The Entry Requirements for Becoming a Roman Soldier

[E. I.Smith]

The entry requirements for becoming a soldier in the Roman army were relatively basic as there were Roman soldiers in many Roman provinces, protectorates, and client states from France to the Levant. The Roman Empire, wanting to maximize the number of soldiers at its disposal, made it a point to keep the requirements basic and to keep as many soldiers battle-ready as possible. The requirements for entrance into the Roman army were as follows: A man must be a freeborn Roman citizen, able to pass a medical exam, be at least 5′ 8″ tall, be at least 20 years of age, be able to march at least 20 miles in a day, and be willing to commit to 25 years of service to the Roman army. As you can see, the requirements were all about the physical abilities and the level of loyalty that each prospective soldier possessed. Roman soldiers were measured on their ability to act rather than to reason, and they were expected to do whatever their centurion told them to do in the heat of battle.

[caldrail]

A medical inspection would be more accurate. Firm muscles, good posture - open your mouth boy, I want to check your teeth... That sort of thing. Who was your father? A legionary? Excellent, you're in. And you boy? Your father was a what? A perfume seller? Ahem. Well thanks for turning up. No really, you can go. Get lost.

Loyalty was not considered as recruitment point because it wasn't measured beforehand. Legionaries were made to swear oaths at various occaisions but the legions were more concerned about discipline and obedience than loyalty. In fact, the behaviour of Roman soldiers in everyday matters was nothing like the 'organised good manners' we expect of soldiers today. Romans could be quite vocal about their concerns - Roman society always shows evidence of the lower classes venting their anger and soldiers sometimes did so too. Much is made of discipline and whilst punishments could be very harsh, the troops were in fact barely under control in many circumstances. t was common policy to allow soldiers whatever time off they wanted if there was no civil project to occupy their attentions, and please note how quickly the legions in Germania and Pannonia fell into rebellious anarchy on the death of Augustus. There are letters that show other faults such as dereliction of duty, drunkenness, and theft from civilians, not to mention violence that might leave victims with serious or permanent injuries.

Obedience to a centurion is a two sided coin. Whilst this was the desirable state of affairs, note that these centurions were responsible for leading their men and used strongarm tactics to keep their unit in order. Further, we have hints in the sources that soldiers would not follow the orders of a centurion they did not know or respect.

[E. I.Smith]

That is really interesting, especially the part about the soldiers not being held to the stringent standards of subordination that modern-day military personnel are held to. You appear to be well-learned in Roman history. Please take a look at my post entitled, Roman Legends, The Alexamenos Graffito, and Proof of Christ's Existence and tell me what you think. Did the pre-Constantine Romans deride the legend of Jesus Christ to accomplish anything of note, or were they simply repulsed by Christianity by virtue of its apparent roots in Jewish superstition?