Search This Blog

Wednesday, July 3, 2024

Hoplite

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A Greek hoplite

Hoplites (/ˈhɒplts/ HOP-lytes) (Ancient Greek: ὁπλῖται, romanizedhoplîtai [hoplîːtai̯]) were citizen-soldiers of Ancient Greek city-states who were primarily armed with spears and shields. Hoplite soldiers used the phalanx formation to be effective in war with fewer soldiers. The formation discouraged the soldiers from acting alone, for this would compromise the formation and minimize its strengths. The hoplites were primarily represented by free citizens – propertied farmers and artisans – who were able to afford a linen or bronze armour suit and weapons (estimated at a third to a half of its able-bodied adult male population). It also appears in the stories of Homer, but it is thought that its use began in earnest around the 7th century BC, when weapons became cheap during the Iron Age and ordinary citizens were able to provide their own weapons. Most hoplites were not professional soldiers and often lacked sufficient military training. Some states maintained a small elite professional unit, known as the epilektoi or logades (means "the chosen") since they were picked from the regular citizen infantry. These existed at times in Athens, Sparta, Argos, Thebes, and Syracuse, among other places. Hoplite soldiers made up the bulk of ancient Greek armies.

In the 8th or 7th century BC, Greek armies adopted the phalanx formation. The formation proved successful in defeating the Persians when employed by the Athenians at the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC during the First Greco-Persian War. The Persian archers and light troops who fought in the Battle of Marathon failed because their bows were too weak for their arrows to penetrate the wall of Greek shields of the phalanx formation. The phalanx was also employed by the Greeks at the Battle of Thermopylae in 480 BC and at the Battle of Plataea in 479 BC during the Second Greco-Persian War.

The word hoplite (Greek: ὁπλίτης hoplítēs; pl. ὁπλῖται hoplĩtai) derives from hoplon (ὅπλον : hóplon; plural hópla ὅπλα), referring to the hoplite's equipment. In the modern Hellenic Army, the word hoplite (Greek: oπλίτης : oplítîs) is used to refer to an infantryman.

Warfare

Hoplite, 5th century
Hoplites shown in two attack positions, with both an underhand and an overhand stance

The fragmented political structure of Ancient Greece, with many competing city-states, increased the frequency of conflict, but at the same time limited the scale of warfare. Limited manpower did not allow most Greek city-states to form large armies which could operate for long periods because they were generally not formed from professional soldiers. Most soldiers had careers as farmers or workers and returned to these professions after the campaign. All hoplites were expected to take part in any military campaign when called for duty by leaders of the state. The Lacedaemonian citizens of Sparta were renowned for their lifelong combat training and almost mythical military prowess, while their greatest adversaries, the Athenians, were exempted from service only after the age of 60. This inevitably reduced the potential duration of campaigns and often resulted in the campaign season being restricted to one summer.

Armies generally marched directly to their destination, and in some cases the battlefield was agreed to by the contestants in advance. Battles were fought on level ground, and hoplites preferred to fight with high terrain on both sides of the phalanx so the formation could not be flanked. An example of this was the Battle of Thermopylae, where the Spartans specifically chose a narrow coastal pass to make their stand against the massive Persian army. The vastly outnumbered Greeks held off the Persians for seven days.

When battles occurred, they were usually set piece and intended to be decisive. The battlefield would be flat and open to facilitate phalanx warfare. These battles were usually short and required a high degree of discipline. At least in the early classical period, when cavalry was present, its role was restricted to protection of the flanks of the phalanx, pursuit of a defeated enemy, and covering a retreat if required. Light infantry and missile troops took part in the battles but their role was less important. Before the opposing phalanxes engaged, the light troops would skirmish with the enemy's light forces, and then protect the flanks and rear of the phalanx.

The military structure created by the Spartans was a rectangular phalanx formation. The formation was organized from eight to ten rows deep and could cover a front of a quarter of a mile or more if sufficient hoplites were available. The two lines would close to a short distance to allow effective use of their spears, while the psiloi threw stones and javelins from behind their lines. The shields would clash and the first lines (protostates) would stab at their opponents, at the same time trying to keep in position. The ranks behind them would support them with their own spears and the mass of their shields gently pushing them, not to force them into the enemy formation but to keep them steady and in place. The soldiers in the back provided motivation to the ranks in the front being that most hoplites were close community members. At certain points, a command would be given to the phalanx or a part thereof to collectively take a certain number of steps forward (ranging from half to multiple steps). This was the famed othismos.

Phalanx fighting on a black-figure amphora, c. 560 BC. The hoplite phalanx is a frequent subject in ancient Greek art

At this point, the phalanx would put its collective weight to push back the enemy line and thus create fear and panic among its ranks. There could be multiple such instances of attempts to push, but it seems from the accounts of the ancients that these were perfectly orchestrated and attempted organized en masse. Once one of the lines broke, the troops would generally flee from the field, sometimes chased by psiloi, peltasts, or light cavalry.

If a hoplite escaped, he would sometimes be forced to drop his cumbersome aspis, thereby disgracing himself to his friends and family (becoming a ripsaspis, one who threw his shield). To lessen the number of casualties inflicted by the enemy during battles, soldiers were positioned to stand shoulder to shoulder with their aspis. The hoplites' most prominent citizens and generals led from the front. Thus, the war could be decided by a single battle.

Probable Spartan hoplite (Vix crater, c. 500 BC).

Individual hoplites carried their shields on their left arm, protecting themselves and the soldier to the left. This meant that the men at the extreme right of the phalanx were only half-protected. In battle, opposing phalanxes would exploit this weakness by attempting to overlap the enemy's right flank. It also meant that, in battle, a phalanx would tend to drift to the right (as hoplites sought to remain behind the shield of their neighbour). The most experienced hoplites were often placed on the right side of the phalanx, to counteract these problems. According to Plutarch's Sayings of Spartans, "a man carried a shield for the sake of the whole line".

The phalanx is an example of a military formation in which single combat and other individualistic forms of battle were suppressed for the good of the whole. In earlier Homeric, Dark Age combat, the words and deeds of supremely powerful heroes turned the tide of battle. Instead of having individual heroes, hoplite warfare relied heavily on the community and unity of soldiers. With friends and family pushing on either side and enemies forming a solid wall of shields in front, the hoplite had little opportunity for feats of technique and weapon skill, but great need for commitment and mental toughness. By forming a human wall to provide a powerful defensive armour, the hoplites became much more effective while suffering fewer casualties. The hoplites had a lot of discipline and were taught to be loyal and trustworthy. They had to trust their neighbours for mutual protection, so a phalanx was only as strong as its weakest elements. Its effectiveness depended on how well the hoplites could maintain this formation in combat, and how well they could stand their ground, especially when engaged against another phalanx. The more disciplined and courageous the army, the more likely it was to win. Often engagements between various city-states of Greece would be resolved by one side fleeing after their phalanx had broken formation.

As important as unity among the ranks was in phalanx warfare, individual fighting skill played a role in battle. Hoplites' shields were not locked all of the time. Throughout many points of the fight there were periods where the hoplites separated as far as two to three feet apart in order to have room to swing their shields and swords at the enemy. This led to individual prowess being more important than previously realized by some historians. It would have been nearly impossible to swing both shield and sword if the man next to you is practically touching. One piece of evidence of this is the picking of individual champions after each battle was fought. This is most evident in Herodotus' account of the Battle of Thermopylae. "Although great valor was displayed by the entire corps of Spartans and Thespians, the man who proved himself best was a Spartan Officer named Dienekes". The brothers Alpheos and Maron were also honored for their battlefield prowess as well. This is just one example of an ancient historian giving credit to a few individual soldiers and the individuality of phalanx warfare.

Equipment

Body armour

Hoplite armour exhibit from the Archaeological Museum of Corfu. Note the gold inserts around the chest area of the iron breastplate at the centre of the exhibit. The helmet on the upper left is a restored version of the oxidised helmet on the right.

Each hoplite provided his own equipment. Thus, only those who could afford such weaponry fought as hoplites. As with the Roman Republican army it was the middle classes who formed the bulk of the infantry. Equipment was not standardized, although there were doubtless trends in general designs over time, and between city-states. Hoplites had customized armour, the shield was decorated with family or clan emblems, although in later years these were replaced by symbols or monograms of the city states. The equipment might be passed down in families, as it was expensive to manufacture.

The hoplite army consisted of heavy infantrymen. Their armour, also called panoply, was sometimes made of full bronze for those who could afford it, weighing nearly 32 kilograms (70 lb), although linen armor now known as linothorax was more common since it was cost-effective and provided decent protection. The average farmer-peasant hoplite could not afford any armor and typically carried only a shield, a spear, and perhaps a helmet plus a secondary weapon. The richer upper-class hoplites typically had a bronze cuirass of either the bell or muscled variety, a bronze helmet with cheekplates, as well as greaves and other armour. The design of helmets used varied through time. The Corinthian helmet was at first standardized and was a successful design. Later variants included the Chalcidian helmet, a lightened version of the Corinthian helmet, and the simple Pilos helmet worn by the later hoplites. Often the helmet was decorated with one, sometimes more horsehair crests, and/or bronze animal horns and ears. Helmets were often painted as well. The Thracian helmet had a large visor to further increase protection. In later periods, linothorax was also used, as it is tougher and cheaper to produce. The linen was 0.5-centimetre (0.20 in) thick.

Stele of Aristion, heavy-infantryman or hoplite. 510 BC. Top of helmet and pointed beard missing.
Armour of an ancient Athenian Hoplite

By contrast with hoplites, other contemporary infantry (e.g., Persian) tended to wear relatively light armour, wicker shields, and were armed with shorter spears, javelins, and bows. The most famous are the Peltasts, light-armed troops who wore no armour and were armed with a light shield, javelins and a short sword. The Athenian general Iphicrates developed a new type of armour and arms for his mercenary army, which included light linen armour, smaller shields and longer spears, whilst arming his Peltasts with larger shields, helmets and a longer spear, thus enabling them to defend themselves more easily against hoplites. With this new type of army he defeated a Spartan army in 392 BC. The arms and armour described above were most common for hoplites.

Shield

Hoplites carried a large concave shield called an aspis (sometimes incorrectly referred to as a hoplon), measuring between 80 and 100 centimetres (31 and 39 inches) in diameter and weighing between 6.5 and 8 kg (14 and 18 lb). This large shield was made possible partly by its shape, which allowed it to be supported on the shoulder. The shield was assembled in three layers: the center layer was made of thick wood, the outside layer facing the enemy was made of bronze, and leather comprised the inside of the shield. The revolutionary part of the shield was the grip. Known as an Argive grip, it placed the handle at the edge of the shield, and was supported by a leather fastening (for the forearm) at the centre. These two points of contact eliminated the possibility of the shield swaying to the side after being struck, and as a result soldiers rarely lost their shields. This allowed the hoplite soldier more mobility with the shield, as well as the ability to capitalize on its offensive capabilities and better support the phalanx. The large shields, designed for pushing ahead, were the most essential equipment for the hoplites.

Spear

The main offensive weapon used was a 2.5–4.5-metre (8.2–14.8 ft) long and 2.5-centimetre (1 in) in diameter spear called a doru, or dory. It was held with the right hand, with the left hand holding the hoplite's shield. Soldiers usually held their spears in an underhand position when approaching but once they came into close contact with their opponents, they were held in an overhand position ready to strike. The spearhead was usually a curved leaf shape, while the rear of the spear had a spike called a sauroter ("lizard-killer") which was used to stand the spear in the ground (hence the name). It was also used as a secondary weapon if the main shaft snapped, or for the rear ranks to finish off fallen opponents as the phalanx advanced over them. In addition to being used as a secondary weapon, the sauroter doubled to balance the spear, but not for throwing purposes. It is a matter of contention, among historians, whether the hoplite used the spear overarm or underarm. Held underarm, the thrusts would have been less powerful but under more control, and vice versa. It seems likely that both motions were used, depending on the situation. If attack was called for, an overarm motion was more likely to break through an opponent's defence. The upward thrust is more easily deflected by armour due to its lesser leverage. When defending, an underarm carry absorbed more shock and could be 'couched' under the shoulder for maximum stability. An overarm motion would allow more effective combination of the aspis and doru if the shield wall had broken down, while the underarm motion would be more effective when the shield had to be interlocked with those of one's neighbours in the battle-line. Hoplites in the rows behind the lead would almost certainly have made overarm thrusts. The rear ranks held their spears underarm, and raised their shields upwards at increasing angles. This was an effective defence against missiles, deflecting their force.

Sword

Hoplites also carried a sword, mostly a short sword called a xiphos, but later also longer and heavier types. The short sword was a secondary weapon, used if or when their spears were broken or lost, or if the phalanx broke rank. The xiphos usually had a blade around 60 centimetres (24 in) long; however, those used by the Spartans were often only 30–45 centimetres long. This very short xiphos would be very advantageous in the press that occurred when two lines of hoplites met, capable of being thrust through gaps in the shieldwall into an enemy's unprotected groin or throat, while there was no room to swing a longer sword. Such a small weapon would be particularly useful after many hoplites had started to abandon body armour during the Peloponnesian War. Hoplites could also alternatively carry the kopis, a heavy knife with a forward-curving blade. The scabbard of the sword was called koleos (κολεός).

Theories on the transition to fighting in the phalanx

Athenian cavalryman Dexileos fighting a naked Peloponnesian hoplite in the Corinthian War. Dexileos was killed in action near Corinth in the summer of 394 BC, probably in the Battle of Nemea, or in a proximate engagement. Grave Stele of Dexileos, 394-393 BC.

Dark Age warfare transitioned into hoplite warfare in the 8th century BC. Historians and researchers have debated the reason and speed of the transition for centuries. So far 3 popular theories exist:

Gradualist theory

Developed by Anthony Snodgrass, the Gradualist Theory states that the hoplite style of battle developed in a series of steps as a result of innovations in armour and weaponry. Chronologically dating the archeological findings of hoplite armour and using the findings to approximate the development of the phalanx formation, Snodgrass claims that the transition took approximately 100 years to complete from 750 to 650 BC. The progression of the phalanx took time because as the phalanx matured it required denser formations that made the elite warriors recruit Greek citizens. The large amounts of hoplite armour needed to then be distributed to the populations of Greek citizens only increased the time for the phalanx to be implemented. Snodgrass believes, only once the armour was in place that the phalanx formation became popular.

Rapid adoption theory

The Rapid Adaptation model was developed by historians Paul Cartledge and Victor Hanson. They believed that the phalanx was created individually by military forces, but was so effective that others had to immediately adapt their way of war to combat the formation. Rapid Adoptionists propose that the double grip shield that was required for the phalanx formation was so constricting in mobility that once it was introduced, Dark Age, free flowing warfare was inadequate to fight against the hoplites only escalating the speed of the transition. Quickly, the phalanx formation and hoplite armour became widely used throughout Ancient Greece. Cartledge and Hanson estimate the transition took place from 725 to 675 BC.

Extended gradualist theory

Chigi Vase with Hoplites holding javelins and spears

Developed by Hans Van Wees, the Extended Gradualist theory is the most lengthy of the three popular transition theories. Van Wees depicts iconography found on pots of the Dark Ages believing that the foundation of the phalanx formation was birthed during this time. Specifically, he uses an example of the Chigi Vase to point out that hoplite soldiers were carrying normal spears as well as javelins on their backs. Matured hoplites did not carry long-range weapons including javelins. The Chigi vase is important for our knowledge of the hoplite soldier because it is one if not the only representation of the hoplite formation, known as the phalanx, in Greek art. This led Van Wees to believe that there was a transitional period from long-range warfare of the Dark Ages to the close combat of hoplite warfare. Some other evidence of a transitional period lies within the text of Spartan poet Tyrtaios, who wrote, "…will they draw back for the pounding [of the missiles, no,] despite the battery of great hurl-stones, the helmets shall abide the rattle [of war unbowed]". At no point in other texts does Tyrtaios discuss missiles or rocks, making another case for a transitional period in which hoplite warriors had some ranged capabilities. Extended Gradualists argue that hoplite warriors did not fight in a true phalanx until the 5th century BC. Making estimations of the speed of the transition reached as long as 300 years, from 750 to 450 BC.

History

Hoplites on an aryballos from Corinth, c. 580–560 BC (Louvre)

Ancient Greece

The exact time when hoplite warfare was developed is uncertain, the prevalent theory being that it was established sometime during the 8th or 7th century BC, when the "heroic age was abandoned and a far more disciplined system introduced" and the Argive shield became popular. Peter Krentz argues that "the ideology of hoplitic warfare as a ritualized contest developed not in the 7th century [BC], but only after 480, when non-hoplite arms began to be excluded from the phalanx". Anagnostis Agelarakis, based on recent archaeo-anthropological discoveries of the earliest monumental polyandrion (communal burial of male warriors) at Paros Island in Greece, unveiled a last quarter of the 8th century BC date for a hoplitic phalangeal military organization.

The rise and fall of hoplite warfare was tied to the rise and fall of the city-state. As discussed above, hoplites were a solution to the armed clashes between independent city-states. As Greek civilization found itself confronted by the world at large, particularly the Persians, the emphasis in warfare shifted. Confronted by huge numbers of enemy troops, individual city-states could not realistically fight alone. During the Greco-Persian Wars (499–448 BC), alliances between groups of cities (whose composition varied over time) fought against the Persians. This drastically altered the scale of warfare and the numbers of troops involved. The hoplite phalanx proved itself far superior to the Persian infantry at such conflicts as the Battle of Marathon, Thermopylae, and the Battle of Plataea.

Crouching warrior, tondo of an Attic black-figure kylix, c. 560 BC (Staatliche Antikensammlungen)

During this period, Athens and Sparta rose to a position of political eminence in Greece, and their rivalry in the aftermath of the Persian wars brought Greece into renewed internal conflict. The Peloponnesian War was on a scale unlike conflicts before. Fought between leagues of cities, dominated by Athens and Sparta respectively, the pooled manpower and financial resources allowed a diversification of warfare. Hoplite warfare was in decline. There were three major battles in the Peloponnesian War, and none proved decisive. Instead there was increased reliance on navies, skirmishers, mercenaries, city walls, siege engines, and non-set piece tactics. These reforms made wars of attrition possible and greatly increased the number of casualties. In the Persian war, hoplites faced large numbers of skirmishers and missile-armed troops, and such troops (e.g., peltasts) became much more commonly used by the Greeks during the Peloponnesian War. As a result, hoplites began wearing less armour, carrying shorter swords, and in general adapting for greater mobility. This led to the development of the ekdromos light hoplite.

Many famous personalities, philosophers, artists, and poets fought as hoplites.

According to Nefiodkin, fighting against Greek heavy infantry during the Greco-Persian Wars inspired the Persians to introduce scythed chariots.

Sparta

Achaemenid king killing a Greek hoplite. Circa 500 BC–475 BC, at the time of Xerxes I (Metropolitan Museum of Art)

Sparta is one of the most famous city-states, along with Athens, which had a unique position in ancient Greece. Contrary to other city states, the free citizens of Sparta served as hoplites their entire lives, training and exercising in peacetime, which gave Sparta a professional standing army. Often small, numbering around 6000 at its peak to no more than 1000 soldiers at lowest point, divided into six mora or battalions, the Spartan army was feared for its discipline and ferocity. Military service was the primary duty of Spartan men, and Spartan society was organized around its army.

Military service for hoplites lasted until the age of 40, and sometimes until 60 years of age, depending on a man's physical ability to perform on the battlefield.

Macedonia

Paintings of Ancient Macedonian soldiers, arms, and armaments, from the tomb of Agios Athanasios, Thessaloniki in Greece, 4th century BC

Later in the hoplite era, more sophisticated tactics were developed, in particular by the Theban general Epaminondas. These tactics inspired the future king Philip II of Macedon, who was at the time a hostage in Thebes, to develop a new type of infantry, the Macedonian phalanx. After the Macedonian conquests of the 4th century BC, the hoplite was slowly abandoned in favour of the phalangite, armed in the Macedonian fashion, in the armies of the southern Greek states. Although clearly a development of the hoplite, the Macedonian phalanx was tactically more versatile, especially used in the combined arms tactics favoured by the Macedonians. These forces defeated the last major hoplite army, at the Battle of Chaeronea (338 BC), after which Athens and its allies joined the Macedonian empire.

While Alexander's army mainly fielded Pezhetairoi (= Foot Companions) as his main force, his army also included some classic hoplites, either provided by the League of Corinth or from hired mercenaries. Beside these units, the Macedonians also used the so-called Hypaspists, an elite force of units possibly originally fighting as hoplites and used to guard the exposed right wing of Alexander's phalanx.

Hoplite-style warfare outside Greece

Etruscan warrior, found near Viterbo, Italy, dated circa 500 BC
Spartan hoplite (image from Vinkhuijzen Collection of Military Costume Illustration, before 1910)

Hoplite-style warfare was influential, and influenced several other nations in the Mediterranean. Hoplite warfare was the dominant fighting style on much of the Italian Peninsula until the early 3rd century BC, employed by both the Etruscans and the Early Roman army, though scutum infantry had existed for centuries and some groups fielded both. The Romans later standardized their fighting style to a more flexible maniple organization, which was more versatile on rough terrain like that of the Apennines. Roman equipment also changed, trading spears for swords and heavy javelins (pilum). In the end only the triarii would keep a long spear (hasta) as their main weapon. The triarii would still fight in a traditional phalanx formation. Though this combination or similar was popular in much of Italy, some continued to fight as hoplites. Mercenaries serving under Pyrrhus of Epirus or Hannibal (namely Lucanians) were equipped and fought as hoplites.

Early in its history, Ancient Carthage also equipped its troops as Greek hoplites, in units such as the Sacred Band of Carthage. Many Greek hoplite mercenaries fought in foreign armies, such as Carthage and Achaemenid Empire, where it is believed by some that they inspired the formation of the Cardaces. Some hoplites served under the Illyrian king Bardylis in the 4th century. The Illyrians were known to import many weapons and tactics from the Greeks.

The Diadochi imported the Greek phalanx to their kingdoms. Though they mostly fielded Greek citizens or mercenaries, they also armed and drilled local natives as hoplites or rather Macedonian phalanx, like the Machimoi of the Ptolemaic army.

Hellenistic period

The Greek armies of the Hellenistic period mostly fielded troops in the fashion of the Macedonian phalanx. Many armies of mainland Greece retained hoplite warfare. Besides classical hoplites Hellenistic nations began to field two new types of hoplites, the Thureophoroi and the Thorakitai. They developed when Greeks adopted the Galatian Thureos shield, of an oval shape that was similar to the shields of the Romans, but flatter. The Thureophoroi were armed with a long thrusting spear, a short sword and, if needed, javelins. While the Thorakitai were similar to the Thureophoroi, they were more heavily armoured, as their name implies, usually wearing a mail shirt. These troops were used as a link between the light infantry and the phalanx, a form of medium infantry to bridge the gaps.

Roman legion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_legion
 
The Roman legion (Latin: legiō, Latin: [ˈɫɛɡioː]), the largest military unit of the Roman army, was composed of Roman citizens serving as legionaries. During the Roman Republic the manipular legion comprised 4,200 infantry and 300 cavalry. After the Marian reforms in 107 BC the legions were formed of 5,200 men and were restructured around 10 cohorts, the first cohort being double strength. This structure persisted throughout the Principate and middle Empire, before further changes in the fourth century resulted in new formations of around 1,000 men.

Size

The size of a typical legion varied throughout the history of ancient Rome, with complements ranging from 4,200 legionaries and 300 equites (drawn from the wealthier classes – in early Rome all troops provided their own equipment) in the Republic, to 5,500 in the Imperial period, when most legions were led by a Roman Imperial Legate.

A legion had 4,800 legionaries (in 10 cohorts of 6 centuries of 80 legionaries) from the late republic to the time of Julius Caesar. It expanded to 5,280 men plus 120 auxiliaries in the Imperial period (split into 10 cohorts, nine of 480 men each, with the first cohort being almost double-strength at 800 men). These are typical field strengths while "paper strength" was slightly higher (e.g. 600 and 1,200 respectively for Imperial cohorts).

In the early Roman Kingdom the term legion may have meant the entire Roman army, but sources on this period are few and unreliable. The subsequent organisation of legions varied greatly over time but legions were typically composed of around five thousand soldiers. During much of the republican era, a legion was divided into three lines, each of ten maniples. In the late Republic and much of the imperial period (from about 100 BC), a legion was divided into ten cohorts, each of six (or five) centuries. Legions also included a small ala, or cavalry unit. By the third century AD, the legion was a much smaller unit of about 1,000 to 1,500 men, and there were more of them. In the fourth century AD, East Roman border guard legions (limitanei) may have become even smaller. In terms of organization and function, the republican era legion may have been influenced by the ancient Greek and Macedonian phalanx.

Function and constitution

For most of the Roman Imperial period, the legions formed the Roman army's elite heavy infantry, recruited exclusively from Roman citizens, while the remainder of the army consisted of auxiliaries, who provided additional infantry and the vast majority of the Roman cavalry (provincials who aspired to Roman citizenship gained it when honourably discharged from the auxiliaries). The Roman army, for most of the Imperial period, consisted mostly of auxiliaries rather than legions.

Longevity

Many of the legions founded before 40 BC were still active until at least the fifth century, notably Legio V Macedonica, which was founded by Augustus in 43 BC and was in Egypt in the seventh century during the Islamic conquest of Egypt.

On the other hand, Legio XVII ("Seventeenth Legion"), Legio XVIII ("Eighteenth Legion") and Legio XIX ("Nineteenth Legion"), founded by Augustus around 41 BC, were destroyed by a Germanic alliance led by Arminius in the Varian Disaster (September 9, AD 9) and never raised again by the Romans thereafter.

Evolution

Almost nothing is known about the legion of the Roman Kingdom period that could have included 1000 men from each of the three original Roman tribes. The earliest surviving detailed description comes from Polybius, who was writing c. 150 BC and his account most likely was influenced by the organization of the Roman army after the defeat of Hannibal in the Punic wars some 50 years earlier.

The legions of the Republic were only conscripted in times of conflict and usually limited to four legions, two to be commanded by each consul, though more could be levied if needed. Legionaries lacked the opportunity of a military career; they were not paid well, their primary form of income being what they could loot from the battlefield, and were simply called upon when needed and returned to their civilian lives when they were no longer required.

In terms of organization and function, the early Republican era military was inherited from the Etruscans and seemingly influenced by the ancient Greek and Macedonian phalanx.

Depiction of Roman legionnaires

After a crushing defeat at the Battle of the Allia, in 387 BC the military structure was reformed. Under the Camillan system the legions were initially structured based on social class, with the poorest being the first line of the formation. The legionaries most often fought with hastae (spears) and scuta (large rectangular shields) in a checkered maniple formation with assistance from skirmishers. The exception to this was the triarii, the final line of the formation who instead fought as hoplites, using Greek clipei and whose wealth could afford them gladii in the case of a broken spear.

By the 3rd century BC, this system was seen to be inefficient. Under the new Polybian system the ranks were no longer structured by wealth, and instead by age and experience. All legionaries had their hastae replaced by gladii, along with two pila, which were used as an opening volley before melee. The former classes of poor legionaries, the accensi, rorarii, and leves were replaced by the velites. Unit sizes were also expanded.

Non-citizens or peregrini were also offered a position in the military as auxiliaries.

The Republican legion evolved from 3,000 men in the Roman Republic to over 5,200 men in the Roman Empire, consisting of centuries as the basic units. Until the middle of the first century AD, ten cohorts made up a Roman legion. This was later changed to nine cohorts of standard size (with six centuries at 80 men each) with the first cohort being of double strength (five double-strength centuries with 160 men each).

By the fourth century AD, the legion was a much smaller unit of about 1,000 to 1,500 men, and there were more of them. This had come about as the large formation legion and auxiliary unit, 10,000 men, was broken down into smaller units – originally temporary detachments – to cover more territory.

In the fourth century AD, East Roman border guard legions (limitanei) may have become even smaller.

History

Roman Kingdom (c. 752 to 509 BC)

In the period before the raising of the legio and the early years of the Roman Kingdom and the Roman Republic, forces are described as being organised into centuriae of roughly one hundred men. These centuries were grouped together as required and answered to the leader who had hired or raised them. Such independent organisation persisted until the 2nd century BC amongst light infantry and cavalry, but was discarded completely in later periods with the supporting role taken instead by allied troops. The roles of century leader (later formalised as a centurion), second in command and standard bearer are referenced in this early period.

Rome's early period is undocumented and shrouded in myths, but those myths tell that during the rule of Servius Tullius, the census (from Latin: censeō – accounting of the people) was introduced. With this all Roman able-bodied, property-owning male citizens were divided into five classes for military service based on their wealth and then organised into centuries as sub-units of the greater Roman army or legio (multitude). Joining the army was both a duty and a distinguishing mark of Roman citizenship; the wealthiest land owners performed the most years of military service. These individuals would have had the most to lose should the state have fallen.

Mid Republic (509–107 BC)

At some point after the overthrow of the Roman monarchy the legio was subdivided into two separate legions, each one ascribed to one of the two consuls. In the first years of the Republic, when warfare was mostly concentrated on raiding, it is uncertain if the full manpower of the legions was summoned at any one time. In 494 BC, when three foreign threats emerged, the dictator Manius Valerius Maximus raised ten legions which Livy says was a greater number than had been raised previously at any one time.

Also, some warfare was still conducted by Roman forces outside the legionary structure, the most famous example being the campaign in 479 BC by the clan army of gens Fabia against the Etruscan city of Veii (in which the clan was annihilated). Legions became more formally organised in the 4th century BC, as Roman warfare evolved to more frequent and planned operations, and the consular army was raised to two legions each.

In the Republic, legions had an ephemeral existence. Except for Legio I to IV, which were the consular armies (two per consul), other units were levied by campaign. Rome's Italian allies were required to provide approximately ten cohorts (auxilia were not organised into legions) to support each Roman Legion.

In the middle of the Republic, legions were composed of the following units:

  • Equites (cavalry): the cavalry was originally the most prestigious unit, where wealthy young Roman men displayed their skill and prowess, laying the foundation for an eventual political career. Cavalry equipment was purchased by each of the cavalrymen and consisted of a round shield, helmet, body armour, sword and one or more lances. The cavalry was outnumbered in the legion. In a total of c. 3,000 men (plus the velites that normally enlarged the number to about 4,200), the legion only had around 300 horsemen, divided into ten units (turmae) of 30 men. These men were commanded by decurions. In addition to heavy cavalry, there would be the light cavalry levied from poor citizens and wealthy young citizens not old enough to be in the hastati or the equites. In battle, they were used to disrupt and outflank enemy infantry formations and to fight off enemy cavalry. In the latter type of engagement, they would often (though not always) dismount some or all of the horsemen to fight a stationary battle on foot, an unusual tactic for the time, but one that offered significant advantages in stability and agility in a time before stirrups.
  • Velites (light infantry): these were mainly poorer citizens who could not afford to equip themselves properly. Their primary function was to act as skirmishers – javelin-throwers, who would engage the enemy early in order either to harass them or to cover the movement of troops behind them. After throwing their javelins, they would retreat through the gaps between the maniples, screened from the attack of the enemy by the heavy infantry lines. With the shortage of cavalry in the army of the early to mid Republican army, the velites were also used as scouts. They did not have a precise formal organisation or formation.
  • Heavy infantry: this was the principal unit of the legion. The heavy infantry was composed of citizen legionaries that could afford the equipment composed of a bronze helmet, shield, sword, armour and pilum, a heavy javelin whose range was about 30 metres. After the Second Punic War, the preferred weapon for the hastati and principes was the gladius, a short sword. Their hobnailed sandals (caligae) were also an effective weapon against a fallen enemy. Heavy infantry was subdivided, according to experience, into three separate lines of troops:
    • The hastati (sg.: hastatus): these consisted of raw or inexperienced soldiers, considered to be less reliable than legionaries of several years' service. The Hastati were placed at the front for several reasons. One reason is the city of Rome could ill-afford to lose experienced soldiers, so they put the greenest soldiers at the front. If they survived, the hastati would gain invaluable experience. Another reason is if the newest soldiers succumbed to battle nerves and broke and tried to run, then there were experienced soldiers behind them to stiffen their resolve.
    • The principes (sg.: princeps): these were the more experienced soldiers, often better equipped than the hastati, and having more experience on the battlefield, they would take up the second line in the battle in the event the Hastati failed or fled. They were the second wave in an early Republican Legion.
    • The triarii (sg.: triarius): these were the veteran soldiers, to be used in battle only in extreme situations; they rested one knee down when not engaged in combat. The triarii served primarily as reserves or barrier troops designed to backstop the hastati and principes, and were equipped with long hastae (spears) rather than the pilum and gladius (the hastati and principes stopped using spears in 387 BC). Thus armed, they fought in a phalanx formation. The sight of an advancing armored formation of triarii legionaries frequently discouraged exultant enemies in pursuit of retreating hastati and principes troops. Ad triarios redisseTo fall back upon the triarii – was a Roman idiom meaning to use one's last resort.

Each of these three lines was subdivided into (usually ten) chief tactical units called maniples. A maniple consisted of two centuries and was commanded by the senior of the two centurions. At this time, each century of hastati and principes consisted of 60 men; a century of triarii was 30 men. These 3,000 men (twenty maniples of 120 men, and ten maniples of 60 men), together with about 1,200 velites and 300 cavalry gave the mid Republican ("manipular") legion a nominal strength of about 4,500 men.

Late Republic (107–27 BC)

Visual representation of the legion showing size and disposition for Infantry formations

Each century had its own standard and was made up of ten units (contubernia) of eight men who shared a tent, a millstone, a mule and cooking pot.

Full Roman citizenship was open to all the regions of Italy. At the same time, the three different types of heavy infantry were replaced by a single, standard type based on the principes: armed with two heavy javelins called pila (singular pilum), the short sword called gladius, chain mail (lorica hamata), helmet and rectangular shield (scutum).

The role of allied legions would eventually be taken up by contingents of allied auxiliary troops, called auxilia. Auxilia contained immunes (specialist units), engineers and pioneers, artillerymen and craftsmen, service and support personnel and irregular units made up of non-citizens, mercenaries and local militia. These were usually formed into complete units such as light cavalry, light infantry or velites, and labourers. There was also a reconnaissance squad of ten or more light mounted infantry called speculatores, who could also serve as messengers or even as an early form of military intelligence service.

A typical legion of this period had 5,120 legionaries as well as a large number of camp followers, servants and slaves. Legions could contain as many as 11,000 fighting men when including the auxiliaries. During the Later Roman Empire, the legion was reduced in size to 1,000 to allow for easier provisioning and to expand the regions under surveillance. Numbers would also vary depending on casualties suffered during a campaign; Julius Caesar's legions during his campaign in Gaul often only had around 3,500 men.

Tactics were not very different from the past, but their effectiveness was largely improved because of the professional training of the soldiers.

Throughout the history of Rome's Late Republic, the legions played an important political role. By the 1st century BC, the threat of the legions under a demagogue was recognised. Roman governors were not allowed to leave their provinces with their legions. When Julius Caesar broke this rule, leaving his province of Gaul and crossing the Rubicon into Italy, he precipitated a constitutional crisis. This crisis and the civil wars which followed brought an end to the Republic and led to the foundation of the Empire under Augustus in 27 BC.

Early Empire (27 BC–AD 284)

Map of Roman legions by 14 AD
Roman Empire and legions in 125 AD near its maximum extent

Generals, during the recent Republican civil wars, had formed their own legions and numbered them as they wished. During this time, there was a high incidence of Gemina (twin) legions, where two legions were consolidated into a single organisation (and was later made official and put under a legatus and six duces). At the end of the civil war against Mark Antony, Augustus was left with around fifty legions, with several double counts (multiple Legio Xs for instance). For political and economic reasons, Augustus reduced the number of legions to 28 (which diminished to 25 after the Battle of Teutoburg Forest, in which three legions were completely destroyed by the Germanics).

Beside streamlining the army, Augustus also regulated the soldiers' pay. At the same time, he greatly increased the number of auxiliaries to the point where they were equal in number to the legionaries. He also created the Praetorian Guard along with a permanent Roman navy where served the liberti, or freed slaves. The legions also became permanent at this time, and not recruited for particular campaigns. They were also allocated to static bases with permanent castra legionaria (legionary fortresses).

Augustus' military policies proved sound and cost effective, and were generally followed by his successors. These emperors would carefully add new legions, as circumstances required or permitted, until the strength of the standing army stood at around 30 legions (hence the wry remark of the philosopher Favorinus that It is ill arguing with the master of 30 legions). With each legion having 5,120 legionaries usually supported by an equal number of auxiliary troops (according to Tacitus), the total force available to a legion commander during the Pax Romana probably ranged from 11,000 downwards, with the more prestigious legions and those stationed on hostile borders or in restive provinces tending to have more auxiliaries. By the time of the emperor Severus, 193–211, the auxiliaries may have composed 55 to 60% of the army, 250,000 of 447,000. Some legions may have even been reinforced at times with units making the associated force near 15,000–16,000 or about the size of a modern division.

Throughout the Imperial era, the legions played an important political role. Their actions could secure the empire for a usurper or take it away. For example, the defeat of Vitellius in the Year of the Four Emperors was decided when the Danubian legions chose to support Vespasian.

In the Empire, the legion was standardised, with symbols and an individual history where men were proud to serve. The legion was commanded by a legatus or legate. Aged around thirty, he would usually be a senator on a three-year appointment. Immediately subordinate to the legate would be six elected military tribunes – five would be staff officers and the remaining one would be a noble heading for the Senate (originally this tribune commanded the legion). There would also be a group of officers for the medical staff, the engineers, record-keepers, the praefectus castrorum (commander of the camp) and other specialists such as priests and musicians.

Later Empire (from 284 AD)

Map of Roman legions by 212 AD

In the Later Roman Empire, the number of legions was increased and the Roman army expanded. There is no evidence to suggest that legions changed in form before the Tetrarchy, although there is evidence that they were smaller than the paper strengths usually quoted. The final form of the legion originated with the elite legiones palatinae created by Diocletian and the Tetrarchs. These were infantry units of around 1,000 men rather than the 5,000, including cavalry, of the old legions. The earliest legiones palatinae were the Lanciarii, Joviani, Herculiani and Divitenses.

The 4th century saw a very large number of new, small legions created, a process which began under Constantine II. In addition to the elite palatini, other legions called comitatenses and pseudocomitatenses, along with the auxilia palatina, provided the infantry of late Roman armies. The Notitia Dignitatum lists 25 legiones palatinae, 70 legiones comitatenses, 47 legiones pseudocomitatenses and 111 auxilia palatina in the field armies, and a further 47 legiones in the frontier armies. Legion names such as Honoriani and Gratianenses found in the Notitia suggest that the process of creating new legions continued through the 4th century rather than being a single event. The names also suggest that many new legions were formed from vexillationes or from old legions. In addition, there were 24 vexillationes palatini, 73 vexillationes comitatenses; 305 other units in the Eastern limitanei and 181 in the Western limitanei. A rare instance of apparent direct continuity between the legions of the early Empire and those of the post-6th century army was Legion V Macedonica; created in 43 BC, recorded in the Notitia Dignitatum as a legione comitatense under the title of Quinta Macedonica and surviving in Egypt until the Arab conquest of 637 AD.

According to the late Roman writer Vegetius' De re militari, each century had a ballista and each cohort had an onager, giving the legion a formidable siege train of 59 ballistae and 10 onagers, each manned by 10 libritors (artillerymen) and mounted on wagons drawn by oxen or mules. In addition to attacking cities and fortifications, these would be used to help defend Roman forts and fortified camps (castra) as well. They would even be employed on occasion, especially in the later Empire, as field artillery during battles or in support of river crossings.

Despite a number of organisational changes, the legion system survived the fall of the Western Roman Empire. It was continued within the Eastern Roman Empire until the 7th century, when reforms begun by Emperor Heraclius to supply the increasing need for soldiers resulted in the Theme system. Despite this, the Eastern Roman armies continued to be influenced by the earlier Roman legions, and were maintained with similar levels of discipline, strategic prowess, and organization.

Legionary ranks

Aside from the rank and file legionary (who received the base wage of 10 assēs a day or 225 denarii a year), the following list describes the system of officers which developed within the legions from the late republic (100s BC) until the military reforms of Diocletian (c. 290).

Senior officers

  • Legatus Augusti pro praetore, Imperial Legate: the commander of two or more legions. The Imperial Legate also served as the governor of the province in which the legions he commanded were stationed. Of Senatorial rank, the Imperial Legate was appointed by the Emperor and usually held command for 3 or 5 years.
  • Legatus legionis, Legion Legate: the overall legion commander. The post was usually filled by a senator, appointed by the emperor, who held command for 3 or 4 years, although he could serve for a much longer period. In a Roman province with only one legion, the legatus was also the provincial governor. In such circumstances, the Legatus was dual-hatted as both Legion Legate and Imperial Legate. The Legion Legate also served as commander of the auxiliary units attached to the legion though they were not formally a part of the legion's command structure.
  • Tribunus laticlavius, Broad Band Tribune: named for the broad striped tunic worn by men of senatorial rank, this tribune was appointed by the emperor or the Senate. Though generally young, he was more experienced than the tribuni angusticlavii, he served as second in command of the legion, behind the legate. Because of his age and inexperience he was not the actual second in command in battle, but if the legate died he would take command of the legion.
  • Praefectus castrorum, Camp Prefect: the Camp Prefect was third in command of the legion. Generally he was a long serving veteran from a lower social status than the tribunii whom he outranked, and who previously had served as primus pilus and finished his 25 years with the legions. He was used as a senior officer in charge of training a legion, though he could also command a cohort of auxiliaries.
  • Tribuni angusticlavii, Narrow Band Tribunes: each legion had five lower ranking tribunes, who were normally from the equestrian class and had at least some years of prior military experience. They often served the role of administrative officers. This tribunate was often a first, but optional, step in a young man's political career (see cursus honorum).

Centurions

A historical reenactor in Roman centurion costume

The rank of centurion was an officer grade that held much responsibility. The most senior centurion in a legion was known as the primus pilus (lit. "first maniple"), who directly commanded the first century of the first cohort and commanded the whole first cohort when in battle. Within the second to tenth cohorts, the commander of each cohort's first century was known as a pilus prior and was in command of his entire cohort when in battle. The seniority of the pilus prior centurions was followed by the five other century commanders of the first cohort, who were known as primi ordines.

There is a story of one centurion, Petronius Fortunatus, making rank in four years, then spending the next forty-two years in twelve different legions never once serving in the primi ordines.

The six centuries of a normal cohort, were, in order of precedence:

  • The forward hastati (forward spears)
  • The rear hastati (rear spears)
  • The forward principes (forward principal line)
  • The rear principes (rear principal line)
  • The forward triarii (forward third line)
  • The rear triarii (rear third line)

The centuries took their titles from the old use of the legion drawn up in three lines of battle using three classes of soldier (each century would then hold a cross-section of this theoretical line, although these century titles were now essentially nominal). Each of the three lines is then sub-divided within the century into a more forward and a more rear century.

  • Primus pilus: the primus pilus was the commanding centurion of the first century, first cohort and the senior-most centurion of the entire legion. (Unlike other cohorts, the first cohort had only one javelin century, instead of a "front spear" and a "back spear" century.) The primus pilus had a chance of later becoming a praefectus castrorum. When the primus pilus retired, he would most likely gain entry into the equestrian class. He was paid 60 times the base wage. Primus pilus were also paid more than an average centurion and like a narrowband tribune.
  • Pilus prior: the "front file" centurions were the commanders of the 10 1st centuries within the legion, making them senior centurions of their respective cohorts. While the legion was in battle formation, the pilus prior was given command of their entire cohort. The primus pilus was also a pilus prior, and the most senior of all the centurions within the legion. These positions were usually held by experienced veteran soldiers who had been moved up within the ranks. This rank is subordinate to the primus pilus.
  • Primi ordines: the "ranks of the first [cohort]" were the five centurions of the first cohort, and included the primus pilus. They, excluding the primus pilus, were paid 30 times the base wage. This rank is senior to all other centurions, save the primus pilus and pilus prior.
  • Other centurions: each legion had 59 or 60 centurions, one to command each century of the ten cohorts. They were the backbone of the professional army and were the career soldiers who ran the day-to-day life of the soldiers and issued commands in the field. They were generally moved up from the ranks, but in some cases could be direct appointments from the emperor or other higher-ranking officials. The cohorts were ranked from the first to the tenth and the century within each cohort ranked from 1 to 6, with only five centuries in the first cohort (for a total of 59 centurions and the primus pilus). The century that each centurion commanded was a direct reflection of his rank: command of the 1st century of the first cohort was the highest, and the 6th century of the 10th cohort was the lowest. Paid ten times the basic wage.

Legionaries

The Roman army maintained a complex position and grading system for its soldiers that reflected the many and varied duties of the Roman army. There were three pay grades within the rank of legionary: standard, one and a half, and twice the basic pay rate.

Standard duty positions

  • Optio: one for each centurion (59–60), they were appointed by the centurion from within the ranks to act as his second in command and were graded pay twice the basic wage.
  • Tesserarius (guard commander): one for each century. They acted as seconds to the optios and were graded pay one and a half times the basic wage. Keeper of the watchword, administrative assistant to HQ Staff, third in command of a century. These men fought as normal soldiers when the century they were attached to was not in the vanguard.
  • Decurion: commanded a cavalry unit (turma) of 10 to 30 eques legionis.
  • Decanus: commanded a contubernium or ten men tent party, eight soldiers and two non-combatants. A group of four soldiers would be referred to as a quaternion.

Special duty positions

  • Aquilifer: a single position within the legion. The aquilifer was the legion's standard – or aquila (eagle) – bearer and was an enormously important and prestigious position. Losing the aquila was considered the greatest dishonor a legion could endure. This post therefore had to be filled with steady veteran soldiers, with an excellent understanding of the tactics of the legion. He was graded pay twice the basic wage.
  • Signifer: each century had a signifer (thus, there were 59 in a legion) and within each cohort the 1st century's signifer would be the senior. He was standard-bearer for the centurial signum, a spear shaft decorated with medallions and topped with an open hand to signify loyalty, which was a rallying point for the soldiers. In addition to carrying the signum, the signifer also assumed responsibility for the financial administration of the unit and functioned as the legionaries' banker. He was graded pay twice the basic wage.
  • Cornicen ("horn blower"): worked hand in hand with the signifer drawing the attention of the men to the centurial signum and issuing the audible commands of the officers. He was graded pay twice the basic wage.
  • Imaginifer: a special position from the time of Augustus onwards. Carried the standard bearing the image of the Emperor as a constant reminder of the troops' loyalty to him. He was graded pay twice the basic wage.
  • Immunes: immunes were legionary soldiers who possessed specialised skills, qualifying them for better pay and excusing them from labour and guard work. Engineers, artillerymen, musicians, clerks, quartermasters, drill and weapons instructors, carpenters, hunters, medical staff and military police were all immune soldiers. These men were still fully trained legionaries, however, and were called upon to serve in the battle lines when needed.
  • Evocatus: a veteran of the Roman army who had earned his military diploma for military service, but had chosen to re-enlist. They received double pay and were excluded from regular duties, such as manual labour.

Pay

Legionaries received 225 denarii a year (equal to 900 sestertii) until Domitian, who increased it to 300 denarii. In spite of the steady inflation during the 2nd century, there was no further rise until the time of Septimius Severus, who increased it to 500 denarii a year. However, the soldiers did not receive all the money in cash, as the state deducted a clothing and food tax from their pay. To this wage, a legionary on active campaign would hope to add the booty of war, from the bodies of their enemies and as plunder from enemy settlements. Slaves could also be claimed from the prisoners of war and divided amongst the legion for later sale, which would bring in a sizeable supplement to their regular pay.

All legionary soldiers would also receive a praemia (veterans' benefits) on completion of their term of service of 25 years or more: a sizeable sum of money (3,000 denarii from the time of Augustus) and/or a plot of good farmland (good land was in much demand); farmland given to veterans often helped in establishing control of the frontier regions and over rebellious provinces. Later, under Caracalla, the praemia increased to 5,000 denarii.

Pay scales

  • Caligati: a pay grade receiving standard pay
  • Sesquiplicarii: a pay grade receiving one and a half standard pay
  • Duplicarius: a pay grade receiving double the standard pay.

Symbols

From 104 BC onwards, each legion used an aquila (eagle) as its standard symbol. The symbol was carried by an officer known as aquilifer, and its loss was considered to be a very serious embarrassment, and often led to the disbanding of the legion itself. Normally, this was because any legion incapable of regaining its eagle in battle was so severely mauled that it was no longer effective in combat.

Reenacters portraying Roman legionaries of Legio XV Apollinaris

In Gallic War (Bk IV, Para. 25), Julius Caesar describes an incident at the start of his first invasion of Britain in 55 BC that illustrated how fear for the safety of the eagle could drive Roman soldiers. When Caesar's troops hesitated to leave their ships for fear of the Britons, the aquilifer of the tenth legion threw himself overboard and, carrying the eagle, advanced alone against the enemy. His comrades, fearing disgrace, 'with one accord, leapt down from the ship' and were followed by troops from the other ships.

With the birth of the Roman Empire, the legions created a bond with their leader, the emperor himself. Each legion had another officer, called imaginifer, whose role was to carry a pike with the imago (image, sculpture) of the emperor as pontifex maximus.

Each legion, furthermore, had a vexillifer who carried a vexillum or signum, with the legion name and emblem depicted on it, unique to the legion. It was common for a legion to detach some sub-units from the main camp to strengthen other corps. In these cases, the detached subunits carried only the vexillum, and not the aquila, and were called, therefore, vexillationes. A miniature vexillum, mounted on a silver base, was sometimes awarded to officers as a recognition of their service upon retirement or reassignment.

Civilians could also be rewarded for their assistance to the Roman legions. In return for outstanding service, a citizen was given an arrow without a head. This was considered a great honour and would bring the recipient much prestige.

Discipline

The military discipline of the legions was harsh. Regulations were strictly enforced, and a broad array of punishments could be inflicted.

Minor punishments

  • Castigatio – being hit by the centurion with his staff or animadversio fustium (Tac. Annals I, 23)
  • Reduction of rations or to be forced to eat barley instead of the usual grain ration
  • Pecuniaria mulcta – reduction in pay, fines or deductions from the pay allowance
  • Flogging in front of the century, cohort or legion
  • Whipping with the flagrum (flagellum, flagella), or "short whip" – a much more brutal punishment than simple flogging. The "short whip" was used by slave volunteers, volones, who constituted the majority of the army in the later years of the Roman Empire.
  • Gradus deiectio – reduction in rank
  • Missio ignominiosa – dishonourable discharge
  • Loss of time in service advantages
  • Militiae mutatio – relegation to inferior service or duties.
  • Munerum indictio – additional duties

Major punishments

  • Fustuarium – a sentence for desertion or dereliction of duty, stealing, false witness, sexual misconduct and repeating three times a same offense. The legionary would be stoned or beaten to death by cudgels, in front of the assembled troops, by his fellow soldiers or those whose lives had been put in danger. Soldiers under sentence of fustuarium who escaped were not pursued but lived under sentence of banishment from Rome. In the event that a group of legionaries are to be subjected to this punishment, the tribune would make an alteration in order to spare the majority of the accused. The tribune would first select a handful of the guilty men, and those selected would be condemned to the original penalty under the fustuarium. The remainder of the accused would then be driven out of the camp and forced to live in an undefended location for a chosen period of time; they were also limited to eating only barley.
  • Decimation – according to 17th century belief (possibly folk etymology), the Romans practiced this punishment in which a sentence was carried out against an entire unit that had mutinied, deserted, or shown dereliction of duty. One out of every ten men, chosen by lots, would be beaten to death, usually by the other nine with their bare hands, who would be forced to live outside the camp and in some instances obliged to renew the military oath, the sacramentum.

Factors in the legion's success

Montesquieu wrote that "the main reason for the Romans becoming masters of the world was that, having fought successively against all peoples, they always gave up their own practices as soon as they found better ones".

Examples of ideas that were copied and adapted include weapons like the gladius (Iberians) and warship design (cf. Carthaginians' quinquereme), as well as military units, such as heavy mounted cavalry and mounted archers (Numidians and Parthians).

  • Roman organisation was more flexible than those of many opponents. Over time, the legions effectively handled challenges ranging from cavalry, to guerrillas, and to siege warfare.
  • Roman discipline (cf. decimation), organization and systematization sustained combat effectiveness over a longer period. These elements appear throughout the legion in training, logistics, field fortification etc.
  • The Romans were more persistent and more willing to absorb and replace losses over time than their opponents. Wars with Carthage and the Parthians and most notably, the campaigns against Pyrrhus of Epirus, illustrate this.
  • Roman leadership was mixed, but over time it was often effective in securing Roman military success.
  • The influence of Roman military and civic culture, as embodied particularly in the heavy infantry legion, gave the Roman military consistent motivation and cohesion.
  • Strict, and more importantly, uniform discipline made commanding, maintaining, and replacing Roman legionaries a much more consistent exercise.
  • Roman military equipment (cf. Roman military personal equipment), particularly armor, was of better quality and far more ubiquitous, especially in the late Republican and Early Imperial era, than that of most of their opponents. Soldiers equipped with shields, helmets and highly effective body armor had a major advantage over warriors protected, in many cases, with nothing other than their shields, particularly in a prolonged engagement.
  • Roman engineering skills were second to none in ancient Europe, and their mastery of both offensive and defensive siege warfare, specifically the construction and investiture of fortifications (cf. sudis, castra), was another major advantage for the Roman legions.
  • Roman military training focused on the more effective thrusting of the sword rather than the slash.

All men are created equal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_men_are_created_equal The quotation &qu...