The Roman Army

[Gaius Octavius]

Notes from: "Hannibal" (The Roman Army), The Early Army of Rome 500-350BC; Theodore Ayrault Dodge.

 

Earliest: Three Tribes each required to produce 1,000 foot and 100 horse. Foot divided into 10 centuries of 100 men. Horse divided into 10 decuries of 10 men. (After first mounted mob and second Dorian Phalanx.)

King or leader had a personal guard of 300 mounted men called celeres. They were paid and kept constantly at the ready. Each 1,000 foot were commanded by a tribune (~colonel). Each century by a centurion (~captain).

 

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.

 

Servian Classes:

1st - 20 jugera or more of farms or 100,00 As'. (1 As originally equaled 1lb of copper or alloy.)

2nd - 3/4 of 1st.

3rd - 1/2 of 1st.

4th - 1/4 of 1st.

5th - 1/8 of 1st

6th - Less than 5th and regarded as supernumeraries and made up of artificers and musicians.

 

Their Arms:

1st - helmet, breastplate or coat of mail, grieves, shield, sword and long lance.

2nd - No grieves.

3rd - Neither grieves nor breastplate.

4th - No metal helmet, grieves or breastplate.

5th - Armed only with darts and bows.

 

Desireable height was 5' to 5'3" (Roman measure?). Higher not considered strong; shorter preferred. Strongly built, big hands, intelligent.

Youths of less than 17 (called tirones or recruits) were put through the extremes of training.

 

Best men in front rank. Each levy district furnished equal parts of each century for uniformity. 8 to 12 ranks; 250 to 375 files, covering a front of less than 1/4 mile.

[Faustus]

Desireable height was 5' to 5'3" (Roman measure?). Higher not considered strong; shorter preferred. Strongly built, big hands, intelligent.

 

Best men in front rank. Each levy district furnished equal parts of each century for uniformity. 8 to 12 ranks; 250 to 375 files, covering a front of less than 1/4 mile.

 

All these numbers and proportions are something to ponder; very interesting G.O. It will be interesting to see what others add to this.

 

Putting the shortest men in front has lots of advantages: They present a smaller target, (usually) they are more agile (that

[Gaius Octavius]

legionnaire! legionnaire! This ain't no French Foreign Legion!

 

Edited April 29, 2008 by Gaius Octavius

[Faustus]

legionnaire! legionnaire! This ain't the French Foreign Legion!

 

Sorry! That's what your sp check can get you on MSO!

[caldrail]

Servian Classes:

1st - 20 jugera or more of farms or 100,00 As'. (1 As originally equaled 1lb of copper or alloy.)

2nd - 3/4 of 1st.

3rd - 1/2 of 1st.

4th - 1/4 of 1st.

5th - 1/8 of 1st

6th - Less than 5th and regarded as supernumeraries and made up of artificers and musicians.

 

Their Arms:

1st - helmet, breastplate or coat of mail, grieves, shield, sword and long lance.

2nd - No grieves.

3rd - Neither grieves nor breastplate.

4th - No metal helmet, grieves or breastplate.

5th - Armed only with darts and bows.

These class descriptions date from a later time - they were 'reverse engineered' by roman writers and must be viewed as suspect. In particular the equipment, which probably wasn't strictkly adhered to and in any case the individual soldier bought what he could afford or obtain, not what the class dictated he could.

[Gaius Octavius]

For myself, I will go with Col. Dodge. I am sure that he adequately researched his subjects. (Did you know that he walked the battle fields he spoke of?) Because some subject is back engineered, that does not make it wrong. Were there exceptions? Not even water is always H(2)O.

[caldrail]

For myself, I will go with Col. Dodge. I am sure that he adequately researched his subjects. (Did you know that he walked the battle fields he spoke of?) Because some subject is back engineered, that does not make it wrong. Were there exceptions? Not even water is always H(2)O.

But Colonel Dodge was a military man who instinctively attempted to describe the roman legions in terms he understood. Regarding the roman classes of the servian era, although these classes existed in the voting assemblies at the time the record was written, the various allotted equipment was very different from that issued to roman soldiers of the day, and since sculptural displays were all the evidence to go by, the writer used that to construct what he thought was the allocation. The reality of hoplite warfare is that you fight with what you brought with you. Although in general this means your wealth dictates who well you're equipped, thats not a binding factor, and if you glance through the definitions of roman hoplite equipment described, are you really suggesting the romans bothered themselves with such defined distinctions? Of course they didn't, the hoplite army was a citizen force who turned up to fight with anything they had. The romans had long experience of war and I really can't see them ignoring practicality, especially since the whole point of the citizen army was to put aside social differences for the common good. The later writer was piecing it all together and made assupmtions that the various classes were visually seperated - as indeed was the case in his own time.