The Levy of the Annual Regular Legio

caldrail · May 6, 2008

Or better still, are these 'legiones Urbana' the four legions raised as an emergency measure (and therefore unique) during 217/216 BC? The phrase Legiones Urbana appears to be a designation of imperial formations.

The Roman armies for a long period consisted entirely of what we might term militia. Every citizen was, to a certain extent, trained to arms during a fixed period of his life; he was, at all times, liable to be called upon to serve; but the legion in which he was enrolled was disbanded as soon as the special service for which it had been levied, was performed; and although these calls were frequent in the early ages of the kingdom and the commonwealth, when the enemies of the republic were almost at the gates, yet a few months, or more frequently, a few weeks or even days, sufficed to decide the fortunes of the campaign. The Roman annalists assure us that a Roman army had never wintered in the field, until more than three centuries after the foundation of the city, when the blockade of Veii required the constant presence of the besiegers...

...Hence, for upwards of seven centuries, there was no such thing as the military profession, and no man considered himself as a soldier in contradistinction to other callings. Every individual knew that he was bound as a member of the body politic to perform certain duties; but these duties were performed without distinction by all - at least by all whose stake in the prosperity of their country was considered sufficient to insure their zeal in defending it; and each man, when his share of this obligation was discharged, returned to take his place in society, and to pursue his ordinary avocations.

A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities William Smith, D.C.L., LL.D

Edited May 6, 2008 by caldrail

roman wargamer · May 6, 2008

The Phalanx Formation Description

"Of these sixteen ranks" or sixteen men deep. for visual aid o/ represent one man.

" if only the phalanx has its proper formation and strength,

nothing can resist it face to face or withstand its charge" Polybius

o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/o/

The Histories, Book XVIII, Chapters 28-32:

From: Polybius, The Histories of Polybius

Many considerations may easily convince us that, if only the phalanx has its proper formation and strength, nothing can resist it face to face or withstand its charge. For as a man in close order of battle occupies a space of three feet; and as the length of the sarissae are sixteen cubits according to the original design, which has been reduced in practice to fourteen; and as of these fourteen four must be deducted, to allow for the weight in front; it follows clearly that each hoplite will have ten cubits of his sarissa projecting beyond his body, when he lowers it with both hands, as he advances against the enemy: hence, too, though the men of the second, third, and fourth rank will have their sarissae projecting farther beyond the front rank than the men of the fifth, yet even these last will have two cubits of their sarissae beyond the front rank; if only the phalanx is properly formed and the men close up properly both flank and rear, like the description in Homer:

And if my description is true and exact, it is clear that in front of each man of the front rank there will be five sarissae projecting to distances varying by a descending scale of two cubits.

With this point in our minds, it will not be difficult to imagine what the appearance and strength of the whole phalanx is likely to be, when, with lowered sarissae, it advances to thecharge sixteen deep. Of these sixteen ranks, all above the fifth are unable to reach with their sarissae far enough to take actual part in the fighting. They, therefore, do not lower them, but hold them with the points inclined upwards over the shoulders of the ranks in front of them, to shield the heads of the whole phalanx; for the sarissae are so closely serried, that they repel missiles which have carried over the front ranks and might fall upon the heads of those in the rear. These rear ranks, however, during an advance, press forward those in front by the weight of their bodies; and thus make the charge very forcible, and at the same time render it impossible for the front ranks to face about.

Such is the arrangement, general and detailed of the phalanx.

Edited May 6, 2008 by roman wargamer

Pompieus · May 7, 2008

A closer reading of Livy reveals that in spite of what Polybius says (i.16, ii.24,vi.19) the Romans did not necessarily raise four legions EVERY year... the senate apparently retained discretion in this area. However, when war was in progress or threatened (after 225BC anyway) , the senate almost invariably authorized the consuls to recruit troops, and in most cases (the Gallic invasion of 225, during the 2nd Punic War, when war threatened with Macedon in 200 and 169, and with Syria in 190) the senate ordered "urban legions" be raised and stationed at Rome as a reserve (Livy xxiii.14, xxxi.9, xxxvi.2 et al). And the veteran Sp Ligustinus served twice in "legions raised for a year" (Livy xlii.34). Commanders in subsequent years could concievably select trained men from these units to bolster the troops they raised.

I also concede that troops raised by the consuls often immediately left with the consul for his province, so training would be limited to what could be taught en route to Spain or Gaul. One wonders how the habits of discipline and drill were instilled in the peasant soldiers without any real period of structured training.

Edited May 7, 2008 by Pompieus

Gaius Paulinus Maximus · May 7, 2008

I also concede that often troops raised by the consuls immediately left with the consul for his province, so training would be limited to what could be taught en route. One wonders how the habits of discipline and drill were instilled in the peasant soldiers without any real period of structured training.

Some kind of training must have been carried out from the earliest times. Polybius gives information about the retraining of experienced soldiers after Scipio captured Carthage in 209 B.C. It took the form of a seven day schedule comprising running i9n full armour, cleaning of weapons and armor and weapons drill (carried out with wooden swords and javelins with a button on the end to avoid accidents.) The schedules were repeated until the soldiers were considered competent.

There's a quote from the later empire by Josephus which goes "It would be fair enough to call their drills bloodless battles and their battles bloody drills"

caldrail · May 8, 2008

The quote from Josephus describes roman soldiers of the Jewish War in the 1st century AD, it does not apply to men raised as a citizens army (almost a militia) two or three hundred years before. Thje reforms of Marius were very far reaching - for the first time Rome had a professional army and a structured training program. The training involved with the consular legions was nothing like that. Men were expected to be warriors anyway (they were Romans for crying out loud :lol: ) and the level of military skill was not the same as post-marian legions. There is no guarantee any training took place at all in consular legions, that was the decision of the commander and if he was satisfied his men were up to it or he couldn't be bothered with such activity, or because the situation was pressing and no time was available, then training wasn't included.

Its important to realise that the consular legions were not armies raised professionally, with ordinary citizens turned into trained soldiers as would happen later. Instead, they were citizens called upon to fight for Rome. Further, the belligerent nature of the roman culture of this time shouldn't be ignored. Whilst the consular legion was effectively an amateur army, the people in it were used to the culture of fighting and were acquainted with weaponry anyway, and the older experienced men may well have taught by example as mch as lecture to their neophyte youngsters amongst them, so the new citizen warrior was learning y example as much as anything.

roman wargamer · May 8, 2008

A closer reading of Livy reveals that in spite of what Polybius says (i.16, ii.24,vi.19) the Romans did not necessarily raise four legions EVERY year... the senate apparently retained discretion in this area. However, when war was in progress or threatened (after 225BC anyway) , the senate almost invariably authorized the consuls to recruit troops, and in most cases (the Gallic invasion of 225, during the 2nd Punic War, when war threatened with Macedon in 200 and 169, and with Syria in 190) the senate ordered "urban legions" be raised and stationed at Rome as a reserve (Livy xxiii.14, xxxi.9, xxxvi.2 et al). And the veteran Sp Ligustinus served twice in "legions raised for a year" (Livy xlii.34). Commanders in subsequent years could concievably select trained men from these units to bolster the troops they raised.

I also concede that troops raised by the consuls often immediately left with the consul for his province, so training would be limited to what could be taught en route to Spain or Gaul. One wonders how the habits of discipline and drill were instilled in the peasant soldiers without any real period of structured training.

my time line in reference to my reply to PP was early republic.

before Rome possess any province

roman wargamer · May 8, 2008

The Levy of the Annual Regular Legio, how officer and legiones being commission
at the end of spring, the Roman senate convene to commission the annual levy of the army's legiones.

What is the time frame being presented here. The annual "levy" process of the legion

evolved as much as the structure and tactical function of the legion itself did over time.

if we will limit time epoch... in relation to the title of the thread.

it should be of the early republic and before the middle republic begun.

initially the praetor could have an imperium.

until it was corrupted by the patrician into the hands of consul.

The Phalanx Formation Description

each figure represent 4 men deep and 4 men abreast = 16 men per figure

the phalanx have 1000 men here: 16 men deep X 62 men abreast

/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O

compare to the old classical maniple

[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/.[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/. the Hastati

()/()/()/()/()/()/()/.()/()/()/()/()/()/()/. the princeps

......[]/.[]/.[]/.[]/.......[]/.[]/.[]/.[]/...... the triarii

the Roman divided the men

into maniple of 120 men for each hastati maniple with 60 men inside the 2 centuriae

into maniple of 120 men for each principes maniple with 60 men inside the 2 centuriae

into maniple of 060 men for each triarii, the veterans have only a single centuriae

footnote

390

after the Gallic Sack of Rome who defeated the Roman phalanx formation legio at Allia

the next war and general experimented in dividing the solid phalanx into 3 to 4 division.

at around 312 bce, or maybe before,

the old classical legion formation become formally establish

the following maniple line become standard

hasta.........first maniple line

princeps.....second maniple line

triarii..........third maniple line

the phalanx is a solid blocked of retangled formation while compared to

the new Roman Maniple was segmented and divisible into manipular or "handful"

that can be detached from and into independent tactical command and move

strategically away from main body.

Servius Tullius: 168 centuries of foot divided into 4 legions of 4,200 foot

(42 centuries); 2 legions of juniores, aged 17-45. 2 legions of seniores,

aged 46-60. A cavalry arm 2,400 strong. There also were centuries of

pioneers and musicians. Notes from: "Hannibal" (The Roman Army),

The Early Army of Rome 500-350BC; Theodore Ayrault Dodge. from post of G. Octavius

Edited May 8, 2008 by roman wargamer

caldrail · May 9, 2008

I also concede that troops raised by the consuls often immediately left with the consul for his province, so training would be limited to what could be taught en route to Spain or Gaul. One wonders how the habits of discipline and drill were instilled in the peasant soldiers without any real period of structured training.

my time line in reference to my reply to PP was early republic.

before Rome possess any province

PP - The habits of discipline and drill were already present. The 'militia' form of army worked because it was the accepted roman way, that they all needed to be ready to defend Rome. From childhood men would have been raised with this idea, and no doubt older men were only too keen to instill this attitude and some practice with weapons to prepare them for manhood.

The decline of the diadochi and the phalanx was inextricably linked with the rise of Rome and the Roman Legion, from the 3rd century BCE. The Romans had originally fought in a phalanx formation themselves, but gradually evolved more flexible tactics, resulting in the familiar Legion. Rome would eventually conquer all the Macedonian successor states, and the various Greek city-states and leagues. These territories were incorporated into the Roman Republic, and since the Hellenic states which had ceased to exist, so did the armies which had traditional used the phalanx formation. Subsequently, troops raised from these regions by the Romans would have been equipped and fought in line with the Roman system.
Wickpedia.com

RW - The hoplite formations are not the same as the hastatii/principes/triarii formation of the consular legions. Consular legions did not form as phalanxes and instead formed as traditional three manipular line which you described. You seem to be confused between the two.

Edited May 9, 2008 by caldrail

roman wargamer · May 10, 2008

The decline of the diadochi and the phalanx was inextricably linked with the rise of Rome and the Roman Legion, from the 3rd century BCE. The Romans had originally fought in a phalanx formation themselves, but gradually evolved more flexible tactics, resulting in the familiar Legion. Rome would eventually conquer all the Macedonian successor states, and the various Greek city-states and leagues. These territories were incorporated into the Roman Republic, and since the Hellenic states which had ceased to exist, so did the armies which had traditional used the phalanx formation. Subsequently, troops raised from these regions by the Romans would have been equipped and fought in line with the Roman system.
Wickpedia.com

RW - The hoplite formations are not the same as the hastatii/principes/triarii formation of the consular legions. Consular legions did not form as phalanxes and instead formed as traditional three manipular line which you described. You seem to be confused between the two.

either the phalanx or the maniple organization are both called legio or levied.

by republic time, Rome could now raise a consular army which means 2 legion under one command.

i do not know if You are just ignoring the timeline presented before or really by passed it intentionally.

to re quote post #42

"390 bce after the Gallic Sack of Rome who defeated the Roman phalanx formation legio at Allia

the next war and general experimented in dividing the solid phalanx into 3 to 4 division.

at around 312 bce, or maybe before,

the old classical legion formation become formally establish" rw

____________________________________________________________

The Phalanx Formation Description [ until the Gallic Sack and sometime later ]

each figure represent 4 men deep and 4 men abreast = 16 men per figure

the phalanx have 1000 men here: 16 men deep X 62 men abreast

/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O/O

compare to the old classical maniple

[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/.[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/[]/. the Hastati

()/()/()/()/()/()/()/.()/()/()/()/()/()/()/. the princeps

......[]/.[]/.[]/.[]/.......[]/.[]/.[]/.[]/...... the triarii

the Maniple Formation

at around 312 bce, or maybe before,

the old classical legion formation become formally establish

Edited May 10, 2008 by roman wargamer

roman wargamer · May 10, 2008

the Roman Cavalry

The junior heir and sons of the aristrocacy of the leading patrician and plebians sent letter to petition.

a militiae petitor was sent to the comitia.

the stage for cavalry recruitment begin at this way.

all senior officers of the 500 cavalry, allies, socii and 1000 cavalry commander was commission first.

then followed by the lesser influential family son's to be appointed to the junior officer command.

the lower officer command was given to the equites members.

caldrail · May 10, 2008

i do not know if You are just ignoring the timeline presented before or really by passed it intentionally.

No, its not being bypassed, I'm pointing it out to you.

Incidentially, could you please inform us where you're getting these lists of command titles and procedures? There are people out there using this site for study and wouldn't like to see them marked down because they read duff information.

roman wargamer · May 12, 2008

the pooling of Roman Cavalry members

as the comitia centuriata voting memberships convene;

all the first right to vote members or the equites [knight] assemble themselves in front of the comitia.

then the prefecti equites begun the commissioning of the heavy cavalry members.

note: although patrician-plebians aristricracy sons are considered honorary equites members

all of them begun their career as senior officers of the Roman cavalry and not as ordinary knights.

whiile the legiones prefectus tirones also begun the commissioning of the commander of the centuriae.

timeline early republic

1 commander of the maniple

2 captain of the centuria

timeline late republic

1 captain for each centuria, and 1 legion liason officer also for each ceturia,and 1 signal officer also.

and 3 assistant or lieutenant for each centuria

the executive officer,the 1st lieutenant and the 2nd lieutenant.

please note:

all of these men family head and line are voting members of the comitia so sons can be an officers.

younger one begin as assistant of the captain, the experience are captain of the centuria.

________________________________________________________________________________

_______

late republic

the commanders of the company or centuriae: example

centuria of hastatus prior

1 captain senior

1 legion liason officer

1 signal officer

and 3 assistant or lieutenant for each centuria

centuria of hastatus posterior

1 captain junior

1 legion liason officer

1 signal officer

and 3 assistant or lieutenant for each centuria

Gaius Paulinus Maximus · May 12, 2008

Captain senior?? Captain junior??? Legion liaison officer??? Signal officer??? Assistant lieutenant???

RW you obviously know your fair share about the Roman army but your terminology is way of the mark, along with all the little symbols you use, it does nothing more than confuse me.

Instead of Captain Senior, junior, lieutenant etc shouldn't you just use terms like centurion, optio etc??? i.e. the correct Roman name instead of a modern equivalent.

Edited May 12, 2008 by Gaius Paulinus Maximus

Primus Pilus · May 12, 2008

I also concede that troops raised by the consuls often immediately left with the consul for his province, so training would be limited to what could be taught en route to Spain or Gaul. One wonders how the habits of discipline and drill were instilled in the peasant soldiers without any real period of structured training.

my time line in reference to my reply to PP was early republic.

before Rome possess any province

PP - The habits of discipline and drill were already present. The 'militia' form of army worked because it was the accepted roman way, that they all needed to be ready to defend Rome. From childhood men would have been raised with this idea, and no doubt older men were only too keen to instill this attitude and some practice with weapons to prepare them for manhood.

I'm not disputing the basic underlying concept of the above reply... just wanted to clarify that it was incorrectly directed at me. Wasn't me who asked the question... Forgive my vanity :wacko:

Primus Pilus · May 12, 2008

Captain senior?? Captain junior??? Legion liaison officer??? Signal officer??? Assistant lieutenant???

RW you obviously know your fair share about the Roman army but your terminology is way of the mark, along with all the little symbols you use, it does nothing more than confuse me.

Instead of Captain Senior, junior, lieutenant etc shouldn't you just use terms like centurion, optio etc??? i.e. the correct Roman name instead of a modern equivalent.

Indeed, this is really the core of the issue. Why not just stick to the actual ranks rather than "Captain Junior", "Liason Officer", etc? The mixing of ancient titles with invented combinations of modern names as acronyms only confuses the issue.

Sign In

The Levy of the Annual Regular Legio

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites