In the eastern regions, Roman military units often included a handful of camel riders, typically integrated into a cohors equitata. Records show between 32 to 36 dromedarii enlisted in cohors XX Palmyrenorum equitata at Dura-Europos during the early 3rd century. Occasionally, one or two would accompany missions alongside both cavalry and infantry forces. Emperor Trajan established a complete 1,000-member camel unit, known as ala I Ulpia dromedariorum milliaria¹ stationed in Syria.

The role of dromedarii varied, sometimes serving as infantry and other times as cavalry, depending on the local organizational structures. For instance, the 1,000-strong unit mentioned earlier was designated as an ala, while camel riders within cohors XX Palmyrenorum in Syria were attached to infantry divisions. Their names typically appeared at the end of enlistment rosters, following the infantry listings. However, in Egypt, a dromedarius named Cronius Barbasatis was assigned to the cavalry turma under the command of decurion Salvianus. Cronius volunteered for this role and hadn’t transferred from another unit, indicating immediate recognition of his skills upon enlistment. Nonetheless, it’s generally believed that dromedarii would initially enlist as infantrymen, serving a few years in that capacity before transitioning to camel riders.

In addition to, each governor maintained a prestigious mounted “guard of honor”, known as the equites singulares, outfitted according to the historian and military leader Flavius Josephus in a manner akin to the troopers of an ala. Interestingly, these guards were selected from the ranks of the equites within the alae and cohortes equitatae stationed in the province, indicating their elite status. Naturally, both the equites singulares and the individuals who would replace them in their parent units required mounts. So, in the Eastern provinces, dromedarii were additionally assigned to the equites singulares, further diversifying the composition of these specialized units.

Arguably, this was the most obvious adaptation to the desert made by the Roman army. The dromedarii (κάμηλιτοι in Greek) were clearly recognized as an official military specialization, embedded within cohortes equitatae and alae. While their strategic and tactical roles remain somewhat obscure, our understanding of their logistical significance is more robust. Camels were employed both in active campaigns and as part of the logistical infrastructure in established provinces. Strabo mentions their utilization by the Roman prefect Gaius Aelius Gallus during operations against the Nabateans (who later used them as guides at the expedition to Arabia Felix), and historical evidence suggests the construction of the Berenike-Koptos route by Ptolemy Philadelphos’s forces for long-distance camel transport, although the intended use, military or civilian, remains ambiguous.

The limited extent of excavation and survey in desert regions constrains speculative interpretations, although it’s highly probable that camelry played a significant role at key junctures along various Egyptian communication routes besides serving as postal carriers and guardians for the Arabian governor.

Regarding their involvement in combat, literary sources provide some insights. Both Appian’s Syrian Wars² and Livy³ describe an Arabian contingent of camelry fighting alongside Antiochus against the Romans. They are depicted as archers who engaged in mounted combat, equipped with long swords (gladius) for close-quarters fighting. Livy mentions their positioning ahead of the cavalry. Additionally, Appian classifies this Arabian contingent with the light-armed forces, strongly indicating their use as skirmishers in this particular battle. The contemporary historian Dabrowa suggests that the purported length of the sword mentioned by Livy, four cubits, implies the use of spears rather than swords. Although artistic representations at Dura depict dromedarii bearing spears, these are associated with Palmyrene (or Palmyrene-influenced) forces.

The Arabian dromedarii were evidently designed for agility and swiftness, ideally engaging in combat from a distance, reflecting their role as archers. However, they were equipped with a secondary weapon for close-quarters combat, serving as a backup in such situations. Their primary function emphasized rapid mobility and ranged attacks, characteristic of skirmishers and archers, while the close-quarters weapon served as a contingency measure rather than a primary mode of engagement. Another interpretation is the presence of different units for each specific role, whether it be harassment with archers or impact with spearmen.

Sources:

Beattie, Melissa, “Just deserts: Roman military operations in arid environments (108 BC-AD 400).”, MPhil Thesis, Cardiff University, 2011.

P. Southern, “The Roman Army: A Social and Institutional History”, publ. Oxford University Press, 2007.

R. W. Davies,“The Supply of Animals to the Roman Army and the Remount System”, Latomus, T. 28, Fasc. 2, publ. Société d’Études Latines de Bruxelles, (April-June 1969), pp. 429-459.

A. von Domaszewski, “Die Rangordnung des römischen Heeres”, 1908, revised edition by B. Dobson, 1967.

E. Dabrowa,“Dromedarii in the Roman army: a note”, publ. Roman Frontier Studies, 1991.

Footnotes:

1. Ala quingenarìa : cavalry units, alae (singular ala) with a nominal strength of 1,000 men, although in practice these figures are different. ↩︎
2. 6.32 ↩︎
3. 37.40 ↩︎