Pre Marius Roman Army

[Rameses the Great]

Before the cohorts were made these units helped defend Rome. They were ironically similar to the cohorts. They both threw pilas before charging and had similar characteristics. A big difference was that these soldiers had round shields and cohorts had square ones. Also the invetion of harder armour contributed to the cohorts. I have one theory though, the pre Marius soldiers were good for protecting the fledgling state of Rome, Rome did not truly start to expand until the cohorts were made.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong please. And guys no threads this time lol.

[Primus Pilus]

Before the cohorts were made these units helped defend Rome. They were ironically similar to the cohorts. They both threw pilas before charging and had similar characteristics. A big difference was that these soldiers had round shields and cohorts had square ones. Also the invetion of harder armour contributed to the cohorts. I have one theory though, the pre Marius soldiers were good for protecting the fledgling state of Rome, Rome did not truly start to expand until the cohorts were made.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong please. And guys no threads this time lol.

 

Well... Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica, Africa including Carthage, Hispania, Gallia Cisalpina, Narbonensis, Illyria, Macedonia, Achaea, Thracia, Asia Minor among others were all essentially brought under Roman domination before Marius so unscientifically speaking the pre and post Marian legions are about equal in their expansive role.

[Rameses the Great]

Ok, thanks for clearly answering me clearly. Just one question, the Cathaginians fought legionaries while it was conquered. Hannibal experienced them at the battle of Cannae. The second punic war eded in disaster for the Carthaginians but were still independent. The Carthaginians in the third punic war again rose against rome. Later the legionaries of rome came and sacked Carthage. They later salted the Earth after conquering Carthage to symbolize nothing shall grow there again.

[Primus Pilus]

Ok, thanks for clearly answering me clearly. Just one question, the Cathaginians fought legionaries while it was conquered. Hannibal experienced them at the battle of Cannae. The second punic war eded in disaster for the Carthaginians but were still independent. The Carthaginians in the third punic war again rose against rome. Later the legionaries of rome came and sacked Carthage. They later salted the Earth after conquering Carthage to symbolize nothing shall grow there again.

 

Yes, the Carthaginians fought legions but the Second and Third War were both still prior to the reforms of Marius.

 

And by the by, the rising of Carthage in the third war against Rome is not quite true. They did rise up but it was mainly in defense against the Numidians, and Massinissa in particular, who was quite encouraged (or at least not highly dissuaded) by Rome. When Roman intermediaries began to get involved in the conflict between the two African nations, the idea of Carthaginian resurgence and financial health began to take root. There is no evidence of the salting Carthage, either in ancient text or archaeology. It was a symbolic description that seems to have been made in the middle ages. The incredible expense of salting such a huge area (salt was a major commodity) as well as the logistics involved really make the idea lack credibility.

[Rameses the Great]

Thank You Primus Pilus. What this shows me is the ability for Rome to adapt quickly through the times. They made cohorts, because it was now necessary to make better units. The adaptability of Rome was second to none. How they were able to change and conquer new lands by reformating the country is remarkable. The thing that is so great about Rome was that for 1,000 years it was undoubtedly the greatest nation. America is too, but remember America is 200 years old and some of that period was not the strongest. Perhaps if the Romans adapted their army a third time they coud have protected against the Visigoths. But the how and the way they lasted so dominantly for 1,000 years is nothing short of amazing.

Edited April 4, 2006 by Rameses the Great

[Rameses the Great]

Just a quick question. If the Romans defended from invaders much dangerous than the Visigoths why did they fall to them? Could they have beaten them if they adjusted their army one more time?

[Julia C]

Remember, cohorts are simply an organizational unit. What distinguishes the Marian legions is that they were an entirely different structure, so I would not simply use cohorts to describe them. One, after all, does not use platoon as a synonym for modern infantry.

 

The reason the Romans only had a few provinces in those early days was that they were incapable of expanding. The legions could only be deployed during the campaigning season, afterwards, the soldiers had to go back to tend their farms. They did not have long enlistments and if they were offered, no one would have taken it. Even serving a few years away from home would mean ruin for a yeoman. There are numerous other reasons for the limited expansion until the ending years of the Republic, but this is the one that relates to the army.

 

Rameses: The Roman army and society as a whole was very different in 107 BCE than it was in 14 CE than it was in the 400s CE. Your question is akin to asking if the French armies under Napoleon could defeat Germany, why wouldn't those in World War II? The conditions, technology, and leadership were vastly different.

[Primus Pilus]

[quote name='Julia C

[Julia C]

I'm aware of what he meant, and I'm aware that he's aware of what he meant. But I was pointing out to him that it's still more useful to use proper terminology whenever possible.

[Rameses the Great]

I'm sorry I'm not as smart as you but I promise I will use better terminology. I was just asking how were the Romans so dominant in taking new lands in norhten Europe, and the next thing you know their running for ther lives in Italy? I was just fascinated in that aspect.

[Julia C]

You don't have to apologize.

 

Well, the important thing about your fascination is that it isn't really "the next thing you know."

 

There's several hundred years involved--nearly half a millennium. It's like saying that the United States was just a bunch of rebellious colonies and the next thing you know, they're the world hyperpower. That took 200 years in the making and a lot of things on the way.

 

It's the precise same thing with the Romans.

[Rameses the Great]

My question is not how did it just collapse so easily. The Romans were not on a slow decline, at that specific time. Out of no where Visigoths show up and start ransacking Rome.

 

I just thought was it poor leadership, was it that they were outnumbered, or what?

 

They were not declining at the time of the Visigoth invasions. Its like America beeing the strongest thing and the next thing you know, you see the USSR.

Edited April 7, 2006 by Rameses the Great

[Germanicus]

The Romans were not on a slow decline, at that specific time.

 

You can start by reading The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Gibbon. He starts the decline at Commodus, with good reason.

 

I just thought was it poor leadership, was it that they were outnumbered, or what?

 

Have a read of this earlier thread

[Rameses the Great]

Germanicus I promise no more threads.

 

I read the read what you told me too. I understand the decline. After though when they split up the Roman Empires it was doing better. The Eastern Empire offered up help to the Wester Empire, but they were selfish wanting the glory. Leading to ther demise.

 

I want to start a new converstion about when the Gauls attacked Rome in 300 B.C. how did they fair, were they sackes, and what troop types did they have?

[Germanicus]

I want to start a new converstion about when the Gauls attacked Rome in 300 B.C. how did they fair, were they sackes, and what troop types did they have?

 

Rameses - it's ok - just start the new thread. The topic you mention can probably go in either the military folder or Imperium Romanum - go to that forum and hit the "new topic" button.