.e. foreigners, people from outside the Empire) permitted to, and granted land to, settle on imperial territory on condition that they provide recruits for the Roman military. The term laetus is of uncertain origin, but most likely derives from a Germanic word meaning "serf" or "half-free colonist". Other authorities suggest the term was of Latin, Celtic or even Iranian origin.
Origin
Laeti may have been groups of migrants drawn from the tribes that lived beyond the Empire's borders. These had been in constant contact and intermittent warfare with the Empire since its northern borders were stabilized in the reign of Augustus in the early 1st century. In the West, these tribes were primarily Germans, living beyond the Rhine. There is no mention in the sources of laeti in the Eastern section of the Empire. Literary sources mention laeti only from the late 3rd and 4th centuries.
Notitia Dignitatum
Much of our information on laeti is contained in the Notitia Dignitatum, a document drawn up at the turn of the 4th/5th centuries. The document is a list of official posts in the Roman Empire, both civil and military. It must be treated with caution, as many sections are missing or contain gaps, so the Notitia does not account for all posts and commands in existence at the time of compilation. Furthermore, the lists for the two halves of the Empire are separated by as much as 30 years, corresponding to ca. 395 for the Eastern section and ca. 425 for the West, and may include deployments from as early as 379. Therefore not all posts mentioned were in existence at the same time, and not all posts that were in existence are shown.
The surviving Notitia mentions laeti settlements only in Gaul - and even the two lists of laeti prefects extant are incomplete. But the Notitia suggests that laeti settlements may have existed in the Danubian provinces also. The list of praefecti laetorum in Gaul contains prefects for the Lingones, Nervii and Batavi.
List of known laeti settlements
Title XLII of the Western part contains a list of praefecti laetorum in Gaul.
- Batavi and Suevi at Baiocas and Constantia, Lugdunensis II
- Suevi: Ceromannos and another, unknown location in Lugdunensis III
- Franks: Redonas, Lugdunensis III
- Teutoniciani: Carnunta, Lugdunensis IV
- Suevi: Arumbernos (Auvergne), Aquitanica I
- Taifali: Poitiers, Aquitanica
- : dispersed over Belgica I
- Acti: Epuso, Belgica I
- : Fanomantis, Belgica II
- : Nemetacum, Belgica II
- Contraginnenses: Noviomagus, Belgica II
- : Remo and Silvamectum, Belgica II
- Lagenses: near the Tungri, Germania II
Citations
- Goldsworthy (2000) 215
- Walde & Hofmann (1965) Bd. 1. A - L. 4. Aufl.
- Neue Pauly-Wissowa Laeti
- Jones (1964) 620
- Mattingly (2006) 238
- Cite error: The named reference
Notitia Occ. XLIIwas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - Notitia Occ. XXXIV and XXXV
References
Ancient
- Notitia Dignitatum (late 4th c.)
Modern
- Birley, Anthony (2002), Band of Brothers: Garrison Life at Vindolanda
- Elton, Hugh (1996), Roman Warfare 350-425
- Goldsworthy, Adrian (2000), Roman Warfare
- Goldsworthy Adrian, (2005), The Complete Roman Army
- Jones, A. H. M. (1964), Later Roman Empire
- Mattingly, David (2006), An imperial possession: Britain in the Roman empire
- Neue Pauly-Wissowa
- Walde, A. and Hofmann, J.B. (1965), Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch.