Fresh from the success of confirming the identity of the skeleton in the car park in Leicester as the remains of Richard III, and hot on the heels of the documentary about Eddie Izzard’s genetic ancestry, another DNA research breakthrough was announced about 10 days ago. In The Daily Telegraph (23rd February 2013) it was reported that up to a million Britons carry genetic signatures that are commonly found in and are likely to have their origin in Italy. The DNA marker R1b-S28 is thought to come from men who served in the Roman army.
I have to confess I am a tad sceptical about this. After all it’s not so long ago that claims were made on the basis of DNA studies that the Etruscans really were descended from people who left Lydia or western Turkey to settle in northern Italy as was claimed by some writers. Later it was revealed that the DNA link went back much much earlier and it reflected the fact that people recolonized Europe after the last Ice Age over ten thousand years ago from warmer refuges in western Asia. Most Italians had the Asian DNA not just those living in northern Italy because they were mainly descended from a small population of ancestors who’d lived in the same refuge before the last Ice Age.
The claim in The Daily Telegraph seems to assume that all the men in the Roman army were Romans or at the very least Italian. However, detailed research on the Roman army over many years has shown that it was ethnically an extremely diverse organisation. ‘Odds and sods’ of all sorts as Mark Hassall once put it. The number of soldiers fluctuated but much of the time there were three legions numbering in total 15,000-18,000 men in Britain and at least as many auxiliaries. The auxiliaries were recruited from peoples who had been incorporated in the empire or who supplied troops under a treaty obligation. After serving for 25 years the auxiliaries received Roman citizenship. One of our best sources of information about ethnicity in the Roman Empire is epigraphy or the study of inscriptions. Gauls, Spaniards, Moors, Germans, Syrians and many other peoples are attested. For example, for a time here in Manchester the garrison of the Roman fort consisted of men from Raetia and Noricum (Switzerland and the modern Styria, Carinthia, Salzburg, and part of Austria and Bavaria in eastern central Europe). Once these men had become Roman citizens their sons would have been eligible to serve in the legions. This being so, we should expect a diverse DNA profile.
Even if we focus on the legions, historically the recruitment shifted over time from Italy to the provinces, although these men must have been the sons and grandsons of men who were Romans and Italians in the late Republic/early Empire. Later as the sons of auxiliaries awarded Roman citizenship became eligible to serve in the legions a broader genetic catchment must have had an influence.
One of the best examples we have here in the Museum’s Ancient Worlds displays of ethnicity in the Roman army is a fragmentary bronze auxiliary diploma from Ravenglass in Cumbria. This official record showed the recipient has been awarded Roman citizenship after serving the requisite number of years. We don’t know the man’s name. That bit of the diploma hasn’t survived, sadly, but we do know he came from Syria.
The date he was demobbed – in the reign of Antoninus Pius – suggests he was recruited in the early 130s AD. In his publication of the diploma Paul Holder, who works at the Rylands Library, suggested that the most likely historical circumstance in which this man was recruited is the suppression of the Jewish revolt in 132-5 AD. Afterwards the man came back to Britain with his unit and, because his diploma was found in the North West, he must have stayed here. Like another easterner, Barates, the Palmyran who married his former slave, the British woman Regina or Queenie (her tombstone is at South Shields), the Syrian on the Ravenglass diploma probably put down roots. Maybe he got married, had children, and ran a business in a vicus or civilian settlement attached to a fort. Could Syrian DNA be identified in the populaton of northern Britain? The numbers involved were probably not large. A cohort of Hamian archers on Hadrian’s Wall numbered 480 men. However, in the First World War Yemeni sailors settled at South Shields and married local women. 1800 years earlier Tigris boatmen had been garrisoned at Arbeia. Just a thought.
Pingback: Engaging with the Roman Army | Ancient Worlds
You dont mention anything about Britons in Roman Army there is quite a lot of evidence for it
Thank you for this comment. I originally wrote this blog in response to the article about finding the DNA marker for men from northern Italy in the present day population of Britain, the inference being that this genetic marker was left by men serving in the Roman army. I was saying that there were relatively few Romans and Italians in the Roman army in Britain – certainly after the reign of Hadrian (AD 117-38). British auxiliary regiments were raised but they were posted abroad. It seems to have been the policy to post auxiliaries outside the province where they were raised in order to discourage rebellion. This measure may have been no more than common sense but there is a historical precedent. Hannibal at the outbreak of the Second Punic War sent soldiers from Spain to Africa and vice versa (Polybius Histories III.33). The consequences of not observing this rule coud be disastrous. There was a serious mutiny by Batavian soldiers in Germania Inferior in AD 69-70 who were serving on or close to home ground. That aside, the recruiting pattern changed during the later Roman Empire, perhaps because all free people living in the Roman Empire had been granted citizenship by the Emperor Caracalla. The old distinction between native men being recruited to auxiliary regiments (serving for 25 years in return for citizenship) and Roman citizens being recruited to the legions disappeared. Presumably at this point more local recruitment became the norm and men who had been born in the province served in the Roman army in Britain. It would be reasonable to expect men to be recruited for an auxiliary regiment from amongst the male population of the civilian settlement or vicus usually attached to the fort where the auxiliary regiment was stationed. They were probably the children of the soldiers of the garrison. To what extent were ethnic regiments like the Hamian archers or the Dacians and other nationalities attested in Britain still Syrian and eastern European after a generation or so? The later recruits were probably the sons and grandsons of the men of those regiments which were transferred to Britain. That they were born in Britain did not make them any less proud of their foreign military traditions and heritage. They would also carry the biological marker of their fathers and grandfathers’ foreign ethnic origin. In addition native Britons served in the Roman army and David Mattingly lists four possible candidates in his An Imperial Possession Britain in the Roman Army (Allen Lane, 2006). However, Britons may well be under-represented because they had not got the ‘epigraphic habit’ of setting up inscriptions.
Pingback: Roman Finds Group Meeting at Manchester Museum 8th October 2014 | Ancient Worlds
Pingback: Musings about Thematic Collecting and Roman Migration | Thematic Collecting
Pingback: Two Thousand Years / Two Thousand Miles – Stories from the Museum Floor