Military of ancient Rome

For the military of the East Roman Empire after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, see Byzantine military

This article is part of the series on: Military of ancient Rome (Portal) 800 BC - AD 476

Structural history

Roman army (unit types, legions, generals)

Roman navy (fleets, admirals)

Campaign history

Lists of Wars and Battles

Decorations and Punishments

Technological history

Military engineering (castra, siege engines)

Personal equipment

Political history

Strategy and tactics

Infantry tactics

Frontiers and fortifications

The Military of ancient Rome (known to the Romans as the militia) relates to the combined military forces of Ancient Rome from the founding of the city of Rome to the end of the Western Roman Empire. Originally consisting entirely of the Roman army, a small navy was added during the Second Samnite War.

The Roman military was an important part of the Roman state. Josephus describes the Roman people as "as if born ready armed."^[1]. Its campaign history stretched over 1300 years and saw Roman armies campaigning as far East as Asia Minor, as far south as Africa, and as far north as the semi-legendary British Isles

The Roman military evolved through several stages in its history (See: Structural history), first from small-scale Italian warfare with javelineers to an Etruscan — and Greek — influenced phalanx of citizen spearmen and, after contact with the Gauls, to swordfighters. Following a series of reforms at various periods, the army grew to a highly trained and well equipped body of professional soldiers in the middle of the Roman Imperial period. The Romans also had a powerful navy that ruled the Mediterannean and the European Atlantic coast. In the late Imperial period, while equipment quality decreased, the military's numbers were significantly increased to cover the borders and suppress unrest. The circumstances of the Empire had changed; the Western Roman Empire now relied heavily on foederati units of mostly Germanic tribes living within the borders, who fought in the name of Rome during the Migration Period.

Manpower

At its territorial height, the Roman Empire may have contained between 45 million and 120 million citizens.^[2] Historian Edward Gibbon estimated that the size of the Roman army "most probably formed a standing force of 375,000" men at the Empire's territorial peak in the time of Hadrian. This probably included only legionary and auxiliary troops.^[3] However, Gibbons states that it is "not... easy to define them with any tolerable accuracy." In the late Imperial period, when vast numbers of foederati were employed by the Romans, Antonio Santosuosso estimated the combined number of men in arms of the two Roman empires numbered closer to 700,000 in total (not all members of a standing army), drawing on data from the Notitia Dignitatum. However, he notes that these figures were probably subject to inflation due to the practice of leaving dead soldiers "on the books" in order to continue to draw their wage and ration. Furthermore, it is irrespective of whether the troops were raised by the Romans or simply hired by them to fight on their behalf.^[4]

Evidence has also emerged recently that the Roman army may have included women as well as men. Women were never admitted into core units such as the legions, but there is archeological evidence that some women did serve in the federated troops used in the late Empire.^[5] Contemporary sources made no record of this phenomenon and there is no archaeological evidence that suggests that women constituted a significant proportion of troops even amongst the federated troops of the late empire.

Funding and expenditures

Although early in its history troops were expected to provide much of their own equipment, eventually the Roman military was almost entirely funded by the state. Since soldiers of the early Republican armies were also unpaid citizens, the financial burden of the army on the state was minimal. Hoewever, since the Roman state did not provide services such as housing, health, education, social security and public transport that are part and parcel of modern states, the military always represented by far the greatest expenditure of the state.^[6]

During the time of expansion in the Republic and early Empire, Roman armies had acted as a source of revenue from the Roman state, plundering conquered territories, displaying the massive wealth in triumphs upon their return and fueling the economy^[7] to the extent that historians such as Toynbee and Burke believe that the Roman economy was essentially a plunder economy. However, after the Empire had stopped expanding in the second century, this source of revenue dried up; by the end of the third century, Rome had "ceased to vanquish."^[8] As tax revenue was plagued by corruption and hyperinflation during the Crisis of the Third Century, military expenditures began to become a "crushing burden"^[9] on the finances of the Roman state.^[10] It now highlighted weaknesses that earlier expansion had disguised. By 440, an imperial law frankly states that the Roman state has insufficient tax revenue to fund an army of a size required by the demands placed upon it.^[11]

Several additional factors bloated the military expenditure of the Roman Empire. Firstly, substantial rewards were paid for the demeanor of "barbarian" chieftains in the form of negotiated subsidies and for the provision of allied troops.^[12] Secondly, the military boosted its numbers, possibly by one third in a single century.^[13] Finally, the military increasingly relied on a higher ratio of cavalry units in the late Empire, which were many times more expensive to maintain than infantry units.^[14]

While military size and costs increased, new taxes were introduced or existing tax laws reformed in the late Empire in order to finance it frequently. Although more inhabitants were available within the borders of the late Empire, reducing the per capita costs for an increased standing army was impractical. A large number of the population could not be taxed because they were slaves or held Roman citizenship, which exempted them from taxation in one way or another.^[15] Of the remaining, a large number were already impoverished by centuries of warfare and weakened by chronic malnutrition. Still, they had to handle an increasing tax rate^[16] and so they often abandoned their lands to survive in a city.^[17] Of the Western Empire's taxable population, a larger number than in the East could not be taxed because they were "primitive subsistence peasant[s]"^[18] and did not produce a great deal of goods beyond agricultural products. Plunder was still made from suppressing insurgencies within the Empire and on limited incursions into enemy land. Legally, much of it should have returned to the Imperial purse, but these goods were simply kept by the common soldiers, who demanded it of their commanders as a right. Given the low wages and high inflation in the later Empire, the soldiers felt that they had a right to acquire plunder.^[19][20]

The image below gives a very approximate timeline of how funding for the army was raised. It is necessarily approximate because there is very little extant information on exactly how revenue was raised:

Command structure

The nominal head of the military prior to the establishment of the Roman Republic was the king, although little else is known of the military command structure during this early period. From the Republic onwards, the Senate was the nominal head of the military, but in practice became increasingly subservient to the wishes of their leading citizens, who became known eventually as Emperors: Julius Caesar was named imperator ("commander") and "Father of the Country" and for all intents and purposes "could do as he liked".^[21] As the Empire developed, the Emperor became the de facto head of the Roman military. The command structure grew in complexity throughout the Republic and Empire, but a simple representation is presented below:

Military command structure of the Roman Kingdom

Military command structure of the Roman Republic

Military command structure of the early to mid Roman Empire

Military command structure of the late Roman Empire

Culture

Heather describes Roman military culture as being "just like the marines, but much nastier".^[1] At least in the legions of the Republic, discipline was fierce and training harsh, all intended to instill a group cohesion or esprit de corps that could bind the men together into effective fighting units. Unlike opponents such as the Gauls, who were fierce individual warriors, Roman military training concentrated on instilling teamwork and maintaining a level head over individual bravery - troops were to maintain exact formations in battle and "despise wild swinging blows"^[2] in favour of sheltering behind ones shield and delivering efficient stabs when an opponent made himself vulnerable.

Loyalty was to the Roman state but pride was based in the soldier's unit, to which was attached a military standard - in the case of the legions a legionary eagle. Successful units were awarded with accolades that became part of their official name, such as the 20th legion, which became the XX Valeria Victrix (the "Valiant and Victorious 20th").

Of the martial culture of less elite units such as sailors, and light infantry, little is known, but it is doubtful that its training was as intense or its esprit de corps as strong as in the legions.

Grand strategy

Main article: Strategy of the Roman military

In its purest form, the concept of strategy deals solely with military issues. However, Rome is offered by Edward Luttwak and others as an early example of a state that possessed a grand strategy which encompassed the management of the resources of an entire nation in the conduct of warfare. Up to half of the funds raised by the Roman state were spent on its military, and the Romans operated a system of grand strategy that was clearly more complicated than simple knee-jerk strategic or tactical responses to individual threats. Rome's grand strategy changed over time, implementing different systems to meet different challenges and reflecting changing internal priorities, but elements of Rome's grand strategy included client states, the deterrent of armed response in paralel with manopulative diplomacy, and a fixed system of troop deployments and road networks.

Capabilities

Readiness

Locations of Roman legions, 80.

The military capability of Ancient Rome – its military preparedness or readiness – was always primarily based upon the maintenance of an active fighting force acting either at or beyond its military frontiers, something that historian Luttwak refers to as a "thin linear perimeter."^[3] This is best illustrated by showing the dispositions of the Roman legions, the backbone of the Roman army. (see right). Because of these deployments, the Roman military did not keep a central strategic reserve after the Social War. Such reserves were only re-established during the late Empire, when the army was split into a border defense force and mobile response field units.

Power projection

The Roman military was keen on the doctrine of power projection – it frequently removed foreign rulers by force or intimidation and replaced them with puppets. This was facilitated by the maintenance, for at least part of its history, of a series of client states and other subjugate and buffer entities beyond its official borders, although over which Rome extended massive political and military control. On the other hand, this also could mean the payment of immense subsidies to foreign powers^[4] and opened the possibility of extortion in case military means were insufficient.

Sustainability

The Empire's system of building an extensive and well-maintained road network, as well as its absolute command of the Mediterannean for much of its history, enabled a primitive form of rapid reaction, also stressed in modern military doctrine, although because there was no real strategic reserve, this often entailed the raising of fresh troops or the withdrawing of troops from others parts of the border. Usually, however, border troops were very capable of handling enemies before they could penetrate far into the Roman hinterland.

The Roman military had an extensive logistical supply chain. There was no specialised branch of the military devoted to logistics and transportation, although this was to a great extent carried out by the Roman Navy due to the ease and low costs of transporting goods via sea and river compared to over land.^[5] There is archeological evidence that Roman armies campaigning in Germania were supplied by a logistical supply chain beginning in Italy and Gaul, then transported by sea to the northern coast of Germania, and finally penetrating into Germania via barges on inland waterways. Forces were routinely supplied via fixed supply chains, and although Roman armies in enemy territory would often supplement or replace this with foraging for food or purchasing food locally, this was often insufficient for their needs: Heather states that a single legion would have required 13.5 tonnes of food per month, and that it would have proved impossible to source this locally^[6]

Policing

For the most part, Roman cities had a civil guard used for maintaining the peace. Due to fears over rebellions and other uprisings, they were forbidden to be armed up to militia levels. Policing was split between the civil guard for low-level affairs and the Roman legions and auxilia for suppressing higher-level rioting and rebellion. This created a limited strategic reserve, one that fared poorly in actual warfare.

Engineering

Main article: Roman military engineering

The Roman military also had extensive engineering capabilities. Heather writes that "Learning to build, and build quickly, was a standard element of training".^[7] This engineering expertise served in the construction of siege equipment such as ballistae, onagers and siege towers, as well as allowing the troops to construct roads, bridges and fortified camps. All of these led to strategic capabilities, allowing Roman troops to, respectively, assault besieged settlements, move more rapidly to wherever they were needed, cross rivers to reduce march times and surprise enemies, and to camp in relative security even in enemy territory.

International stance

Rome was established as a nation making aggressive use of its high military potential. From very early on its history it would raise two armies annually to campaign abroad. Far from the Roman military being solely a defense force, for much of its history, it was a tool of aggressive expansion. Noteably the Roman army had derived from a militia of mainly farmers and gaining new farming lands for the growing population or later retiring soldiers, was often one of the campaigns' chief objectives. Only in the late Empire did the Roman military's primary role become the preservation of control over its territories. Remaining major powers next to Rome were the Kingdom of Aksum, Parthia and the Hunnic Empire. Knowledge of China, the Han Dynasty at the times of Mani, existed and it is believed that Rome and China swapped embassies in about 170.^[8]

Branches and structural overview

Main article: Structure of the Roman military

The branches of the Roman military at the highest level were the Roman army and the Roman navy. Within these branches the actual structure was subject to substantial change throughout its history.

History

See:

• Structural history of the Roman military
• Campaign history of the Roman military
• Technological history of the Roman military
• Political history of the Roman military.

Influence and modern impact

Luttwak states that there are "instructive similarities" between Roman and modern military strategy.^[9]

Notes

References

Primary sources

• Livy, The Rise of Rome, Oxford University Press, 1998
• Polybius, History, Book 6
• Tacitus, The Histories, Book V

Secondary sources

• Gibbon E., The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Penguin, 1985
• Goldsorthy A., In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire, Weidenfield and Nicholson, 2003
• Grant, M., The History of Rome, Faber and Faber, 1993
• Heather, P., The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History, MacMillan, 2005
• Jones, The Later Roman Empire,John Hopkins University Press, 1964
• Lane Fox, Robin, The Classical World, Penguin, 2005
• Luttwak, E., The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire, John Hopkins
• Matyszak, P., The Enemies of Rome, Thames and Hudson, 2004
• Santosuosso, A., Soldiers, Emperors and Civilians in the Roman Empire, Westview Press, 2001

External links

• UNRV's Roman Military
• Internet Ancient History Sourcebook

Categories

Find

Find