View Full Version : historical thread
well i thought i might start posting some historical information on armies and units from then to wet your appetities...if you dont like my thread say so and i will discontinue it...or you can contribute too and we can make it a interesting reading post for others
history of legion evolution
just a bit about historical roman legion from my west point class papers enjoy it
The Earliest Army
The earliest Roman army is usually described as composed of about 1,000 men per tribe drawn in 100 man levies. The soldiers were armed as Greek Hoplites and fought in a simple Phalanx.
The 4,000 MAN Five Class Army
Tradition attributes the reorganization of the army to the sixth king, Servius Tullius, although the actual process may have taken a number of years. By the time of the war with Veii the army probably had fully developed the 5 classes. Without detailed descriptions of the army formed from the classes one can only make reasonable guesses about its composition. In this model the same number of men are assumed to have been levied from each Century, the phalanx is kept at the Greek standard of 8 ranks, and the overall army size is about 4,000.
If 25 men from each Century were levied then there would have been 2,000 from the First Class, 500 from Classes II through IIII and 750 from Class V. 4,000 men in 8 Ranks will fill 500 Files. That would give the First Class 4 Ranks, Classes II through IIII one Rank each and leave 750 men in Class V for the 500 files of the last Rank.
The last Rank is represented as composed of 500 men of the Fifth Class with the remaining 250 men being used as skirmishers, flankers or camp guards. In the drawing this presumed 250 man unit is not depicted. Although barely visible at this scale, the Phalanx in the drawing above is divided into separate ranks by Class. Each Class is given a different color.
Under the assumption that the Phalanx would have been somehow subdivided into smaller units, the 500 files have been divided into units of 100 files 8 ranks deep and separated by three meters (ten feet) to provide room for the phalanx to maneuver. Of course, the actual armies were never so nicely composed, but this configuration at least gives a reasonable starting point for visualizing the army.
The Early Livy Legion
The earliest legion is generally said to be the 45 unit legion as described by Livy and dates to the early part of the 4th century BC. The maniple consisted of two centuries of 10 files by 3 ranks. All maniples had the same number of men. In front of each Hastati maniple there were 20 skirmishers called Leves. All maniples were armed with the spear and oval shield.
In addition to the Hastati, Principes and Triarii, Connolly includes equal size units of the Rorarii and Accensi, both armed with shields and spears, and placed behind the Triarii.
An Alternative Early Legion
Delbrück offers an alternate interpretation of the Livy legion, different from Connolly in his analysis of the Rorarii and Accensi. He works from Livy's number: 186 men "antipilani" and "sub signis." His explanation is that the Triarii were at one time called the Pilani and that the Triarii, Rorarii and Accensi were positioned behind the standards. Those behind the standards, then, were the 60 men of the Triarii; plus the 120 Rorarii attached in units of 40 men to each of the Hastati, Principes and Triarii maniples; plus the 6 Accensi, orderlies or company clerks; for a total of 186 men.
He considers the Leves, the skirmishers, to be a part of the 40 man Rorarii unit assigned to each Hastati maniple. For the 10 Hastati maniples that would place some 200 skirmishers directly in front of the battle line. These are the men who would retreat through the gaps in the Hastati line. He also mentions that there may have been other skirmishers on the flanks; possibly the other 20 Rorarii of the Hastati maniples. He does not believe the Rorarii of the Principes and Triarii maniples were combat soldiers at all, but rather were unarmed assistants. The Accensi, he says, were totally misinterpreted by Livy. These were the 6 orderlies of the cohort. In muster formation the three 40 man Rorarii units would stand behind the 60 man Triarii maniples. Behind them would stand the 6 Accensi orderlies. This gives the number of 186 men as "sub Signis."
Delbrück argues against the notion that the legion actually went into battle with wide gaps between the maniples. His view is that the legion was really an articulated Phalanx with only small intervals between the maniples to allow adjustments in spacing due to irregular terrain and errors in marching. The gaps would be naturally closed by the men in the adjoining maniples at the time contact is made. If larger gaps opened whole units such as centuries or maniples of the Principes would fill in. The maniples of the Principes would have lined up on the small intervals in the Hastati.
The Delbrück maniple has men on 0.91m (3'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif spacing both for file and rank with the centuries placed side by side. Each century has 10 files and 6 ranks. The placement of the centurions is not given. Delbrück recognizes the requirement for 1.83m (6'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif of fighting room for each individual given by Vegetius. However he interprets the 1.83m (6'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif spacing as being between adjacent ranks, not files. His method is to have alternate ranks step to the side to fill in the gaps in the rank in front. In this way there is 1.83m (6'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif between rank 1 and rank 3 The Delbrück maniple in battle formation had a staggered formation.
Twenty men from each Rorarii unit attached to the Hastati are depicted as skirmishers spread in a thin line in front of the legion. They would retreat through the narrow gaps between the maniples. The other twenty men of the Hastati Rorarii units may have been used as skirmishers on the flanks; they are not depicted in the schematic. The balance of the Rorarii and Accensii are placed at the bottom of the schematic to indicate that they were, in Delbrück's reconstruction, not a part of the battle and may have been left as camp guards.
The Triarii maniples are comprised of two 30 man centuries aligned one behind to other to maintain a 6 Rank depth. Delbrück states that a depth of fewer than 6 Ranks would not have been an effective force and that the maniples could make up for the gap because of the distance they had between themselves and the battle lines would allow them time and space to maneuver to close the gaps if necessary.
Delbrück does not specify how wide the small gaps between maniples were, but he does allow enough for the 20 skirmishers to retreat. The model uses a spacing between maniples of 3.05m (10'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif which seems large enough to allow the 20 skirmishers room to retreat and small enough for a few men on either side to close the gap.
Delbrück also argues that the 76m (250'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif spacing of the later legions is an echelon tactic introduced first by Hannibal and adopted into the Roman system by Scipio Africanus, sometime between 211 and 200 BC, probably in Spain. Prior to his innovation the three lines, Delbrück believes, would have been fairly close together, about 30m (100'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif. The legion formation shown here incorporates these elements.
The 4,200-man Republican Legion
At some time after 340 BC the legion was reorganized again. It may have been about this time that 200 of the Rorarii were withdrawn, trained, armed as light skirmishers and named Velites. From this time the legion was configured with the standard 30 maniple formation. The maniple was comprised of two 60 man centuries, usually described as either 10 files by 6 Ranks or 12 files by 5 Ranks. In this version of the legion the large Velites units are shown aligned between the two centuries of the Triarii in the third line as they would have been during muster and, perhaps, during battle after they had retired. The centuries of the Hastati and Principes are shown aligned one behind the other. This is the classic formation as it is usually given, by Montross and Rüstow, for example.
Echelon Tactics
Delbrück credits the development of echelon tactics to Scipio Africanus, probably during his campaigns in Spain. The great advantage of echelon tactics is that it allowed the lines to operate somewhat independently. He also places the introduction of the Pilum to coincide with the new tactics. The legion of Scipio is essentially the same as the earlier legion in its overall formation with the exception that the lines are much further apart, about 76m (250'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif.
The 4,800-man Legion of Marius -- Cohort Tactics
A major change came at the time of Marius and is usually attributed to him, although some elements of the reorganization of the legion may have been implemented prior to Marius' reform. The nominal maniple strength was probably 160 men, divided into two centuries which most authors place one behind the other. The most likely configuration is 16 files by 10 ranks. It has the advantage of scaling down by units of 5 or ten as the maniple strength was depleted.
By the time of Caesar it is clear that the cohort had become the fundamental tactical unit. He describes battle formations and troop movements in terms of cohorts and legions appear more as administrative units than battlefield tactical units. Caesar sends cohorts and groups of cohorts, not legions, on flanking maneuvers.
Since the number of men in a cohort could vary considerably the formation must have been scaleable in some consistent manner so that its fighting efficiency was not destroyed by the reduction in manpower. The typical formation, described above, uses a spacing of 0.91m (3'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif for the files and 1.22m (4'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif for the ranks; allowing for the centurion, then, the cohort would have a front of 15.85m (52'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif. If the three cohorts fought side by side, as is always depicted, then their combined front would have extended to 48.16m (158'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif. The cohort would, in essence, be a miniature phalanx, 10 ranks deep and 58 files wide.
Caesar's legions are usually described as having a strength of about 3,600 men, fewer than the full strength legion. How would the understrength legion have been configured? It seems reasonable that the cohort would be scaled down by reducing the number of files, not the number of ranks. Reducing the number of ranks would decrease the depth and hence the power of the formation. Reducing the number of files would reduce the front but retain the full power of the formation. It therefore seems most logical to retain the full 10 ranks as the depth and reduce the number of files as necessary. The drawing on the right shows two reduced centuries of 5 ranks and 12 files each.
At the battle of Ilerda Caesar's forces were caught on a narrow ridge just wide enough for three cohorts in line of battle. Judson states that this ridge can could be identified in his day and was 110 meters (360'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif wide. The front of a 12 file cohort is 12.2m (40'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif, giving a three-cohort unit a front of exactly 109.73m (360'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif. If Judson's information is correct, it would appear to confirm this formation.
The full strength legion formation in this configuration is shown in the model above.
The Legion of Marius -- Alternate Formations
Delbrück does not specifically discuss the question of gaps between the cohorts of the Marian legion. He argues, persuasively I think, against the possibility of gaps in the pre-Marian legion formation in which the units and, consequently, the gaps were much smaller. To be consistent Delbrück would have to be presumed to eliminate the wider gaps in the post-Marian legion, placing the cohorts close together with only small gaps between them. The drawing below shows this legion with 7.62m (25'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif spaces between the cohorts for the skirmishers. The legion formation in this configuration is much more compact and has a front of only 212m (694'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif.
If this were the legion formation then it would be a departure from the earlier legion in that the centuries would now be aligned front to back rather than side by side. In favor of this configuration are: (1) the cohort front fits Judson's information about Ilerda (assuming Judson is accurate), (2) the second century was called the posterior century, and (3) since cohorts were used as quasi-independent tactical units they may have needed the extra depth of the formation.
Against this configuration is the argument for consistency and conservatism. It can be argued that, if the centuries were aligned side by side prior to the reorganization of Marius, then it seems likely that they would have been aligned that way after Marius. The change in the position of the Posterior Century would represent a significant change in tactics, even down to details such as how and when the ranks could employ their pila. The style of fighting had evolved over a long period and may be considered to have been "optimized." That is, the tactics of the individual soldiers armed with the scutum, pilum and gladius which had been evolved to this time were probably those which best suited those weapons; major changes would probably not have been an improvement. Finally, at the level of the century, the soldiers were trained, drilled and led by their centurions who represented a conservative, in the sense "conserving," element in the army; Marius' changes were dramatic enough without also including fundamental changes in tactics at every level and the re-training which would have had to occur.
The 5,130-man Imperial Legion
During the second half of the first century AD, the size of the cohorts was increased. The regular cohort was increased in size to 480 men in six centuries of 10 files and 8 ranks each. The first cohort was enlarged to 810 men in 5 centuries of 18 files and 9 ranks.
The centuries are usually represented as being arranged two deep with the maniples side by side. For the six centuries of the normal cohort this is a logical formation. For the five centuries of the first cohort the scheme does not work. If four of the centuries are aligned in a rectangle they occupy about the same space as the six centuries of the other cohorts. This would allow them to fit nicely into the overall legion formation. That would leave one extra century.
The "extra" century of the first cohort is difficult to fit into the regular legion formation. It could have been attached to the other four centuries of its cohort in some fashion, perhaps to strengthen the right wing.
An alternate formation is possible. If the legion did close gaps by aligning the maniples side by side within the cohorts to form a continuous line, then the formation may have looked something like the drawing below. The front of this imperial legion is shorter than for a Caesarian legion shown because the depth of each century is increased from 5 to 8 Ranks.
Conclusion
From this brief overview of legion formations according to various authorities it is clear that there are some fundamental questions remaining. The legion was a fighting unit with unique weapons, tactics and formations; and was the most successful army of the ancient world. Yet we do not understand how it functioned in some of the most basic ways.
The legion's formation and tactics were changed over time and were adapted to meet local battlefield conditions. Yet there is a core understanding, an "idealized legion," which can be described. The legion incorporated its own unique characteristics; among them were: the regular use of two and three lines, division of forces into centuries, maniples and cohorts, command by Centurions, use of trumpets and standards, and the tactics of the Pilum and Gladius.
here is some more of my project papers for you to read and be happy
GLADIVS versus SARISSA
Roman legions against Greek pike phalanx
by
khurram wadiwalla
M.A. (War Stud.)
During the first half of the 2nd century BC the Roman legion confronted the Macedonian phalanx. In most of the engagements - including the major ones at Cynoscephalae, Magnesia and Pydna - the Romans prevailed over their opponents and the Republic emerged as the indisputable Mediterranean power. This essay deals with the causes of the Roman military successes by examining briefly the Macedonian and Roman systems of war and searching for possible other factors that contributed to the defeat of the phalanx. The focus of this effort will be the battles of Cynoscephalae and Pydna. For a number of reasons, Magnesia is not going to be treated here. The ancient accounts are considered to be completely fantastic and it is argued that the army of Antiochus III did not have a pure sarissa phalanx formation.1 It is also suggested that the outcome was determined mostly by the action of the Pergamene cavalry of king Eumenes, a Roman ally, and not by an actual clash between the legion and whatever kind of phalanx Antiochus employed at Magnesia.2 Besides, the study of the Roman victories against Philip V and Perseus is more than sufficient for our purpose, given also the space limitation.
First of all, let's have a look at the effectiveness of the weapons and tactics used by the phalanx and the legion during the period of their confrontation. The main weapon of the phalangite was the sarissa, a spear which by that time extended up to 21 feet and it was held with both hands. According to Polybius, all the sarissae had the same length.3 Still, it has been suggested that the first four ranks of the phalanx were equipped with shorter spears of various lengths, from 9 to 18 feet, and that the 21-foot sarissae were carried by the additional twelve ranks.4 At any rate, the fact remains that the sarissa had a really long reach and could pierce the shields and breastplates of the legionaries who stood on its way, as it happened at Pydna.5 On the other hand, the sarissa was obviously a heavy and unwieldy weapon, unsuitable for fighting man to man;6 for this purpose the phalangites had a small sword.7 The men on the front lines carried shields but those at the rear most probably had either no shields at all or small and light ones slung across their chests;8 however, they proved to be inadequate protection against the Roman sword.9 This brings us to the next issue, Roman weaponry.
The main weapon of the legionary was the so-called Spanish sword (gladius), excellent for thrusting and hacking since its double-edged blade was very strong and firm.10 Livy describes very vividly the horrible wounds inflicted by the gladius and the shock of Philip's troops when they saw the maimed bodies of their dead comrades.11 The Roman soldier was armed also with a couple of special javelins (pila), a light and a heavy one; both of them were thrown against the enemy before contact was made. If it did not kill, the pilum could pierce a shield and, due to its design and construction, render it virtually useless.12 Concerning defensive equipment, the most important piece for the legionary was his large rectangular shield (scutum). The scutum left no parts of the body exposed and offered a high degree of protection against Macedonian arrows and short swords but not against sarissae, as it has been mentioned.13
According to Plutarch, the Roman consul Aemilius Paulus was terrified by the sight of the phalanx charging and sweeping everything before it at Pydna.14 It appears that the phalanx of the 2nd century BC was tightened up more than the original Macedonian phalanx and it was equipped with longer sarissae. The Macedonian battle formation was usually 16 men deep; the first five ranks had their sarissae levelled while the rest held them elevated so as to keep off the incoming missiles. In the close battle order of this later phalanx each man occupied half the width of a Roman soldier in formation. Thus, in a frontal attack one legionary had to face two phalangites and ten sarissae simultaneously;15 '... and it is both impossible for a single man to cut through them all in time once they are at close quarters and by no means easy to force their points away'.16 Another advantage of the phalanx was that - apart from the first and the rear ranks - it could be composed of half-trained men who just held their sarissae and pushed.17 So, it is obvious that the sarissa phalanx was a tight formation based on mass shock action and not on individual fighting. On the other hand, the Romans relied on tactical flexibility and skilled swordsmanship.
The legion of the Macedonian wars had a strength of 4,200 infantry and 300 cavalry. The light-armed troops (velites) numbered about 1,200. The heavy infantry was deployed in three successive lines, each one composed of a different kind of legionary. The 1,200 men on the front were the less heavily armored hastati; next came the 1,200 principes who were the best swordsmen of young age while the older soldiers, the 600 triarii, were placed at the back. The legion was broken up into smaller tactical units, the maniples, each one consisting of 120 men - except the maniples of the triarii which were 60 men strong. There were 30 maniples of heavy infantry in every legion positioned with intervals between them and arranged in a chequerboard formation; thus, each maniple covered the gap of the line in front of it. Usually, the legion marched into battle in this way.18
After skirmishing, the velites withdrew through the intervals between the maniples and regrouped behind the triarii. Then, the 10 maniples of the hastati came forward and formed a solid line; the legionaries hurled their pila, drew their swords and came to grips with their opponents, trying to exploit gaps in the enemy formation. If the hastati failed to breakthrough, they disengaged and retired through the 10 maniples of the principes. In their turn, the principes formed a solid line and attacked with pila and swords. If the enemy still held its ground, the principes were relieved similarly by the 10 maniples of the triarii. So, the legion kept its adversary under constant pressure by fresh troops. Depending on the circumstances this standard procedure, as well as the width, depth and disposition of the maniples, could be modified.19
Finally, both Macedonians and Romans used cavalry and/or allied troops to cover their flanks, as it is reported by the ancient accounts.
After this basic outline of the Macedonian and Roman fighting methods, a summary of the two great battles which virtually ended the effective military history of the phalanx is necessary. After some minor operations, the decisive battle of the 2nd Macedonian war took place in May 197 BC in Thessaly. King Philip V of Macedon had an army of approximately 16,000 phalangites, 7,500 other infantry and 2,000 cavalry. The Roman side, under the command of consul Titus Quinctius Flamininus, numbered about 18,000 Roman and Italian troops, 8,000 Greek allies - most of them Aetolians - 2,400 Roman, Italian and Aetolian cavalrymen and 20 elephants.
In a thick mist, the advanced forces of the opposing armies met each other unexpectedly on the Cynoscephalae hills. Both commanders sent reinforcements and the reconnaissance skirmish soon developed into a full-scale engagement. Philip, despite the unfavourable terrain and the fact that he had sent many of his men to collect fodder, accepted battle after receiving encouraging messages from the front line. The king, leading on the right wing the half of his phalanx that had formed up, charged downhill and pushed back the Roman left. Yet, Flamininus saw that most of the Macedonians on the left were still in marching order uphill or trying to deploy and immediately launched an attack with his right flank and the elephants against them. The disordered Macedonian left broke easily and fled pursued by Romans and Aetolians. In the meantime, the Roman left was being hardly pressed by the advancing phalanx. Then, an unknown tribune took 20 maniples from the victorious right flank and attacked the Macedonian right from the rear; the exposed phalangites suffered heavy casualties and they were finally routed. The Macedonians lost about 8,000 dead and 5,000 prisoners while the Roman side had 700 killed.20 This was the first time that the sarissa phalanx was defeated by the legion in a pitched battle.
Concerning the battle of Pydna not much is known from our ancient sources but possibly things happened as follows. The strength of king Perseus' army is estimated at 20,000 phalangites, 17,000 other infantry, an elite agema of 3,000 men and 4,000 cavalry. On the other side, consul Lucius Aemilius Paulus had at his disposal a force of about 37,000 Romans, Italians, Pergamenes and Numidians plus 34 elephants. In June 168 BC the two armies were met at Pydna in southern Macedonia and the fighting began accidentally over a stream. Initially, the charge of the phalanx was irresistible. The Macedonians advanced swiftly and after some fierce fighting the Romans made an orderly retreat towards rough ground. When the pursuing phalanx entered that area, it started to lose its cohesion and gaps were created in its long line. Realising this, Paulus ordered his legionaries to infiltrate in small groups wherever possible and fight many single combats at close quarters; thus, the phalanx gradually disintegrated. In the meantime, the Roman right had managed with a counter-attack supported by elephants to break the enemy left. On the other wing, Perseus with the main body of his cavalry had already fled. The remaining phalangites, being attacked now by all sides, were slaughtered; the 3,000 picked troops of the agema fell fighting to the last man. Within an hour everything was over. According to the sources the Macedonian losses were enormous, 20,000 killed and 11,000 captured. The Romans had only 100 dead.21
Regarding the causes of the Roman victories, Polybius wrote in his classical comment on Macedonian and Roman tactics that nothing could withstand the frontal charge of the phalanx as long as it preserved its characteristic formation.22 However, ' ... it is acknowledged that the phalanx requires level and clear ground with no obstacles such as ditches, clefts, clumps of trees, ridges and water courses, all of which are sufficient to impede and break up such a formation .... the Romans do not make their line equal in force to the enemy and expose all the legions to a frontal attack by the phalanx, but part of their forces remain in reserve and the rest engage the enemy. Afterwards whether the phalanx drives back by its charge the force opposed to it or is repulsed by this force, its own peculiar formation is broken up. For either in following a retreating foe or in flying before an attacking foe, they leave behind the other parts of their own army, upon which the enemy's reserve have room enough in the space formerly held by the phalanx to attack no longer in front but appearing by a lateral movement on the flank and rear of the phalanx .... the Macedonian formation is at times of little use and at times of no use at all, because the phalanx soldier can be of service neither in detachments nor singly, while the Roman formation is efficient. For every Roman soldier, once he is armed and sets about his business, can adapt himself equally well to every place and time and can meet attack from every quarter . He is likewise equally prepared and equally in condition whether he has to fight together with the whole army or with a part of it or in maniples or singly'.23
In this way Polybius clearly presented what was most likely to happen in every encounter between phalanx and legion. Having in mind the accounts of the battles at Cynoscephalae and Pydna, it is easy to understand that things happened exactly as Polybius had pointed out. The frontal assault of a coherent phalanx was devastating but in rough and uneven ground this formation could not work. Philip's left wing did not manage to form up in time and Perseus' entire phalanx was disordered because of the terrain. On the contrary, the manipular system enabled the legion to operate much more easily and disperse its attacks. The massive and cumbersome Macedonian formation was unable to protect itself when it was attacked on the flank or the rear by independently acting maniples and at close quarters the phalangites were generally no match for the better equipped and trained Roman swordsman.24
Another major factor that contributed to the defeat of the phalanx was the inadequate flank protection by the cavalry force. In contrast to earlier glorious periods, the Macedonians had neglected their cavalry and relied mostly on the sarissa phalanx, trying to maximize its shock action but not taking into account the disadvantages. It is surprising to see that Philip had only 2,000 troopers, half of them Macedonians, against an enemy which counted on maneuverability and outflanking in order to deal with the phalanx; on the contrary, it was the Roman and allied cavalry that proved to be superior. It is argued that, most possibly, the outcome of the wars would have been different if there had been a strong and efficient Macedonian cavalry force.25
The help of the allies in the Roman victories should also be mentioned. As it has been stated, much of the Roman army was composed of Greek, Italian or other troops. They provided an additional manpower used for a variety of purposes but especially concerning cavalry their contribution had been crucial. For example, the Aetolian troopers at Cynoscephalae performed excellently and prevented a general rout of the advanced Roman forces.26
Next, the elephants seem to have played an important role at the two great battles, smashing through the Macedonian left wing at Cynoscephalae and pushing back the enemy cavalry at Pydna before they were joined in the attack by the Roman forces that routed Perseus' left flank.27 The action of the elephants at those instances resulted in the opportunities that the legionaries awaited for and fully exploited, that is, gaps in the Macedonian line and the right conditions for outflanking.
Last but not least, the issue of leadership. It appears that in this aspect too the Romans had an advantage. Philip, although he had realized that neither the place nor the time were suitable, finally made the fatal mistake to engage with only part of his force at Cynoscephalae in order to support his skirmishers28 Furthermore, the phalangites on the left flank tried to catch up with the rest of the charging army 'having no one to give them orders'.29 This incident clearly indicates a break in the Macedonian chain of command. On the other hand, with the 'brilliant initiative of the military tribune' who hit the phalanx at the rear the Romans won a total victory.30 Finally, Perseus seems to have lost control of his army at Pydna and fled early in the battle; his overall performance was lamentable compared to the competence and bravery displayed by Aemilius Paulus.31
To sum up, the inherent weaknesses of the later Macedonian phalanx, the more flexible Roman tactics and better armament for hand to hand combat combined with the allied help, the effective use of elephants, the superiority in cavalry and the successful high and lower command resulted in the victory of the legion over the phalanx. It was time for a new master.
ANCIENT SOURCES
Titus Livius: Books XXXI-XLV.
Plutarch: Flamininus.
Plutarch: Aemilius Paulus.
Polybius: The Histories.
a bit about celtic warbands for the fanatics
hehe its my feast day fellow citizens
took me awhile to gewt this info up and running too bad i cant put pictures on
here we go
ANCIENT CELTIC WARFARE
hi, cum est usus atque aliquod bellum indicit – quod ante Caesaris adventum fere quotannis accidere solebat, uti aut ipsi iniurias inferrent aut inlatas propulsarent -, omnes in bello versantur . . .
Whenever the need arose and a war broke out – which as a rule happened every year before Caesars arrival that they either opened up hostilities themselves or had to defend against -, they all joined the battle . . . (Caesar, De Belli Gallico VI - 15,1)
Caesar may be a biased source, but his statement tells us a lot about the role of war in ancient Celtic society: it was an important part of life, primarily for the nobility, but, to a lesser degree, also for the average man. We see a similar picture if we take a look at the Irish or Welsh legends, where the heroes go off to fights, most often one at a time or in small groups, but often in the company of their followers and clients to fight mass battles.
A Short, Short History of Celtic Expansion and Retreat
Before we look into ancient Celtic warfare itself, it is necessary to define what time and geographical region I will be talking about. Even though Celtic culture developed probably some centuries earlier, the oldest material I’ll be discussing dates to the beginning of the 5th century BC in central Europe. From that point, the culture expanded until, in the 3rd century BC, it reached its greatest extent with Celts living in Ireland and Spain in the West and as far as Galatia in Asia Minor in the East. This was partly due to cultural exchange and peaceful transmission of ideas, partly due to massive military campaigns like that in northern Italy. From then on, however, the Celts began to lose ground. Starting even in the 3rd century BC, the Romans began to conquer the Celtic lands From the South . Only a little later, Germanic pressure increases from the Northeast. By the end of the 1st century BC, all the Celtic lands but the British Isles were conquered either by the Romans or had become germanised, either by a similar cultural exchange (like that when they became Celtic) or by force of arms. Most of Britain comes under Roman control less than a century later, leaving only what is modern Scotland and Ireland as Celtic territory. The end of what I think of as ancient Celtic culture came when Ireland was christianised in the 5th century BC, followed by Scotland soon after.
The "Typical" Celtic Warrior
To start with, the typical Celtic warrior was male. Even hints that armed females existed are extremely rare. Not a single instance of a female burial containing a shield or a sword has yet been uncovered. About 50 percent of the males, about 25% of the total population, were buried with weapons. Caesar, in his report about the Helvetian census, tells us that of about 350,000 people about 90,000 carried arms, which amounts to about 25% of the Helvetian population that decided to move into Gaul.
A Celtic warrior’s basic equipment consisted of a set of one to four spears. One was a 1.8 meters long fighting spear called a "lancea" that sometimes had very large spearheads of up to 50 centimetres in length. The others were shorter throwing spears called "gaesum" with relatively small, normally shorter than 10 centimetres long spearheads. A warrior also had a large—about 1.2 meter high and 0.5 meters wide—leather-covered, wooden shield with a metal shield-boss. This was likely to have been decorated with painting and sometimes metal ornamentation. With this basic equipment, the average warrior usually wore his everyday clothing consisting of trousers, a shirt, and a mantle.
A must for the Celtic noble, besides his torc (neck ring), was a long-sword with a blade-length of about 0.8 to 1 meter. Those from the early period had definite swordpoints, enabling them to be used for slashing and piercing. In the later period, these swords often had rounded points that allowed only slashing attacks. In rare cases, especially in finds from the eastern Celtic world, such swords had anthropomorphic handles, the pommel most often cast from bronze in the form of a human head. Additionally, the typical noble warrior probably wore armor and helmet, all made from leather. Depending on how rich they were, nobles might have equipment such as helmets, made from bronze or iron, often elaborately decorated with ornamentation and inlays of coral or even gold. Occasionally, the helmet might have additional embellishments such as the one from the famous find at Ciumesti, Romania, which has a figure of a raven with mobile wings fixed to its crest. That helmet must have been an impressive sight when the owner moved down the battlefield. Chainmail suits, covering the body down to the knees and, most often, leaving the arms free, were very rare, and, obviously affordable by only the wealthiest nobles.
The Celtic Battle-Chariot
Even though it was not used always and everywhere in the Celtic world, the battle-chariot is considered a very typical part of Celtic warfare. It was called a "carpentom" or similar term, and was a light, two-wheeled vehicle drawn by a pair of yoked horses, little more than four meters in length and less than two meters wide. The chariot consisted almost exclusively of organic material; the main metal parts were the iron tires and the iron fittings to strengthen the hubs. In some cases, metal rings and connectors were used to strengthen joints and flexible connections. What made the Celtic chariot so special, however, was that the chariot-platform was not fixed to the axle but hung free in a rope suspension. This made it a lot more comfortable to drive and a lot easier to fight from.
Usually two persons rode in the chariot. The charioteer sat in the open front of the chariot and actually drove. The warrior stood behind the charioteer and threw his spears from the chariot before alighting and fighting on foot. The charioteer stayed close enough to retrieve his warrior and carry him away from the battle if he were wounded or killed. This system is well documented in the Irish Ulster Cycle, as well as in the works of Roman and Greek historians.
Celtic Warrior Bands
Also quite typical among the Celts were warrior-bands like the Irish fianna or the Gaesates who fought in the Italian Wars against the Romans. Such warbands consisted mainly of young men led by charismatic leaders like the Irish Fionn Mac Cumhaill or the two kings of the Gaesates. The latter seem to have been used as high response troops in battle, according to the Roman sources. Most probably these groups had a religious dimension, requiring various initiation rituals for membership. They most probably enjoyed a special status in Celtic society. Members of these warrior bands probably were known for performing heroic feats. For example, historians recorded that the Gaesates fought naked in the battles in the Po valley in Italy where the Cisalpine Celts opposed the Romans. Most notably these warbands seem to have consisted mostly or even exclusively of infantry.
The Nature of Celtic Warfare
The Celts fought many battles. Some involved rather small numbers of combatants, but there were also mass battles in which at least tens of thousands or perhaps even hundreds of thousands participated, if we believe the numbers reported by various ancient historians. However, in contrast to the rigid Roman military organisation, Celtic warriors seem to have been much less used to fighting in formations and organized units. The records we have from ancient historians paint the picture of mostly unorganised groups. The ancient Celtic warriors engaged their enemy as if they would defeat them simply by overrunning them, trusting their brute force more than elaborate tactics and clever strategies. This may well be due to a trait of Celtic mentality, which valued individual prowess with arms and heroic feats more than fighting in tight groups and trusting in the combined power of many men in close military formations.
Military organisation seems to have been based, in case of the infantry, more on where one came from than the type of weapons one carried, although chariots and/or cavalry were set aside to fight together. The warbands, who were most likely the high response troops of the Celts, often formed the first line of the infantry, hurling themselves upon the enemy in the first assault.
In battles, the Celts also made use of what has been dubbed "psychological warfare." Before actually engaging the enemy, they are said to having made a horrible noise by clashing their weapons against their shields, crying and singing, with horns (carnyx) being blown and maybe drums being beaten. In the early period, these practices, together with the wild onslaught by the first lines of warriors, seems to have shocked Roman troops so that much that they simply gave way and fled from the field in fear for their lives. Also, before the actual fight, the Celtic war leaders paraded in front of their troops, performing heroic feats, proclaiming their own deeds, belittling their enemies, and challenging enemy leaders to duels. The results of these individual combats were apparently regarded as omens of the outcome of the battle.
However fierce that first onslaught, the ancient Celts had, according to the ancient historians, little endurance. If their first assault didn’t succeed, the Celtic forces were easy to defeat, or so the historians say. On the other hand, the historians might have been perpetuating the image of the Celts as barbarians by ascribing superior physical strength but less endurance to them, especially since endurance was regarded as one of the primary Roman virtues. Evidently, to actually defeat the Celts was not as easy as the ancient historians wanted their readers to believe, since quite a number of reports tell us that the Celts continued to fight valiantly to the end, even when the battle already was lost. Often the Celts were depicted as killing themselves and their close relatives rather than surrendering and being sold into slavery.
However, the most of the battles seem to have been rather small, involving only a few warriors on both sides. Most probably they occurred as a result of raids on neighbouring tribes, such as the raids mentioned by Caesar in the quote at the beginning of this essay, or in the Irish story of the cattle raid of Cooley. Raiding was a practice well-attested for the Irish as late as the 15th century CE. Of course, if such a raiding party were intercepted, a battle would result. We also should assume that raids were not limited to cattle but could well have targeted other valuables or slaves. Such raids, of course, brought retribution which could, of course, lead to larger military operations. Most such raids and military operations probably were taken up in late spring, when weather and agricultural necessities allowed for small and large military operations to take place.
Famous Battles and Statements of Ancient Celtic Warriors
During history, the Celts fought a number of famous battles that have been recorded by historians and, as such, have come down on us.
Immediately after their first appearance in written history, Celts came into military conflict with the Mediterranean world. After moving into the Po valley, they pushed back the Etruscans after probably defeating them in some battles. The Celts then celebrated what was probably their most famous victory. During a military campaign of the Celts against an Etruscan city in the year 390 or 387/386 BC, the Romans were called in as negotiators. During the talks, a Roman emissary killed one of the Celtic leaders. Understandably enraged, the Celts sent emissaries to Rome demanding that the murderer be handed over to them, but the Roman Senate decided not to heed their request. Upon hearing this, the Celts decided to march on Rome, defeated a Roman army on their way, and entered the city of Rome. The Romans had decided not to defend the city, but instead had retreated to the Capitol hill. The Celts lay siege to this hill for some time, until the Romans agreed to pay a high ransom. When the sum was collected, the Romans complained about the Celtic scales, claiming that they were not properly balanced. At this, a certain Brennos, leader of the Celtic army, threw his sword on the scales and exclaimed, "Vae victis" (Woe to the defeated). This defeat severely affected the Roman psyche, instilling a fear of Celtic troops marching on Rome that led them to take extreme measures as late as the 3rd century AD, when independent Celts had ceased to exist everywhere but in Scotland and Ireland, far away from Rome.
Alexander the Great encountered Celts when he arrived in the lower Danube during his campaign on the Balkans in the second half of the 4th century BC. On this occasion was made the famous statement that the Celts feared nothing but that the heavens might drop on their head; Alexander had expected to hear that they feared his military might.
In the early 3rd century BC, the Celts appeared in Greece, again led by someone named Brennos. The Celts attacked Delphi which, according to the sources, was defended successfully only because an earthquake hindered the Celts. The leader Brennos asked his close friends to kill him after he was seriously wounded in the battle. The bulk of the Celts retreated back north, but a group of them split off and crossed the Dardanelles to Asia Minor, where, after fighting a number of battles, they settled in central Anatolia.
From then on, however, the Celts were on the losing end. Northern Italy was lost during the 3rd century AD in a number of consecutive battles, the most famous of which probably was the one at Telamon in 225 BC. Though the Gaesates fought valiantly, the Celts were defeated.
In the years 58 to 52 BC Roman legions, led by Julius Caesar, conquered Gaul. In his commentary De Bello Gallico, Caesar described a number of battles that took place during this war. In the last years of the war against Rome, the Gauls more or less united under the leadership of an Avernian noble named Vercingetorix. Though Vercingetorix won some battles against Caesar (who was barely able to save his own life in the battle of Gergovia in 52 BCE), but he was finally defeated in the battle of Alesia in the same year. This effectively ended Gaulish independence.
In the second quarter of the 1st century AD the Romans conquered Britain as part of a number of relatively limited battles. The last of the famous Celtic battles for which there are records happened in Britain. First there was the rebellion under the leadership of Icenian queen Boudicca in 61 CE. Finally in the year 83 or 84 CE, the battle at Mount Graupius, assumed to be as far north as near Aberdeen in Scotland, where the Celts were defeated. This battle was the last time the Romans recorded encountering use of the Celtic chariot in battle.
From Ireland, the only records of battles are the myths, such as cattle-raid of Cooley in the Ulster Cycle. Since these are related only in the myths, we cannot be sure whether they were actual historical battles or completely belong to the realm of legend.
Conclusions
War and warfare definitely played an important role in ancient Celtic society. The nobility most probably was a warrior elite that spent considerable time training with weapons. For them, fighting and raiding were quite common occurrences. The client landowners most probably were also required to fight if and when the need arose, both to defend their own land and to attack enemies. Since they were involved in the production-cycle, they probably did not have as much training as the nobility and probably were less often involved in actual military conflicts.
do you want more info peeps??? just drop me line here
Salaam Khurram Sahib
That's very interesting. I am still reading through it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif , do you study history ? btw there is a history forum called Monastary here at .org
Thanks for those posts. I am sure I will have some questions once I get to finish reading everything (should happen during the course of this working day http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif )
Quote[/b] (SeljukSinan @ July 27 2003,19:08)]Salaam Khurram Sahib
That's very interesting. I am still reading through it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif , do you study history ? btw there is a history forum called Monastary here at .org
Thanks for those posts. I am sure I will have some questions once I get to finish reading everything (should happen during the course of this working day http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif )
hey bro thanx you like my thread
actually i work as military historian for us army and i write review thesis for the cadet studies
the reason i am posting it in this forum is to give all the restless souls here a chance to read about actual units and armies and people from thattime...makes a useful guide to measure the rtw units against
i will be posting more tomorrow as its pretty late here
Catiline
07-28-2003, 13:03
Good stuff, but it belongs in the Monastery, so I'm moving it htere...
very interesting stuff,thank you man.
Btw,what exactly is "reviewing thesis for the cadet studies"?
Interesting ... so, do you have more about thracians, dacians, numidians. I'm interested in your sources, too.
Quote[/b] (Macedon @ July 28 2003,01:23)]very interesting stuff,thank you man.
Btw,what exactly is "reviewing thesis for the cadet studies"?
lol i write papers to be used in military cadet scholls i.e on conflicts which have taken place and are raging atm.
a look at macedonian army which served as model for late greek states
just a little excursion into realms of military history as to how flexible were the phalanexes used by macedoneans compared to late greek states which fought against roman republic here we go
THE MACEDONIAN ARMY
For much of Classical history Macedonia was a back-water territory on the fringes of the Greek world. During the Persian Wars the Macedonian cavalry were forced to fight on the Persian side, and were defeated by the Greek’s at the battle of Plataea in 479 B.C. Little is known about Macedonian history before the time of Philip II, except for the continuous wars with various tribal enemies that surrounded them. The Macedonians were originally a Doric people who, through many generations of isolation from Greek culture tended to identify more with their tribal neighbors rather than the Greeks to the south, whom they felt were snooty and pompous. These neighbors included Paeonians, Triballians, Thracians, and Illyrians, all of these were tough barbarian tribes, difficult to contain let alone subdue. But the more enlightened Macedonians understood that they must eventually be able to compete with the expanding Greeks, as they were the real ultimate threat. Various Kings attempted to "Hellenize" the Macedonians, but this was mostly rejected by the Macedonian people and more importantly, the army. Yet suddenly, incredibly, in the middle of the fourth century B.C. the Macedonians became rulers of Greece and immediately thereafter conquered the huge Persian Empire. All of this can be attributed to the innovations and actions of one man, Philip II, who became king of Macedon in 359 BCE. Almost single handedly he turned the "Backward" Macedonians into the most organized and efficient fighting force the world had yet seen. Only his son, Alexander the Great was able to eclipse Philip’s fame with even more amazing feats of conquest.
This army forged by Philip and Alexander was centered around Philip’s own invention- the Macedonian Phalanx; a battle formation that was to dominate Mediterranean warfare for the next one hundred and fifty years. Armies that included Macedonian Phalanx's eventually dominated vast territories- from the fringes of India, throughout the former Persian Empire, Greece, and even Egypt formed armies based on serried ranks of pikemen. Finally one by one, the pike armies were eventually destroyed by the Roman Legions, which replaced the phalanx as the dominant fighting formation of ancient warfare.
PHILIP II OF MACEDON
In 359 BCE, Macedonia was thrown into disarray when their King (Perdiccas III) was killed in a battle with their old enemies the Triballians. Because Perdiccas’ son Amyntas was an infant, his brother Philip was made regent. Philip’s position was precarious indeed. Not only were there the usual tribal enemies surging on Macedon’s frontier borders, but the Greeks were once again trying to eat away at Macedonia’s weak frontiers. Athens was playing power politics in the Chersonese peninsula in an attempt to win back some of her empire and prestige lost in the Pelopponessian War. Almost directly to the south, the Thebans, by virtue of their great victories over Sparta by the military genius Epaminondas, were the "Hegemons" of Greece and at the peak of their military power.
As if these threats were not bad enough, Philip had to deal with five other claimants to the throne. (It appears that usually the last contender standing would be rewarded with the Macedonian crown!http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif. Philip’s energy and skills soon overpowered his rivals, and he quickly threw back the barbarians ravaging the countryside. The Macedonians were so impressed with this vigorous leadership that they acclaimed him King Philip II, dumping the young Amyntas.
South of Macedon, the ancient city of Thebes had gained control of Greece by the sheer will and presence of one man. Epaminondas of Thebes was the greatest general to come from the era of the Greek city state. He had re-invented tactics and by brilliant maneuvers and stratagems defeated even the lofty Spartans- destroying not only Sparta’s era of invincibility, but causing irreplaceable losses to her manpower. However at his crowning moment Epaminondas was killed in battle- leading his Thebans in battle at Mantinea in 362 B.C. Without Epaminondas’ savvy leadership the Thebans were not able to hold onto their gains and almost immediately Greece began to fragment once more into city state squabbling. Philip knew Epaminondas well as he was a hostage to the Theban Oligarchy when he was fifteen. Being able to learn first hand the revolutionary tactics of the Thebans was very fortunate, not having to face a general of Epaminondas’ quality was probably the key factor that allowed Philip’s run of luck, guile, and brashness that eventually allowed him to conquer and become "Hegemon" of all Greece. Ultimately this prepared the way for Philip’s son Alexander, to become the west’s most famous conqueror.
REFORMING THE ARMY
Philip II inherited a polyglot army of Royal guardsmen, tribal levies and noble cavalrymen. He had already been reorganizing the army since his return from Thebes in 364 B.C. , but shortly after consolidating his reign, he could muster 600 Cavalry and 10,000 foot. The Macedonian cavalry were notably his best troops and were called Companions. Unlike the skirmishing cavalry favored by most Greek states, the Macedonian Companions preferred to fight as shock troops and wore armor, greaves, helmets, and carried a nine foot thrusting spear called a Xyston. The Agema Companions (Royal Guard), were the Kings own bodyguard and numbered 300. Philip recruited many of these from the lesser nobility obviously as a hedge to the other "nobles". Philip’s army in many ways reflected the politics of Macedonian society and he strove to consolidate his power by re-inventing his army.
The Macedonian infantry force was another matter. Aside for the Hypaspists (shield bearers), the territorial levies of infantry originally were somewhat unreliable troops. For the most part it is known that they sometimes fought in Greek style phalanxes but were most comfortable and useful as peltasts and favored "hunting" style tactics and equipment . The Agema Hypaspists were more seasoned and reliable troops. These became Philip’s "Royal" bodyguards and they were constantly kept mustered, unlike the rest of the Macedonian foot troops. The new Macedonian King knew that his task of consolidating his position in Macedon would one day lead to conflict with Athens, Thebes, and even Sparta, thus he would need a force of infantry that could match the discipline and drill of the Hoplites that these City States could field. Philip set about to reorganize the drill and training of his army, this "momentous innovation" was unheard of at the time. He forced all of his army to learn complex tactical maneuvers, he ordered them to go on 35 mile marches with full packs and provisions, and he outlawed baggage carts that would slow down his army. The number of slaves and retainers was reduced to the bare minimum to keep this new army lean on the march. He delivered inspiring speeches to his weary and tired troops. All in all his efforts were similar to putting his whole army through boot camp
Philip, like the Romans later on, had a knack for copying things from others and then improving upon them and creating a revolutionary new style of warfare. As a hostage of Thebes he was exposed to the innovations of Epaminondas’ and grasped how the "oblique order" of Thebans tactics was the key factor in their defeats of Spartan Hoplite armies. (the historian and general Xenophon preferred to blame Spartan drunkenness on their disasters!http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif. Not only did these "tactics" confound the foe but the Thebans also preferred to fight in phalanxes of much greater depth than the usual Greek battle line. This allowed the less fighting skilled, and trained Thebans to put enormous pressure on one spot of the enemy line, and in fact allowed them to break through even the Spartan Guards and then roll up the Spartan phalanx from the flank. This knowledge obviously had an impact upon him as he changed the Macedonian tactics to mirror this oblique order, only instead of leading from the left as the Thebans did, the Macedonians would punch from the right flank and drive a wedge into the enemy lines with their Companion cavalry. Not only did Philip copy Theban tactics, but he increased the depth of his infantry formations to give them added punch and moral stamina. Philip was also well versed with "Thessalian tactics" which was a well known ruse used by disciplined troops to feign flight and then turn upon a straggling pursuing force (the Spartans used this ruse famously at the battle of Thermopylae).
The other innovation that completed this brilliant "New-Model" army was the lengthening of the infantryman’s spear to 12-15 foot length. This idea was copied from the famous Greek Mercenary General Iphicrates who had created a body of specialized troops of lightly armored, but well drilled pikemen that were trained to fight in a looser formation than traditional Hoplites. These "Iphicrataean" Hoplites were most famous for being involved in the destruction of a Spartan Mora (regiment) of 600 Hoplites at the battle of Coronaea in 300 B.C. The combination of these two changes in armament not only gave the Macedonian footmen a reach advantage over their spear armed Hoplite foes, but also greater depth in the Macedonian phalanx gave them the morale boost needed to stand up to and defeat the barbarian tribesmen currently threatening Macedon, and later the Greek Hoplites themselves. Because of Philip’s innovations the pike phalanx became a dominant style of warfare, one that would be copied and used by many ancient armies for the next two hundred years.
Organization of the Macedonian Phalanx
The Macedonian army Philip inherited seemed to be based on the common Doric and barbarian division by ten man files. Sometime during or shortly after Philip’s reign almost all units in his army were restructured on a more "Greek-like" 8 man file. Officers fought to the front and brought up the rear of each file. Eventually the base unit of the Pezhetairoi (foot Companions as they became known) evolved into the 256 man Syntagma formation that most ancient sources describe. A Syntagma was formed 16 ranks wide by 16 ranks deep for most situations. Two of these composed a 512 man Lochos. By Alexander’s time three Lochoi would form a Taxeis or battalion of nominally 1536 men and officers. The Taxi was led by a "Taxiarch" and some of these became Alexander’s best known officers.
Besides re-arming and re-structuring the infantry force, Philip’s insisted on drilling his troops to a degree unheard of in Greece (except maybe in Sparta). This was most effective for him since in 356 B.C. he had secured the gold mines of Mount Pangaeus which gave him a huge revenue of 1000 talents per year which allowed him to keep his army on constant operations. Except in Sparta where their warrior society was slowly attempting to rebuild their numbers of diminished Spartiates, the Greek armies were at best militia forces brought together for a campaign then disbanded in winter to tend their crops and businesses. The Greeks abhorred the expense of training their troops, and keeping them in the field for year long operations was rare, one reason why Greek sieges were usually failures. Philip changed this forever by paying his troops. He could keep them mustered and the trained cadre of his formations were always under arms to indoctrinate the new recruits. Although not the first professional army in history, the Macedonians again would prove that trained, highly drilled veterans would prove to be more than a match for their unprepared foes.
It appears that the pike armed, 16 man deep formation was quite maneuverable when compared with the Greek Phalanx. The self contained Syntagmas were able to face to the rear, or face to any flank reasonably quickly by counter marching. In emergencies the phalanx could about face, but this is undesirable as it would leave the officers at the rear. Phalangites gripped their Sarissas (pikes) in two hands and raised them when marching or maneuvering. Because of this they carried a smaller shield than the Greek Hoplite’s Hoplon. This shield was bronze faced but didnt have the broad rim that could rest on the shoulder, instead it had straps that slung it over their backs and around their necks. The Pezhetairoi would carry their shield on their backs when not in use but could swing them around quickly when close to action.
The Phalangite wore a helmet, most commonly of the Thracian style popular at the time, the two foot bronze faced shield, and the Sarissa. The front rankers possibly wore heavy armor, either composite style Hoplite cuirasses, or Muscle cuirasses of bronze. Other ranks may have been unarmored as Arrian many times relates that Alexander took "the lightest armed of the Phalanx" on many of his fast marches. After being repulsed at the Persian Gates, Alexander threatened to only replace the Phalangites lost armor with half-corselets covering only the front- so they would be less likely to turn their backs next time Many would have worn bronze greaves on their legs, although most wouldn’t be able to afford the form fitted kind, but cheaper models secured by straps. Much of the armor was made of iron, and some armor was silvered. When the army received new armor in preparation for the invasion of India the old cuirasses were burned, implying they were composite linen panoplies. It is speculated that the Phalangites wore red tunics. Helmets were often painted blue, red or silvered. Sometimes designs or wreaths were painted on. Stars bursts and crescents seemed to be the favored shield designs of infantrymen. It is very possible that helmets displayed battalion colors.
The Phalanx’s tactics were based on it’s weapons and formation. The men formed up with a spacing of one yard per man. Up to three and maybe four ranks of spear points could stick out through the front of the unit which was usually the 16 x 16 man Syntagma. The back ranks would hold their pikes at a forty five degree angle which helped deflect arrows and also gave the formation an imposing height on the battlefield. Since six Syntagma were arrayed in line, a 1536 man Taxei would cover a front of a little over 100 yards. In some circumstances the phalanx would close up to 8 ranks deep and halve each man’s space. This "locked shields’ formation made the phalanx ponderous to move but almost impossible to close with frontally. However this formation could only move forward and was unable to quickly react to flank threats.
Philip and Alexander’s Phalangites marched onto the battlefield in complete silence with pikes held upright. Once closer to the enemy the Pikemen would swing their shield into place with a loud clang. The Phalanx would finally level their pikes and then charge, yelling their war cry to Ares, ‘Alalalalai" This sudden outburst of noise after a silent advance must have been unsettling to all but the most steady troops.
Even so this formidable mass of men with a seemingly impenetrable wall of Sarissas was actually a defensive force and not expected to deliver the decisive stroke in a Macedonian victory. Although the phalanx could be arrayed in depths up to 16 men deep, it’s strength was in it’s wall of spears creating a long barrier that pinned the enemy in place. This wall of pikes could cover the deployment of reserves or create a base from which the Macedonian cavalry could spring out into gaps that the enemy would create when trying to reach around to the flanks of the Macedonian line. Cavalry were unable to close with a well ordered phalanx from the front at all, and rarely even attempted to hit it’s flank or rear even when such opportunities were presented. The phalanx was accustomed to light troops moving in and out through its files to screen it from enemy skirmishers, or seek the protection behind the pike units.
Later descriptions of the phalanx give it the capacity to form into many shapes based on current threats. Thus the Phalanx could form a hedgehog for all around defense against cavalry, or it could open lanes and allow chariots to drive harmlessly through. Wedges could be formed , or crescents, in effect the phalanx was drilled to be able to execute these measures quickly and with a minimum of confusion. For a period of 30 years during Alexander’s and Philip’s campaigns, the Macedonian phalangites and Hypaspists became the most drilled and seasoned infantry the world had yet seen. Later generations of Phalanx’s retained the same armament and tactics but declined in quality of drill and experience becoming more ponderous and inflexible, especially in the hands of generals who miss-interpreted the lessons of Alexander’s victories.
The Phalanx was always susceptible to disorder on hilly or broken ground and especially so in "locked shield" formation. It is not clear whether the phalanx pushed their foes like a rugby scrum, or used their spears to pin the enemy front ranks while others behind attempted to pierce at the enemy unprotected faces and underarms. Polybius’ description of the opening of the battle of Pydna in 168 B.C. tells us how an allied Roman contingent of Peligni was overthrown by a phalanx, sticking their spears into their shields and pushing them back. But we’ll save this for later.
The Hypaspists
Unfortunately the armament of the Hypaspists (shield-bearers) is not well documented. However we are given plenty of descriptions of their role in the Macedonian army. They are, to say the least, some of the most flexible troops in any ancient army. They could form up in a phalanx with armor and pikes, or carry thrusting spears and javelins and skirmish with equal skills. They were constantly involved in raids or forced marches to pursue the enemy or grab key objectives. Philip taught the Hypaspists how to maneuver with their pikes as his adopted brother Iphicrates had taught his peltasts. The Hypapsists were capable of retiring in the face of an enemy then reforming and charging over eager pursuers. In Alexander’s great battles the Hypaspist regiments would form on the right flank of the phalanx, there superior maneuverability allowed them to keep closer to his decisive Companion Strikes into the guts of the enemy line.
The Three regiments of Hypaspists consisted of a thousand men each. The Premier Regiment or Agema (Guards) was composed the most seasoned veterans in the Macedonian army. Although lesser nobles sons that couldn’t afford horses would become Guardsmen, the regiments were kept up to strength by transfers from the phalanx. Later on in Alexander’s campaigns some the Hypaspists were given silver shields and armor which then caused them to be called the Argyaspids. These troops became as famous in antiquity as Caesar’s Tenth legion, or as Napoleon’s Old Guard is to us now.
The Macedonian Cavalry
The new Macedonian army was from the very first a "combined arms force". Unlike the Greeks who relied on their Hoplite Infantry almost totally, the Macedonians, up to the time of Philip, had always relied on the irresistible charge of their noble cavalry to carry the day. But Philip knew that cavalry alone could make little headway against the Hoplite shield wall. His efforts to create a solid infantry phalanx made his Companion cavalry even more effective, as he learned to use the phalanx as a screen for his horsemen or as a solid wall to pivot around and find the enemy flanks, or find gaps in their battleline that they could quickly dash through. The small squadrons of 200-300 horsemen in highly maneuverable wedges could quickly face in any direction an either exploit enemy weaknesses and flanks, or scurry back to the protection of the infantry if things got tight. There are many descriptions of the Macedonian wedges "breaking up" formations of much larger (and more heavily armored) enemies time and time again.
The main thing that set Macedonian cavalry apart from all their contemporary foes was their desire to close in hand to hand combat. During this period most cavalry forces had given up bows but many still used javelins as their main weapon and closed with hand axes or swords for the brief and uncomfortable "melees". The Companions used the nine foot long Xyston made of stout cornel wood. Aside from the point the back end had a useful butt spike that was used when the spear shattered during the initial clash. Macedonian cavalrymen weren’t shy about using their Kopis (cutting swords) when their spears were rendered useless. A weapon which is vividly described as being able to cleave through a shoulder and lop off an arm clean.
When Philip inherited Thessaly during the "Sacred War" he also gained access to Thessalian cavalrymen who were the best horsemen in Greece. They were similarly armed as the Companions but they also seemed to use javelins equally. They preferred the Rhombus over the wedge as it was perfectly suited for their "Thessalian" tactics of fire turn in place and retire. Just like a wedge the Rhombus had an officer on each apex, when the formation right/left or about faced then all they had to do was follow the officer who now led the whole squadron.
Besides these "Heavies", the Macedonian army relied on numerous units of light cavalry as scouts, skirmishers, and battle cavalry. The most famous units of these were the Prodomoi (scouts) and Sarissaphaori (Lancers). The scouts regiments were crack units of Paeonian and other horsemen usually led by Macedonian Officers. Their role was to cover the deployment of the army, chase off enemy scouts, and find the enemy. In most of Alexander’s battles they fight in the opening stages of the battle to delay, harass with javelins, and break up the enemy charges. In the pursuit of defeated foes they were swift and relentless.
The Sarissaphaori squadrons were similar to the scouts, however they became known as the "Lancers" because they were armed with pikes. This unusual armament is unique to Alexander’s army, and, although described as effective overthrowing foes many times their number, no later army seems to have used this type of troop again. After this period it did become common for heavy cavalry to adopt the longer spear which became known as the Kontos which is just another name for a cavalry pike. It is interesting that Alexander is depicted using a sarissa on horseback also, although this isn’t described in the written histories. It is possible that the lancers were Alexander’s "pet" regiment and thus he favored being depicted as one in paintings or on statues—much like later Cavalrymen would like to adopt the garb of the dashing Hussars. For some time these Lancers were thought to have been recruited from Thrace, where other Lancer cavalry originated, but they could also have been composed of Macedonians as well, or even mixed. The Macedonian army was a very diversified force, it’s hard to fathom with so many different languages and troop types the army could have cooperated at all
The other Cavalry units in the army were composed of Thracian, Odrysian, and even some Illyrian horsemen. These were mostly skirmishing types armed with javelins, but many of them could stand up to a hand to hand fight on occasions. Alexander had some Greek light cavalry, and one unit of Greek heavy cavalry supplied to him for the Persian invasion. The rest of the cavalry were mercenaries, either light or heavy.
One part of the Macedonian army is often overlooked, these were the Royal pages and Grooms that formed ad hoc regiments on the battlefield. Similar to the role of Squires, these young men’s duties were to serve the Royal camp, and to learn the ways of becoming a Macedonian officer or guardsman. On the battlefield they hung back behind the lines and provided re-mounts for the heavy cavalry. On one occasion the pages rounded up and destroyed enemy chariots that had broken through the battleline., but normally they rounded up stragglers, delivered messages, and probably guarded prisoners.
The large and maneuverable Macedonian cavalry force was the perfect complement to the massive but slower moving phalanx. When Philip began his wars of conquest in 359 B.C. he started with 600 cavalry out of a total of 10,000 troops, by 331 B.C. at Gaugamela, Alexander was able to field about 7500 horsemen, which was almost exactly 25% of his total force, a massive amount of cavalry by Greek army standards.
Peltasts and Archers and other Mercenaries
The unusual thing about the rise of the Macedonian army was that all aspects of the army were reorganised at once, especially the missile support and light infantry. In the past, new tactics or new ways of equipping troops came sporadically and focused on one type of troop in an army at a time. Iphicrates was able to fight tradition and create a new peltast style of fighting that became more popular in Greece- but this was going against the grain of Greek tradition. His new style troops defeated the Spartans in a running fight and the "Iphicratean" mercenaries became sought out and employed as mercenaries, especially in Persia. Epaminondas showed that cavalry and light troops had a role in pitched battles even against the most disciplined Hoplites. Further in the past there were anecdotal instances where light forces had beaten heavy troops all on their own. During the Peloponnesian War, Athenian light infantry had forced Spartan Hoplites to surrender at Spacteria island. The disasterous Athenian rout at the hands of Aetolian skirmishers in 426 B.C. further showed that heavy troops needed to have plenty of skirmishers and missile troops of their own to keep these Psiloi at bay, especially in rugged terrain where phalanxes had difficulty.
Philip, absorbed all these lessons of military history (unlike most ancient generals) and began to create through alliances and hiring mercenaries a strong light infantry screen and missile support for his heavy troops. He at once gained close ties with Crete and hired their archers, who were the best in Greece. They used a composite bow and fired a broad bladed arrow. Cretans are noted as wearing red tunics. They also carried shields, unusual for archers, and were noted for their ability to go hand to hand with enemy light troops---something that must have been rare for other archers. Cretans were also noted for being into everybody else’s business. Philip created a mercenary archer regiment which became known as the "Macedonian archers". But Macedon isnt famous for it’s archery heritage, so these fellows were probably recruited from other provinces.
The close proximity to Thrace meant that Macedon was constantly at war with them. Many Thracians also fought on the Macedonian side as allies or mercenaries. In earlier days the Thracian carried small semi-circular or round wicker shields called Peltas, hence their name. Greek light skirmishers without shields were driven off by the showers of javelins from these Peltasts and a number of Hoplite armies suffered from the inability to close with them in hand to hand. Peltasts had become a standard troop type in all Greek armies by the time of Philip. Many Thracian Peltasts carried an unusual weapon called a Rhomphaia which was a sickle shaped blade attached to a pole, apparently there was a longer and heavier version which was wielded in two hands and was as effective as an axe. The Thracians in the Macedonian army wore helmets and now carried a larger oval shield called a Thureos, some of them still wore their long decorated cloaks as seen on Classical Greek vase art, but most now wore regular tunics for practical day to day mercenary work.
The most important light infantry contigent in the Macedonian army were the Agrianians. Alexander had a small body of these- usually less than a thousand strong but their effectiveness far exceeded their numbers. They were related to the Paeonians but were hillmen rather than horsemen. Noted for their fierce hand to hand charges and their accurate javelin fire these troops were the first line, screening the "heavies" from harassing enemy skirmishers, chariots and other threats. The Agrianians are described as having tatooed bodies like the Celts, and they also dyed their beards blue. They carried swords, a thureos shield, and a bundle of cornel wood javelins. Some Agrianians also served as slingers.
Throughout Alexander’s campaigns he constantly created "task forces’ for lightning raids, and the Agrianians were always picked to join the guardsmen and the cavalry on these missions. The Agrianians stuck close to the Companions and would infiltrate into their melees and pull the enemy horsemen from their mounts.
Solid infantry combined with numerous elite cavalry made the Macedonian army a formidible foe, but the addition of crack units of light infantry made this army the first ever to have a true combined arms force. This made the Macedonians the most flexible army up to that time, and in the hands of extremely capable generals like Philip, Alexander, Antipater, and Antigonus almost unbeateable
ROMAN ARMY CONTINUED
here is some more historical info about auxiliaries who fought with romans
The auxilia
The service conditions
The imperial Roman army continued the republican tradition of supplementing the citizen legions with units recruited from peregrini, non-citizens from conquered or allied communities. In the imperial army the total numerical strength of the various auxiliary formations was roughly comparable to that of the legionary troops. These forces were known as socii or auxilia and were composed of both regular and irregular formations. Many modern works distinguish regular auxilia consisting of cohortes and alae from irregular numeri. This present day division disregards the fact that irregular units could be designated as a cohors and that numerus was a very generic term which was also in general use for regular army units. As in the legiones draftees and volunteers served side by side in the auxiliary forces. With the spread of Roman citizenship among the population of the conquered territories the auxilia were increasingly recruiting citizens into the ranks, blurring the original division between peregrine auxiliaries and citizen legionaries.
The imperial auxilia were composed of a variety of units. Infantry units were generally organised in cohorts that in the case of cohortes equitatae could include a small mounted force. Cavalry was usually formed into alae or 'wings'. Both cohortes and alae could comprise either quingenaria units of approximately 500 man or milliaria formations of 800-1000 soldiers. Infantry cohorts with a mounted contingent had an additional 120 to 250 cavalry troopers. Infantry cohorts were composed of three to five manipuli of each two centuriae. Cavalry alae counted 16 to 24 turmae of 30-40 mounted soldiers. Auxiliary formations were usually commanded by a praefectus cohortis or praefectus alae, though a tribunus cohortis or legionary centurio was occasionally employed. Some of these commanders were drawn from the tribal aristocracy, though most were recruited from the equestrian order. Command of a cavalry alae was only entrusted to men who had previously served as a praefectus cohortis and legionary tribunus. The infantry subunits had similar officers and NCO's as their legionary counterparts. Cavalry turmae were placed under a decurio instead of a centurion. Legionaries were regularly transferred to act as officers and NCO's in the units of the auxilia.
Units in the auxiliary forces carried like the legions a number and a title. The numbering of units followed different patterns and partly reflected the order in which troops had been levied. The names of units varied greatly, many like cohors I Batavorum being derived from the tribe that provided the original levies, others reflecting the armament, e.g. the ala I contariorum, or honouring a former commander, for example ala Siliana. Redeployment of units and the Roman practice of local recruitment of replacements meant that the ethnic titles borne by formations did not reflect the actual origins of its soldiers.
The infantry of the auxilia consisted mainly of soldiers trained and equipped to fight in a way comparable to that of the legionary heavy infantry. In addition to these existed specialised formations of light infantry adept at fighting in a looser order. Units of archers formed a large proportion of the available auxiliary forces. The alae were for the larger part made up of medium cavalry suited for both skirmishing and shock tactics. Formations of mounted archers were also much employed. A minority of the cavalry units were composed of heavy cavalry troopers armed with the contus, a two handed cavalry spear. These soldiers and some of their mounts as well were heavily armoured. In at least part of the medium cavalry alae a number of troopers used to fight as horse archers or heavy cavalry giving the unit a wider range of combat capabilities.
From the auxiliary units of a provincial army a number of soldiers were selected for service in the singulares of the governor's guard. Infantrymen from the cohorts were grouped in the pedites singulares while horsemen from both cohortes equitatae and alae were brigaded in the equites singulares. Both units were trained and commanded by legionary centuriones. The strength of these guard formations was probably related to the numbers of troops deployed in a province. The fact however that regular army formations like the ala singularium were formed from such elite units seems to indicate a strength of approximately 500 for both infantry and cavalry singulares. As promotions in the Roman army were as much depending on personal relations as on merit, men serving in the governor's guard could look forward to better army careers.
The service conditions
There is much debate on the actual service conditions enjoyed by soldiers serving in the auxilia. Recently published evidence seems to indicate that basic pay under the principate was either 1/6th part less or even equal to that of the legionaries. Auxiliaries were also included in the occasional distribution of donativa. These similar service conditions help explain why legionary soldiers were transferring freely to posts in auxiliary units. An important service condition for non-citizens enlisted in the auxilia was the grant of Roman citizenship. Generally this was awarded after 25 years of service, though on occasion grants were made during service as a reward for bravery in battle. An additional retirement grant of money for the auxilia is very likely, though the evidence available is ambiguous. The often cited difference in dimensions of the living space between the larger bases of legions and the smaller frontier forts may not have served to accentuate status differences between the legions and auxiliaries. Not only were legionary soldiers regularly stationed in the smaller forts, but the larger forts were also in part garrisoned by units of the auxilia.
ROMAN ARMY CONTED
The imperial guard
The praetorian guard
The imperial horse guard
The Roman emperor had several guard units at his disposal. The most important of these were the cohortes praetoriae or praetorian guard. During the reign of the Julio-Claudian dynasty the Germani custodes corporis or German bodyguard provided additional security. From the accession of Traianus the equites singulares Augusti recruited among the auxiliary cavalry formed the emperor's horse guard. The majority of these men served as guards, i.e. picked troops, rather than bodyguards directly watching over the person of the emperor. These elite forces at the emperor's immediate disposal formed the nucleus of the field armies assembled for imperial military expeditions. Smaller numbers of soldiers were selected among the guard units for personal protection duties.
The praetorian guard
Under the republic Roman generals had usually formed a guard unit named cohors praetoria after the praetorium or HQ. Under the empire such units became a privilege reserved for the emperor under whose auspicia all military operations were conducted. Augustus originally formed nine numbered cohortes praetoriae consisting of both infantry and cavalry billeted at Rome and some other Italian cities. This number was later raised to ten units and the cohorts were concentrated in a large base adjacent to Rome. Command of the praetorian guard was entrusted to one or two equestrian praefecti praetorio. Three additional cohortes urbanae with a similar structure were also present at Rome, but not under the direct control of the praetorian prefects.
A praetorian cohort consisted of approximately 500 infantrymen organised in manipuli and centuriae and under the overall command of a tribunus. This strength was doubled in the course of the first century AD. The majority of praetorians fought as heavy infantry with smaller numbers acting as light infantry lancearii and archers. Added to these foot soldiers each cohort contained a number of cavalrymen. The combined equites praetoriani numbered at least 400 men and may even have been a thousand strong. Other troopers were known as equites speculatores and served as bodyguards to the emperor. The praetorian cohort that guarded the imperial palace and accompanied the emperor in the city of Rome was known as the cohors togata. As their duties were performed within the pomerium, the sacred boundary of the city, these soldiers could not wear full armour and equipment and therefore dressed in civilian togae, though keeping their swords at hand.
Service conditions in the praetorian cohorts were better than in the legions. Pay was substantially higher and donativa were more frequent. The term of service of sixteen years compared favourably to the 20 to 25 years in the legions. Promotion opportunities were also excellent. A large part of the legionary posts as centurio was filled by former praetorian guardsmen. The cohortes praetoriae recruited originally in Italy and the older coloniae in the provinces, though at times legionaries were transferred to the guard. From the reign of Septimius Severus the transfer of picked legionaries became the usual method of filling the ranks of the praetorian guard.
The praetorian guard originally served as the backbone of field armies assembled for campaigns that involved the emperor, one of his relatives or a praefectus praetorio. Contrary to popular opinion this meant that the Rome based soldiers had a fair chance of being involved in combat either against the barbarians from across the borders or rebellious Roman army units. Despite the increase in the establishment strength of the praetorian cohorts the guards were increasingly complemented by other formations. In the course of the third century AD the cohortes praetoriae in the comitatus, the imperial field army, were regularly supplemented by mobile troops from the legio II Parthica based at Albanum in Italy. Vexillationes of elite legionaries and auxiliaries from the frontier armies joining these core formations in the imperial field army were slowly developing into separate units that were permanently attached to the imperial retinue.
The imperial horse guard
The citizen guardsmen of the praetorian cohorts had their counterpart in the originally non-citizen horse guards. These consisted in the Julio-Claudian era of the Germani custodes corporis disbanded after Nero and the later equites singulares Augusti. Both these units were also known as Batavi after the tribal origin of many imperial horse guards. Members were usually recruited from the alae and cohortes equitatae, though at times men were directly recruited. The centuriones exercitatores or cavalry training officers for the imperial horse guard were however not drawn from the auxilia, but were selected from the legionary cavalry. The strength of the horse guard was approximately a thousand troopers, a number doubled by Septimius Severus. The organisation of the horse guard resembled that of the cavalry in the auxilia with turmae commanded by decuriones. An equestrian tribunus functioned as overall commander of the imperial horse guards.
well peeps thats enough for today??? if not just strike here lol i will be posting more later on
Heraclius
07-29-2003, 00:20
great stuff, i'm nowhere closed to finish but I'm getting there. thanks for the info. say, you wouldn't happen to have a little bit on the Byzantine Army would you? if not no problem. thanks for the articles m8.
Sjakihata
07-29-2003, 00:54
Thank you, very good articles.
also check this link http://www.warscholar.com/Links/AncientArmiesLinks.html
Tactics
Roman Tactics
Information about tactics can be derived from accounts of battles, but the very military manuals known to have existed and to have been used extensively by commanders, have not survived. Perhaps the greatest loss is the book of Sextus Julius Frontinus. But parts of his work were incorporated in the records of the historian Vegetius.
The importance of the choice of ground is pointed out.
There is an advantage of height over the enemy and if you are pitting infantry against cavalry, the rougher the ground the better. The sun should be behind you to dazzle the enemy. If there is strong wind it should blow away from you, giving advantage to your missiles and blinding the enemy with dust.
In the battle line, each man should have three feet of space, while the distance between the ranks is given as six feet.
Thus 10'000 men can be placed in a rectangle about 1'500 yards by twelve yards, and it was advised not to extend the line beyond that.
The normal arrangement was to place the infantry in the centre and the cavalry on the wings. The function of the latter was to prevent the centre from being outflanked and once the battle turned and the enemy started to retreat the cavalry moved forward and cut them down. - Horsemen were always a secondary force in ancient warfare, the main fighting being done by the infantry.
It was recommended that if your cavalry was weak it was to be stiffened with lightly armed foot soldiers.
Vegetius also stresses the need for adequate reserves. These could prevent an enemy from trying to envelope one's own forces, or could fend off enemy cavalry attacking the rear of the infantry.
Alternatively, they could themselves move to the sides and perform an enveloping manoeuver against an opponent.
The position to be taken up by the commander was normally on the right wing.
The wedge was commonly used by attacking legionaries, - legionaries formed up in a triangle, the front 'tip' being one man and pointing toward the enemy, - this enabled small groups to be thrust well into the enemy and, when these formations expanded, the enemy troops were pushed into restricted positions, making hand-to-hand fighting difficult. This is where the short legionary gladius was useful, held low and used as a thrusting weapon, while the long Celtic sword became impossible to wield.
The saw was opposite tactic to the wedge. This was a detached unit, immediately behind the font line, capable of fast sideways movement down the length of the line to block any holes which might appear to develop a thrust where there might be a sign of weakness.
Here are seven specific instructions by Vegetius regarding the layout before battle:
1 On level ground the force is drawn up with a centre, two wings and reserves in the rear. The wings and reserves must be strong enough to prevent any enveloping or outflanking manoeuvre.
2 An oblique battle line with the left wing held back in a defensive position while the right advances to turn the opponent's left flank. Opposition to this move is to strengthen your left wing with cavalry and reserves, but if both sides are successful the battle front would tend to move in an anti-clockwise direction, the effect of which would vary with the nature of the ground. With this in mind it is as well to attempt to stabilize the left wing with the protection of rough or impenetrable ground, while the right wing should have unimpeded movement.
3 The same as No 2 except that the left wing is now made the stronger and attempts a turning movement and is to be tried only when it is known that the enemy's right wing is weak.
4 Here both wings are advanced together, leaving the centre behind. This may take the enemy by surprise and leave his centre exposed and demoralized. If, however, the wings are held, it could be a very hazardous manoeuvre, since your army is now split into three separate formations and a skillful enemy could turn this to advantage.
5 The same tactic as No 4, but the centre is screened by light infantry or archers who can keep the enemy centre distracted while the wings engage.
6 This is a variation of No 2 whereby the centre and left wing are kept back while the right wing attempts a turning movement. If it is successful, the left wing, reinforced with reserves, could advance and hop to complete the enveloping movement which should compress the centre.
7 This is the use of suitable ground on either flank to protect it, as suggested in No 2
All these tactics have the same purpose , that of breaking the enemy battle line. If a flank can be turned, the the strong centre has to fight on two fronts or is forced to fight in a restricted space. Once an advantage like this has been gained it is very difficult to correct the situation. Even in the highly trained Roman Army it would have been difficult to change tactics during the course of the battle and the only units which can be successfully deployed are those in the reserves or that part of the line not yet engaged. Thus the most important decision a general had to make concerned the disposition of the troops. If a weakness could be detected in the enemy line, it was exploited by using a stranger force to oppose it. Likewise, it was necessary to disguise one's battle line - even troops were disguised to delude the enemy. Often the very size of the army was skillfully hidden, troops packing tightly together to make it appear small, or spreading out to appear large. There were also many examples of surprise tactics made by detaching a small unit which suddenly emerged from a hidden place with much dust and noise to make the enemy believe that reinforcements had arrived.
Vegetius (Frontinus) is full of the oddest stratagems to mislead the enemy or demoralize his troops.
Once the enemy cracked, however, they were not to be surrounded, but an easy escape route left open. The reasons for this were that trapped soldiers would fight to the death but if they could get away, they would, and were exposed to the cavalry waiting on the flanks.
This important section of Vegetius closes with the tactics to be used in the case of a withdrawal in the face of the enemy. This highly difficult operation requires great skill and judgement. Both your own men and those of the enemy need to be deceived. It is suggested that your troops be informed that their retirement is to draw the enemy into a trap and the movement can be screened from the enemy with the use of cavalry across the front. Then the units are drawn off in a regular manner, but these tactics can only be employed if the troops have not yet been engaged. During a retreat units are detached and left behind to ambush the enemy if there is a hasty or incautious advance, and in this way tables can often be turned.
On a wider front, the Romans used tactics of denying their opponents the means of sustained warfare. For this they employed the tactic of vastatio. It was in effect the systematic revaging of an enemy's territory. Crops were destroyed or carried off for Roman use, animals were taken away or simply slaughtered, people were massacred or enslaved.
The enemy's lands were decimated, denying his army any form of support. Sometiems these tactics were also used to conduct punitive raids on barbarian tribes which had performed raids across the border.
The reasons for these tactics were simple. In the case of punitive raids they spread terror among the neighbouring tribes and acted as a deterrent to them. In the case of all-out war or the quashing rebels in occupied territories these harsh tactics denied any enemy force the support they needed to sustain a lengthy struggle.
just to keep you guys drooling for the game. Here is a brief report i wrote couple of yrs ago regarding the roman weapons and armour.
Introduction
The Roman Empire was one of the greatest military powers the world had ever seen. They conquered a large portion of the civilized world. They did it by using superior weapons and tactics.
Basic Equipment
Cassis- helmet
Lorica Segmentata- armor
Gladius- sword, 18-24 in. long
Pilium- medium-length throwing spear
Scutum- shield
Red Battle Cloak
Sandals
The cassis was a bronze general issue helmet. Many say it resembles a pot.
The armor was the lorica segmentata. It consisted of many plates of armor layered upon the one before it.
The gladius was a very effective sword. It was a smaller sword used for thrusting instead of a long, heavy one, because a long, heavy one took to much energy to fight with.
The pilium played a vital role in battle. It was a metal point attached to a wooden rod. The pilium was jabbed into the shield of an enemy and would break. The enemy could no longer use his shield, making him more vulnerable to death.
The Roman soldier's frontal protection was the scutum. It was a shield that stood 40 inches tall, and 30 wide. It was curved to give protection from the flank as well.
A long red cloak was worn during battle also. This no only kept the soldier warm, but it put fear into the eyes of the enemy as well.
A soldier is nothing without shoes. At that time, they had sandals. They were rugged and easy to repair.
Artillery
Many men never saw the men they killed. They were the artillery men. They killed the enemy from hundreds of yards away. Four main artillery pieces were used:
Scorpio
Ballista
Onager
Catapult
The scorpio was similar to a crossbow of the later middle ages. It fired an arrow by pulling a strap back as far as it would go and letting it go.
The ballista was similar to a catapult. It flung large rocks over walls of a town. It was also fired by pulling back a strap.
The onager was a smaller version of the ballista. It flung medium-sized rocks in the same fashion of the ballista.
The catapult is probably the most famous of the four. It had a spring which was coiled and released and caused the rock to fly through the air and inflict injuries to the enemy.
Note: The stone flinging artillery used many types of ammunition. Flamming balls of pitch are one example. They were not limited to just rocks.
Tactics
Sheild to Sheild
Battle Readiness
Starvation
Training
In battle, the Roman soldiers would stand with the shields in front side by side, and in the rows behind, with the shields on top of the heads of the ones in front. It made an advancing group of Romans a giant tortise, and less vulnerable to artillery fire. This also made the group of soldiers a giant wall that couldn't be broken without many casualties.
During a fierce battle, a soldier can get easily get tired. The Romans solved this. A soldier would only be at the front of a fighting column for fifteen minutes, then move to the back. This was invaluable to the soldiers.
Starving a sieged town into submission was a favorite of the Romans. The town would be surrounded, plastered with artillery, and wait for the supplies to run out. But if this took too long, siege towers were built. These allowed the Roman soldiers to scale walls of a town easily. Together they worked like a charm.
Training was the most important tactic to the Roman Army. The Romans were trained to fight hard and improvise. Every soldier was trained like an engineer. They could make anything out of anything.
Unity
The real reason the Roman Empire was so victorious in its military conquests, is because the men were so close to each other. Each man thought of the next as his brother. If he ran from battle, he was letting down his family, this was unbearable to think of, so men stayed by their brothers no matter what the odds of the battle were.
Works Cited
Diagram Group, The. Weapons. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1992.
Gonen, Rikva. Weapons of the Ancient World. London: Cassell, 1975.
extracts of alexander the greats tactics at issusto show phalanx flexibility
hi there again(oh no its him again groan)
just to show you ppl who thought of phalanx as a mass of bungling ill trained soldiers. Phalanx in the the hands of a good general with well trained hoplits or peltast(macedoneans) can be very deadly . so read here and comment
Battle
Alexander led more campaigns than any other general of his day (Fuller 55-66)
Commanded respect from his soldiers and his enemies, and he respected them (Fuller 55-66)
Alexander conquered more than half of the known world during his lifetime(Fuller 55-66)
Battle of Issus
The battle of Issus was considered a great victory by Alexander. He was considerably outnumbered and his men were very tired. Alexander won the battle, but it was not a decisive victory for him. Here is some information on the Battle of Issus:
The battle was not fought at Issus, it was fought on the Pinarus River on the south-eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea (Hammond 96)
The battle was between Alexander and Darius, the Persian general (First meeting with Darius)
The Persians had 600,000 men, Alexander only had 75,000 (Arrian 155)
Alexander held back a reserve force, the first time it had ever been done (First meeting with Darius)
In all 124,950 soldiers died during the battle, 110,000 Persians (Fuller 162), 450 Macedonians died and 4500 were wounded, and 10,000 Greek mercenaries (Green 162, 235)
The battle was won by Alexander and the Macedonians
Allies
Both Alexander and Darius had allies from other lands at the Battle of Issus, they were:
Darius and the Persians: Greek mercenaries, and the Kardakes (Arrian 153-155)
Alexander and the Macedonians: the Thessalians, and the Agrianes (Arrian 155-157)
Beginning of battle
The beginning of the battle is the opening manuevers, before any actual fighting takes place. The Battle of Issus began as follows:
Darius entered Issus in late October or early November, 333 BCE. Alexander had taken his men on a forced march to Myriandrus, thinking this was where Darius was going (Fuller 154). Alexander had left all of his sick and wounded at Issus. When Darius got to Issus, he killed all of Alexander's hospital cases. Darius learned of Alexander's position and took his troops to the Pinarus and took a defensive position on the northern bank, right along Alexander's line of communication (Green 224-226). Once Alexander learned of Darius' position, he gave a rousing speech to his men and positioned his men for battle. Alexander put his cavalry, the Thessalians, allies of the Macedonians, and his Macedonians on the right, and other allies on the left. Darius stationed 30,000 Greek mercenaries against the Macedonian phalanx and on either side 60,000 Kardakes, who were allies of the Persians, he also put 20,000 men on the ridge to face Alexander's right (Arrian 147-155). Darius was in the center of his army behind the Royal Bodyguard. Darius moved all of his best troops against Alexander's left, so Alexander moved the Thessalians to the left as reinforcements. Both armies deployed, but the Macedonian army stopped when thy got to within arrow shot of the Persians, hoping they would attack, but Darius had a good defensive position, and was not leaving it (Green 228-230).
Middle of battle
This is where the actual fighting starts. The middle is where the Macedonians and the Persians jockey for position, before the battle is decided.
Alexander had thrown out his right wing in advance at the Persian left-center, right where Darius was stationed (Montross 26). The Persian left gave way very quickly, a quick victory for the Macedonians (Arrian 161). The Macedonian phalanx had lost its solidarity while crossing the Pinarus (Montross 26). A gap opened in the right flank of the Macedonian phalanx and the Greek mercenaries took advantage, driving a deep wedge into the Macedonian line. Alexander swung his cavalry around against the rear files of the mercenaries (Green 231).
End of battle
The jockeying for position has taken place and Alexander is about to come out on top.
Alexander's battalions went to help out in the center. The Persian cavalry would not give way, but attacked the Thessalian squadrons, during this time, Darius took flight and the Persian army soon gave way without its leader (Arrian 163-165). Only the Greek mercenaries stood their ground, dying as they were attacked from all sides (Montross 26). The Persians suffered their heaviest loses in retreat (Arrian 165). The Macedonian army and Alexander took off after Darius, but couldn't catch him, he had a half-mile head start (Green 233).
After the battle
The battle is over, the Macedonians have won. However, the story isn't quite over.
Once Alexander had gotten to the Persian camp, he and his soldiers proceeded to loot it, Alexander getting the best things, things from Darius' tent. While there, Alexander found Darius' mother, wife, and children mourning for Darius because they had found Darius' armor, which he had thrown off in flight, and thought him dead. Alexander sent someone to clear up the misunderstanding and treated them with the respect deserving of a royal family (Green 233). Finally, they had a funeral for the Macedonian dead (Arrian 168). Darius and the Persians suffered heavy losses at the Battle of Issus: 100,000 infantry and 10,000 cavalry were killed (Fuller 162). Alexander and the Macedonians lost only 450 infantrymen, but had 4500 wounded (Green 162).
Victories during battle
During every battle there are always minor victories in different parts of the battlefield that influence the overall outcome, these are the minor victories during the Battle of Issus:
At the very start of the battle, the right wing of the Macedonian army had a quick victory against the left wing of the Persian army (Arrian 161)
The Greek mercenaries, allies of the Persians, defeated the right flank of the Macedonian phalanx during the early stages of the battle (Green 231)
Since the Persian left wing had been defeated so quickly, Alexander moved his right wing to the center to help out, this caused Darius to retreat since he was in the center, and then the rest of the Persian army soon gave way (Arrian 163-165)
However, the Greek mercenaries stood their ground, but they were attacked from all sides and of them were killed except 10,000 (Montross 26)
In closing
The Battle of Issus was a great battle between Alexander and Darius. However, it wasn't the last. But, Alexander won, and changed the face of modern-day war.
Works Cited
"Alexander the Great: First Meeting with Darius." 14 Dec 1998. Online. 14 Oct 1999
The Byzantine Army AD 565-ca.900
Less than thirty years after the death of emperor Justinian, when the emperor Tiberius II Constantinus succeeded to the throne in AD 578, the army was further reorganized.
One of the emperor's leading generals, who was later to become emperor himself, Maurice, issued the strategicon, a handbook of the workings of the army of the eastern empire.
The Byzantine army possessed not only the Roman traditions of strategy but also a complete system of tactics suited to the conflicts of the age.
Greek expressions, as well as some Germanic terms, are now in some cases beginning to take the place of the former Latin ones. Though Latin still remained the language of the army.
The mailed horse-archer still remained the great power of war, but a completely new system of units and names was introduced.
The forces were now organized in numeri, an expression for some units which appeared to have come into use as early as Diocletian or Constantine. The numeri, or war-bands (bandae), were not necessarily all of the same size. In fact the Byzantine army appeared to take great care not to have all its units of the same size, in order to confuse an opponent in battle as to where its strengths and weaknessses lay. (A system still used by Napoleon.) A numerus which was between three or four hundred men strong and was commanded by a comes or tribunus. If several numeri could form a brigade (drungus) of two to three thousand men, which would be commanded by a dux. These brigades again could unite to form a division (turma) of up six to eight thousand men.
During peacetime these forces were not united into brigades and divisions, far more they were spread across the territories. It was only at the outbreak of war that the commander would weld them into a force.
Also part of the reorganization was the end of the comitatus system by which the soldiers owed their loyalty to their commander. Now the soldiers' loyalties lay with the emperor. This change was made easy by the fact that the German federates who had brought in such customs were now in the decline within the eastern army. As the amount of money available to the government declined so too did the number of German mercenaries decrease.
The remaining German mercenaries were to be found divided into foederati (federates), optimati (the best men picked from the federates), buccellarii (the emperor's bodyguard).
The optimati are of particular interest as they appear clearly to resemble the fore-runners of medieval knights. They were chosen bands of German volunteers, who appeared to be of such standing among their own people that they each brought with them one or two armati, who were their personal assistants, just as later squires attendend to their knights.
Around the end of the first war with the Saracens in the seventh century, during the reign of Constans II or his son Constantine IV, a new order was established. The military order was closely linked with the very land it protected.
The old boundaries of the provinces and their administration had been wiped out by the invasions of the Persians and the Saracens. The lands were ruled by the military commanders of the various forces. Hence the emperor (either Constans II or Constantine IV) divided the land into provinces, called themes, which took their names directly from the units that were based there. Themes with names like Buccellarion, Optimaton or Thrakesion (the Thracian units in Asia Minor (Turkey)) clearly revealing who was based there and in charge of the administration.
The names of the themes further reveal that the various units were not all based along the frontiers with the Saracen foe, but far more were spread out all over the Byzantine territories.
The commander of a frontier theme of course had greater forces at his disposal than one of his colleagues in an inland district.
Did the word 'theme' come to stand for both the province as well as the garrison within it, then the same was the case for the 'turma'. The turma, commanded by a turmarch, was merely smaller unit within a theme. Further there was also the clissura, commanded by a clissurarch, which was a small garrison protecting one or more fortified mountain passes.
The strength of the Byzantine army remained its heavy cavalry. The infantry was merely there to man the fortresses and to act as garrisons for important centres. Though some campaigns appear to have been done solely by the cavalry, the infantry did appear still to be a part of most, though it never really played a decisive role.
The heavy cavalryman wore a mail shirt reaching from the neck to the waist or thighs. A small steel helmet protected his head whilst gauntlets and steel shoes protected his hands and feet.
The horses of the officers and of the men in the front rank also were armoured with protection to their heads and chest.
Over their armour the riders would wear a linen cape or tunic to protect themselves against the sun or a heavy woolen cloak to protect against cold weather. These tunics, as well as the tufts on the helmets and any pennants on the lances would be of the same colour in each warband, creating a kind of uniform. The weapons of the rider were a broadsword, a dagger, a bow and quiver, a long lance fitted with a leather strap towards it butt (to help keeping hold of it).
Some would further add to their weaponry by carrying an axe or a mace strapped to the saddle. Some of the young, inexperienced soldiers would still use the shield, but its use was frowned upon as it was seen to hinder the free use of the bow.
These armoury and weaponry can not be precisely gauged as the Byzantine army was by no means as uniform as the old Roman army. Had once every soldier carried the same weapons and armour, the Byzantine army possessed a large mix of individually armed riders.
Like the equestrians of the old Roman republic, the cavalry men of the Byzantine army were of considerable social standing.
The emperor Leo VI pointed out that the men chosen for the cavalry should be robust, courageous and should possess sufficient means to be free from care for their homes and possessions in their absence.
Farms of cavalrymen were exempt from all taxation except land tax during the reign of Leo VI (and most likely under the rule of other emperors) in order to help in the management of the estates when the master was on campaign.
The large proportion of cavalrymen were hence small landowners and their officers were drawn from the Byzantine aristocracy.
As many of the men were of some standing, many brought with them servants boys and attendants who relieved the forces of many of their menial duties. However, these camp followers did indeed slow down the otherwise rapid moving cavalry units considerably.
The infantry in the time of Leo VI still consisted almost entirely of archers, just as it had done in the sixth century under Justinian.
The light archer is largely unprotected, wearing merely boots and tunic and no helmet.
The more heavily armed footsoldier, the so-called scutatus wore a pointed steel helmet and a mail shirt. Some of them may have also worn gauntlets and greaves to protect the hands and shins. The scutatus carried with him a large round shield, a lance, a sword and an axe with a blade at one side and a spike at the other. The shield and the colour of the the tuft on the helmet were of all the same colour for each war band.
Once more, just as with the cavalry, we most imagine the Byzantine infantry as a body varying largely in its equipment from each soldier to the other.
The infantry also went on campaign with a large baggage train, bringing with it, among vital supplies also picks and spades, for the Byzantine army carefully fortified its camps against suprises, just as the ancient Roman army had done. A unit of engineers always marched ahead with the vanguard helped the footsoldiers in the preparation of the camp for the night's stay.
Decline of the Byzantine Army AD 1071-1203
The great turning point for the Byzantine army was the battle of Manzikert in AD 1071 at which the main body of the army under command of emperor Romanus IV Diogenes was shattered by the Seljuk Turks under their Sultan Alp Arslan.
The disaster of Manzikert was followed by a mass invasion of Asia Minor (Turkey) by the Turks and a time of civil wars within the remaining Byzantine realm.
In this chaos the formidable old Byzantine army practically disappeared. Not only had Constantinople lost its army at Manzikert but with the invasion of Asia Minor it had lost its traditional recruiting grounds where to find the soldiers with whom to replace the lost regiments.
In AD 1078 emperor Michael VII Ducas collected the remaining soldiers from the former provinces of Asia Minor into a new body of cavalry - the so-called 'Immortals'. And even though he supplemented them with new recruits they numbered only ten thousand. They were the survivors of what had once been 21 themes, a force most likely well above 80'000 men.
In the face of such devastation Constantinople turned to recruiting of foreign mercenaries to help protect itself. Franks, Lombards, Russians, Patzinaks and Seljuk Turks were taken into service in the defence of what little territory remained Byzantine. Most favoured were the westerners as they were found less likely to rebel and because the sheer bravery the Frankish and Lombard warriors displayed in battle.
Though naturally the eastern horse-archers were still sought to provide their skill in ranged combat to the fierce charge of the western heavy cavalry.
Though if the troops were now largely foreign, the old tactics, the sophisticated Byzantine art of war survived in its commanders.
Even when parts of Asia Minor (Turkey) were reconquered, the military organisation of the 'themes' was not restored. Asia Minor had been so utterly devastated by the Turks, that the old recruiting grounds of the empire were barren ruins. And so the Byzantine army remained an improvised mix of various mercenary forces.
Under the emperors Alexius, John II and Manuel the Byzantine military though still managed to function quite well, despite these shortcomings. But with the death of Manuel Comnenus (AD 1180) the time of Byzantine military power faded away.
The next emperors possessed neither their predecessors' strength of leadership nor did they find the means by which to raise the money necessary to maintain an effective army.
Unpaid mercenaries make for a bad army. And so, when the Frankish knights forced their way into the city of Constantinople (AD 1203), most of the garrison - but for the Varangian Guard - refused to fight.
The Varangian Guard
The Varangian Guard, also known as the Waring Guard or the Barbarian Guard, emerged in the 11th century in Constantinople as the bodyguard to the emperor. The first mention of this guard appears in 1034, and they were re-organized in the mid eleventh century by Romanus IV.
Mostly this bodyguard consisted of Danes and Englishmen, many of the latter joined after the defeat at Hastings in 1066, preferring the service to the emperor to life under Norman rule back home in England.
The Varangians were ferocious fighters, with full beards and using two handed battle-axe as their prefered weapon (which is why they were also known as 'the axe-bearers' in Constantinople). They lived under their own laws, prayed at their own church and elected their own officers.
Their leader was known as the 'Acolyte' (the follower), which was derived from the fact that he always followed immediately behind the emperor whereever he went. At banquets or audeniences the acolyte was to find found standing right behind the emperor's throne.
Unlike bodies such as the Praetorian Guard, the Varangians became famed for their loyalty to the emperor, even their willingness to fight to the death to protect him.
Soldier's Pay
One of the most difficult aspects of army service to understand is that of the soldiers' pay.
A soldier's pay began with the viaticum which recruits received upon joining. Some records still exists for recruits joining the auxiliary forces, who received 3 aurei (75 denarii). There is no definite evidence for the legions, but it is largely assumed that the viaticum for joining the legion was the same amount. At least until the time of emperor Septimius Severus, it is believed that the viaticum remained at the level of 75 denarii.
As for the regular pay of the Roman soldier, it is unknown if any amounts might have been compulsorily deducted for rations, equipment and various purposes.
The situation changed from time to time and with gradual inflation the pay progressively increased.
Basic facts are few and far between. Caesar doubled the daily pay of legionaries from 5 to 10 asses, meaning 225 denarii a year. When Augustus left in his will 300 sestertii (75 denarii) to all legionaries this was a third of the annual amount and most probably indicates that the troops were paid three times a year and Augustus merely added an extra pay-day.
The basic rate remained unchanged until Domitian, who increased it from nine to twelve gold pieces a year (i.e. to 300 denarii) In spite of the steady inflation during the second century, there is no further rise until the time of Severus who increased it to 500 denarii a year.
Occasionally there were bounties or donations. Caligula after his abortive invasion of Britain gave all legionaries four gold pieces (100 denarii). Claudius started an unfortunate precedent in giving a donation to the praetorian guards on his accession, and it can be assumed that equivalent amounts would have been given to the legionaries.
Later emperors simply felt obliged to follow this example to secure the loyalty of the troops. The inevitable result was that it was expected, until Vespasian, having satisfied at least part of his victorious army with booty, quietly dropped the idea.
Although the custom of paying the praetorians on accession did return later.
Apart from the bounties and donations the legionaries could look forward to substantial grants on their discharge either in cash or land (praemia). Augustus fixed the amount in AD 5 at 3000 denarii and by the time of Caracalla it had risen to 5000 denarii. The real difficulty in assessing the soldiers' pay is that of stoppages (soldier's food and animal fodder) and deductions. This practice dates back to the origins of the army. Early records show that the soldiers had to purchase their corn and clothes and some of their arms, presumably replacements, at a set price which the quaestor deducted from their pay. Although attempts were made to alleviate this burden, it remained a source of grievance in the early empire.
A small amount was paid into a pool, watched over by the chief signifer which paid for soldiers' burial expenses.
There is no evidence on the pay of centurions, but it seems likely that it was at least five times the soldiers' rate and may have been even more. one of the main privileges of the centurion's position was the practice of levying fees for exemption from certain noncombatant duties. Otho tried to correct this abuse of power at least within the paetorians by making a grant from the treasury of an equivalent amount which would have had the effect of raising centurions' pay. Later this became an established rule under some emperors, or emperors like Hadrian, enforced stricter discipline in order to suppress such illegitimate practices.
A primus ordo (a centurion of the first cohort) would earn about twice as much as a normal centurion.
A primus pilus (first centurion) would earn an estimated four times the amount of a normal centurion. He would receive enough on discharge to acquire equestrian status, a property qualification of 400'000 sestertii.
The pay of the auxilia poses difficult questions through absence of reliable evidence. There appears to have been basic differentials between units.
The cavalry of the alae were better paid than the men in the cohortes and in the cohortes equitatae mounted men got more than the foot soldiers.
A humble foot soldier in the auxilia is estimated by modern historians to have received about 100 denarii a year.
Length of Service
In the early republican days, there was no army if Rome was at peace. Armies were only raised to fight particular foes and were dispanded once these were defeated. But in practice, as Rome was almost perpetually at war with someone, there always appeared to be men at arms.
By the time of Marius regular army service of the conscripts was already at 6 years.
With Marius' introduction of mercenaries the length of time they served increased to roughly 16 years. For now military life had become a choice of profession, rather than a duty of the Roman citizen.
Though by the time of Augustus, after the lengthy civil wars which had seen huge numbers of men at arms, the length of service had fallen back to between 6 and 10 years again.
Augustus reset the number of years back to 16, with a further four years served by a veteran with the legion, though for this extended time he was excused from some duties.
Unlike in the late republic there would be no veterans who had served only a few years, experienced fighters within the population who could threaten the peace. Now all ex-soldiers would in effect be old soldiers.
Though the main reason for this was most likely the cost of discharging veterans (grants of land) which was a great a burden to the state.
Later the period of service was extended even further, to 20 years, with propably a further five years service as veterans with lesser duties. The distinction between the ordinary legionary and the veteran eventually began to fade, and a soldier served a full 25 to 26 years, discharges only being made every two years.
The Recruit of the republican Army
before the Reforms of Marius
War offered the Roman citizen of the republic the possibility of returning covered in glory, having won both land and money.
To the Romans of the early republic serving in the legion and war itself were the same thing. For Rome had no army unless it was at war. As long as there was peace, people stayed at home and there was no army. this shows the essentially civilian nature of Roman society. But Rome is still famed today for being in a state of near constant warfare.
The changeover from peace to warfare was a mental as well as spiritual change. When war was decided upon by the senate then the doors to the temple of the god Janus would be opened. Only once Rome was at peace would the doors be closed again. - The gates of Janus were almost always open.
For the citizen becoming a soldier was a transformation far beyond simply donning his armour.
When war was declared and an army would be raised, a red flag was hoisted over the capitol of Rome. The news would be carried out to all the territory under Roman rule. The hoisting of the red flag meant that all men subject to military service had thirty days to report for duty.
Not all men were obliged to serve. Only the tax paying landowners were subject to military service, for it was deemed only they had reason to fight. Of them it was those aged between 17 and 46 who would have to serve. Those veterans of the infantry who had already been on sixteen previous campaigns, or the cavalrymen who had served on ten campaigns, would be excused. Also free from service would be those very few who had through outstanding military or civil contributions won the specific privilege of not having to take up arms.
In was on the capitol that the consul(s) would, together with their military tribunes select their men. First to be chosen from were the wealthiest, most privileged. Last to be chosen from were the poorest, least privileged. Care would be taken not to deplete completely the number of men of a particular class or tribe.
Selection thereafter depended largely on the men being deemed fit to serve. Though those deemed unfit for duty must have no doubt been dishonoured in the eyes of the others. For the army was in Roman eyes not so much a burden as an opportunity to prove oneself worthy in the eyes of one's fellow countrymen. Meanwhile those who had shown themselves worthy in their civic duties were no longer required to do so. And those who had disgraced themselves in the eyes of the public, would be denied the opportunity of serving in the republican army
To perform their transformation from Roman citizens into Roman soldiers, the selected men would then have to swear an oath of allegiance.
This swearing of the sacramentum, changed the status of the man entirely. He was now utterly subject to his general's authority, and had thereby laid down any restraints of his former civilian life. His actions would be by the will of the general. He would bear no responsibility for the actions he would commit for the general. If he was ordered to do so, he would kill anything in sight, be it an animal, a barbarian, or even a Roman.
There was more than mere practicality behind the change from the white toga of the citizen to the blood red tunic of the legionary. The symbolism was such that the blood of the vanquished would not stain him. He was now no longer a citizen whose conscience would not allow for murder. Now he was a soldier. The legionary could only be released from the sacramentum by two things; death or demobilization. Without the sacramentum, however, the Roman could not be a soldier. It was unthinkable.
Once he had taken his oath, the Roman would return home make the necessary preparations for his departure. The commander would have issued the order where they would have to assemble at a given date.
Once all was prepared, he would gather his weapons and make his way to the where the men had been ordered to gather. Very often this would entail quite a journey. The assembly tended to be close to the actual theatre of war.
And so it could be that the soldiers would be told to gather far away from Rome. For example, the Greek wars saw a commander order his army to assemble at Brundisium at the very heel of Italy, where they would be embarked on ships for their journey to Greece. It was upon the soldiers to get to Brundisium and it no doubt will have taken them some time to get there.
The day of assembly till the day of demobilization saw the legionary living a life, totally separated from the civilian existence of other Romans. He would not spend his time as a town garrison, but in a military camp miles from any place of civilization.
The camp the legionaries built every night while they were on the march fulfilled more than just the function of protecting the soldiers from attacks by night. For it maintained the Roman understanding of order; it didn't merely keep army discipline, but set the soldiers apart from the barbarians they fought. It reinforced their being Roman. Barbarians might sleep wherever they laid themselves down like animals. But not Romans.
No longer being civilians, but soldiers, the diet had to be as hardy as their lifestyle. Wheat, frumentum, was what the soldier received to eat each day, come rain, come shine.
If it was monotonous, then it was also what the soldiers demanded. It was deemed good, hardy and pure. To deprive the soldiers' of frumentum and give them something else instead was seen as a punishment.
When Caesar in Gaul struggled to keep his troops fed on wheat alone, and had to substitute their diet with barley, beans and meat, the troops grew discontented. It was only their fides, their loyalty , to the great Caesar which made them eat what they were given.
For just as with their attitudes toward their nightly encampment, the Romans saw the food they ate as soldiers as a symbol which set them apart from barbarians. If barbarians filled their bellies with meat and alcohol before battle, then the Romans kept to their stark rations. They had discipline, inner strength. To deny them their frumentum was to think of them as barbarians.
In the Roman mind the legionary was a tool, a machine. Though it possessed dignity and honour, it abandoned its will to its commander. It ate and drank only in order to function. It required no pleasure.
This machine would feel nothing and flinch from nothing.
Being such a machine, the soldier would neither feel cruelty nor mercy. He would kill simply because he was ordered. Totally devoid of passion he could not be accused of enjoying violence and indulging in cruelty. Far more his was a form of civilized violence.
Yet the Roman legionary must have been one of the most terrifying sights. By far more horrific than the savage barbarian. For if the barbarian simply knew no better, then the Roman legionary was a ice cold, calculating and utterly ruthless killing machine.
Totally different to the barbarian, his strength lay in that he hated violence, but he possessed such total self control that he could force himself not to care.
The Recruit of the imperial Army
after the Reforms of Marius
The typical recruit to the Roman army would present himself for his interview, armed with a letter of introduction.
The letter would generally have been written by his family's patron, a local official, or perhaps his father.
The title for this interview was the probatio.
The first and one of the most important functions of the probatio was to establish the precise legal status of the applicant. After all, only Roman citizens were allowed to serve in the legion. And any native of Egypt for example could only be recruited into the fleet (unless he belonged to the ruling Graeco-Egyptian class).
Further there was also a medical examination, where the candidate had to meet a minimum standard to be acceptable for service. There even appeared to have been a minimum height which was demanded. Though with the shortages of recruits in the later empire, these standards began to fall. There are even reports of potential recruits who cut off some of their fingers in order not to be useful for service. In answer to that the authorities decided to accept it if provincial administrators who were required to recruit a given number of men in their area, would manage to recruit two mutilated men in place of one healthy one.
The historian Vegetius tells us that tehre was a preference for recruits from certain professions. Smiths, wagon-makers, butchers and huntsmen were very welcome. Whereas applicants from professions associated with women's occupations, like weavers, confectioners or even fishermen, were less desirable to the army.
Care was also given, especially in the increasingly more illiterate later empire, to establish if the recruits had some grasp of literacy and numeracy. the army required men of some education for certain posts. An army was a huge machine in need of men to oversee and note the delivery of supplies, pay and the performance of duties by the various units.
Once accepted by the probatio the recruit would receive advance pay and would be posted to a unit. He would then most likely travel in a small group of recruits, led perhaps by an officer, to where his unit was stationed.
Only once they had reached their unit and were entered on the rolls of the army, were they effectively soldiers. Before their entry onto the rolls, they were, even after their receipt of advance pay, still civilians. Though the prospect of the viaticum, an initial joining payment, most likely assured that no-one of the recruits changed their mind whilst in this strange legal situation of being a recruit to the army without being a member of it.
The rolls in the Roman army were initially known as numeri. But in time the expression was changed to be matriculae. This may well have been the case, due to the introduction of particular auxiliary forces with the name of numeri. the name therefore perhaps simply had to change in order to avoid misunderstandings.
Before being accepted onto the rolls, they would then have to swear the military oath, which would legally bind them to the service. Though this swearing in may well have only have been a ritual of the early empire. The later empire, which didn't' refrain from tattooing, or even branding its new soldiers, might well have dispensed with niceties such as swearing-in ceremonies.
The Men from the Ranks
The main supply for the centurionate of the legions came from the ordinary men from the ranks of the legion. Though there was a significant number of centurions from the equestrian rank.
Some of the late emperors of the empire prove very rare examples of ordinary soldiers who rose all the way through the ranks to become high-ranking commanders. But in general the rank of primus pilus, the most senior centurion in a legion, was as high as a ordinary man could go.
Though this post brought with it, at the end of service, the rank of equestrian, including the status - and wealth - that this elevated position in Roman society brought with it.
The ordinary soldier's promotion would start with the rank of optio. This was the assistant to the centurion who acted as a kind of corporal. Having proven himself worthy and earned promotion an optio would then be promoted to being a centurio.
However for this to happen, there would have to be a vacancy. If this was not the case he might be made optio ad spem ordinis. This marked him out by rank as ready for the centurionate, merely waiting for a position to become free.
Once this happened he would be awarded the centurionate. But, there was further division between the seniority of centurions. And as a newcomer, our former optio would start on the lowest rung of this ladder.
With their being six centuries in each cohort, each regular cohort had 6 centurions.
The centurion commanding the century most forward was the hastatus prior, the one commanding the century immediately behind his, was the hastatus posterior.
The next two centuries behind them were commanded respectively by the princeps prior and the princeps posterior. Finally the centuries behind these were commanded by the pilus prior and the pilus posterior.
Seniority between the centurions was most likely such that the pilus prior commanded the cohort, followed by the princeps prior and then the hastatus prior. Next in line would be the pilus posterior, followed by the princeps posterior and finally the hastatus posterior.
The number of his cohort was also part of a centurion's rank, so the full title of the centurion commanding the third century of the second cohort would be centurio secundus hastatus prior.
The first cohort was the most senior in rank. All its centurions outranked the centurions of the other cohorts. Though according to its special status, it had only five centurions, their being no division between pilus prior and posterior, but their role being filled by the primus pilus, the highest ranking centurion of the legion.
The Equestrians
Under the republic the equestrian class supplied the prefect and the tribunes. But generally there was not a strict hierarchy of different posts during this era.
With the increased numbers of the auxiliary commands becoming available under Augustus, a career ladder emerged with various posts available to those of equestrian rank.
The main military steps in this career were:
praefectus cohortis = commander of an auxiliary infantry
tribunus legionis = military tribune in a legion
praefectus alae = commander of an auxiliary cavalry unit
With both the prefect of an auxiliary cohort and the prefect of the cavalry, those commanding a millaria unit (roughly a thousand men) were naturally deemed senior to those commanding a quingenaria unit (roughly five hundred men). So for a praefectus cohortis to move from command of a quingenaria to a millaria was a promotion, even if his title would not actually change.
The various commands were held one after another, each one lasting three or four years. They were generally given to men who had already gained experience in civilian positions of senior magistrates in their home towns and who were perhaps in their early thirties.
Commands of a cohort of auxiliary infantry or a tribunate in a legion were usually granted by the provincial governors and hence were largely political favours.
Though with the award of cavalry commands it is likely that the emperor himself was involved. Even with some of the commands of millaria auxiliary infantry cohorts it appears that the emperor made appointments.
Some equestrians went on from these commands to become legionary centurions. Others would retire to administrative posts.
There was however a very few enormously prestigious posts open to experienced equestrians. the special status of the province of Egypt meant that the governor and legionary commander there could not be a senatorial legate. It hence fell to an equestrian prefect to hold command of Egypt for the emperor.
Also the command of the praetorian guard was created as a post for equestrians by emperor Augustus.
Though in later days of the empire naturally the increasing military pressures began to blur the lines between what was reserved strictly for the senatorial class or for equestrians. Marcus Aurelius appointed some equestrians to legionary commands simply by making them senators first.
The senatorial Class
In the changing Roman empire under many reforms introduced by Augustus the provinces continued to be governed by senators. This left open to the senatorial class the promise of high office and military command.
Young men of the senatorial class would be posted as tribunes to earn their military experience. In every legion of the six tribunes one position, the tribunus laticlavius was reserved for such a senatorial appointee.
Appointments were made by the governor/legatus himself and hence were among the personal favours he make to the young man's father.
The young patrician would serve in this position for two to three years, beginning in his late teens or early twenties.
Therafter the army would be left behind for a political career, gradually climbing the steps of the minor magistracies which could last for about ten years, until finally the rank of legionary commander could be reached.
Before this however, usually would come another term of office, most likely in a province without legions, before reaching the consulate.
The province of Egypt, so important for its grain supply, remained under the emperor's personal command. But all the provinces with legions within them were commanded by personally appointed legates, who acted both as army commanders as well as civil governors.
After having been consul an able and reliable senator might be appointed to a province containing as many as four legions. The length of service in such an office would generally be for three years, but it could vary considerably.
Almost half of the Roman senate was required to at some time serve as legionary commanders, indicating just how competent this political body must have been in military matters.
The length of office for able commanders however increased with time. By the time of Marcus Aurelius it was well possible for a senator of great military talent to hold three or even more successive major commands after he had held the consulate, after which he might progress onto the emperor's personal staff.
The Military Oath
To be placed on the rolls of the legion, a recruit had to swear the military oath.
The oath, the sacramentum, naturally changed in time as the Roman state and the empire evolved.
In republican times, one man would recite the oath out loud (praeiuratio), thereafter each oteh man in turn would say the words, 'idem in me' ('the same in my case'http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif.
It may well have been that new recruits who joined the army all had to speak the full oath, if numbers allowed this. But the renewal of the oath, will have been conducted in the shorter fashion described above.
In early republican times, the historian Dionysius tells us, the oath sounded something like this;
'to follow the consuls to whatever wars they may be called, and neither desert the colours nor do anything else contrary to law.'
The renewal of the oath was always conducted on New Year's Day, up until either the reign of Vespasian or Domitian when it was moved to 3 January.
A Christian version of the oath is described by the historian Vegetius,
'They swear by God, by Christ and by the Holy Spirit; and by the majesty of the emperor, which, next to God, should be loved and worshipped by the human race... The soldiers swear to perform with enthusiasm whatever the emperor commands, never to desert, and not to shrink from death on behalf of the Roman state.'
Army Discipline
The discipline of the republican army is legendary. However, it is believed to be somewhat exaggerated by Roman historians keen to show that discipline of earlier generations had been firmer than that of their own.
Though it was indeed the case that a strict system of rewards and punishments was applied the the conscripted soldiers. But discipline was not necessarily so strict as to blunt the citizen-soldier's individual initiative. Intelligent, independent-minded soldiers who worked together as a unit no doubt posed a significantly greater threat to an enemy, than blindly obedient men who only did what they were told.
But then this is not to say that the discipline of the Roman army wasn't an iron one. During times of crisis such as the war against Hannibal severe measures were most likely necessary to maintain army discipline against a seemingly invincible opponent.
The historian Polybius reports that the Roman army punished with death not only things such as desertion but also far more minor matters and that order and discipline was largely maintained by fear.
In the days of the empire discipline does appear to have relaxed at least slightly. Perhaps this was due to it by then being a volunteer army which shouldn't be abused quite as harshly if one wanted to find any new recruits, perhaps it was the emperor's desperate need to keep the troops happy if he was to survive, or perhaps it was simply the result of changing attitudes of the day.
In any case the changes brought about more self-confident armies, which were more likely to revolt if an old-fashioned disciplinarian took command.
Corporal punishment (castigatio), monetary fine, (pecunaria multa), added duty (munerum indictio), relegation to an inferior service (militiae mutatio), reduction in rank (gradus deiectio) or dishonourable discharge from service (missio ignominiosa) were all forms of minor punishments at the disposal of commanders seeking to maintain discipline. Execution - The death penalty was a deterrent used against desertion, mutiny or insubordination. In practice however, it was rare. Even in cases of desertion, factors such as the soldier's length of service, his rank, previous conduct, etc. were taken into consideration. Special consideration was also given to young soldiers. After all, trained soldiers didn't grow on trees. To kill off one's own ranks was to be avoided as much as possible.
Decimation - Perhaps the most gruesome punishment of all known to the Roman army was that of decimation. It generally was applied to entire cohorts and meant that every tenth man, randomly chosen by a draw of lots, was killed by being clubbed or stoned to death by his own comrades. This form of punishment of the troops was however extremely rare.
Disbandment of an entire legion was also a means by which to punish mutinous troops. This naturally was very rarely done, and if so more for political purposes (ridding oneself of armies who had supported a contender to the throne, etc) then as a purely punitive measure. But the threat of disbandment was sometimes used against troops demanding more pay, or better conditions to bring them to heel.
Army Decorations
Like most modern armies, the Roman army did not only have a code for disciplining soldiers, but also one for rewarding them. Decorations were usually worn by the soldiers on parades and were generally awarded at the end of a campaign.
The decorations possible for any soldiers lower than the centurions were torques (necklaces), armillae, (armbands) and phalerae (embossed discs worn on the uniform).
Such minor awards were abandoned during the reign of emperor Severus, but the torques were reintroduced in the later empire.
Centurions could be awarded the corona aurea, a plain gold crown. Aside from this there was also the corona vallaris or corona muralis, for being the first officer over enemy defences or city wall.
(The corona aurea could apparently also be awarded to ranks beneath the centurionate, the little known so-called evocati who ranked between the principales and the centurionate.)
The primus pilus, the highest ranking centurion of a legion, could be awarded the hasta pura (silver spearshaft), which was the award usually handed to any members of the questrian order, - a rank the primus pilus would only strictly speaking have achieved by the end of his service.
Above the rank of primus pilus the awards become, just as the posts were, of more politically symbolic nature. High ranking commanders needed hardly storm any enemy walls in person to gain their awards. And it is to a point questionable if only truly oustanding commanders received awards.
A military tribune of the lowest rank (tribunus augusticlavius) would be awarded with a corona and a hasta pura. But those tribunes senior two him might already receive a vexillum. This award was a little miniature standard mounted on a silver base.
The senior tribune (tribunus laticlavius), a man of senatorial rank no less, would generally receive two coronoae, two hasta purae and two vexilla.
Men of praetorian rank, the legionary legates (the generals of the Roman army), would receive three coronoae, three hasta purae and three vexilla.
If this bestowing of glory in such numbers seems a little ridiculous, then it is still not the highest award. For a general of consular rank, would receive four coronae, four hasta purae and four vexilla.
An award which was open to all ranks, was the corona civica. It was an award granted for saving the life of a fellow Roman. Though it appeared to go out of use after the reign of Claudius. Emperor Severus later reintroduced it as the corona civica aurea, but only for centurions.
There is a wellknown case in the traditional Roman semi-mythical hero L. Siccius Dentatus of awards being quite literally heaped onto war heroes. A veteran of 120 battles he is supposed to have received 18 hastae purae, 25 phalerae, 83 torques, over 160 armillae, 14 coronae civicae, 8 coronae auraea, 3 coronae murales and one corona obsidialis/corona graminae (the highest award for valour).
But not only individuals, also entire units could be awarded. Praetorian cohorts could be awarded the cornona aura, which they could add to their standards. The regular legions could be granted a corona, but their cohorts could only receive phalera.
Army Supplies
A Roman legion was a vast body of men who all required food. A soldier's daily grain ration was the equivalent of 1.5 kg (ca. 3 lb 5 oz), which was generally supplemented with other foodstuff.
However, this meant that the total consumption of grain was around 7500 kg a day. Together with up to 500 kg of fodder for the animals this made a substantial amount of food.
In military bases, units were heavily involved in their own supply. Land was set aside for the use of the military to plant crops and graze their animals. These lands were referred to either as prata (meadow), or simply as territorium (territory).
Herds of cattle were also kept, watched over by soldiers called pecuarii (herdsmen). There are reports, particularly in the later empire of large numbers of limitanei (frontier guardsmen) who acted as soldier-farmers, charged with growing the crops for the troops.
Estimates of yield in Roman-style farming vary from 2000 kg to 500 kg per hectare land. These estimates result in land being required in the region between 7.5 km x 7.5 km and 3.5 km x 3.5 km to produce enough grain to feed the men. Add to this the necessity for additional land to grow grain and forage for the animals and one can only conclude that the military bases on the frontiers of the empire were far more than mere fortified headquarters, but large agricultural estates.
It also gives us an impression of the logistical difficulties of bringing up food when the armies were on campaign.
In some areas though grain could simply not be grown on the scale required and had to be imported.
Merchants would fulfil the function of shipping the grain from its point of origin to the army bases. But so too veterans and even some acting soldiers were involved in the trade.
Further food was brought in by hunting expeditions. Archaeologists have unearthed the remains of deer, foxes, even bears in the scrap heaps of military camps.
And yet an army was not supplied with food alone. Wine beer and olive oil had largely to be imported.
But so too, was there a constant need for other materials. Leather, iron and wood for repairs to equipment as well as for heating and cooking.
Clothing, too, would need to be replaced.
And for the maintenance of any army base, stores of building materials would be needed. A regular legionary fortress would be built of something akin to 15000 cubic metres of stone, alongside other materials.
The Fleet
The Roman Navy was always considered an inferior arm and was strictly under army control.
But already during the First Punic War, Rome proved itself capable of launching a fleet capable of checking an established naval power such as Carthage.
Romans were no sailors though. They had no knowledge of ship building. Their ships were in fact built copying the example of captured Carthaginian vessels, combined with the expertise supplied by the Greek cities of southern Italy.
Rather unexpected success in battle was obtained by a logical Roman idea that a warship was little more than a floating platform on which the soldiers could be brought into close contact with the enemy.
For this purpose they invented a huge boarding plank with a large spike on the end, which could be raised and lowerd like a drawbridge. Before battle it would be raised and then dropped onto an enemy's deck. The spike would embed itself into the oppnent's deck planking and the legionaries could board the enemy vessel across it. This elaborate contraption was called 'the raven' (corvus) This invention gave Rome five victories at sea. However, it is believed that it's weight, carried above the water line, also made the ships unstable, and could in rough seas cause them to capsize.
In effect, much of this achievement of their sea victories was minimized by the losses the Romans hence suffered at sea. Partially the corvus might well be responsible for some of these losses. But generally it was the inept way the Romans handled their vessels as well as their ill fortune in running into several tempests.
It is possible that Rome's losses at sea through lack of seamanship and ignorance of navigation had her rely completely on the Greek cities to provide ships when they were required. But as Rome gained control of the lands of the eastern Mediterranean, so the sea power of the Greek cities declined, and in the years 70-68 BC the pirates of Cilicia were able to carry on their trade with impunity right up to the Italian coastline.
The threat to the vital corn supply was such that the Senate was stung into action and gave Pompey an extraordinary command to clear the seas of pirates. He achieved this in only three months. Far too short a period in which to have built any ships of his own. His fleet was largely composed of vessels pressed into service from the Greek cities. After this there is evidence of fleets kept in the Aegean, although they may not always have been in great fighting condition.
It was the civil war between Caesar and Pompey which so clearly demonstrated the true significance of sea power and at one time there had been as many as a thousand ships engaged in the Mediterranean. As the struggle continued Pompey's son, Sextus, acquired a fleet sufficient to keep Octavian at bay and endanger the grain supply to Rome.
Octavian and Agrippa set to work to construct a large fleet at Forum Iulii, and train the crews. In 36 BC Sextus was finally defeated at Naucholus and Rome became, once more, mistress of the western Mediterranean. The final event of the civil war was the Battle of Actium, which destroyed Antony.
Octavian was left with some 700 ships of various sizes, ranging from heavy transports to light galleys (liburnae, which were his private property and which he manned with slaves and freedmen of his personal service. - No Roman citizenry ever handled an oar
These ships formed the first standing fleet, the best ships forming the first permanent squadron of the Roman Navy and established at Forum Iulii (Fréjus).
Augustus saw, as with the army itself, the need for a permanent arrangement for maintaining the peace, but the most strategic and economical situations for the main bases had yet to be evolved. Forum Iulii controlled the north-western Mediterranean, but soon further bases were needed to protect Italy itself and the corn supply to Rome and the Adriatic. an obvious choice was Misenum on the Bay of Naples, and considerable harbour works and buildings were started by Augustus, the port thereafter remaining the most important naval base throughout Imperial times.
Augustus also constructed a new naval harbour at Ravenna at the head of the Adriatic, helping to deal with any potential trouble form Dalmatia and Illyria, should it arise.
Another important area which Augustus felt needed special care and protection was Egypt, and it is probable that he founded the Alexandrine Fleet. (For services to Vespasian in the civil war it was rewarded with the title Classis Augusta Alexandrina).
the squadron had a detachment along the African coast at Caesarea when Mauretania became a province and may have been responsible for supplying the armies sent there under Claudius.
A Syrian squadron, the Classis Syriaca was believed by later Roman historians to have been founded by Hadrian, but it is believed that is was created much earlier.
Along the northern frontiers squadrons were created to meet the needs along the coasts and rivers as the empire expanded. The conquest of Britain involved massive naval preparations. Ships were assembled at Gesoraicum (Boulogne) and this harbour remained the main base for the Classis Britannica.
The fleet naturally played a vital part in the conquest of Britain, in bringing supplies to the troops. One of the finest recorded achievements in the conquest of Britain is the circumnavigation of the Scotland under Agricola, proving that in fact Britain was an island. In AD 83 the fleet was used to soften the position in Scotland by making lightning raids up the east coast; it also discovered the Orkney islands.
In the campaign against the Germans the Rhine played a major role. Squadrons of the fleet were operating along the lower stretches of the river as early as 12 BC under Drusus the Elder, but with as yet little understanding of the tides his ships were left high and dry in the Zuyder Zee and his forces were only saved by the Frisian allies. Drusus also constructed a canal to shorten the distance from the Rhine to the North Sea. This was used by his son Germanicus in AD 15, in whose campaign the fleet was again much in evidence.
But the stormy weather of Northern Europe generally proved a lot to handle for a Roman fleet more accustomed to the calm waters of the Mediterranean. The fleets both in Germany and Britain suffered heavy losses throughout.
Although its activities could hardly be called distinguished, the fleet of the Rhine did receive the title Augusta from Vespasian an later shared with the Lower German units the title pia fidelis Domitiana, following the suppression of Antonius Saturninus.
The headquarters of the German fleet, the fleet of the Rhine, or Classis Germanica, were at today's town of Alteburg near Cologne.. There were probably other stations lower down the river, especially near the mouth, where navigation became hazardous.
The Danube, the other great natural boarder guarding the Roman empire from the northern hordes, has a natural division into two parts at the Iron Gates in the Kazan Gorge at it was probably difficult to pass in times of low water. The river thus came to have two fleets, the Pannonian fleet, Classis Pannonica, in the west, and the Moesian fleet, Classis Moesica, to the east.
The Pannonian fleet owed its creation to the campaign of Augustus in 35 BC. The natives attempted naval warfare on the Sava river with dugout canoes but with short-lived success.
Hostile patrols and supply routes along the rivers Sava and Drava became factors in this campaign. As soon as the Danube became the frontier the fleet was moved there, although Roman patrols will have continued along the main southern tributaries of the great stream.
With Trajan's conquest of Dacia added the need also patrol the northern tributaries- and furthermore the need to guard the coast toward the vast Black Sea, the Pontus Euxinus.
Extensively colonized by the Greeks in the eighth to sixth century BC, it did not attract any serious attention from Rome until the reign of Claudius; until then power had been invested in friendly or client kings.
Little attempt had been made to control piracy. It was the annexation of Thrace which brought part of the shoreline under direct Roman control and there appears to have been a Thracian fleet, the Classis Perinthia, which may have been of native origin.
The Armenian campaigns under Nero's rule led to the taking over of Pontus , and the royal fleet became the Classis Pontica.
During the civil war following Nero's death the Black Sea became a battleground. The freedman Anicetus, commander of the fleet, raised the standard of Vitellius, destroyed the Roman ships and the town of Trapezus and then turned to piracy assisted by tribes from the eastern shore who used a type of boat known as camera.
Thus, a new fleet had to be fitted out and this, with legionary support, frown Anicetus into his stronghold at the mouth of the river Khopi on the east shore from where he was alas surrendered to the Romans by the local tribesmen.
Under Hadrian the Black Sea was divided between the Classis Pontica, responsible for the southern and eastern parts of the Black SEa, the mouth of the Danube and the coastline to the north as far as the Crimea was the responsibility of the Classis Moesica
Organization of the Fleet
The commanders of the fleet were praefecti recruited from the equestrian order like those of the auxiliaries. their status in the military and civil hierarchy underwent changes in the first century AD. At first there was a tendency to use army officers, tribunes and primipilares (first centurions), but under Claudius it became linked with civil careers and some commands were given to imperial freedmen. Though this proved unsatisfactory, one need only look at the example of Anicetus to understand why.
There was a reorganization under Vespasian, who raised the status of the praefecture, and the command of the Misene Fleet became one of the most important and prestigious equestrian posts obtainable. This, together with the praefecture of Ravenna, became a purely administrative position with active service a very unlikely event. The praefectures of the provincial fleets ranked with auxiliary commands.
The lower commands present a complex system. In the first place many of these positions were Greek, owing to the origins of Roman navigation. The navarch must have been the squadron commander, the trierarch a ship captain, but just how many ships constituted a squadron is unknown, although there are indications that it might have been ten.
The basic difference between army and navy was that navy officers could never hope for promotion into another arm, until the system was changed by Antoninus Pius. The highest rank any sailor could achieve until then was to become a navarch.
Each ship had a small administrative staff under a beneficarius and the whole crew was considered a century under a centurion assisted by an optio.
Presumably the centurion was responsible for the military aspects and had under his command a small force of trained infantry who acted as a spearhead in an assault party. The rowers and the other crew members would have some arms training and would have been expected to fight when called upon. The exact relationship between centurion and trierach may have been difficult at times, but custom must have established precise spheres of authority.
The sailors themselves were normally recruited from the lower ranks of society, but were free men. However, the Romans had never readily taken to the sea and few sailors would have been from Italian origin. Most would have originated from amongst the sea-faring peoples of the eastern Mediterranean.
Service was for twenty-six years, a year longer than the auxiliaries, marking the fleet as a slightly inferior service, and citizenship was the reward for discharge. Very occasionally whole crews might for a special piece of gallantry be fortunate enough to receive immediate discharge and there are also cases where they were enrolled into the legion.
Siege Tactics
In conducting sieges the Romans showed their practical genius combined with ruthless thoroughness. If a place could not be overcome by the initial assaults or the inhabitants persuaded to surrender, it was practice of the Roman army to surround the whole area with a defensive wall and ditch and spread their units around these fortifications. This assured no supplies and reinforcements got to the besieged as well as guarding against any sorties of an attempt o breaking out.
There are several examples of efforts being made to cut off the water supply. Caesar was able to take Uxellodunum by concentrating on this target. First he stationed archers who maintained a steady fire on the water carriers who went to draw from the river which ran round the foot of the hill on which the citadel stood. the besieged then had to rely entirely on a spring at the foot of their wall. But Caesar's engineers were able to undermine the spring and to draw the water off at a lower level, thus forcing the town to surrender.
Siege Engines
Siege weapons were varied and ingenious inventions, their main object being to effect an entrance through the gates or walls. Gateways were usually the most heavily defended positions, so that it was often better to select a point along the walls. First, however, the ditches had to be filled with hard packed material to allow the heavy machinery to approach the foot of the wall. But the soldiers manning the wall would try to prevent this by firing their missiles at the working party. to counteract this the attackers were provided with protective screens (musculi) which were lined with iron plates or hides. The musculi provided some protection but not hardly enough. So constant fire had to be directed against the men on the wall to harass them. This was managed by bringing up stout timber towers, higher than the wall, so that men on their tops could pick off the defenders.
The Siege Tower
The ram was a heavy iron head in the shape of a ram's head fixed to a massive beam which was constantly slung against a wall or gate until it was breached. There was also a beam with an iron hook which was inserted into a hole in the wall made by the ram and with which stones would be dragged out. Further there was a smaller iron point (terebus) used for dislodging individual stones. The beam and frame from which it was swung were enclosed in a very strong shed covered with hides or iron plates, mounted on wheels. This was called a tortoise (testudo arietaria), since it resembled this creature with its heavy shell and head that moved in and out.
Under the protection of the towers , most likely in protective sheds, gangs of men worked at the foot of the wall, making holes through it, or digging down to get underneath it. Excavating galleries under the defences was common practice. the purpose was to weaken walls or towers at the foundations so that they collapsed. this was of course much more difficult to do without the enemy becoming aware of it.
At the siege of Marseille the defenders countered attempts to tunnel under their walls by digging a large basin inside the walls which they filled with water. When the mines approached the basin, the water flowed out, flooding them and causing them to collapse.
The only defence against the Roman's massive siege engines was to destroy them either by fire missiles, or by sorties made by a small, desperate body of men who'd try to set fire to them or turn them over.
Catapults
The Roman army used several types of powerful siege weapons for discharging missiles, the largest was the onager (the wild ass, because of the way it kicked out when it fired). Or so it was called from the late third century AD onwards.
When being moved with a legion it would be on a waggon in it's dismantled state, pulled by oxen.
The Onager
Apparently there was an earlier version of this catapult, known as the scorpion (scorpio), although this was a considerably smaller less powerful machine.
Onagri were used in sieges to batter down walls, as well as by defenders to smash siege towers and siege works. This explains their use as defensive batteries in cities and fortesses of the late empire.
The stones they hurled naturally were also effective when used against the densely packed lines of enemy infantry.
Another infamous catapult of the Roman army was the ballista. In essence it was a large crossbow, which could fire either arrows or stone balls. Various shapes and sizes of the ballista were around.
Firstly, there was the large basic ballista, most likely used as a siege engine to fire stones, before the introduction of the onager-type catapults. It woudl have a practical range of about 300 metres and would be operated by about 10 men.
The Ballista
There were more nimble, smaller sizes, including one dubbed the scorpion (scorpio), which would fire large arrow bolts. Also there was the carro-ballista which essentially was a scorpion-sized ballista mounted on wheels or a cart, which could therefore rapidly be moved from one place to another, - no doubt ideal for a battle field.
The most likely use for the bolt-firing scorpio and carro-ballista would be on the flanks of the infantry. Used in much the same way as modern machine guns, they could fire across the heads of their own troops into the enemy.
The large bolts varied in length and size and were equipped with various types of iron head, from simple sharp tips to crested blades.
When on the march these mid-range catapults would be loaded on waggons and then drawn along by mules.
The Scorpio-Ballista
Other, more strange versions of the ballista existed.
The manu-ballista, a small crossbow based on the same principle of the ballista, could be held by one man. No doubt it could be seen as the forerunner of the hand-held medieval crossbow.
Further there has also been some research done into the existence of the self-loading, serial-fire ballista. Legionaries either side would continuously keep turning cranks which turned a chain, which operated the various mechanisms to load and fire the catapult. All that was needed was for another soldier to keep feeding in more arrows.
The estimates regarding the numbers of these machines which a legion would have to draw on are wide-ranging.
One one hand it is said that, each legion had ten onagri, one for each cohort. Apart from this each century was also allocated a ballista (most likely of the scorpion or carro-ballista variety).
However, other estimates suggest that these engines were anything but widespread and that Rome relied for more on the ability of its soldiery to decide matters. And when used by legions on campaign, the catapults had simply been borrowed from forts and city defences. Hence there would be no regular spread of such machines across the troops.
It is hence hard to establish how widespread the use of these machines truly was.
One term causing confusion with these catapults is the 'scorpion' catapult (scorpio). This derives from the fact that the name had two different uses.
Essentially the catapults used by the Romans were largely Greek inventions. And one of the Greek ballista type catapults at first appeared to be called 'scorpion'.
However, also the smaller version of the 'onager' was given that name, most likely as the throwing arm, reminded of the stinging tail of a scorpion. Naturally, this causes some degree of confusion.
redrooster
07-29-2003, 07:32
Goodness, guess i'll be stuck in this thread for a while. Thanks for sharing your work with us Khurjan. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
DemonArchangel
07-30-2003, 00:07
DAMN you're good Khurjan great work, i hope to hear more from you.
This is what the monastary is about.
hi there again this is your host ***** taking you through history again
samnites were rated by romans as their most bitter enemies and here is a chronicle of the three great wars they fought. Material for research was hard to get took me 4 days so enjoy it
First Samnite War (343-341 BC)
While Philip II of Macedonia was expanding his empire, war in Italy erupted again on the plains of Campania, near Neapolis (Naples). People on the plains were invaded by Samnite warrior-herdsmen from nearby hills who wished to use the grasslands of the plains for their animals -- lands that the plains people had fenced. Those on the plains sought help from Rome. Roman envoys went to leaders among the hill people for discussions and were rudely treated. War between Rome and the Samnite hill people followed -- the First Samnite War. The war lasted two years, ending in 345 with Rome triumphant and the Samnites willing to make peace.
Five years after the conclusion of the treaty with Carthage, Rome was at war with the Samnites. For centuries the Sabellian highlanders of the Apennines had struggled to force their way into the plains between the hills and the Mediterranean. But Tuscans and Latins had held them in check, and for the past hundred years the direction of their expansion had been not on Latium but east and south-east. They had begun to stream into Campania where they had become accustomed to a more civilized life, and in turn had become less warlike and ill-fitted to cope with their kinsmen of the hills. The most powerful group of the highlanders, the confederated Samnites, were now, in the middle of the fourth century, swarming down upon their civilized precursors in Campania, as, farther east and south, Lucanians and Bruttians were pressing upon the Greek colonies.
In effect the semi-civilized were hammering the over-civilized. The Greeks were appealing for help to Epirus, the Campanians appealed to Rome and Rome went to their rescue.
The First Samnite War was brief. It was marked by Roman victories in the field and by a mutiny on the part of the soldiery, which was suppressed by the sympathetic common sense of the distinguished dictator Marcus Valerius Corvus, who was said to have vanquished a Gallic Goliath in single combat in his youth.
The war was ended by a hasty peace, owing to the revolt of Rome's Latin allies who resented their dependence on the dominant city. In effect the Romans deserted the Campanians, in face of an immediate menace to their own position. They had forced the members of the Latin League into the Samnite War without consulting them.
Despite its brevity the First Samnite War resulted in the major acquisition to the Roman state of the rich land of Campania with its capital of Capua. Roman historians modeled their description of the war's beginning on the Greek historian Thucydides' account of the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta. Nevertheless, they were probably correct in stating that the Campanians, when fighting over the town of Capua with the Samnites, allied themselves with Rome in order to utilize its might to settle the quarrel. If so, this may have been the first of many instances in which Rome went to war after being invited into an alliance by a weaker state already at war. Once invited in, Rome usually absorbed the allied state after defeating its adversary. In any event, Campania now somehow became firmly attached to Rome; it may have been granted Roman citizenship without the right to vote in Rome (civitas sine suffragio). Campania was a major addition to Rome's strength and manpower.
The Second (Great) Samnite War (326-304 BC)
In 327, war broke out again between Samnite hill people and those on Campania's plain. The Samnites established a garrison in Neapolis -- a city inhabited by Greeks. Again people of the plain sought Rome's assistance, and again Rome went to war against the Samnites. A Roman and allied force became entrapped at Caudine Forks, and it surrendered. The war stalled for five years. And, as Rome waited for the war to resume, it strengthened its military by increasing recruitment.
In 320 and 319, the Romans returned for revenge against the Samnites and defeated them in what the Roman historian Livy described as one of the greatest events in Roman history. Peace was established between Rome and some Samnite towns. But the war dragged on with other Samnites to 311, when the Samnites were joined by Etruscan cities that had decided to join a showdown against Roman power. The war became a contest for the dominance of much of Italy. Between 311 and 304, the Romans and their allies won a series of victories against both the Etruscans and the Samnites. The Samnites announced that they were ready for peace. For assurance, the Romans demanded inspections, and peace was established between the Romans and Samnites that remained until 298.
The Romans soon confronted the Samnites of the middle Liris (modern Liri) River valley, sparking the Second, or Great, Samnite War (326-304 BC), which lasted twenty years and was not a defensive venture for Rome.. During the first half of the war Rome suffered serious defeats, but the second half saw Rome's recovery, reorganization, and ultimate victory.
At first the Roman arms were so successful that in 321 BC the Samnites sued for peace. But the terms offered were so stringent that they were rejected and the war went on.
In the same year (321 BC) the two consuls, leading an invading force into Samnium, were trapped in a mountain pass known as the Caudine Forks where they could neither advance nor retire, and after a desperate struggle would have been annihilated if they had not submitted to the humiliating terms imposed by the Samnite victor Pontius. The troops were disarmed and compelled to pass 'under the yoke', man by man, as a fow vanquished and disgraced. This ancient ritual was a form of subjugation by which the defeated had to bow and pass under a yoke used for oxen. (In this case it was a yoke made from Roman spears, as it was understood to be the greatest indignity to the Roman soldier to lose his spear.)
Six hundred knights had to be handed over as hostages. Meanwhile the captive consuls pledged themselves to a five-year treaty on the most favourable terms for the Samnites. Later Roman historians, however, tried to deny this humiliation by inventing stories of Rome's rejection of the peace and its revenge upon the Samnites.
In 315 BC, after the resumption of hostilities, Rome suffered a crushing defeat at Lautulae.
Until 314 BC, success seemed to flow with the Samnites. Campania was on the verge of deserting Rome. Then the tide turned. But the Roman victory was delayed by the intervention of the Etruscans in 311 BC when the forty years peace reached its end. It was only postponed, however. After the first shock the Romans continuously defeated both their enemies. In 308 BC the Etruscans sued for peace which was granted on severe terms and in 304 BC the Samnites obtained peace on terms probably severe but not crushing.
Ancient sources state that Rome initially borrowed hoplite tactics from the Etruscans (used during the 6th or 5th centuries BC) but later adopted the manipular system of the Samnites, probably as a result of Samnite success at this time. The manipular formation resembled a checkerboard pattern, in which solid squares of soldiers were separated by empty square spaces. It was far more flexible than the solidly massed hoplite formation, allowing the army to maneuver better on rugged terrain. The system was retained throughout the republic and into the empire.
During these same years Rome organized a rudimentary navy, constructed its first military roads (construction of the Via Appia was begun in 312 BC and of the Via Valeria in 306), and increased the size of its annual military levy as seen from the increase of annually elected military tribunes from 6 to 16.
During the period 334-295 BC, Rome founded 13 colonies against the Samnites and created six new rustic tribes in annexed territory. During the last years of the war, the Romans also extended their power into northern Etruria and Umbria. Several successful campaigns forced the cities in these areas to become Rome's allies.
Third Samnite War (298-290 BC)
At the turn of the century, the Samnites decided that they had had enough of peace. They wanted to try again to thwart Roman domination of Italy. The Third Samnite War was the last desperate attempt of the Samnites to remain independent. They persuaded the Etruscans, Umbrians, and Gauls to join them.
The war began again in 298 BCon the plains near Neapolis. When the Romans saw the Etruscans and Gauls in northern Italy joining the Samnites they were alarmed. The Romans had benefited from a lack of coordination among its enemies, but now Rome faced them all at once.
Some relief came with a victory over the Samnites in the south, but the crucial battle for Italy took place in 295 at Sentinum in Umbria, in Italy's northeast, where more troops were engaged than any previous battle in Italy. At first the Romans gave way before an attack by Gauls in chariots. Then the Romans rallied and crushed the Samnites and Gauls, the Romans benefiting from their self-discipline, the quality of their military legions, and their military leadership.
Nevertheless, the stubborn Samnites fought on till a final defeat in 291 BC made further resistance hopeless, and in the following year peace was made on more favourable terms for the Samnites than Rome would have granted any less dogged foe.
The Campanian cities, Italian or Greek, through which Rome had been involved in the Samnite wars, Capua and others, were now allies of Rome, with varying degrees of independence. Roman military colonies were settled in Campania as well as on the eastern outskirts of Samnium.
After Rome's great victory at Sentinum, the war slowly wound down, coming to an end in 282. Rome emerged dominating all of the Italian peninsula except for the Greek cities in Italy's extreme south and the Po valley -- the Po valley still being a land occupied by Gauls.
___
Leonidas (Agiad King, 491-480, Killed at Battle of Thermopylae)
When Xerxes wrote again: 'Deliver up your arms,' he wrote back: 'Come and take them.'
He passed the word to his soldiers to eat breakfast in the expectation that they would be having dinner in Hades.
a bit about celtic warfare part 1
hi this is me your host back with a new episode
here we about the original head bangers of rock
The Celts in Battle
Polybius,who lived between about 202 and 120 B.C.,gives a full account of how the Celts fought at the battle of Telamon in 225 B.C;it is worth quoting at length because it highlights several recurring characteristics:'The Celts had drawn up the Gaesatae from the Alps to face their enemies on the rear ... and behind them the Insurbes ... The Insurbes and the Boii wore trousers and light cloaks,but the Gaesatae in their over confidence had thrown these aside and stood in front of the whole army naked,with nothing but their arms;for they thought that thus they would be more efficient,since some of the ground was overgrown with thorns which would catch on their clothes and impede the use of their weapons.
'On the other hand the fine order and the noise of the Celtic host terrified the Romans;for there were countless trumpeters and horn blowers and since the whole army was shouting its war cries at the same time there was such a confused sound that the noise seemed to come not only from the trumpeters and the soldiers but also from the countryside which was joining in the echo.No less terrifying were the appearance and gestures of the naked warriors in front,all of whom were in the prime of their life and of excellent physique.All the warriors in the front ranks were adorned with gold torcs and armlets.The Romans were particularly terrified by the sight of these men,but,led on by hope of gain,they were twice as keen to face the danger.
'... to the Celts in the rear their trousers and cloaks afforded good protection,but to the naked men in front events turned out differently to what they had expected and caused them much discomfiture and distress.For since the Gallic shield cannot cover the whole body,because they were naked,the bigger they were,the more chance there was of missiles striking home.At length,unable to ward off the javelin throwers because of the distance and the number of javelins falling upon them,in despair and distress some rushed upon the enemy in wild rage and willingly gave up their lives;others,retreating step by step towards their comrades,threw them into confusion by their manifest show of cowardice.'
The ancient writers dwelt upon the terrifying effect an srmy of Celts had on their opponents;their great stature,their wild cries,their gesticulations and prancings,the clashing of arms and blowing of trumpets-all combined to terrify and confuse the enemy.As long as these demonstrations of enthusiasm and bravado struck terror into the foe,the Celts would drive all before them.'For they were always most formidable while they were fresh.' The whole race is war mad,says Strabo,high spirited and quick to fight,but otherwise straightforward and not at all of evil character.
Chariots
In the early encounters of the Celts and the Romans, it was the war chariot which most attracted the Roman interest. It appears that the main use of the chariot was for causing panic when the charioteers drove against the enemy lines at top speed, throwing javelins and by mere speed and noise terrifying the enemy. "Many of the first line were trodden underfoot by the rush of horses and chariots." Once the initial stage of terrifying was over, the warriors dismounted from the chariots and fought on foot, while their attendants kept the chariot at the ready to effect, if necessary, a speedy retreat. The chariots were then merely a means of transport for the warriors to and from their combats, as in Homeric Greece. A thousand chariots took part in the battle of Sentinum (295BC), and at Telamon (225BC) the chariots were stationed on the wings.
"When going into battle," says Diodorus Siculus, "the Gauls use two-horsed chariots which carry the charioteer and the warrior.
When they meet with cavalry in war, they throw their javelins at the enemy and, dismounting from their chariots, they join battle with swords... They bring also freemen as servants, choosing them from among the poor, and these they use as charioteers and shield bearers".
As their prowess and agility as horsemen increased, so the Gauls gradually gave up the chariot. Chariots were no longer in fashion when Caesar was conquering Gaul, and he was surprised to find them still in use in Britain. Strabo states that the Britons used chariots as did some of the Gauls, while Diodorus Siculus says that "they used chariots as the heroes of Greece are traditionally said to have done in the Trojan War".
Caesar's description of the Britons in action gives a good picture of their skill and agility. "At first they ride along the whole line and hurl javelins; the terror inspired by the horses and the noise of the wheels generally throw the enemy ranks into confusion. Then when they have worked their way between the lines of their own cavalry, they jump down from the chariots and fight on foot. Meanwhile the drivers withdraw a little from the field and place the chariots so that their masters, if hard pressed by the enemy, have an easy retreat to their ranks... Their daily training and practice have made them so expert that they can control their horses at full gallop on a steep incline and then check and turn them in a moment. They can run along the chariot pole, stand on the yoke and return again into the the chariot very speedily".
The archaeological evidence for the chariots comprises the metal pieces of the vehicle and the harness found in graves or in votive deposits.Representations on sculpture and on coins help to provide information about the wooden or wicker pieces that no longer survive.Harness was richly decorated with bronze ornaments, sometimes inlaid with coral or enamel. The leather does not survive, but the metal parts have been frequently found in burials and in hoards. Bridle bits, or snaffles, often consisted of three main elements; a central bar, sometimes itself jointed, with rings at each end by which the side loops or cheek pieces were attached to the reins. The leather harness was further elaborated at the strap junctions with a series of mountings of a variety of shapes and decoration. In order to allow the charioteer greater control of the horses, the reins were led over the wooden yoke through a series of bronze rings. Such rein rings (or terrets) were often decorated, but the wear marks where the reins strained the bronze show that they had a practical function. Several important deposits of metalwork of this type have been found in Britain, notably from Lyn Cerrig Bach (Anglesey, Gwynedd)(now in the National Museum of Wales), from Melsonby (North Yorkshire) and from Bawdrip (Somerset) (now in the British Museum).
The technology available to the Celtic wheelwright was the result of the experimentation and knowledge of many earlier generations of European craftsmen. On the continent the wooden rim was usually from a single piece of wood, or felloc, bent to a circular shape with the tapering ends brought together in a long overlapping scarf joint. This was kept in a position by a U-shaped iron clamp, thus keeping the hub and spokes together. The wheel was further strengthened by an iron tyre. A wheel of Celtic type, found in a rubbish pit on the Roman fort at Bar Hill (Dunbartonshire, Strathclyde), had survived because of the damp conditions; the felbe was a single piece of ash, the eleven spokes were of lathe-turned willow and the similarly turned hub was of elm. This careful choice of material shows the craftsman's appreciation of the qualities of the different woods. The iron tyre had been made in one piece and had been set round the felloe when still hot and then shrunk on to it, thus compressing the wood as it cooled. In Britain the more usual type of wheel has several sections to the felbe cut from a plank and joined by tenons; a wheel of second century BC date from Holme Pierrepont (Nottinghamshire) has six sections, with two of the twelve spokes in each, kept rigid by an iron tyre, which has been shrunk round the wooden frame.
The wheels were attached to the axle of a chariot by means of linchpins, often of iron with bronze decoration. Above the axle was the platform, probably about 1 metre (3 feet 3 inches) square, on which the warrior and charioteer stood, while at right angles to the axle the chariot pole rose from axle height about 0.5 metres 1 foot 8 inches) to the height of the shoulders of the horses, about 1.15 metres (3 feet 9 inches). There was probably considerable variation in the style of the sides of the platform, although lightness would have been important for speed. The use of wickerwork is mentioned in the Irish tales, and Fox favoured semicircular sides filled in with wicker.However, a double arcade seems a hetter interpretation of the coin evidence, and there is an attractive model of this type in the British Museum. The front and back would be open, and the view from the platform looking along the pole is a telling reminder of the agility of the warriors described by Caesar.
Several classical authors assert that the Celts had scythed chariots', and this notion has caught popular imagination since 1902, when a statue of Boudica standing in such a chariot was erected on Westminster Bridge. No archaeological corroboration for such additions to the hub caps has been found in Europe, though it seems that chariots with some form of hub projections were found in eastern warfare in the second and third centuries BC.
Head Taking
Another Celtic custom, only very briefly mentioned by polybius, was the decapitation of their enemies. "The consul Gaius fell fighting desperately in the thick of battle, and his head was brought to the Celtic king." After a battle between the Senones and the Romans the consul got no news of the disaster "til some Gallic horsemen came in sight with heads hanging from their horses' breasts or fixed on spears and singing their song of triumph as is their custom". On another occasion the Boii killed a Roman leader, cut off his head and bore it off to their most holy temple. Then the skull was gilded and used as a sacred vessel for libations or as a drinking cup by the priest and temple attendants. During the Punic War, a Celtic contingent in the Roman army, believing that Hannibal's prospects were brighter, killed some Romans and, cutting off their heads, departed with them to join the Carthaginian.
"When their enemies fall", writes Diodorus Siculus, "they [the Gauls] cut off their heads and fasten them to the necks of their horses. They hand over the blood-stained spoils to their attendants and they carry them off as booty chanting a paean over them and singing a hymn of victory. They nail up the heads on their houses just as certain hunters do when they have killed wild beats. They embalm in cedar oil the heads of their most distinguished enemies and keep them carefully in a chest: they display them with pride to strangers, declaring that one of their ancestors or their father or the man himself refused to accept a large sum of money offered for this head. They say that some of them boast that they refused the weight of the head in gold." Strabo repeats these details almost verbatim and claims that Posidonius had seen such heads displayed in many places and had at first been disgusted by the sight but later got used to it.
This head taking and the preservation of the heads of the most distinguished enemies was a practice which had for the Gauls a religious and a magical significance. To the Romans, however, it was a sure sign of inhuman savagery, and Strabo says the Romans put an end to it. Caesar does not mention the custom, and it may have died out by the time he started his campaigns in Gaul.
Naked Warriors
As already mentioned, Polybius described a contingent of Gaesatae (sometimes taken as mercenaries, now more often as spearmen), which took part in the battle of Telamon; they came from beyond the Alps to help the Gauls already in north Italy
(for example the Boii and the Insubres). The Celts of north Italy wore trousers and cloaks, but the Gaesatae fought naked. At
the battle of Cannae (216BC) polybius describes the naked Celts and the Iberians with their short linen tunics with purple borders, and Livy speaks of the Gauls naked from the navel up and of the Iberians with dazzlingly white tunics bordered with purple. The Celts in Asia Minor seem to have preserved this custom, for they too are described as naked in battle with skin white
because they were never exposed except in battle. Camillus, trying to raise the morale of the Romans after the siege of the Capital, pointed to some naked Gauls and said: "These are the men who rush against you in battle, who raise loud shouts, clash
thier arms and long swords, and toss their hair. Look at their lack of hardiness, their soft and flabby bodies and go to it". Dionysus of Halicarnassus expresses the same sentiments: "Our enemies fight bare-headed, their breasts, sides, thighs, legs are all bare, and they have no protection except from their shields; their weapons of defence are thin spears and long swords. What injury could their long hair, their fierce looks, the clashing of their arms and the brandishing of their arms do us? These are mere symbols of barbarian boastfulness."
oh please tell me more about celtic warfare pt 2 zzzzz
hehe here we continue our galant assault on celtics
Noise and Trumpets
In their attempts to throw the enemy into confusion and terror,the Celts made great use of noise.They yelled their war cries as they advanced,howling and singing and brandishing their spears.Livy,in two different contexts,distant in time and place,vividly depicts the noise accompanying their mad rush into battle.Describing the battle of the River Allia,he says;'they are given to wild outburts and they fill the air with hideous songs and varied shouts.'Of the Gauls in Asia he writes:'their songs as they go into battle,their yells and leapings,and the dreadful noise of arms as they beat their shields in some ancestral custom-all this is done with one purpose,to terrify their enemies.' In sharp conrast to the wild onset of the Celts,which was evident also during their invasion of Greece,was the silent,orderly advance of the Greek army.When the Gauls defeated the Roman army at the river Allia,they marched on Rome. 'They arrived at the city and entered atfirst in fear lest there should be some treachery,but then,when they saw that the city was deserted,they moved forward with equal noise and impetuosity.' On another occasion the Romans experienced a new form of noisy warfare:'for standing up in chariots and wagons,the armed enemies came at them with great noise of hooves and wheels so that the unfamiliar din terrified the horses of the Romans.'
There were also the noise of the trumpets.At the battle of Telamon the number of trumpeters and horn blowers was incalculable.Diodorus silicus says they had trumpets peculiar to barbarians:'for when they blow upon them,they produce a harsh sound,suitable to the tumulut of the war.' The Gauls also had their shouts of victory and triumph.'They shouted "Victory,Victory" in their customary fashion and raised their yell of triumph(ululatus)',and at Alesia ' they encouraged their men with shouts of triumph(clamore et ululatu)'.There are several representations of Celtic trumpets on classical sculpture,most notably at Pergamon in Asia Minor,and on the triumphal arch at Orange in Southern France,and a few fragment of actual trumpets have survived.
The mouth of the trumpet shaped in the manner of a boar's head was found in 1816 at Deskford(Banffshire,Grampian);although the trumpet itself no longer survives,the mouth may be compared with the representations on the cauldron from Gundestrup in Denmark,where the sectional nature of the trumpet construction is clearly shown.The Deskford trumpet may originally have had ears and a mane rather like the Gundestrup examples;when first discovered,however,it retained a movable wooden "tongue" which may have added vibration to the strident sounds blown from it.The Deskford piece is usually dated to the middle of the first century AD.
Among the earlier representations of trumpets are those from the temple of Athena Polias Nikephoros at Pergamon in Asia Minor dating to about 181 BC and celebrating the victories of Attalus I over the Galatian tribes in the late third century BC.Trumpets,shields,standards,indeed all the trophies are set out in a great display of spoils of war on the triumphal arch at Orange.The large number of trumpets shown at Orange underlines the impression of the great noise during battle given by the classical writers.
Single Combat
When two armies were arrayed in line,the loud voice of the Celtic chief could sometimes be heard.'For they were accustomed ... to come forward before the frontline and challenge the bravest of the enemy drawn up opposite them to single combat,brandishing their weapons and terrifying the enemy.Whenever one accepts the challenge,they praise in song the manly virtues of their ancestors,proclaiming also their own brave deeds.At the same time they abuse and belittle their opponent,trying by their words to rob him of his boldness of spirit beforehand.'
The story of how Marcus Cladius Marcellus killed a Gallic leader at Clastidium(222 BC.) is typical of such encounters.Advancing with a smallish army,Marcellus met a combined force of Insurbrian Gauls and Gaesatae at Clastidium.The Gallic army advanced with the usual rush and terrifying cries,and their king,Britomartus,picking out Marcellus by means of his badges of rank,made for him,shouting a challenge and brandishing his spear.Britomartus was an outstanding figure not only for his size but also for his adornments;for he was resplendent in bright colours and his armour shone with gold and silver.This armour,thought Marcellus,would be a fitting offering to the gods.He charged the Gaul,pierced his breastplate and cast him to the ground.It was an easy task to kill Britomartus and strip him of his armour.These spoils Marcellus offered to Jupiter.This is the only story of its kind in which the name of the Celtic chief is recorded.
Woman Warriors
It can be said that all celtic societies from the isles to the mainland Europe that both men and women fought along side one another in battle.Boys and girls would be sent out of the families to be fostered in the household of a neighboring tribe or individual.In this way perhaps greater bonds were forged between foster-parent and child,as well as between their families.This would keep the tribe cohesive in a society prone to feuding and deeds of vengeance.
Young boys often received their training from a woman-warrior rather than from a tribal champion.Women warriors were a common feature of Celtic society,but not enforced.The position of the woman warrior was one of teacher.
An old story tells of an Irish hero named Cuchulainn who travels to Alba(Scotland)to learn of Scathach.Scathach,'goddess' of the Isle of Skye,is perhaps the most famous woman warrior.
Another famous celtic female warrior is Queen Boudicca,of the Iceni tribe.Who actively fought against the Roman invasion of Briton.There is even a statue made in her honor with her daughters at the northern end of Westminster Bridge in London.For it is near London that upon excavation presumed to be a site where Boudicca and the Iceni burned a Roman placement to the ground.It has been reported that there are several layers of soot from the excavation.In the end Queen Boudicca and the Iceni were defeated later on,and rather than be taken by the Romans it is said that she and her daughters commited suicide.This is a description of her as written by the Roman Dio Cassius,"was huge of frame and terrifying of aspect with a harsh voice.A great mass of bright red hair fell to her knees".
From me exclusively:
By example we can say that there was much equality among men and women in Celtic society so to speak.The question is what happened to this equality down through the ages.Well since the coming of christianity and the supposed son and 'male' deity there was a shift in belief with the conversion of 'Celts'.So gone are the major female deities who have been manifested into the virgin Mary,Mary Magdalene,etc.An almost one sided replacement with the male aspect.Which means to some degree that the balance between male and female fell out of place.It seems to me that the womens movement born out of the Sixties,women's lib,would never have had to have taken place.With all things comes change and it has been a rather long road back to the balance between men and women.Perhaps if the Celts had been able to repel the Romans the world would be a different place with respect to the Celts and their ancestors.But who's to know.We can not say for sure but if by example with what we have learned from our findings of the Celts the great division of todays world between men and woman in at least the new world that comprises many descendants of the Celts it would certainly be quite different and possibly more balanced.
i will start with hellenistic Era after alexander's death becuase the greek warfare was closer to what romans encountered in their expansion into southern italy and adriatic and since most units in it are in the game. Its always useful to know how and why those greek colonies were founded. This hellenistic era is divided into 4 parts
Battles of Alexander's Successors
After Alexander died of some mysterious illness or poison at Babylon in June 323 BC, the bodyguards summoned his principal friends and officers. Perdiccas placed on the empty throne the ring Alexander had given him while dying and suggested they wait to see if the pregnant Roxane would give birth to a son who could be king, but Ptolemy and others disliked being ruled by the son of an Asian mother. The general Meleager objected to being ruled by Perdiccas in a regency and walked out to join disgruntled soldiers. To avoid civil war, someone suggested Philip's son Arrhidaeus could be king as Philip III, and though considered retarded he had enough presence to prevent imminent fighting; it was agreed that Meleager would be a third general after Craterus and Perdiccas.
A barbaric Macedonian ritual was arranged in which a dog was cut in two and the army was supposedly purified. At the urging of Perdiccas though, Philip III allowed 300 men, who had instigated the discord with Meleager, to be trampled to death by the elephants, and Meleager was later murdered in a temple. It was decided that the king would hold supreme power with Ptolemy satrap in Egypt and Libya, Leomodon in Syria, Philotas in Cilicia, Antigonus in Lycia and greater Phrygia, Cassander in Caria, Menander in Lydia, Leonnatus in western Phrygia, Eumenes in Cappadocia, Pithon in Media, Lysimachus in Thrace, and the eastern provinces were to stay the same. Perdiccas was to command the army for the king. Alexander's body in an elaborate funeral procession was headed for Macedonia, but in Damascus it was diverted to Egypt by Ptolemy.
When news of Alexander's death in Babylon reached Athens, Demades doubted it, saying if it were true, the whole world would stink with the dead body. Already upset by the decree they must readmit exiles and thus give up Samos, Athens led by Hyperides and Leosthenes voted to equip 200 triremes and 40 quadriremes and put all men under forty in the military. Phocion opposed war but continued as a general, while Pytheas, Callimedon and others fled to Antipater and helped to discourage the revolt among the Greeks. With Athenian arms and money Leosthenes hired 8,000 mercenaries at Taenarus. Hyperides and Demosthenes recruited allies in the Peloponnese, though because of the recently defeated Spartan revolt little help came from there. In gratitude for his patriotic efforts Demosthenes was welcomed back to Athens, which paid his fine. The Athenians and Aetolians did get strong cavalry support from Thessaly as well as Achaeans, Dorians, a few Illyrians and Thracians, Carystians from Euboea, and some Argives, Sicyonians, Eleians, and Messenians from the Peloponnesian peninsula. The league established at Corinth was dissolved, and a new Hellenic league was formed. Macedonian ruler Antipater sent to Craterus in Asia for aid.
Athenian Leosthenes led a force to the pass at Thermopylae and attacked and defeated the Boeotians so that allies could join him. In the first battle with Antipater the Thessalian cavalry helped the Athenians and their allies defeat Antipater's Macedonians, who took refuge in Lamia. Antipater asked to negotiate; but Leosthenes demanded surrender and besieged the fortress, though he did not have the equipment to storm the town successfully. Knowing that Macedonian reinforcements were sure to arrive, Phocion noted that the short sprint had been run well, but he doubted they had the strength for the long course. Leosthenes was hit by a stone from a catapult and died; he was replaced by Antiphilus. A Macedonian army of 20,000 with 1500 cavalry was led from Asia by Leonnatus, but he was defeated and killed by the Hellenic league's 22,000 infantry and 3500 cavalry after they left Lamia, allowing Antipater to withdraw with the remaining forces into Macedonia. At a funeral for Leosthenes and others Hyperides spoke of their courage to safeguard the universal liberty of Greece through the rule of law.
If men are to be happy, the voice of law,
and not a ruler's threats, must reign supreme;
if they are free, no groundless charge,
but only proof of guilt, must cause them apprehension;
nor must the safety of our citizens depend on
those who slander them and truckle to their masters
but on the force of law alone.1
However, a Macedonian fleet of 240 ships defeated the Athenian navy in two major battles off the coast of Aetolia and at Abydos near the Hellespont. Many of the Greek allies who had volunteered went home, and Craterus arrived with 43,000 troops and 5,000 cavalry to defeat the league at Crannon in August 322 BC. With the isthmus to the Peloponnesian peninsula blocked and Athens' harbor at Peiraeus blockaded, Athenians had to submit; they recalled the disenfranchised Demades and sent him with Phocion, Demetrius of Phalerum, and Academy head Xenocrates to Antipater, whose turn it was to demand surrender. By Antipater's refusing to negotiate with the league as a whole and by granting favorable terms to the allies, Aetolia and Athens were left isolated.
Athens was required to pay the cost of the war, accept a Macedonian garrison at Munychia, disenfranchise and exile more than half their citizens, transfer Samos to its natives and exiles, and surrender Demosthenes, Hyperides and two other anti-Macedonian politicians (who were hunted down and killed). Xenocrates commented that these terms were moderate if they were slaves but severe if they were free men. Phocion argued against the garrison, and it was agreed it might be removed when the disenfranchised Athenians went into exile; but the garrison stayed fifteen years. Athens thus became an oligarchy run by its richest 9,000 citizens, who had property over 2,000 drachmae (a drachma being a skilled worker's day's wage); this marked the end of Athenian naval power. Aetolians retreated into the mountains unconquered, as Antipater and Craterus returned to Macedonia before crossing over to Asia to challenge Perdiccas in alliance with Antigonus and Ptolemy. In Libya Thibron, who had probably killed Harpalus on Crete, with the mercenaries attacked and besieged Cyrene. The poor drove out the rich, who fled to Egypt and appealed to Ptolemy; he sent a force led by Ophellas which defeated the democrats and Thibron's forces.
Roxane had given birth to a son, Alexander IV; now there were two kings. When Philip II's daughter Cynane arranged for her daughter Eurydice to marry Philip III, Olympias instigated Perdiccas and his brother Alcetas to murder Cynane; but the soldiers were so upset that they had to allow the king to marry Eurydice. Perdiccas, leaving Alcetas and Eumenes in Cappadocia, marched into Egypt, where a botched crossing of the Nile lost 2,000 men; his army mutinied, killed him, and joined Ptolemy. Eumenes, not telling his men they were fighting against Craterus, killed Neoptolemus in single combat and won a victory in which Craterus was also killed. The message from the Greek Eumenes to Perdiccas was read by the Macedonian army, which declared Eumenes an enemy and killed supporters of Perdiccas. Antipater became guardian of the two kings while in Syria, and the satrapies of Antigonus and Ptolemy were confirmed, while Seleucus was given Babylon, Antigenes Susa, and Peucestes held Persia. Antigonus went to war against Eumenes and defeated him in Cappadocia, killing 8,000; but Eumenes escaped to a fortress in Armenia. Antigonus consolidated Lydia and Phrygia and built a fleet that destroyed Alexander's navy commanded by Cleitus for Polyperchon, while Ptolemy sent an army that took over Syria and Phoenicia.
Antipater returned to Macedonia with the two kings and died of illness, having appointed Polyperchon administrator and as chief bodyguard his son Cassander, who immediately replaced the governor of the Munychia garrison at Athens with Nicanor. Next Cassander allied himself with Antigonus and Ptolemy against the imperial dynasty, which turned to Eumenes in Asia. Olympias came to Macedonia but became unpopular for executing Antipatrian partisans. Having escaped a siege with an oath of allegiance to the royal family and driven from the Phoenician coast, Eumenes went east to gather support. Seleucus would support the kings but would not obey Eumenes, who had been condemned by a Macedonian army. So Eumenes captured and garrisoned Babylon but was flooded out by Seleucus and Pithon, who opened a dike. In Persia Eumenes was supported by Antigenes, Peucestas and the imperial army. Two large battles were fought against the army of Antigonus; but when the wives and children of his veterans were captured with the baggage, they mutinied and gave up Eumenes to get them back. Antigonus executed Eumenes and had Antigenes burned alive. Seleucus, fearing treachery when called to account by Antigonus, fled to Egypt where Ptolemy treated him kindly.
To gain favor in Greece, Polyperchon proclaimed for the kings that exiles (with a few exceptions) were to return to the cities, which were to have the autonomy they had under Philip and Alexander. So the Athenians asked the Macedonian garrison to leave Munychia; but Nicanor, serving Cassander and refusing to obey Olympias' order to surrender it, took over the harbor at Peiraeus and was reinforced by Cassander before Polyperchon's son Alexander arrived. Phocion, whose trust of Nicanor had allowed this, now urged the Athenians to let Alexander's troops into Athens; but the growing number of exiles returning voted to depose those who held office in the Antipatrian oligarchy, which included Phocion and Demetrius of Phalerum, who took refuge with Nicanor while Phocion went to Alexander's camp and was accused of treason. His "trial" was by a large mob that included foreigners and slaves, and very few could hear him over the shouting; finally Phocion exclaimed that he pleaded guilty and pronounced his own death sentence but then asked why the others who were not guilty should be punished too. Nonetheless Phocion and four others were executed with poison hemlock, but Demetrius of Phalerum went into exile. Within three months Cassander arrived with an army, and the oligarchic party put to death their prosecutor and recalled Demetrius of Phalerum.
Polyperchon brought an army of 25,000 but could not retake Piraeus; he operated from Corinth but failed to take Megalopolis. The Athenians made terms with Cassander that lowered the property requirement for citizenship to 1,000 drachmae, but Cassander retained the garrison of Munychia for the duration of the war; Demetrius of Phalerum was put in charge of the government as a despot under Cassander and held that position for ten years. Athens was said to have 400,000 slaves, a vast majority. Many Greek cities supported Cassander, and for the first time in its long and proud history Sparta built a wall of defense around the city.
Olympias, supported by prince Aeacides of Epirus, marched back to Macedonia, imprisoned and had killed Philip III and his wife Eurydice (who chose suicide by hanging) and a hundred prominent friends of Cassander. However, Cassander's army escaped from the Peloponnese and besieged Olympias at Pydna; when the Macedonian soldiers were too awed by Alexander's mother to kill her, some relatives of her victims murdered Olympias. Cassander joined with Lysimachus of Thrace, Ptolemy of Egypt, and Seleucus of Babylon to challenge the growing power of Antigonus, while Polyperchon retreated to Aetolia. Cassander revived the city of Thebes and sailing across to Epidaurus retook Argos and Messenia from Polyperchon's son Alexander. Antigonus had Cassander condemned by a Macedonian council for killing Olympias and recalling Olynthian exiles. Antigonus took over Phoenicia, put his son Demetrius at Gaza, and built a fleet of 240 large ships; he also proclaimed Greek freedom and self-government. Antigonus was imitated in this proclamation by Ptolemy; this stimulated Cyrene to revolt against Ophellas, but it was quelled.
In 313 BC Antigonus sent forces to the Black Sea, Miletus and Caria, the Peloponnesian peninsula, and Chalcis before approaching the Bosphorus with his army; but he was blocked there by Lysimachus. Ptolemy with an army of 22,000 attacked Demetrius at Gaza, where 8,000 mercenaries surrendered; Peithon and perhaps Nearchus were killed, and Demetrius fled. Ptolemy then recovered Phoenicia and Syria and settled surrendering mercenaries and Jews at Alexandria. This enabled Seleucus to raise an army and occupy Babylon, defeating and enlisting most of the 17,000 troops of Nicanor before going on to take Media and Susiana. Antigonus recovered Syria and Phoenicia as Demetrius captured 7,000 of Ptolemy's troops at Myus, and Cyrene's Ophellas became independent. Eventually after it was agreed that Antigonus should rule in Asia, Lysimachus in Thrace, Ptolemy in Egypt, the Greek cities be free, and Cassander command in Macedonia, Cassander had Roxane and the young Alexander IV killed. Antigonus encouraged the forming of the Ionian and Aeolian Leagues, founded several new cities, collected contributions, and interfered with grain trading.
Cassander offered to let Polyperchon's son Alexander govern the Peloponnese under him; he accepted and fought against Antigonus' supporter Aristodemus until Alexander was assassinated, though his widow held onto Sicyon. Antigonus encouraged Polyperchon to support Alexander III's son by Barsine, Heracles, and to invade Macedonia; but Cassander offered him the Peloponnese also, and Polyperchon accepting murdered young Heracles. The army of Antigonus ravaged Babylon but could not subdue Seleucus, stimulating Ptolemy to send forces to Cilicia against Antigonus. When Ptolemy wanted to marry Cleopatra, a full sister of the "great" Alexander III, she was assassinated by order of Antigonus, who blamed it on some women he then executed. Only Cassander's wife Thessalonica, a daughter of Philip by a Thessalian mistress, survived of the royal family; all the rest were murdered in these power struggles between the successors. Ptolemy brought an army into Greece and took over Corinth and Sicyon, proclaiming himself a liberator of Cassander's garrisons; but angry the Peloponnesians did not make the contributions they promised, he made an agreement with Cassander, left his own garrisons in Corinth and Sicyon, went back to Egypt, and recovered Cyrene after the death of Ophellas.
In 307 BC Antigonus' son Demetrius took the Peiraeus by surprise, allowed Demetrius of Phalerum to retreat to Thebes and then Egypt, and captured the Cassandrian garrisons at Munychia and Megara, declaring the Megarians free and destroying the fortifications at Munychia. The Macedonian Demetrius entered Athens triumphantly, restored its democracy, and promised a large distribution of wheat. Athenians responded by declaring Demetrius and his father Antigonus not only kings but gods and saviors. Those in the previous Athenian government who did not go into exile but stayed for a trial were acquitted. Resentment of the aristocratic government of Cassander and Demetrius of Phalerum influenced by the philosopher Theophrastus (Aristotle's successor) and the speech-writer Deinarchus led a Sophocles to propose and pass a law that no philosopher could open a school without permission of the council and assembly. Theophrastus and other philosophers left Athens, but a year later Philon of the Peripatetic school prosecuted Sophocles for an unconstitutional law, and the latter was fined five talents; it was repealed, and the philosophers returned along with a new one named Epicurus.
Demetrius, aided by thirty quadriremes from Athens, at Cyprus defeated Ptolemy, who lost 120 warships and had 8,000 mercenaries captured. Demetrius and his father Antigonus began calling themselves kings. Antigonus with 88,000 men, the largest Greek army ever, and a comparable navy led by Demetrius invaded Egypt; but storms scattered the fleet, and Ptolemy won over many of Antigonus' mercenaries with money. Now Ptolemy was called king of Egypt, and the royal title was soon adopted by Lysimachus in Thrace, Seleucus in Babylon, and Cassander in Macedonia. Next Rhodes with help from Ptolemy held out for more than a year against the huge siege engines of Demetrius before peace was made; Rhodes sold the abandoned siege engines and used the money to build the famous Colossus of the Sun over its harbor. Demetrius returned to Athens and for relieving them from a blockade by Cassander was gratefully welcomed in triumph once again, only to turn Athena's Parthenon into a harem. Demetrius helped liberate much of Greece, married Pyrrhus' sister Deidameia, and revived the league of Corinth as a Panhellenic congress, though it lacked Thessaly, Sparta, and Messenia.
Antigonus now eighty years old refused to negotiate with Cassander, and so Cassander formed an alliance with Lysimachus, Ptolemy, and Seleucus. In 302 BC Demetrius invaded Thessaly with 57,500 men and was met by Cassander with 31,000. However, when Lysimachus crossed the Dardanelles and Seleucus marched west with 500 elephants he had gained in a treaty with India's Chandragupta, Antigonus recalled his son Demetrius to Asia. Two of Antigonus' generals in Asia Minor, Docimus and Phoenix, betrayed him. Lysimachus married the widow of Dionysius to secure Heraclea as winter quarters. Demetrius made a truce with Cassander, recovered the Dardanelles, and wintered in Ephesus. Ptolemy invaded Syria but returned to Egypt after hearing a false report that Lysimachus had been defeated. At Ipsus in 301 BC Lysimachus joined forces with Seleucus, and though supported by his son Demetrius, Antigonus was defeated and killed. Demetrius fled to Ephesus, and Antigonus' kingdom was divided between Lysimachus and Seleucus.
Athenians passed a law declaring their neutrality and forbidding any king to enter the city; thus they sent away Demetrius and his wife Deidameia, though Lachares, supported by Cassander's soldiers, took despotic control. Exiles joined Demetrius, who recovered much of the Peloponnese and blockaded Athens into starvation (by hanging the captain of a wheat shipment to terrorize others) until they opened their gates to him, as Lachares escaped. Cassander died in 298 BC, and his younger son Alexander appealed to Demetrius; but Pyrrhus, secured as king of Epirus by Ptolemy's help, got to Macedonia first and was given western territory by Alexander. Demetrius brought his army, wounded and defeated Pyrrhus, murdered Alexander, expelled his brother Antipater, and proclaimed himself king of Macedonia in 294 BC. When Boeotia allied itself to Pyrrhus and the Aetolian League, Demetrius took Thebes, its money, and garrisoned it, as he had Athens.
Demetrius levied 98,000 soldiers, 12,000 cavalry, and had his fleet built up to 500 galleys in preparation for an invasion of Asia. However, the coalition of Lysimachus, Seleucus, and Ptolemy called in Pyrrhus. Afraid his army would desert to Lysimachus, Demetrius marched against Pyrrhus; but the army, not wanting to fight for his luxuries, mutinied and went over to the Epirote king, as Demetrius fled in a disguise. So in 288 BC while Ptolemy crossed the Aegean to attack Demetrius at Athens and Corinth, Pyrrhus and Lysimachus conquered and divided Macedonia, Pyrrhus yielding the crown to Lysimachus.
Demetrius retired to Cassandrea, where his wife Phila poisoned herself. Athenians had overcome the garrison in the Museum; but an attempt to attack the Piraeus garrison was betrayed, and 419 Athenians were killed. However, the Cynic philosopher Crates managed to persuade Demetrius to lift his siege and not fight Pyrrhus over Athens. Then Demetrius left his son Antigonus Gonatas in charge of the remaining garrisons in Greece, while he crossed over to Asia Minor and took Sardis. The army of Lysimachus drove Demetrius into Phrygia, and he considered going to Armenia and Media; but hunger took 8,000 men, and they retreated south to Tarsus and Cilicia, where his mercenaries defected to Seleucus, who captured Demetrius and allowed him to drink himself to death, which came in 283 BC.
The same year Berenice's son Ptolemy II Philadelphus succeeded in Egypt. Berenice's daughter Arsinoe II, now queen of Macedonia as wife of Lysimachus, got his popular son Agathocles executed for treason, which caused many to join Seleucus in Anatolia. Lysimachus marched his army there but was defeated and killed in Lydia in 281 BC. Seleucus went to Macedonia to claim the crown, but he was assassinated by Ptolemy Ceraunus, Eurydice's disinherited son, who now married his half-sister Arsinoe II. Seleucus had already arranged for his son Antiochus to succeed him. Antigonus Gonatas marched north to discover a large invasion of Celtic Gauls defeating and killing Ceraunus; only a legendary miracle of snow at Delphi, the pursuing Aetolians, and a defeat by Antigonus Gonatas in Thrace were able to push the Gauls back out of Greece and across the Hellespont into Anatolia, where they settled as Galatia. The Macedonian crown passed quickly from Ceraunus to Meleager to Antipater and to Sosthenes until in 277 BC Antigonus Gonatas established the Macedonian dynasty that would last more than a century. Pyrrhus returned from campaigning in Italy and ravaged the Peloponnesian peninsula, but he was eventually defeated and killed at Argos by the combined armies of Sparta and Macedonia in 272 BC.
In 334 BC Alexander of Epirus had attacked Lucanian, Bruttian, and Samnite raiders in Italy, where he was killed by a Lucanian exile. In Greek Sicily the Syracusan constitution of Timoleon had been overthrown by an oligarchy of 600. Syracuse sent a force to help Crotona fight off the Bruttians. The strong Agathocles fought bravely, and resenting not being honored, he organized his own force and tried twice to seize the government of Syracuse. By dressing as a beggar Agathocles escaped assassination, but supported by Carthaginians he was appointed a general in Syracuse by the 600. In 317 BC his soldiers murdered forty senators, then ravaged the city killing 4,000, as 6,000 fled or were expelled. Calling an assembly, Agathocles would only agree to lead if the city gave him dictatorial power. He promised abolition of debts and land distribution; he then expanded Syracusan territory by force of arms.
Syracusan exiles appealed to Spartan king Cleomenes, who sent his son Acrotatus; but when Agathocles killed exile leader Sosistratus at a banquet, Acrotatus fled. A peace mediated by Carthaginian general Hamilcar divided hegemony in Sicily between Agathocles and the Carthaginians although the Greek cities were supposed to be autonomous. Messena stood outside, but Agathocles managed to kill 600 of those who opposed him there and at Taormina. When he besieged Agrigentum, Deinocrates and the exiles turned to Carthage, which captured twenty of his ships. So Agathocles marched into Gela and massacred 4,000 people. At the Himera River he lost 7,000 to the Carthaginian cavalry and from thirsty men drinking salt water.
Besieged at Syracuse in 310 BC Agathocles managed to steal enough money from the 1600 wealthiest citizens he had slaughtered, women's jewelry, and temples to take sixty ships filled with soldiers across to be the first Europeans to attack Carthage. In a sacrifice to Demeter and Persephone he burned his ships before taking a large city and fortifying Tunis. The Carthaginian army was defeated and driven back to Carthage. Believing their loss was because they had been cheating on their child sacrifices, it was said the Carthaginians killed 500 children to expiate their guilt. Meanwhile Agathocles' brother Antander defeated the Carthaginian attack on Syracuse led by Hamilcar, who was captured and killed. The Agrigentines led by Xenodocus expelled garrisons and liberated Sicilian towns. When a mutiny broke out in Tunis, Agathocles' threatening suicide got himself reinstated as general.
After the Syracusans and Carthaginians fought each other while the Libyans watched, Agathocles appealed to Ptolemy's viceroy in Cyrene Ophellas, whom Agathocles then killed, taking over the army he brought, shipping out to Syracuse the colonists Ophellas had raised from Athens. At the same time the Carthaginians were being betrayed by their general Bomilcar. Like Alexander's successors, Agathocles declared himself king; then he attacked Utica by using its leading 300 citizens as shields for his siege engines. Agathocles crossed back to Sicily, and two-thirds of the army led by his son in Libya was destroyed. His generals defeated the Agrigentines, but the autonomy movement was revived by Agathocles' old friend Deinocrates, who raised an army of 20,000.
Agathocles went back to Tunis, where the situation became so desperate he tried to escape secretly but was arrested. Eventually he escaped back to Sicily; his sons left in Libya were killed, as his soldiers capitulated to the Carthaginians; commanders who did not were crucified, while their men were enslaved. In Sicily Agathocles sent for his army, which massacred and plundered Egesta. Unable to agree with Deinocrates, Agathocles made a deal with the Carthaginians, defeated the forces of Deinocrates, and regained control of Syracuse. Agathocles led military expeditions in Italy and took the island of Corcyra away from Cassander's Macedonians in 298 BC and then had 2,000 Ligurians and Etruscans killed for mutinously demanding their pay. Agathocles ruled in Syracuse until his death at age 72 in 289 BC when he was probably poisoned.
Hellistic Era Part 2
hehe you all heard of roman orgies now feel and experiance Creative orgies
Part 2
Egypt Under the Ptolemies
Alexander's army had been welcomed into Egypt, and the Macedonians took over imperial rule from the Persians. After Alexander's death, Ptolemy I Soter defeated Perdiccas and established his Macedonian dynasty in Alexandria. Using Egyptian wealth, he hired Greek mercenaries to defend and expand his kingdom, claiming Syria as far north as the Eleutherus River in 301 BC. Seven years later he commissioned Peripatetic scholar and Athenian exile Demetrius of Phalerum to organize the Museum for Hellenic intelligentsia. With the final fall of the Antigonid Demetrius in 285 BC Ptolemy took over his navy along with ports in the Cyclades, Tyre, and Sidon to add to Cypress. Two years earlier he had repudiated his wife Eurydice and her son Ptolemy Ceraunus to marry Berenice. Against the advice of Demetrius of Phalerum he associated in his rule Berenice's and his son, who two years later became Ptolemy II Philadelphus and locked up Demetrius, who was then killed by an asp. In 280 BC Ptolemy II's army took Damascus and Miletus away from the Seleucids.
In 275 BC Ptolemy II Philadelphus married his sister Arsinoe II, who also took the name Philadelphus to signify their love for each other. The next year his half brother and viceroy of Cyrenaica invaded Egypt, while Antiochus I marched into lower Syria. Arsinoe's ambition was credited with Egypt's holding off the Seleucids and hanging on to Anatolia and Cilicia from Miletus south. Egyptian money was sent to support Pyrrhus' plunder of the Peloponnese until he was killed; then Ptolemy II supported Spartan king Areus against Antigonus Gonatas. Egyptian gold also subsidized the new dynasty at Pergamum in Anatolia, and Ptolemy II took Ephesus, only to have Arsinoe's son (by Lysimachus) placed there turn against him in an Ephesian insurrection in 260 BC. Rhodes took over Ephesus as this son was killed by his own troops, and the next year Antiochus II took back Miletus. Egypt lost a naval battle to Antigonus Gonatas off Cos and had to surrender much of its northern empire.
In 246 BC Ptolemy III Euergetes succeeded his father, as did Seleucus II his father Antiochus II. When his sister Berenice was murdered after having married Antiochus II, Euergetes marched into Syria and was victorious, then lost some territory before signing a peace treaty in Palestine. In 219 BC Antiochus III marched down the Phoenician coast; Ptolemy IV Philopator's prime minister Sosibius recruited an army of native Egyptians and stopped the Seleucids at Raphia near Gaza two years later, but the costs of this taxation were felt for many years. The Ptolemies used substantial income taxes, tariffs, and tolls to maintain their Macedonian-ruled military empire. A bureaucracy of Greeks educated by the state administered the top levels, while the Alexandrian library grew to a collection of 700,000 papyrus scrolls. Slaves captured in wars were imported, and it was said that Ptolemy I Soter brought 100,000 Jewish captives back to Alexandria, though scholars consider this exaggerated. Greeks were clearly favored over natives even by the laws, and resentment grew after the Egyptians helped win the victory at Raphia.
When Ptolemy IV Philopator died in 204 BC, a power struggle led to the disappearance of Sosibius, the lynching of the other minister Agathocles in Alexandria, and the murder of Arsinoe III, Philopator's sister and wife. The young Ptolemy V Epiphanes (r. 203-181 BC) faced revolts and even lost control of Thebes to a secessionist Nubian dynasty until 187 BC. Antiochus III took over Syria for the Seleucids, as Egypt was reduced to itself, Cypress, and Cyrene. Ptolemy V was only 28 when he was poisoned in 181 BC; his widow Cleopatra I, daughter of Antiochus III, ruled as regent for eight years. After Egypt sent an expedition into Palestine, Antiochus IV invaded Egypt, and in 169 BC Ptolemy VI Philometor was captured at Memphis, causing the Alexandrians to appoint his brother Euergetes II king as Ptolemy VII. Rome, which was becoming dependent on Egyptian grain, sent an envoy to demand that Antiochus IV leave Egypt, and thus the Seleucids were kept out of Egypt. The Roman Senate and the Alexandrians agreed that Ptolemy VI Philometor should rule Egypt and Cypress, while Euergetes II was given Cyrenaica. Philometor invaded Syria again in 147 BC and held it for two years before he was killed near Antioch; Ptolemaic Egypt then withdrew from Syria and never returned.
Euergetes II married Philometer's widow and sister of both of them, Cleopatra II, and then ruled for 29 years along with Ptolemy VI's daughter Cleopatra III, surviving an exile of five years from conflicts with his divorced sister and mother-in-law Cleopatra II. According to Diodorus, Ptolemy VII (Euergetes II) was hated for brutally killing Cyreneans and others, but he favored native Egyptians as the native soldier class grew. Greek language and Egyptian culture merged. Cleopatra III co-ruled with her son Ptolemy VIII until she was able to permanently replace him with her favorite son Alexander, who became Ptolemy IX in 108 BC. Cleopatra III died in 101 BC but was replaced by Berenice. In 88 BC Ptolemy VIII expelled his brother and ruled until he died in 81 BC. Rome took over Cyrenaica in 96 BC and annexed it as a province in 74 BC. The Ptolemies continued to rule under the supervision of the Roman senate until the Alexandrians drove out the flute-playing King Ptolemy XI in 59 BC; but he was restored three years later by the Roman commander in Syria and ruled until 51 BC when he was succeeded by Ptolemy XII and his sister Cleopatra VII, who became involved with Julius Caesar and Mark Antony in Rome's civil wars.
Under the Ptolemies the temples of Egyptian religion were respected, and many new ones were built. These included hymns to the gods, such as one to the creator god Khnum urging him to awaken in peace. The Demotic language was used not only for daily business but also for literary works that continued the ancient Egyptian wisdom tradition. Two tales of the antiquarian prince Setne Khamwas indicate that magic was still a popular theme. In the first Setne Khamwas finds a magic book he gets from Na-nefer-ka-ptah and his wife and child, who had all died in attaining the magical book, which Setne then uses to seduce a beautiful woman named Tabubu; but before she will give in to his pleasure she keeps making requests until finally Setne kills his own children. Just as he is about to enjoy her, he awakes naked to see the Pharaoh telling him to go to Memphis to see his children. Setne finds his children there safe and is persuaded to return the magic book back to Na-nefer-ka-ptah.
In the second story Setne's son Si-Osire demonstrates his ability to read a book without opening it. They observe the honored funeral of a rich man and the body of a poor man being carried off only in a mat, but the son wishes that his father will go to the underworld with the poor man. When his father asks why, the son leads him to the next world, where one's good deeds are weighed against one's bad deeds. Those whose misdeeds are greater go to the Devourer, while the soul that has more good deeds rises into heaven with the august spirits. The poor man is now richly dressed and standing next to Osiris, because his good deeds outweighed his bad deeds; but the rich man has been imprisoned for his many bad deeds. Those who do good to others will fare well in the next world, but the evil experience evil. Si-Osire demonstrates his abilities by reading a closed book for the Pharaoh and proving that his magic is more powerful than the magic of the Nubian court; then he vanishes, and Setne and his wife conceive another son.
Animal fables were also passed down as folkloric wisdom. The one which concludes with the Aesopian fable of the mouse who helps the lion after he is spared is very critical of humans who kill and torture various animals such as a panther, horse, donkey, bear, ox, cow, and another lion. Each of these says that there is no animal more cunning than man and hopes that they will not fall into the hand of man. After the mouse helps the lion escape from the human trap, he says, "It is beautiful to do good to him who does it in turn."2
The Instruction of Ankhsheshonq is about a priest of Re who is asked to join a plot to kill Pharaoh, but Ankhsheshonq tries to persuade his friend not to do it. The conspirators are caught and executed, and Ankhsheshonq is put in prison for not reporting the plot. There he writes a long list of proverbial wisdom for his son that includes such ideas as being gentle and patient so that your heart will be beautiful and not to abuse others when faring well lest you fare badly. The golden rule is well expressed as not doing to another what you dislike so as to cause another to do it to you. Wealth of a town is a just lord, of a temple the priest, of a field its work, of a storehouse its stock, of a wise person speech, of a town not taking sides, and of a craftsperson one's equipment. Much more good and practical advice is included.
The Instruction of Papyrus Insinger is more pious and moral. The author notes that a son does not die from being punished by his father, but whoever loves his spoiled son will spoil himself too. Various ways of discovering the heart are by sending one on a mission, testing in some matter, consulting one in deliberation, and asked one for something; but a woman may not be known anymore than the sky. A ruler is punished for letting an impious person have power. Greed is condemned for putting strife and combat in a house and for removing shame, mercy, and trust from the heart. Whoever loves one's neighbor will find a family around one. We are advised not to cheat when questioned, because behind us is a witness (God). Violence, poverty, insult, and unkindness are found to be never at rest.
Leet Eriksson
08-01-2003, 21:58
Good work at history there Khurjan,very enteratining and informative.I say,you made me interested in celtic warfare,gotta read more on that.
thanx for the compliments
i will be including carthagians, byzantines, greeks etc in this thread i opened this thread up in totalwar.com forums too to educate the peeps there....sigh most of them cant even tell a puggio from a gladius kids now adays
Page of Links regarding the history of the Germanic peoples
http://www.anglo-saxon.demon.co.uk/lyfja/ghp/history.html
Great job, khurjan. And good links. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
Murmandamus
08-11-2003, 08:38
Wow, going to take me a while to read all this. Great work.
There is another site here with plenty of info on the Roman Army:
http://www.pvv.ntnu.no/~madsb/home/war/romanarmy/
in this part we will see the intrgues and alliances which brough naviie romans into the clutches of seductive greek civilization and marked the fusion of roman-greek civilization
part 4 the fini
Antigonid Macedonia and Greece
Antigonus II Gonatas, son of Demetrius and grandson of Antigonus I, after defeating the Gauls in Thrace eliminated his rivals and established the Antigonid dynasty in Macedonia in 276 BC. Two years later though, the king of Epirus, Pyrrhus, invaded Macedonia, drove out Antigonus Gonatas to Thessalonica, and took over the defecting Macedonian army. Violations of royal tombs by a garrison of Gauls at Aegae offended people, and Pyrrhus went south to invade the Peloponnese, leaving his son Ptolemy in charge. Antigonus Gonatas regained control of Macedonia and conveyed an army by sea to Corinth against Pyrrhus, whose son Ptolemy was killed in an ambush by the forces of King Areus of Sparta. At Argos Pyrrhus was trapped between the armies of the Macedonians and the Spartans and killed by a tile thrown by a woman from a rooftop in 272 BC.
The Aetolian league had taken possession of Delphi in 290 BC and fought off (according to Diodorus) 160,000 Gauls there in 279 BC. This collection of villages north of the Corinthian Gulf joined together for defense and plunder, increasing their votes on the Amphictyonic council from two to six in ten years. Athens, urged on by Egypt, declared the Chremonidean War (named after its Athenian proposer) against Antigonus Gonatas in 267 BC; but Spartan help collapsed when their king Areus died two years later; the army of Epirus was defeated by Gonatas' young son; and besieged Athens, unrelieved by Egypt, was starved into accepting a Macedonian garrison by 262 BC.
The city of Sicyon often suffered under tyrants; but when Cleon was killed, Timoclides and Clinias were chosen as respected magistrates. When Timoclides died, Abantidas killed Clinias and tried to kill his seven-year-old son Aratus too, but he escaped to Argos. After a while the tyrant Abantidas was killed by Dinias and a logician named Aristotle during a discussion in the marketplace. Abantidas' father Paseas took over but was assassinated by the next tyrant Nicocles. Now twenty, Aratus gathered some mercenaries and in a stealthy raid at night took over the tyrant's house without a person dying, as Nicocles fled through underground passages. Aratus had Sicyonian liberty proclaimed and invited back the many exiles driven out by previous tyrants, causing internal conflicts over property. To defend themselves against the ambitions of Macedonian Antigonus Gonatas, Sicyon joined the Achaean league in 249 BC. Aratus went to Egypt and got 150 talents from Ptolemy II to help settle the disputes between the rich and the poor. Made sole arbitrator, Aratus nonetheless convened a commission of fifteen citizens to help him make settlements.
In 245 BC the Aetolian league defeated the Boeotians and controlled central Greece, while many Dorians and Arcadians became citizens of the Achaean league, which elected Aratus its leader. The Achaean general was not allowed to succeed himself, and so Aratus was elected every other year; two years later after raising money by selling family treasures, Aratus led another daring raid that took the citadel at Corinth away from the Macedonians. Megara, Troezen, and Epidaurus joined the Achaean league; but though Aratus devastated Salamis and released Athenian citizens without ransom, the Athenians refused to join the league.
Intent on overthrowing the tyranny in Argos, Aratus failed and was charged by its latest tyrant Aristippus and convicted of acts of hostility by a jury of Arcadians from Mantinea. His hatred of Argos also caused the Achaeans to violate the traditional safe conduct by selling their enemies, who passed through their territory after attending the games celebrated by the Argives. However, when Aristippus marched on Cleonae, Aratus defeated the Argives, as his forces killed 1500 soldiers and Aristippus without losing a man; but he still could not take or liberate Argos, as Aristomachus became tyrant there. So Aratus turned his attention to Lydiades, who had usurped power at Megalopolis, and he persuaded him to resign the government and enroll his city into the Achaean league. Lydiades was then elected general in 235 BC by the Achaeans and declared war on the Lacedaemonians, which Aratus opposed. While the Achaeans fought the Aetolian league, Aratus and Lydiades were elected general in alternating years. Aristomachus was also persuaded to let Argos join the Achaean alternately in 229 BC, and he was elected general by the Achaeans the next year.
Frequent wars in Greece increased the population of slaves, causing unemployment, increasing mercenaries, and leading to more wars. The poet Leonidas of Tarentum indicated that one had to wear weapons to live in Sparta, for the city had gone weapons-crazy. The number of citizens in Sparta was reduced to 700 hoplites; many of the remaining landowners were women, and wealth was concentrated in the hundred who owned more than their own lots. In 244 BC 20-year-old Agis became king and canceled debts, promising to redistribute the land of Sparta into 4,500 equal lots with 15,000 lots for those dwelling in the surrounding area who could bear arms; he promised to contribute his own land and 600 talents, and many of his wealthy relatives and friends did likewise. However, Agis IV postponed the land reform to join Aratus' Achaean league in challenging Macedonian tyranny over Megalopolis and Argos. Returning from the war, Agis found reactionary forces led by co-king Leonidas in control; rather than provoke a civil war, Agis went into exile and was the first Spartan king to be executed by the ephor officials.
Antigonus Gonatas was succeeded as king of Macedonia in 239 BC by Demetrius II. Alexander of Epirus had also died, and the Aetolians were demanding the northern half of Acarnania, which Epirus thought belonged to them. Alexander's widow Olympias gave Demetrius her daughter Phthia in marriage, which put the Macedonians against the Aetolians, who allied themselves with the Achaeans. Thus Demetrius spent ten years fighting the Aetolian and Achaean leagues, taking Boeotia and Phocis but losing control of the Peloponnese. In Epirus after Macedonian support was withdrawn, a revolution overthrew the royal dynasty in 231 BC, establishing a federal republic and renouncing its claims in Acarnania. The Acarnanians declared their independence, but were invaded by the Aetolians and so appealed to Demetrius for help; he recommended the Illyrians, who known for their piracy now turned to conquest, extending their control south to the Corinthian Gulf and even taking Corcyra until they were stopped by the Romans.
Leonidas II ruled Sparta alone until he died in 235 BC and was succeeded by his son Cleomenes III, who married Agis' beautiful widow Agiatis and was won over by her to the radical program of social reform. After the death of Demetrius II in 229 BC, the Achaean league and the Spartans fought over Arcadian towns. Athens by 228 BC finally paid off the Macedonian garrisons with 150 talents to which Aratus contributed twenty talents although Athens still refused to join the Achaean league. The wealthy Eucleides contributed large amounts, raised private funds for the defense of Athens, and as military treasurer controlled Athenian finances for twenty years. However, the Boeotians and Phocians in throwing off Macedonian domination did join the Achaeans. When the Achaeans attacked Elis in 227 BC, Cleomones' Spartan forces routed them; but he was defeated by a relief force led by Aratus near Megalopolis. When Aratus refused to pursue them, Lydiades did and was killed.
Returning to Sparta to institute the reforms, Cleomenes had his soldiers murder the ephors; he exiled eighty citizens and removed the ephors' seats, except for the one he sat in to conduct business. Cleomenes gave his property to the state and assigned a lot to each of those he had exiled. He made citizens of 4,000 men who lived around Sparta, arming and training them as hoplites with traditional Spartan discipline. Cleomenes was also influenced by the Stoic philosopher Sphaerus, whom he appointed Spartan Minister of Education and put in charge of Lycurgan restoration of Spartan discipline. Those previously not enfranchised who lived around Sparta, resident aliens, and even Helots were given more rights. With Ptolemy III's support the army was re-organized, though the mother and children of Cleomenes III had to go to Alexandria as hostages.
Spartan power grew, but Aratus still refused to accept Cleomenes' leadership of the Achaean league. Instead in 224 BC Aratus turned to the Macedonian regent for young Philip V, Antigonus Doson, who formed an alliance not only with the Achaean league but also with Thessaly, Epirus, Acarnania, Boeotia, Euboea, and Phocis. Doson was elected commander-in-chief (hegemon), took Mantinea and gave it to the Achaean league, which killed or sold into slavery all its people in revenge for the Mantineans having murdered the Achaean garrison. Cleomenes freed 6,000 Helots, who could pay five minae each, raising 500 talents and equipping 2,000 of them for his phalanx. The Spartans captured Megalopolis; Cleomenes offered to restore the city if they would become his ally; but Philopoemen would not let the Megalopolitans abandon their pledge to the Achaeans, and the city was plundered and razed. One of the generals for Megalopolis in their battles with Sparta was the Cynic poet Cercidas, who lamented the suffering of the poor, criticized the gods for not distributing earthly goods justly, and warned the rich to stop being spendthrifts or misers and to help those in need or else there would be trouble.
While the Macedonian troops were in winter quarters, the forces of Cleomenes ravaged the country around Argos; but with their Egyptian subsidy withdrawn, Sparta was defeated at Sellasia by greater numbers and taken for the first time in its history. Although Antigonus Doson treated the city humanely and left soon to quell revolts in the north, the reforms were canceled. Cleomenes fled to Egypt, where he was supported by Ptolemy III; but conditions deteriorated under Ptolemy IV, and Cleomenes and his few supporters, after a futile revolt in Alexandria, committed suicide.
Antigonus Doson died in 221 BC, and 17-year-old Philip V began to rule Macedonia. Described as lascivious and a most cruel tyrant by Plutarch, Philip V gave the Aetolian Dicaearchus twenty ships to use for piracy, ordered 10,000 Dardanians massacred, and put to death without trials so many of his noble subjects and relations that the Macedonians felt horror and hatred toward him. The Aetolians led by Scopas ravaged their former ally Messenia, which having been spared in the Cleomenic war, offered much booty. The Achaeans voted for reprisals. Some Cynaetheans betrayed their city to the Aetolians, and Polybius blamed their destruction on neglecting their musical traditions.
Young Philip did not punish Sparta for those who had killed some of his supporters. Joining with Macedonia's allies at Corinth, he and the Achaean league declared they would take back any city taken by Aetolians since the death of Demetrius II nine years before; but they would not punish those who had been compelled to join the Aetolian league. So began what was called the Social War. Scerdilaidas got help from Philip in subduing Illyria by promising to attack the Aetolians by sea for twenty talents per year. The Byzantines, no longer able to pay off the Gauls, had to start charging shipping duties, which led to a war with maritime power Rhodes until Byzantium agreed to end the tolls. On Crete the dominance of Knossos and Gortyna led to a civil war, as Polyrrhenia appealed to and later supported the Achaeans and Philip, while the Knossians supported Aetolia.
When news of Cleomenes III's death reached Sparta in 219 BC, the ephors were assassinated, Lycurgus and Agesipolis were made kings, and an alliance with the Aetolians and Elis was formed. While Scopas and the Aetolians marched through Thessaly to invade Macedonia, Philip's forces passed through Acarnania to attack the Aetolian city Phoetiae until news of a Dardanian invasion of Macedonia caused Philip to send Demetrius of Pharos by sea while he marched back to Pella, scaring away the Dardanians. While the Spartans harassed Argolis and Arcadia, the Aetolians now led by Dorimachus invaded Epirus and destroyed their sanctuary at Dodona. Philip joined the Achaeans led by the younger Aratus in Arcadia, where they stormed Psophis and gave this town and Lasion to the Achaeans. Next the Macedonian army captured many while plundering Elis, no longer inviolable because of the Olympic games.
Philip started listening more to Aratus than to the advice of Apelles, who was hostile to the Achaeans and whose accusation of Aratus proved false. Short of supplies, Philip got the Achaeans to vote him fifty talents and a large supply of grain. With Dorimachus and half the Aetolian army fighting in Thessaly, Philip invaded Aetolia again and in revenge for Aetolian crimes at Dium and Dodona the Macedonians looted and destroyed religious and artistic works at Thermus. Polybius strongly criticized Philip for this behavior and suggested he would have been much more successful by being generous rather than destructive. Eventually the conspiracy of Apelles, Leontius, and Megaleas was exposed after Megaleas was tried by Philip's friends and imprisoned; Leontius and Ptolemaeus were executed, and Megaleas, Apelles, his son and a favorite took their own lives. Philip's army regained control of Thessaly and Magnesia, taking a town there called Thebes, selling its inhabitants into slavery, and renaming it Philippi.
Hearing that Hannibal had defeated the Romans in Etruria, Demetrius of Pharos began to fill Philip's head with thoughts of greater conquest. So in 217 BC he made a treaty with the Aetolians in which each side kept what they held. Agelaus of Naupactus argued that the Greeks must be united in peace to take up the challenge of either Rome or Carthage. According to Polybius, a drastic change in Philip's situation occurred when he listened to Demetrius of Pharos again rather than Aratus and betrayed the Messenians by taking their citadel. Later Philip V secretly had Aratus poisoned. Philip's ambition caused him to make an alliance with Carthage's Hannibal against Rome, which then formed an alliance with the Aetolians, Elis, Sparta, Messenia, and Pergamum. When Spartan tyrant Machanidas attacked Mantinea in 208 BC, Philopoemen's Achaean army trained in phalanx warfare was said to have slaughtered 4,000 men there, as Philopoemen killed Machanidas with his javelin. The next year Nabis instituted more radical policies in Sparta that even freed some Helots.
Philip invaded Aetolia and made another peace, but his enslavement of the Cius alienated Rhodes. Having built up his navy, the Macedonians attacked Rhodes, raised money by piracy, fought the Pergamene fleet, and besieged Abydos. Attalus I of Pergamum and Rhodes appealed to Rome. When they had defeated Carthage, the Romans saved Athens after Philip's forces sacked the suburbs. The Romans then invaded Macedonia, and supported by the Aetolian league, defeated the Macedonian army in Thessaly in 197 BC. The poet Alcaeus, who satirized Philip for attacking everything except Mount Olympus and for poisoning Epicrates and Callias wrote the following epigram:
Not wept for and not buried in this tomb
we lie, traveler, thirty-thousand men,
destroyed by the fighting Aetolians and Latins
brought by Titus from broad Italy,
a calamity to Emathia; while His Boldness,
Philip, went off faster than any deer.7
Apparently Philip V had the critical poet crucified, for he left the following epigram:
Traveler, on this ridge a leafless, barkless tree,
one gaunt cross, is planted: Alcaeus's.8
The next year during the Isthmian games at Corinth Flamininus proclaimed Greek liberty as a gift from Rome. However, Thessaly was divided into a federation of four states, and several cities had their magistrates and council seats restricted to the wealthy. Unable to protect it, Philip had given Argos to Spartan tyrant Nabis, who instituted his reforms there by terror until he was persuaded by the Romans to free Argos. The Romans withdrew from Greece in 194 BC.
Unhappy with the settlement, the Aetolians allied with Nabis in Sparta and invited Seleucid Antiochus III to liberate Greece. However, some Aetolians, who assassinated Nabis and plundered their host city, were then massacred by the Spartans. The Aetolians took Demetrias in Magnesia and waited there for the 10,000 men Antiochus brought across to take the Propontis peninsula in Thrace; but they were defeated by the Romans at Thermopylae, and Antiochus fled back to Asia. The Romans punished the Aetolians by restricting their territory, and a treaty with Rome ended their independence. The Roman legions marched through Macedonia with Philip's protection, crossed the Hellespont and defeated the Seleucids again at sea and on land. The Roman senate liberated the Greek cities who had taken their side, giving Pergamum much territory and Rhodes Lycia and Caria south of the Maeander. Though Rhodians had argued for liberating Greek cities from Pergamum's control, Lycians were soon fighting Rhodes for their independence.
As this war was ending in 188 BC, the Achaean league led by Philopoemen captured Sparta unresisted. Philopoemen executed eighty Spartans who had murdered Achaeans at Compasium, expelled the partisans of Nabis, sold 3,000 who would not leave into slavery, demolished new fortifications, dispossessed the Helots, and abolished the institutions of Lycurgus, replacing them with Achaean ephebic training. Philopoemen got Sparta, Elis, and Messenia to join the Achaean league, uniting the Peloponnesian peninsula; but when Messenia revolted, Philopoemen was captured and poisoned in 182 BC.
Callicrates became leader of the Achaean league and, while staying on friendly terms with Rome, allowed Sparta to rebuild their walls and resume their traditional discipline. Philip V died in 179 BC and was succeeded in Macedonia by his son Perseus, who already had had his brother Demetrius assassinated, ordered his rival Antigonus killed, and continued his father's war preparations against Rome. When Eumenes II of Pergamum was nearly murdered by agents of Perseus and persuaded the Roman senate to attack Macedonia, the Roman army invaded Greece and took three years to defeat the Macedonians; but in 168 BC largely because Perseus was unwilling to give money to allies, his army was soundly defeated at Pydna. The Antigonid dynasty ended as Macedonia was divided into four tribute-paying republics by the Romans. One thousand eminent Achaeans named by Callicrates were deported to Rome for fifteen years, including the historian Polybius. From Epirus 150,000 were taken to the Roman slave markets. Athens had supplied the Roman army with over a million gallons of grain and was rewarded with Haliartus as well as Lemnos and Delos, which as a free port became a great commercial success, though Athenian settlements caused problems later in all these colonies.
When Athens tried to tax Oropus, they complained to the Roman senate; they referred the dispute to Sicyon, which fined Athens 500 talents. The Athenians sent to Rome Carneades, head of the Academy, along with the heads of the Stoic and Peripatetic schools, and they managed to get the fine reduced to 100 talents. When the Oropians appealed to the Achaean league, Athenians plundered Oropus and withdrew; but a dispute over a bribe of ten talents divided this league, and Rome eventually allowed Sparta, Corinth, Argos, and others to secede from the league. In 150 BC the Achaean league attacked Sparta in defiance of the Roman senate. The next year Andriscus claiming to be the son of Perseus tried to revive the Macedonians; but they were defeated, and Macedonia became a Roman province. In 146 BC the Achaean army was routed by the Romans. Because Roman envoys had barely escaped death from a Corinthian mob, the Roman senate ordered all the inhabitants of Corinth sold into slavery and the city demolished. Greece was absorbed into the province of Macedonia.
When Pontus king Mithridates VI revolted against Roman taxation, he sent to Athens in 88 BC an envoy named Athenion, who persuaded the Athenians to let him take over the city and challenge Rome. The wealthy began to leave, but Athenion placed guards at the gates and put to death many who resisted his dictates. Archelaus led forces that killed thousands of Italians at Delos and sent its treasure with Aristion to Athens. Archelaus also got support for Mithridates' revolt from the Lacedaemonians and Achaeans, and his fleet seized the Piraeus harbor. However, Sulla brought five Roman legions to Greece, picked up support in Boeotia, and besieged Athens and Piraeus. Athenians were reduced by starvation to cannibalism; when the Romans finally stormed the city, many were slaughtered, slaves were sold, Aristion and his bodyguards were executed, 40 pounds of gold and 600 pounds of silver were taken, but Athens was allowed to survive under Roman domination.
Rhodes steadily grew in prosperity and power, especially after withstanding the siege of the Antigonid Demetrius in 305 BC. Building the Colossus and becoming a commercial center, Rhodes got wealthy from a two-percent tax on trade that included much grain. After the colossal statue was destroyed by an earthquake in 227 BC, many Greek cities contributed to restoring the city. Early in the second century BC to safeguard shipping, their navy cleared the eastern Mediterranean of pirates. However, when Rhodes did not support the Romans in their war against Macedonian king Perseus 171-168 BC, Rome declared Delos a free port under Athenian control, which took much banking business and trade away from Rhodes. With less funds piracy increased again, though Rhodes fought off Rome's enemy Mithridates VI, and they continued to be a cultural center until Rhodes was devastated by Caesar's murderer Cassius in 43 BC.
Early Rome till 133 BC part 1
hi all there lend me your ears (groan)
man i should be in hollywood with my one liners )
The reason I choose Early Rome till 133 BC is becuase that roughly concides with where historians agree that true Republic died in all but name and Imperial Rome or rome as we know starts. Though the fiction of Republic was maintained by all.
part 1
Roman and Etruscan Kings
Etruscan culture developed during the iron age, and its confederation of twelve city states flourished during the seventh and sixth centuries BC. Corinthian pottery indicates active trading and the immigration of artisans, such as Demaratus about 655 BC. Artistic expression and strong religious beliefs using divination methods indicate likely influences from Asia. Herodotus reported that Lydians led by prince Tyrrhenus, who were called Tyrrhenians, emigrated to Etruria, and Thucydides' belief that Tyrrhenians had lived on the island of Lemnos has been backed up by written inscriptions found there. Ancient Etruscans themselves believed their ancestors had come from Lydia. Greek settlers seem to have introduced into Italy the cultivation of olives, figs, and grapes. Etruscan religion demanded human sacrifices, and public duels were organized. Their kings wore purple and a golden crown, carried a scepter, sat on an ivory throne, and were protected by guards with an ax in a bundle of rods (fasces), a symbol of their authority to punish. A wealthy class of nobles apparently exploited the labor of serfs and slaves.
Traditional Roman history dates from 753 BC when it was believed that Romulus defeated his brother Remus, moving from Alba to build the city of Rome. The birth of the twins and the death of Romulus are shrouded in legend and mystery, but he is credited with establishing the patrician class from the one hundred fathers (patres) elected to the senate. These aristocrats were considered patrons of the client plebeians who supported them. Duties of the patrician patrons were to explain the laws to their clients, take care of them, and bring suits for them. The clients were expected to help provide dowries for their daughters, pay ransoms if the patricians were captured, and even pay fines for them. Patrons often got their clients to vote their way. However, in contrast to the Lycurgan customs of Sparta the nobles were both soldiers and farmers or artisans.
The society was strongly patriarchal, as fathers had complete power over their children until they died, and the wife was expected to be virtuous and obey her husband although she could be as much mistress of the house as he was master. Romulus favored capital punishment for women who committed adultery or drank wine, which he believed led to adultery. At a festival the new Roman men seized virgin Sabines and carried them off to forced marriages. The Sabines and other tribes complained to the Sabine king Tatius, but the other tribes attacked Rome separately and were defeated. The large armies of the Romans and Sabines fought to a standstill after a Tarpeian girl betrayed the citadel to the latter. Finally the young Sabine women, most of whom had become mothers, intervened between their fathers and husbands to facilitate a peace settlement. The two tribes were unified into one state, and the number of senators was doubled.
When some Laurentian envoys were murdered by Sabines, Tatius did not punish them and was murdered in revenge. Romulus decided that the murders canceled each other out and refused to go to war with Lavinium. However, wars with the Etruscan Fidenates and Veii increased the size and power of Rome as the Romans began their practice of incorporating conquered peoples into their state. The disappearance of Romulus after a reign of 37 years led to an interregnum in which senators alternated as leader every five days. Finally a compromise was reached by which the older Roman senators chose a new king, who came from the Sabines.
The Sabine Numa Pompilius was not even a senator but was selected because of his reputation for virtue and piety. Romulus had greatly increased the army and territory of Rome, but Numa was said to have brought peace throughout his reign based on law and religion. A temple of Janus was built, and its doors were not opened for war until after Numa Pompilius died; they were only closed for peace once after that until the empire of Augustus began in 30 BC. Numa gave the people much to think about besides war during his 44 years as king. Religious ceremonies involved flour and wine instead of bloody sacrifices, as violence became sacrilegious. Numa promoted agriculture to do away with poverty and crime. The law of Romulus that fathers could sell their children into slavery was amended to forbid the practice after the son was married.
One of the eight sacred institutions established by Numa Pompilius was the college of the fetiales, who served for life as heralds to prevent conflicts from developing into war. Numa instituted this, after the Fidenae had ravaged their territory, in order to resolve the problem peacefully. The duty of the fetiales involved not allowing Rome to enter an unjust war. They went as ambassadors to other states to demand justice; only if justice was refused could war begin. Also other states might bring complaints of Roman injustice to them for resolution. They were to make sure that treaties did not violate holy laws and were religiously observed, and they investigated and corrected generals.
When Numa Pompilius died about 672 BC, Tullus Hostilius, the grandson of a war hero, was elected king. According to Dionysius, he inherited much agricultural land from Numa as king and divided it equally among the poor so that they could work their own land. Cattle raids on both sides between the Albans and Romans led to negotiations by the fetiales. An agreement was made that the three Horatii brothers would fight for the Romans against the three Curiati brothers of the Albans for dominion. One Horatius survived the contest; but when his sister mourned the death of her betrothed Curiatus, he killed her. His patriotic father condoned the killing, and a trial by the people also acquitted Horatius.
Tullus Hostilius allowed the Alban government to continue as before, made the Albans Roman citizens, and expanded the senate; but after Mettius conspired with the Fidenae and Veii, holding back his troops to see which side won, Tullus cleverly won the battle and after a trial had Mettius' body torn apart by chariots. The town of Alba was leveled except for the temples, and the Albans moved to Rome. The Caelian hill was opened to build houses for those who had none, and Tullus had his palace built there. He also declared war on the Sabines and invaded. Continuing war with the Latin cities was blamed for a plague, which eventually infected and broke the spirit of Tullus. After reigning 32 years Tullus Hostilius was killed in a fire said to have been caused by lightning from an angry Jupiter, but others blamed his successor Marcius for having him killed.
Ancus Marcius was the maternal grandson of Numa Pompilius. When the Latins abandoned the treaty they had made with Tullus and raided Roman territory, according to Livy Marcius went through the fetiales process, declared war, assaulted Politorium, took much plunder, and removed its inhabitants to Rome. During his reign the port of Ostia was built for trade and to safeguard the essential salt works. After reigning 24 years Marcius was succeeded by an Etruscan whose name meant Tarquin king (r. 616-579 BC); he was said to be the son of the Corinthian Demaratus and a Tarquinian aristocrat. According to Livy Tarquin was the first to canvass the people personally for votes. Tarquin encouraged the immigration of Etruscans, added more senators, and conquered many Latin cities, celebrating his triumphs with public games in the newly built Circus Maximus. The Sabines were also forced to sue for peace, and building projects included a stone wall.
The story of Servius Tullius is that his mother was a war captive in the palace; but after a brightness around his head appeared like flames, he was educated like a prince and married Tarquin's daughter. When the sons of Marcius had Tarquin assassinated with an ax, his queen told the people he was still alive and that Servius Tullius would act as regent, while the sons of Marcius went into exile. Eventually a funeral was held for Tarquin, and Servius was accepted as king. The Roman Emperor Claudius in encouraging Romans to accept foreigners announced in 48 CE that he had discovered that Servius Tullius had been an Etruscan named Mastarna and that his rule had been beneficial.
Servius originated the census and established a class structure that demanded military service from citizens in proportion to their wealth but also gave them comparable political power. Eighty centuries were formed from those whose property was worth more than 100,000 asses (an as being a bronze coin); the second, third, and fourth classes were divided every 25,000 asses below this and had twenty centuries each. The fifth class having 11,000 asses comprised 34 centuries, and all the remaining poor with less than that made up only one century, although they were not required to contribute to the military. Above all these was an elite 18 centuries of knights, whose horses were subsidized. Voting on proposed measures began with the knights and the first class and proceeded until a majority was gained. Since the knights and the wealthy class had 98 out of 193 centuries, most votes were determined by the wealthiest classes, and the chance of the poor ever voting to break a tie was next to impossible. According to the ancient historians 80,000 men were capable of bearing arms at this time. Each class provided their own arms from the heavy bronze armor of the first class down to the slings and stones of the fifth class.
Eventually Servius did get the people to elect him as king, although the senate was never asked to concur, since they disapproved of his distributing land. According to Dionysius, Servius persuaded the Romans to make it easier for slaves to gain their freedom. Servius had no sons, but his two daughters married the grandsons of Tarquin. The story is that the ambitious daughter and son-in-law murdered their unambitious spouses so that they could marry each other. One day the young Tarquin sat on the throne criticizing Servius as a slave who had usurped the throne; when Servius arrived and would not give up the kingship to him, Tarquin threw his aged father-in-law down the steps of the capitol, and his assassins killed Servius in the street; his ruthless daughter was even said to have driven her carriage over his dead body. Livy called the 44-year reign of Servius Tullus good.
Tarquin became known as the Proud (Superbus) and displayed the bad attributes of a tyrant. He was never elected, employed a bodyguard, executed leading senators and the wealthy for their property, and did not consult with the senate. He wooed the Latin leaders by marrying his daughter to Octavius Mamilius of Tusculum and called a conference at Ferentina but failed to appear himself, for which he was criticized by Turnus. Tarquin Superbus bribed the servants of Turnus to hide weapons in his house, accused him of treason, and when the weapons were found, had him executed before he could defend himself. Tarquin brought in Latin troops in equal numbers but put them under Roman centurions. He sent his son Sextus as a spy to the Gabii pretending to be a rebel; after he had gained their confidence by raiding and killing Tarquin's Roman enemies, Sextus arranged for leading Gabii to be executed, bribing support with their confiscated property; finally he betrayed the Gabii to Rome.
Tarquin Superbus' ambitious building plans included a new temple, extending the circus, and the great sewer. Settlers were also sent out to expand Roman territory. However, an assault on Ardea failed, and a long siege resulted. A rape of the noble Lucretia by Sextus Tarquin brought her father Lucretius and husband Tarquin Collatinus with Publius Valerius to Brutus, who witnessing the suicide of Lucretia, vowed to overcome the proud Tarquin and his family. Brutus had been pretending to be dull-witted so that he would not be murdered like his father and older brother. Suddenly Brutus was eloquently telling the story of Lucretia's rape, the crimes of the Tarquins, and persuading Romans to overthrow the tyrants and set up a republic in which two men would be elected each year to rule. The army was won over, and about 509 BC the Tarquins went into exile. Brutus and Tarquin Collatinus were the first two consuls elected.
Early Roman till 133 BC part 2
in this part we will see growing of roman civilization and building of institutions which matured in imperial times
part 2
Republic of Rome 509-343 BC
Brutus began by having the people swear never to allow a king in Rome again and got laws passed to prevent this. He brought more leading men into the equestrian rank and the senate back up to 300. Fear of Collatinus as a Tarquin persuaded him to resign and voluntarily go into exile with his property; Valerius was elected consul in his place. Tarquin Superbus sent envoys to Rome, and the senate debated whether to return his property. A slave named Vindicius discovered a conspiracy of young aristocrats to put Tarquin back on the throne, and their letters to him proved their guilt. Two of them were sons of Brutus, and after a brief trial he ordered and witnessed impassively his sons' execution. The people were allowed to plunder Tarquin's property. Tarquin appealed to the Etruscan Veii and Tarquinii. In a battle Brutus and Tarquin's son Arruns killed each other. Although the Romans had barely won the battle, the Veii and Tarquinii went home.
Publius Valerius became known as Publicola, the people's friend, by proposing measures that gave individuals the right of appeal to the people, made it a capital crime to usurp any magistracy without the people's consent, and relieved the poor of taxes. Criticized for not holding an election for the other consulship after Brutus was killed and for building his house on a hill overlooking the forum, he held the election and moved his house to the bottom of the hill.
Tarquin had fled to Porsena, the king of Clusium, who invaded Roman territory. As the Roman farmers moved into the city, the senate sent to the Greek colony of Cumae and the Volscians to purchase grain; the salt monopoly was taken over by the state; and the commons were exempted from tolls and taxes. After Mucius Scaevola tried to assassinate Porsena, this king agreed to withdraw, exchange prisoners, and eventually even the Roman hostages were returned. Tarquin turned to his son-in-law Mamilius in Tusculum, while the Romans battled the Sabines. The Sabine Appius Claudius, who led a party opposing the war with Rome, fled to Rome and was soon made a senator. The Romans led by Valerius defeated the Sabines. Although he was the most prominent Roman when he died, Valerius Publicola did not have the resources for a funeral, which was provided by the state.
Battles with Latin cities continued as Mamilius tried to organize an alliance against Rome. In this crisis the senate appointed the first dictator of Rome with supreme power but only for six months. In the battle of Lake Regillus Mamilius was killed, and the dictator Postumius returned to Rome in triumph with 5,500 captives. Tarquin finally died in Cumae. The Volscians tried to incite the Latin cities to rebellion, but they had had enough and turned the Volscian envoys over to Rome, which in gratitude returned nearly 6,000 Latin prisoners of war. Meanwhile the debtors complained that their fighting had made them worse off at home. When an impoverished war veteran reduced to slavery appeared at the forum, an angry crowd demanded the senate act. As the Volscian army approached, the poor were ready to let the patricians, who profit from the wars, do the fighting. However, when a law was passed prohibiting seizing or selling property of any soldier on active service, the debtors enrolled in the army, and the Volscians were defeated.
Appius Claudius, now a consul, gave harsh judgments for the recovery of debts; when the people saw debtors being hauled off to court, they set upon the creditors. This time the Sabines were invading, but people refused to enroll in the army by not answering to their names; when the consul ordered the lictor to arrest one man, the people intervened without using violence. After the appointment of a moderate dictator, the brother of the late Valerius, people enlisted, and the Romans managed to fight off their enemies without having to arm the Latins. However, the senate still refused to satisfy the debtors' grievances; so Manlius Valerius resigned. The senate ordered the soldiers to march on the pretext that the Aequians were hostile, but instead they camped out on the Sacred Mount. Menenius Agrippa was sent, and he told them the fable of the parts of the body, which stopped eating because the belly was always taking until they realized that this central organ by distribution nourished them also. After negotiations in 494 BC it was agreed that five tribunes would be elected by the people to protect the commons (plebeians) against abuses by the consuls. Patricians were not allowed to hold this office.
For his courageous role in helping to take the Volscian town of Corioli, Caius Marcius, declining to accept one-tenth of the spoils, was named Coriolanus. The secession of the plebeians for several months during which farming was neglected had led to a famine, which was relieved by a gift of grain from Gelon of Sicily. Angry at the plebeians after not being elected consul, the aristocratic Coriolanus opposed low grain prices unless the plebeians would restore the patricians' privileges; his haughty speech allowed them little choice but starvation or slavery. Led by Sicinius and the oratory of Lucius Junius, who was called Brutus, the plebeians had passed a law protecting the speech of the tribunes and providing for trials by the people. Tribunes representing the anger of the people ordered Coriolanus arrested, but he resisted and was protected by the senate. Eventually a trial was held before the tribes of the people on the charge that he had attempted tyranny and specifically for distributing the spoils of war to his friends instead of turning them over to the state; he was banished for life.
Coriolanus went into exile to the Volscians, where he planned his revenge with the Volscian Rome-hater Attius Tullius. Volscian resentment against Rome was stirred up, and these two men were appointed commanders in the war. They took back several towns including Corioli, expelled Roman settlers, and marched on Rome. The plebeians persuaded the senate to attempt a diplomatic solution, but Coriolanus was inflexible. However, when his mother and wife criticized him for attacking their country and pleaded with him, he withdrew his army. According to Dionysius, as Coriolanus attempted to speak in his defense in the Volscian forum, the faction of Attius Tullius stoned him to death. The alliance between the Volscians and Aequians broke into violent conflict when the latter refused to serve under Attius Tullius.
Consul Spurius Cassius tried to distribute public land that was illegally being kept in private hands but was blocked by the senate. Cassius also failed when his proposal to repay the money people paid for the grain was interpreted as an attempt to gain power. Because he proposed distributing two-thirds of the land to the conquered Latins and Hernicans, after his term of office Cassius was tried, condemned, and thrown off the Tarpeian precipice. Two more attempts to refuse military service failed when most of the tribunes supported the consuls, as Appius Claudius claimed that the tribune power could thus be easily overridden. The Fabius clan, which dominated the consulship for many years, attempted to fight as a private army for Rome with 4,000 supporters; they established a fortress at Cremera and raided the surrounding country, but eventually all 306 of the Fabius clan were lured into an ambush chasing cattle and were killed.
People were holding meetings complaining, because the consuls refused to do anything about the distribution of the land. So the consuls tried to enroll them in the army, using the forays of robbers in neighboring lands as an excuse; but the people refused to enroll until they realized that if they did not, their enemy Appius would be appointed dictator. On the next occasion the people refused to join the army, the consuls enrolled troops just outside the city limits, where the tribunes had no power; those who refused were fined or had their property taken or destroyed. Roman forces led by Servilius after a reckless attack defeated the Etruscans, and Rome made a forty years' truce with the Veii, who agreed to pay an indemnity and supply Rome with grain.
The famine was over, but the tribunes put on trial after their consulships Menenius, who was fined, and Servilius, who noted that the Romans prefer war to peace because in war they hurt their enemies, but in peace they hurt their friends. Servilius escaped condemnation; but when the next two ex-consuls were summoned and complained they were being led to the sacrifice, a tribune was found dead at home. Tribunes did not defend the centurion Volero when he refused to be enrolled as a common soldier, as the lictors tried to arrest him; but Volero fought back, and the people broke the rods of the lictors. Volero became a tribune in the next election and proposed that plebeian magistrates should be elected by the tribal assembly. The patricians countered by electing as consul Appius Claudius, the son of Appius. Despite his resistance the senate passed the law allowing tribune election by the tribal assembly. Yet land reform was still delayed, though Appius Claudius was indicted and either committed suicide or died of illness awaiting trial.
After Antium was taken from the Aequians and garrisoned, the senate opened the town to settlers; but apparently few wanted to leave Rome. Those who did go to Antium were won over by the Aequians. After Rome recovered from a plague, the Volscians were severely defeated with 13,470 killed. The tribune Terentillus proposed that a commission be appointed to codify laws that would limit the power of the consuls and grant more equality, but this was resisted by the patricians. When war was declared against the Antiates, an attempt to enroll people into the army caused a riot. The crisis became worse when a Sabine named Herdonius led 2500 slaves and exiles in taking over the fortress on the capitol hill, killing every man there who refused to join them. While Rome suffered its internal conflicts, a contingent from their ally Tusculum marched to the capitol. Valerius, because of his family's history of supporting the people and his promise to continue to do so, was able to raise a force to aid the Tusculans in taking back the capitol; Herdonius was killed, but so was Valerius. The senate did not fulfill the promise of Valerius, as battles with the Aequians and Volscians continued. When the army of consul Minucius was surrounded by the Aequians, Quinctius Cincinnatus was appointed dictator, left his farm, raised an army, defeated the Aequians, and resigned after only fifteen days.
The tribunes got the senate to increase the number of tribunes to ten, though two had to be from each of the five classes. When the Aequians invaded Tusculan territory, they were again defeated and lost 7,000 men. After a commission to study Greek laws returned, a board of ten (decemvirs), who were beyond appeal, was appointed to draw up a written code while they each alternately acted as chief magistrate too. Their laws of the Ten Tables were adopted. However, the election of another ten to add some more laws was controlled by a young Appius, who had turned demagogue. Suddenly the new decemvirs appeared each with twelve lictors armed with fasces containing axes and with power beyond appeal. Two more tables of laws were added; but after their terms ended, these decemvirs stayed in power, making biased judgments for themselves and their friends and using the rods for beatings and executions. The Sabines invaded Roman territory and drove off cattle with impunity; the Aequians occupied Algidus and threatened Tusculum. Reluctantly troops were raised but fought poorly for the tyrannical decemvirs.
After Siccius suggested the soldiers elect tribunes and refuse service, he was ordered murdered by other soldiers; the story that he and those he killed defending himself were killed by the enemy was not believed. When Appius lusted after beautiful Verginia, her betrothed Icilius defended her; but in the trial Appius declared her a slave. Rather than let her be raped by Appius, her father Verginius stabbed her in the heart with a butcher knife. The younger Valerius and Horatius stopped the lictors from arresting Icilius, arguing that they had no authority from Appius and the decemvirs, whose terms had expired. Bloody Verginius went to the army and roused them to march to the Aventine hill, where they appointed ten military tribunes. When the army left Rome and was joined by many civilians on the Sacred Mount, Rome appeared empty.
In 449 BC the senate adopted most of the people's demands, replacing the decemvirs with newly elected tribunes and consuls. Measures brought by the tribunes and passed by the tribal assembly were to be binding on all the people. They made it a crime even to advocate electing a magistrate who is beyond appeal. The Twelve Tables of the law probably modified by these Valerio-Horatian laws were enshrined in bronze. The important obligation of patrons to their clients was affirmed by making it a capital crime for a patron to cheat his client. Women at the age of 25 were allowed to retain their own property, and a wife could free herself from her husband's legal control by living at least three nights each year away from his house. Appius was put in jail, where he killed himself before his trial. Feeling safer and protected from abuse, the people were persuaded by Quinctius to wage wars against Rome's enemies.
The tribune Canuleius proposed legalizing marriages between the patricians and plebeians and also a bill allowing plebeians to be elected consul. Ardea was complaining about the land the Romans had taken from them; the Veii were raiding the frontier; and as usual the Volscians and Aequians were preparing for battle. Eventually the ban on intermarriage was removed, and military tribunes with consular power were elected, though no plebeians were elected for 44 years. For the first time censors were appointed to take the census and regulate social proprieties. The wealthy Maelius gained popularity by giving away grain; but he was killed resisting arrest after trying to make himself king. Tolumnius, the king of the Veii, ordered four Roman envoys murdered and was later killed by Roman cavalry officer Cossus for this violation of the human contract and law of nations. After the Roman army defeated the Aequians and sacked Labici, the senate approved sending a settlement; 1500 settlers were given grants of one and a half acres each. Patrician consuls were elected, but three out of four quaestors (treasury officials) elected were plebeians. The senate issued a decree that now the soldiers were to be paid by the state instead of having to provide their own expenses.
Wars with Etruscan Veii led to the regular election of military tribunes that now included a few plebeians. After a reported ten-year siege that made the soldiers serve in winter as well as summer, the prosperous city of Veii was sacked in 396 BC; the dictator Camillus ordered its free citizens sold into slavery. Anti-government agitation led to the sending of 3,000 settlers into Volscian territory, where commissioners assigned two acres to each family. When Camillus was besieging the Falerii, a schoolmaster brought out sons of the nobles expecting to be rewarded; but Camillus had him whipped for his treachery as the boys escorted him back into the town. According to Livy this stimulated the Falerii to submit to Roman honor, and Camillus asked from them only tribute to pay the army's expenses for the year in order to relieve the Romans from their war taxes. The senate granted three and a half acres to free plebeians wanting to move to Veii. Camillus become unpopular by depriving his soldiers of the Falerian plunder and for resisting migration to Veii; he was prosecuted by a tribune for forgetting about the ten percent of the plunder taken from Veii he swore to give to Apollo. Facing a large fine, Camillus chose to go into exile to Ardea, even though his friends offered to pay the fine.
When news of a large migration of Gauls reached Rome, three Fabii were sent as envoys. The Celtic Gauls asked for land and threatened war if they did not get it. The argument turned into a fight, and Quintus Fabius killed a Gallic chieftain. The Gallic envoys demanded that the three Fabii envoys be surrendered; but instead the Romans elected them military tribunes. So the Gauls marched on Rome and turned the Roman army to flight at the Allia River; those not killed or drowned fled to Veii or retreated into the Capitoline citadel in Rome. The Gauls marched into Rome and besieged the citadel for seven months until the starving Romans agreed to provide a large quantity of gold. According to Roman historians, Camillus took command of the Roman army in Veii, attacked the Gauls in the countryside, and defeated their army after they burned and left Rome. He then gave a patriotic speech urging his countrymen to rebuild Rome rather than abandon it for Veii. Camillus was again appointed dictator, and according to Livy he laid waste the Volscian territory and after seventy years of warfare forced the Volscians to surrender.
Marcus Manlius, who had heroically saved the Capitoline citadel when the geese warned him that the Gauls were climbing up the precipice, took the side of the suffering debtors, paying off their fines and accusing the patricians of hiding gold they had taken back from the Gauls. Manlius accused the patricians of using the pretense of war to appoint a dictator to champion the money-lenders and attack the plebeians and him; he was charged with falsely accusing the senate of theft and put in prison when the plebeians would not challenge the dictator. Noting resentment of the dictator's triumph, the senate assigned about two acres each to 2,000 Roman colonists to Satricum. When a crowd threatened to break into the prison, the senate released Manlius, who asked the people to stand by him and stop the legal proceedings on debts. The senate put Manlius on trial; even though he produced nearly 400 men he had lent money free of interest, he was convicted; then the tribunes threw him off the Tarpeian Rock, the very place of his earlier heroism. Many blamed the plague and famine that followed on this sacrilege.
In a battle against the Volscians the Romans captured some Tusculans; but when the Romans attacked their city, the Tusculans acted so peacefully by simply going about their business unarmed that the Romans granted them their freedom. As continual wars were being used to distract the plebeians from gaining debt relief, they refused to enroll in the army once more. The Praenestines advanced on Rome but fled when a dictator was appointed.
Finally the tribunes Licinius and Sextius, who had been in office for nine years in a row, demanded three things: first, that all interest paid should be subtracted from the capital owed and the remaining debt be paid in three years without interest; second, no one should be allowed to own more land than 300 acres; and third, one of the two consuls should be a plebeian. They argued that several patricians had been brought to justice after their military tribuneships but never a plebeian. Worried, the patricians appointed Camillus dictator, but the tribunes summoned the tribes to an assembly. The senate threatened a veto, and Camillus was replaced by another dictator before the people voted for the first two proposals but rejected the third. In their tenth elections Licinius and Sextius demanded all three, which were finally won in 366 BC when Sextius was the first plebeian elected consul, though the patricians were mollified with the new office of praetor.
In 358 BC a law against bribery proposed by a tribune was authorized by the senate, and the people voted enthusiastically for a reduction of the interest rate to one-twelfth. The senate proposed a tax on manumitted slaves of one-twentieth to raise revenue, and this was passed by soldiers in their camp voting in tribes. Concerned about the precedent, the tribunes made it a capital offense to hold a people's assembly outside of Rome. An Etruscan uprising brought the appointment of the first plebeian dictator, Rutulus, who won a people's triumph by capturing 8,000 and driving the rest out of Roman territory. The patricians reacted by electing two of their own as consuls. Rome revenged the Tarquins' killing of 307 of their soldiers by beheading 358 Tarquins in the forum. The Samnites made a treaty of alliance with Rome, and Caere was given a hundred-year truce. Conflicts between patricians and plebeians led to brawls protesting increasing interest payments until debts were paid by the treasury while the debtors' property was fairly valuated. By 348 BC social harmony was reflected in a reduction of interest to 1/24 and remission of taxes and conscription; in a treaty Carthage agreed not to capture slaves from Roman towns, while Rome restricted their maritime trade only to Carthaginians.
Early Rome Till 133 BC part 3
did i hear someone say on no not another samnite
in this part we see the Roman and Latin league's struggle for domination in italia
part 3
Rome's Conquest of Italy 343-264 BC
Livy noted that the war with the Samnites marked the beginning of more serious wars in remoter areas. The Samnites had attacked the Sidicini, who turned to the prosperous Campanians. The Campanians, defeated by the Samnites, asked for aid from Rome. The senate decided to help but first sent envoys to the Samnites asking them not to injure the Campanians. When the Samnites raided Campanian territory, the Roman senate sent the fetial priests to demand redress and, not getting it, declared war. The Romans killed as many as 30,000 Samnites in a single battle in their initial victories. At the request of the Campanians garrisons were sent to protect them all year round. Observing the prosperous Campanian life-style and discontent with conditions in Rome, the Roman soldiers organized a mutiny, kidnapped Quinctius as a commander, and marched toward Rome; but Marcus Valerius was named dictator and managed to resolve the crisis peacefully. Historians disagreed on the details, but apparently several innovative plebiscites were passed prohibiting interest and individuals from holding the same office within ten years or more than one office at a time and allowing both consuls to be plebeians.
The truce Rome made with the Samnites in 341 BC was to last sixteen years. However, Latin demands to be represented by one consul and half the senate were scornfully rejected by the Romans, who defeated them in battle and settled plebeians in their territory and in Campania. When Publilius was dictator, the plebeians got the people's decrees made binding on every Roman citizen and the assurance at least one of the censors must be a plebeian. Eventually most of the Latin townships were given citizenship, though some of the rebellious ones lost territory given to colonists; Campanians were citizens but could not vote. After the Romans defeated Privernum in 329 BC, their envoy was asked by the senate what punishment they deserved. He replied what those who think themselves worthy of freedom. When asked what kind of peace the Romans could expect with them, he said, "If you grant us a good one, it will be loyally kept and permanent. If a bad one, it will not last long."1 The senate decided that people who value such freedom deserved citizenship.
After a young man flogged for his debt complained in the street, imprisonment and slavery for debt were outlawed in Rome. Those in bondage for debt were freed, and from then on a debtor's property could be seized but not one's person. The dictator Papirius, who wanted to punish with death his master of horse (second in command) for disobeying orders, was persuaded by the people not to do so. The Samnites were disturbed when the Romans planted a colony in their territory at Fregellae. Violence on the plain of Campania was to determine whether the Samnites or the Romans were to dominate Italy. The Romans defeated the Samnites, who tried to expiate their guilt for breaking the treaty by returning all the prisoners and plunder and their commander, who committed suicide.
When the Samnites trapped a Roman army in the Caudine Forks, their general sent to his father Herennius Pontius for advice, which was to send the Romans away unharmed as soon as possible. When this was rejected, he suggested killing them to the last man, later explaining that the best policy would be to establish peace with a powerful people, but the second was to postpone war as long as possible. Instead the Samnites humiliated the Romans by demanding their weapons, taking their knights as hostages, and making the other 20,000 pass under the yoke. The naked army was welcomed and aided by the city of Capua in Campania. At Rome it was eventually decided to return the officers, who had guaranteed this humiliating treaty; but the Samnite general Pontius did not accept the surrender of the leaders alone as valid and let them depart. Before the next battle envoys from Tarentum asked each side to desist from war and promised to join the side that was attacked. The Romans rejected the Tarentine offer, but the Samnites did not. However, the Romans won the battle and were only restrained from slaughtering their enemy out of fear their imprisoned knights might be executed. Luceria was besieged and its vast plunder captured; 7,000 Samnite soldiers passed under the yoke, and the Roman cavalry was released in 314 BC.
The Capuans were given laws by Roman praetor Lucius Furius, and prefects were sent there. Antium also requested such laws, and the senate sent patrons to the colony. When Sora killed its Roman colonists and went over to the Samnites, the Romans defeated them and beheaded 225 of its leaders in the forum before cheering people. The Romans also massacred the Ausonian people even though they may not have been guilty of revolt. However, the senate voted to spare the inhabitants of Luceria and sent 2500 colonists instead. The Romans continued to defeated the Samnites, killing and capturing as many as 30,000. Colonies were established at Suessa, Pontiae, and Interamna Sucasina.
In 312 BC censor Appius Claudius got the landless population distributed throughout the tribes, the sons of freedman admitted into the senate, the first aqueduct built to bring water nine miles from Gabii to the Circus Maximus, and the Appian Way paved for the 115 miles from Rome to Capua. After the Roman garrison at Cluviae was starved into surrender and put to death, the town was stormed and all its men killed. The wealthy city of Bovianum was captured by the Romans for its plunder. While the Romans were killing another 20,000 Samnites, the Etruscans attacked and besieged Sutrium. Eventually a Roman army defeated the Etruscans, killing many thousands. The Roman army entered the Ciminian forest; after killing and capturing 60,000, a truce for thirty years was made with the Etruscans in 310 BC.
War with the Samnites continued, as 7,000 of their allies were sold into slavery. A revolt by the Umbrians resulted in their surrender, as did one by the Hernici. Rome's treaty with Carthage was renewed in 306 BC. The Samnites finally sent envoys to end the war; but the Romans told them that peace negotiations could have proceeded if they had not been preparing for war. After the Roman army found Samnium peaceful, the treaty was restored. Having helped Rome's enemies after nearly a century of truce and concerned about how the Hernici were treated, the Aequians found themselves at war with Rome and retreated into their cities, many of which were destroyed, stimulating the Marrucini, Marsi, Paeligni, and Frentani to make peace with the Romans. 6,000 settlers were sent to Alba Fucens in Aequian territory and 4,000 to Sora in Volscian land that had been occupied by Samnites. The Marsi forcibly resisted a colony being placed at Carseoli, but Rome appointed a dictator, defeated the Marsi, and confiscated some of their territory before renewing the treaty.
Eight more years of war with the Samnites began in 298 BC. Samnium allied itself with the Etruscans, who hired Gauls to fight; but the Romans raised enough soldiers by conscripting older men and freed men to triumph once again. In the battle at Sentinum 25,000 of Rome's enemies were killed while 8,000 were taken prisoner; the Romans had 8700 casualties, and their consul Decius Mus was killed. This was followed by a battle against the Etruscans in which 4500 Perusini were killed and another battle in which 16,300 Samnites were killed and 2700 captured, while the Roman army lost 2700 men. Heavy casualties in these wars continued, and at Aquilona 20,340 Samnites were killed and 3870 captured, followed by a battle at Cominium in which 4880 died and 11,400 surrendered. Both Aquilonia and Cominium were burned to the ground on the same day. The Romans killed another 10,000 in three more towns and then took 2,533,000 pounds of bronze and 1830 pounds of silver, all of which went into the Roman treasury, causing resentment among the soldiers.
In 287 BC the problem of debt led to the appointment of Hortensius as dictator, and from then on plebiscites passed by the plebeian council had the force of law on everyone and did not have to be approved by the assembly, the classes of centuries, or the senate. Gauls invaded Etruria again in 283 BC and in violation of their treaty were aiding the Etruscans against the Romans. Roman envoys sent to the Celtic Senones were murdered by Britomaris, and so consul Cornelius turned his army from the Etruscans to destroy all the Senones men, enslaving their women and children; the Boii attempting to retaliate for their Senones kinsmen with the Etruscans were defeated by the other consul's army and made peace.
The next year the Romans sent Cornelius with a force south to relieve Greek Thurii from Lucanian attacks; but the Tarentines, who had their own army of 25,000, destroyed the Roman fleet killing its admiral and drove the garrison out of Thurii. Next Tarentum called in from Epirus in Greece king Pyrrhus, who battled Romans at Heraclea on the Gulf of Otranto with 20,000 men. This first of his costly "Pyrrhic" victories won over to the Greek cause the Lucanians and Samnites, doubling his forces. Pyrrhus had a diplomat named Cineas, who had failed to persuade his king to enjoy his own possessions rather than try to rule the world. Cineas was sent to Rome with presents to make peace by releasing all Roman captives without ransom and reducing Pyrrhus' demands to freedom for the Greeks and a guarantee for his Oscan allies; but old and blind Appius Claudius persuaded the Roman senate not to negotiate with Pyrrhus as long as he had forces in Italy.
Pyrrhus marched toward Rome; but the Latin cities closed their gates to him, and he spent the winter at Tarentum. Rome had made peace with the Etruscans and sent Fabricius to Pyrrhus to try to get the Roman prisoners released. Pyrrhus offered Fabricius gifts and a top position with him, but the humble Fabricius declined the bribe and chided the king for being so poor that he had to leave his dominions to reach out for more. Unable to persuade the captured Romans to join him, Pyrrhus released them at the Saturnalia on their honor. Elephants helped Pyrrhus "win" again against the Romans at Asculum, but he admitted to a soldier who congratulated him that one more victory over the Romans like that would completely destroy him. After Fabricius informed him of a plot to assassinate him, Pyrrhus once again released Roman prisoners without ransom.
Hicetas ruled Syracuse for nine years after the death of Agathocles; but in 279 BC he was replaced by Thoenon and Sosistratus, who fought each other, and both invited to Sicily Pyrrhus, who had previously married Agathocles' daughter. Concerned about Sicily, the Carthaginians had offered Rome naval and financial aid and blockaded Syracuse with a hundred ships, while 50,000 men wasted the surrounding territory. However, Carthaginian ships allowed Pyrrhus to sail into the harbor and take over the island Ortygia from Thoenon and the city of Syracuse from Sosistratus, reconciling the two. Pyrrhus now had a fleet of two hundred ships, and Leontini and other Sicilian cities cooperated with him as he took over Acragas and thirty cities from Sosistratus.
Pyrrhus took away the estates of Agathocles' friends and relatives, assigning as magistrates his own officers, whose greed became burdensome to the cities. As the people became hostile, Pyrrhus introduced garrisons, arresting and executing many prominent men including Thoenon. He attacked the Carthaginians with 30,000 soldiers. After Carthaginian reinforcements arrived from Africa, Pyrrhus' forces became bogged down in Sicily and went back to Italy, where after stealing treasure from the temple of Persephone at Locri they were defeated at Beneventum. After six years Pyrrhus returned to Greece, where he was killed in 272 BC, the year Tarentum accepted a Roman alliance and the Roman armies completed their subjugation of the Samnites, Lucanians, and Bruttians and the year after Ptolemy II of Egypt entered into a formal friendship with Rome.
Latin colonies settled in Cosa in 273, Ariminum in 268, and Firnum in 264 BC, the year Rome captured the Etruscan town of Volsinii to complete its conquest of the Italian peninsula south of Cisalpine Gaul. Rome had made treaties of alliance with 150 Italian communities, which required them to supply military aid to Rome; after 338 BC the allied forces outnumbered the Roman soldiers. Rome tended to support the aristocratic class in these cities, as it intervened on their behalf at Arretium in 302, Lucania in 296, and at Volsinii in 264 BC. In addition to material plunder Roman wars also captured land that was colonized by the Latins and their allies. Between 334 and 263 BC nineteen colonies were settled by about 70,000 men and their dependents. The Roman silver coin denarius was minted in 268 BC.
Early Rome Till 133 BC part 4
here is the part which was descisive in making or forging of rome as ultimate predator with its legions and this is how we remember them (go ancestors go)
part 4
Rome at War with Carthage 264-201 BC
Having entertained Etruscans, Samnites, and Campanians, in 264 BC the first gladiatorial contests were held in the city of Rome. Carthage, founded a half millennium before as a Phoenician colony from Tyre on the Tunisian peninsula, now had a population three times that of Rome's with whom they came into conflict in Sicily. In Syracuse the general Hiero by reforming the army and eliminating mercenaries had risen to become king in 270 BC and besieged for years at Messena the Mars-worshiping Mamertines, who finally got the aid of a Carthaginian fleet in 264 BC. After Hiero II left, the Mamertines turned to the Romans to rid them of the Carthaginians. The senate hesitated, but greed for plunder tipped the balance of the Roman assembly toward intervention. The Carthaginians were persuaded by Roman threats and misrepresentations to withdraw from Messena for which the commander was crucified by the Carthaginians, who then sent an expedition of its usual Numidian troops under Carthaginian officers, enlisting the support of Hiero. Messena was under siege when Roman consul Manius Valerius' army arrived and chased Hiero back to Syracuse, which the Romans besieged. Hiero came to terms in a 15-year alliance with Rome that allowed him thirty miles of territory.
Carthage next sent 50,000 Ligurian, Celtic, and Iberian mercenaries to Agrigentum. The Roman armies besieged Agrigentum and although blockaded by sea, stormed and sacked the city; 25,000 Agrigentines were sold into slavery. To expel the Carthaginians from Sicily the Romans built a fleet of a hundred quinqueremes and twenty triremes, designing boarding platforms for hand-to-hand combat, and at Mylae the usually superior Carthaginian navy was defeated, losing fifty ships. Hamilcar's forces killed 4,000 Romans in Sicily, but a Hannibal lost so many ships at Sardinia that the Carthaginians crucified him. In 256 BC the navies of Rome and Carthage met each other with 350 ships on each side; the Romans captured 64 Carthaginian ships and their crews but had no ships taken. Romans landed in Libya, took Aspis and Tunis, and captured 20,000 slaves. A revolt by the Numidians was driving Carthaginians into the city. However, a Spartan general named Xanthippus revived their army, defeating and capturing Rome's Regulus. The Roman navy captured another 114 Carthaginian crews, but a storm off Palinurus reduced their over-confident fleet of 364 to 80. Rome re-built its navy and took Panormus (Palermo) in Sicily.
Romans besieged Lilybaeum in 250 BC, and the next year consul Publius Claudius attacked the last Carthaginian hold-out in Sicily at Drepana; but he was defeated as 93 Roman ships were captured with their crews. Hamilcar Barca raided the Italian coast; but with both economies exhausted by war in 242 BC wealthy Romans paid for 200 more quinqueremes to defeat the Carthaginians, who sued for peace, agreeing to evacuate Sicily, give up all Roman prisoners without ransom, and pay Rome 3200 talents of silver within ten years. All together in the war the Romans had lost 700 of the large quinqueremes and the Carthaginians 500. Except for Syracuse, Rome annexed Sicily as its first overseas province, adopting Hiero's taxation system of taking one-tenth of the crops.
Unable to pay their mercenaries what they were demanding, Carthage faced a "truceless war" led by the runaway Roman slave Spendius and a Libyan named Mathos and a throng of foreign soldiers, who stoned anyone attempting to speak against them. The war had taken half the agricultural produce and doubled the tribute of the towns; Utica and Hippo Zarytus, the two cities which refused to join the revolt, were besieged. Eventually Hamilcar Barca raised an army of 10,000 Carthaginian citizens, broke the siege of Utica, and with Rome's cooperation finally annihilated the mercenary army. A mutiny also occurred on Sardinia; the Carthaginians led by Hanno deserted, and Hanno was crucified. Rome sent a force and, refusing arbitration, declared war. Thus Carthage lost Sardinia and Corsica and had to pay another 1200 talents to Rome. This injustice was resented by the Carthaginians, providing seeds for more war. Rome made Sardinia and Corsica a second province, but it took a century to pacify the people in the mountains.
In 238 BC Hamilcar took an army into Iberia (Spain) and spent nine years there conquering the tribes, exploiting the mines, and conscripting troops before he was killed and succeeded in command by his son-in-law Hasdrubal. After they stopped the Gallic Boii at Ariminum, the Romans actually had a brief peace during which they closed the temple of Janus. Pillaging raids sponsored by Queen Teuta in Illyria stimulated Romans in 230 BC to offer military protection to Corcyra and other coastal towns. Plebeian power now depended on a few nobles, though tribune Flaminius managed to get land from the Ager Gallicus distributed despite protests by the senate that it would cause conflicts with Gallic tribes. In 225 BC Celtic Gauls crossed the alps with an army of 150,000 infantry and 20,000 horse and chariots. They were met by a Roman army of 130,000 of which 6,000 fell; but when a Roman army returning from Sardinia came up behind them, the Gauls caught in between had 40,000 killed and 10,000 captured. The Roman consuls of 222 BC would not grant peace to the Insubres Gauls until they completely submitted to Rome. The next year Hasdrubal was assassinated in Iberia, and the young Hannibal, son of Hamilcar, was elected commander by the army. Across the Adriatic Sea in 219 BC a Roman navy defeated the piratical Demetrius of Pharos, who fled to the Macedonian court of Philip V.
Hasdrubal had promised the Romans the Carthaginians would not cross north of the Ebro River, and south of that river Saguntum asked for Roman protection. Roman envoys warned Hannibal to leave Saguntum alone; but Hannibal, who had promised his father eternal hatred toward Rome, besieged it for eight months and took it, ordering all the men of military age killed. So Rome sent diplomats to Carthage asking them to arrest Hannibal for this crime; the Carthaginians chose war instead. Roman delegations sent to Iberia to gain friends found that the example of Saguntum had lost their trust; nor were they able to persuade the Gauls to take their side, since most resented how the Romans had expelled Gauls from Italy or demanded tribute from them, and many were bought off by Hannibal's gold. Some Roman envoys were even seized by Gallic chiefs to exchange for hostages. Starting with about 100,000 men, Hannibal crossed the Pyrenees mountains, the Rhone River in spite of Gallic opposition, climbed over the Alps, and lost more men and animals sliding down the icy slopes.
With a quarter of his forces left, Hannibal led a cavalry skirmish, which wounded Roman consul Cornelius Scipio. Some Celtic Gauls eager to plunder Roman Italy now joined Hannibal, who trapped at the Trebia River 40,000 Roman soldiers, of which only 10,000 were left to withdraw from northern Italy. Fabius Maximus was appointed dictator but was then criticized for not engaging the enemy fully, though his self-restraint proved a better strategy. Roman forces captured the island of Malta and auctioned Carthaginian prisoners of war at Lilybaeum. The Roman navy defeated Hasdrubal, capturing 25 of his 40 ships, and more than 120 Spanish tribes gave hostages and submitted to Roman authority. In Italy the Romans lost another 15,000 troops and their impulsive consul Flaminius at the battle of Lake Trasimene; Hannibal distributed the Roman prisoners to his companies but released the captured allies to their own countries. However, no towns in Roman territory opened their gates to Hannibal; so his forces plundered Umbria and Picenum, as he ordered all adults in their way killed.
The Roman senate decided to double their army to eight legions. At Cannae in August 216 BC Hannibal had 40,000 infantry and 10,000 cavalry; but losing only 8,000 men, the Carthaginian army wiped out about 50,000 of the Roman forces and captured several thousand in their camp; these the Roman senate refused to ransom, using their funds to arm 8,000 slaves instead. Most of the Samnites and Greeks went over to the Carthaginians, who now controlled most of what the Latins called Magna Graecia in southern Italy. A few days later some Celts in Gaul ambushed a Roman praetor and annihilated his army by felling trees on them. In 214 BC Romans led by Fabius Maximus killed or captured 25,000 Caudini as the territory was devastated.
In the senate at Carthage Hanno again spoke about the folly of the war and again was outvoted. If Hannibal had won such victories, he asked, why was he still asking for reinforcements and more money and grain? In addition to the slaves, who won their freedom fighting at Beneventum, Rome enlisted 6,000 debtors from prison. Marcellus took Nola and after an inquiry executed seventy traitors. Hannibal spent the winter at luxurious Capua, which Livy believed corrupted his men. Philip V of Macedonia sent envoys to make an alliance with the winning Hannibal, while Hiero II of Syracuse supplied the Romans with 200,000 measures of wheat and 100,000 of barley. On Sardinia victorious Romans killed 12,000 and captured 3700, and in Spain according to Livy only 16,000 Romans killed about half of their enemy's army of 60,000, as nearly all the Spanish tribes came over to the Romans. Hiero II died after ruling Syracuse as a Roman ally for 54 years and was succeeded by his grandson Hieronymus, who sided with Hannibal and was assassinated. Various intrigues, coups, and murders resulted in Syracuse being besieged by Marcellus and the Romans, but it was well defended by the engineering genius of Archimedes. After the Roman massacre of the sacred city of Henna, many Sicilians went over to the Carthaginians.
By 212 BC Rome by borrowing money had raised 25 legions, and troops were going without pay. A Roman centurion put in command of an army lost most of his recruits at Lucania. Volunteer-slaves deserted when their leader Gracchus was killed. The Romans lost another 16,000 men to Hannibal's veterans at Herdonea. Finally the Romans stormed Syracuse at night after a drunken festival, and Archimedes was killed during the plundering; Marcellus ordered Roman deserters beheaded and shipped much Sicilian art to Rome. In Spain the Celtiberians were persuaded to abandon the Romans and go home, resulting in the defeat of two armies and the death of both the Scipio brothers; but Lucius Marcius took command of what was left and defeated the Carthaginians. In Campania after a long siege by the Romans, during which Hannibal approached Rome and seventy Numidians pretending to be deserters had their hands cut off by the Romans for spying, Capua was starved into surrender. Fifty-three Capuan senators who did not commit suicide were executed after bringing out 2,070 pounds of gold and 31,200 pounds of silver. The rest of the Capuans were sold into slavery, as Rome took over the government of the city.
Rome also oversaw the future of Syracuse and allied itself with the Greek Aetolians in opposition to Philip V of Macedonia. The Roman aristocrats were drained by taxation and had most of their lands stripped, many of their houses burnt, and their slaves stolen, impressed as oarsmen, or bought cheap for military service. Now their precious metals were contributed to build ships in order to keep the Macedonians out of Italy. Hannibal captured Tarentum except for the Roman garrison in the citadel, which held out for three years until their compatriots retook the city. The fall of Agrigentum soon brought most of Sicily over to the Romans.
Publius Cornelius Scipio was sent to Spain to replace his father and uncle even though at 25 he was too young for the office. In 209 BC his army captured New Carthage, where he took over their mines and had workers supply his army with the better Spanish swords. Scipio won over Iberians by restoring hostages to their families. The next year at Metaurus they defeated Hannibal's brother Hasdrubal, who then took his troops across the Alps, gaining Celtic allies on his way to Italy. At Ilipa Scipio's strategy decisively defeated the Carthaginian army, which in 205 BC surrendered Spain at Gades on the Atlantic coast, as Mago's remaining forces departed in ships. The Romans required military service from the Iberians and silver tribute from their first province on the continent. The town of Iliturgi was destroyed and all its people massacred for having killed Romans during the war. Scipio dealt with a mutiny by deceptively arresting and then executing 35 of its leaders, but he bought back the allegiance of the army by paying their wages.
In Rome envoys from twelve Latin colonies told the consuls that they could no longer supply men or money for the war, though the other eighteen colonies continued their support. Many Bruttians, who betrayed the city to the Romans, were killed along with the Carthaginians and Tarentines when Tarentum was retaken by Roman soldiers; 3,080 pounds of gold went into the Roman treasury, and 30,000 Tarentines were sold into slavery. The two Roman consuls joined their armies to wipe out Hasdrubal and his army at the Metaurus River, though Livius restrained his men from killing the fleeing Gauls so that they would tell people what happened. Seeing now the fate of Carthage, Hannibal retreated to Bruttium at the southern end of the Italian peninsula. In 204 BC the Asian cult of the mother goddess Cybele was brought to Rome.
Laevinus led a Roman fleet to Africa and raided around Utica and Carthage; they defeated a Carthaginian squadron of seventy ships and now controlled the shipping of grain. Scipio made treaties with Nubian kings Masinissa and Syphax in Africa before returning to Rome, where he prepared to invade Carthage. Fabius Maximus argued that there should be peace and safety in Italy before war was taken to Africa. Scipio was elected consul, given the army in Sicily, and allowed to recruit volunteers. Mago, also a brother of Hannibal, raised troops in the Balearic Islands, then captured and destroyed Genoa. A Spanish uprising resulted in the killing of 13,000 of them by the Romans before peace was restored. The twelve Latin colonies that had stopped their support were now required to provide twice their quota of soldiers, as Roman men between the ages of 18 and 46 continued to serve an average of seven years in the army.
In Africa the Carthaginians gained the alliance of Numidian king Syphax when another Hasdrubal gave his daughter to him in marriage, while Scipio lied to his men about it. Masinissa survived defeats by the army of Syphax and eventually showed up with 6,000 infantry and 4,000 cavalry to join the Romans. Scipio's soldiers set fire to the wooden and thatched huts in the camps of the Carthaginians and Syphax's Numidians, then attacked them, killing 40,000 and capturing 5,000 prisoners and 2,700 Numidian horses. Carthage won a naval victory but then was defeated by the Romans along with the large army of Syphax in a battle dominated by cavalry. Carthage agreed to terms with Scipio and sent some young envoys to Rome, while Hannibal and Mago were recalled from Italy. Unable to negotiate an agreement, in 201 BC Hannibal's forces met Scipio's at Zama near Carthage. The cavalry of Masinissa turned the battle, as 20,000 of the Carthaginians and their allies were killed.
Hannibal told the senate of Carthage to accept the terms of Scipio. Carthage was allowed to live under their own laws while giving up all deserters, runaway slaves, prisoners of war, warships (except ten), and elephants. They lost all claims outside of Africa and were not allowed to make war except in Africa and only with Rome's permission. They made a treaty with Masinissa, who gained the city of Cirta and the lands of Syphax. Carthage had to supply grain and wages for the Roman soldiers and pay 10,000 talents over fifty years, giving 100 hostages. When a member of Carthage's minority peace party was asked by the Roman senate what gods would sanction this treaty when they had forsworn the previous one, he replied, "The same gods, since their hostility to treaty-breakers is now proved."2 Hannibal had spent fifteen years fighting in Italy and was said to have killed 300,000 in battles alone and destroyed 400 towns, accomplishing little if any good; even though he had no mutinies, the mercenaries hired by the Carthaginians were ultimately no match for the continued efforts of Roman soldiers and their Latin allies.
Early Rome Till 133 BC part 5
this is the conclusion of early rome before the imperial era
also check at the bottom where i have put my sources for these essays full credits to those grandpa's of history
part 4
Republican Rome's Imperialism 201-133 BC
Soon after the war with Carthage ended, Rome turned its attention to other conflicts. In Gaul the Boii, Insubres, and Cenomani led by Carthaginian Hamilcar destroyed Placentia and were attacking Cremona in 200 BC, but two years later they had 35,000 slain (including Hamilcar) by the Roman army and eventually lost half their territory, which was given to colonists. Envoys from Rhodes and Pergamum's King Attalus complained that the Macedonians were harassing cities in Asia Minor; Athenians also asked for help. At first the Roman people, tired of war, voted against it; but the senate and consul posed the choice as sending legions to Macedonia or suffering their invasion of Italy. They argued that allowing King Philip V to take Athens would repeat the mistake when they let Hannibal take Saguntum. The people were won over, and the fetial priests declared war on Philip's Macedonia. At the Aetolian congress Rome declared its imperialist policy that the fate of any nation would depend on its services or disservices to Rome.
Philip's forces suffered two cavalry defeats from the Romans, and at a funeral his men saw how the Romans' Spanish swords had inflicted such terrible wounds. The Aetolians once again formed an alliance with Rome against Philip. Two thousand war-weary Roman soldiers moving from Africa to Sicily to Macedonia mutinied but waited, while the consul wrote to the senate about their discharge. When King Attalus asked Rome for aid against a threatened attack by Seleucid king Antiochus III, who was an ally of Rome, the senate declared its policy that their allies should keep peace among themselves. Attalus could call his troops home, and Rome sent envoys to persuade Antiochus to keep away from Attalus' Pergamum. At the Aous River the Roman consul Flamininus asked Philip V to withdraw his garrisons from Greek cities, restore their plundered property, and pay for the injuries to Attalus and Rhodes; but Philip, insisting on keeping possessions he had inherited, broke up the conference over Thessaly. The Romans attacked and destroyed Phaloria, causing Metropolis and Cierium to surrender. The fleets of Rome, Rhodes, and Attalus combined to capture Eretria.
The council of the Achaeans decided to join this alliance against Philip V, who had inflicted greater injuries on the Aetolians when they were his ally than as enemies. Now Philip was forcing Thessalians to leave their homes as he destroyed their cities before retreating; both Polybius and Livy contrasted this policy to that of Alexander and his successors, who tended to spare cities not only of allies but of enemies. Negotiations failed again, and Philip handed over Argos to the Spartan tyrant Nabis. Roman consul Titus Flamininus brought the Boeotians into their alliance also, though he connived at the murder of Boeotarch Brachyllas because he was pro-Macedonian. In 198 BC Carthaginians interned in the Latin fortress at Setia and African slaves had revolted but were betrayed; 500 were put to death. Two years later slaves in Etruria rebelled and were put down.
The Macedonian phalanx met the Roman legions in 197 BC at the battle of Cynocephalae, where the rough territory gave the advantage to the more flexible legions. The Macedonians had 8,000 killed and 5,000 captured, while the Romans lost only 700; Philip fled to Tempe and sued for peace. All 35 tribes in Rome voted for the peace treaty in which Philip V agreed to allow all the Greek cities in Europe and Asia to be free with their own laws; his army was to be limited to 5,000, and he was not allowed to make war outside Macedonia without the senate's permission; also he had to pay 1,000 talents to Rome. Everyone accepted the treaty except the Aetolians, who complained that Rome was garrisoning the key locations of Acrocorinth, Chalcis, and Demetrias that Philip had called and used as the "shackles of Greece."
At the Isthmian games at Corinth and the Nemean games at Argos in 196 BC Titus Flamininus announced to grateful audiences the liberation of Greece, as he traveled from city to city urging the Greeks to practice obedience to law, justice, unity, and friendship with each other. Many democracies and even kings asked to have their states protected by Rome. Envoys warned Antiochus III to keep his hands off the free Greek cities too, but he was claiming what his great great grandfather Seleucus I had conquered from Lysimachus in Thrace as well as in Asia. Meanwhile Hannibal as praetor in Carthage was reforming their judicial system by making judges, who had served for life, only eligible to be elected for one year at a time; this and other reforms to remove peculation and government waste made him political enemies among the aristocracy. About to be indicted for plotting war with Antiochus III, Hannibal went and joined him at Ephesus.
In Rome tribunes proposed repealing the lex Oppia, passed twenty years before, that limited the jewelry, colored clothing, and carriage-riding of Roman women. When many women lobbied officials, consul Marcus Cato spoke against repeal, arguing that the husband's authority over his wife prevents trouble with women. Known for renouncing luxuries, Cato warned against this mass movement and compared it to the secession of the plebeians in 494 BC. He asked if the men could endure equality with women and suggested that once equality was granted, women would be superior. Cato cautioned that excessive spending led to the vices of extravagance and avarice, which destroy empires. He pitied the husbands, who would be entreated by their wives for money whether they yield or refuse. Tribune Lucius Valerius argued that women benefited Rome in the past and should not have to suffer this war-time measure in peace-time, believing women's finery should be controlled by husbands and fathers, not by the law; greater power requires greater moderation. A crowd of women besieged the doors of those who intended to veto the tribunes' proposal until they relented; then the tribes voted for the repeal.
The Roman senate declared war on the Spartan tyrant Nabis, who complained of being called a tyrant and felt he was being persecuted by the wealthy for having freed slaves and helped the poor get land. The Romans accused him of capturing their ally Messena and of attacking their ships off the coast of Malea; they demanded he give up Argos and listed numerous conditions for peace. Cornered, Nabis finally capitulated; but some Romans asked why a tyrant had been allowed to live and rule in liberated Greece. Flamininus' answer was that they would have had to destroy Sparta to remove him. In 194 BC the Romans showed the Aetolians they were keeping their word by removing their garrisons from Acrocorinth, Chalcis, and Demetrias. At the same time their armies left Greece they insisted that all Roman citizens who had been enslaved (many because Rome had refused to ransom them in the war against Hannibal) in Greece be freed. In Thessaly, which had never known an election, Flamininus appointed a senate and officials based on property.
In reply to Antiochus III, Titus Flamininus warned that if the Seleucid king wished Rome to stay out of Asia he had better stay away from Europe; but if he crossed into Europe, Rome would protect her allies in Asia. In Spain Roman forces killed 12,000 rebelling Lusitanians with few losses; but in Liguria the Romans lost 5,000 while destroying 14,000 Boii, and Lucius Flamininus executed with his own hands one of their leaders to please his boyfriend. In Greece the Aetolians resented their limited share of the spoils from the Macedonian war and appealed to Antiochus III to liberate Greeks from Roman domination. In 192 BC Antiochus brought his Seleucid forces across the Hellespont, and the Aetolians took Demetrias in Thessaly, where the Seleucids arrived with only 10,000 infantry, 500 cavalry, and six elephants. The Aetolians gave Antiochus command, but the Chalcidians, Athenians and Achaeans found no need for military aid against absent Romans with whom they were enjoying freedom and peace. The war began when Antiochus took Chalcis on Euboea, coming into conflict with small contingents of Achaeans, Romans, and Pergamenes that had been sent for protection. Rome sent commissioners to buy grain from Carthage and Numidia but refused to accept gifts from them or Egypt's Ptolemy V.
As Antiochus and the Aetolians controlled Thessaly and Euboea, Rome sent Marcus Acilius with 20,000 troops, who defeated the Seleucid-Aetolian alliance at Thermopylae; Antiochus fled across the Aegean with only 500 men. When the Romans captured Heraclea, the Aetolians asked for peace, refusing the consul Lucius Scipio's option of paying a thousand talents and opting to entrust themselves to the "good faith of the Roman people." Yet when the Romans demanded certain leaders, who had induced their revolt, the Aetolian leader Phaeneas balked. So Acilius marched Romans down to attack Naupactus, while the Messenians surrendered to the Romans after refusing to join the Achaean league, which had to restore the island of Zacynthus to the Romans. The Aetolians arranged a truce for six months through the famous Scipio Africanus, raising the siege of Amphissa, while Philip V escorted the Roman army through Macedonia and Thrace to the Hellespont. A letter from the Scipio brothers to Bithynian king Prusias persuaded him that Rome did not deprive friendly kings of their thrones, and he came over to their side.
The Seleucid navy was defeated by the Roman fleet at Corycus. Seleucus, the son of Antiochus III, attacked Pergamum while its king Eumenes II was fighting in alliance with Rome and Rhodes on the Lycian coast, and Antiochus ravaged the countryside. The navy of Antiochus III was beaten again at Myonessus with the loss of 42 ships, and he withdrew his garrison from Lysimachia, retreating to Asia and even allowing the Roman army to cross the Hellespont without opposition. Aemilius Regillus tried to control the Romans pillaging Phocaea. Antiochus offered to pay half of Rome's war expenses in exchange for peace; but now that they had crossed into Asia, the Romans demanded he pay the whole expense and vacate Asia to the Taurus mountains, since he had started the war. Antiochus decided this was worse than risking a battle, but at Magnesia he lost about 50,000 men, fleeing with a few friends to Sardis and then Apamea. As Romans took Sardis, his envoys asked for magnanimity from Rome, whose victory now made them "masters of the world."
Scipio Africanus offered Antiochus the same terms previously made as equals to equals: that he stay out of Europe, withdraw from Asia to the other side of the Taurus mountains, pay 15,000 talents over twelve years, compensate Eumenes with 400 talents, give twenty hostages, and surrender Hannibal, the Aetolian Thoas, and three others who incited the war. The Asian territory was divided between Eumenes of Pergamum and Rhodes, which got Lycia and Caria south of the Meander. Those who had previously paid tribute to Attalus of Pergamum now had to pay Eumenes, but those who had paid Antiochus were liberated. Cappadocian king Ariarathes, who had sided with Antiochus, was able to buy peace from Rome for 600 talents.
Meanwhile the Aetolians moved against the Amphilochians, and the Epirotes persuaded the Roman consul to besiege Ambracia. When they heard of Antiochus' defeat, the Aetolians made peace with the Romans, agreeing to pay 500 talents and turning over Ambracia; consul Fulvius Nobilior was later prosecuted for sacking the city after it capitulated, but instead of being punished he was given a triumph. The Gauls in Asian Galatia were punished for their warriors' raids by Roman forces led by consul Manlius Vulso; this was more appreciated by the allies than the defeat of Antiochus. Although Manlius was criticized for fighting these battles without a senatorial declaration of war, Rome was pleased with the immense loot that was obtained. Charges of peculation were brought against Scipio Africanus and his brother Lucius Scipio; but Africanus became ill and died, and eventually the ill will toward the Scipios recoiled against their prosecutors, as even their adversary Sempronius Gracchus defended them. Yet this showed that not even the greatest Roman hero could be considered above the law.
The spread of a Bacchic cult celebrating licentious Bacchanalian orgies at night in which young people were initiated came to the attention of the Roman consuls, and these "criminal gatherings" were broken up; many were imprisoned or executed, while condemned women were turned over to their families for private punishment. Bacchic shrines were destroyed in Rome and throughout Italy. Historians may have confused the killing of 7,000 shepherd slaves in an upheaval in Apulia with the execution of fleeing bacchanals.3
Many complaints came to Rome about Macedonian violations in Thrace and Thessaly. Roman commissioners were sent to a conference at Tempe in Thessaly; some were afraid that their cities would be despoiled by Philip V if he had to give them back. Macedonian garrisons were withdrawn, and Philip was restricted to Macedonia. Thracian problems were taken up at Thessalonica. Philip noted that he had constructed roads, built bridges, and provided supplies for the Roman army's recent passage to Asia, and he complained that Eumenes was trying to despoil him. Eumenes II accused Philip of sending aid to Bithynian king Prusias. The commission confirmed the status quo between Macedonia and Pergamum and referred disputed cities to the Roman senate, though insisting garrisons should be withdrawn from them. Upset, Philip told Onomastus to send Cassander to punish Maronea, where many were killed, causing the head of the commission to request that these two men be questioned by the senate, though Philip only sent Cassander.
As governor of Sardinia, Marcus Cato had greatly reduced government expenditures by his simple living. Although most candidates for censor, whose duty was to watch, regulate, and punish any licentious behavior, campaigned promising leniency, in 184 BC Cato and Lucius Valerius were elected censors by promising drastic purification like the strenuous treatment of a physician; their inexorable administration of justice made Roman authority greatly feared and respected. In attacking extravagance Cato asked how could a city be saved where people pay more for pickled fish than for an ox. Taxes on luxuries valued over 1500 drachmas were increased tenfold. Cato said, "A man who beats his wife or child is laying sacrilegious hands on the most sacred thing in the world."4 Cato owned many slaves he bought as prisoners of war; they could earn their freedom, and a man could pay a price to sleep with one of the women and no other; but those found guilty of a capital crime in his formal trial, he executed. Though he said that he would rather have people ask why there is not a statue of him than why there is one, a statue was erected in his honor in the temple of Hygieia with the following inscription:
When the Roman state was sinking into decay,
he became censor and through his wise leadership,
sober discipline and sound principles restored its strength.5
Suspicious of Eumenes II, Cato described a king as an animal that lives on human flesh. He said that he would rather do what was right and go unrewarded than do wrong and be unpunished, and he was prepared to forgive everyone's mistakes except his own. He noted that the wise learn from the mistakes of fools; but fools do not imitate the wise. Cato undertook numerous prosecutions and caused Lucius Scipio to pay a heavy fine, but 44 impeachments were brought against Cato himself. In Spain he defeated rebellions by giving his army little opportunity to flee from battle. In less than a year he captured 400 cities in Spain, and his soldiers received a pound of silver each, which he said was better than having the pockets of a few filled with gold. Succeeded early in Spain by his adversary Scipio Africanus, Cato on his march to Rome subdued the Lacetani and executed 600 deserters they handed over to him. Cato was the first to publish his speeches and wrote other works such as histories; his only extant book, On Agriculture, is the oldest Latin book we have. Full of practical advice he described the duties of the overseer as the following:
He must show good management. The feast days must be observed. He must withhold his hands from another's goods and diligently preserve his own. He must settle disputes among the slaves; and if anyone commits an offense he must punish him properly in proportion to the fault. He must see that the servants are well provided for, and that they do not suffer from cold or hunger. Let him keep them busy with their work - he will more easily keep them from wrongdoing and meddling. If the overseer set his face against wrongdoing, they will not do it; if he allows it, the master must not let him go unpunished. He must express his appreciation of good work, so that others may take pleasure in well-doing.6
In Arcadia a Roman commission took up Achaean-Spartan conflicts and decided that the Spartan exiles should be forgiven and restored, though Sparta was to remain in the Achaean league. Philip reluctantly complied with the commission's requests and sent his younger son Demetrius to Rome as his ambassador. Demetrius, who had been a hostage in Rome, became very friendly with Romans such as Flamininus; this was resented by his father and older brother Perseus, who eventually accused Demetrius of trying to kill him. Demetrius was able to defend himself verbally; but Perseus used a forged letter from Flamininus to accuse his brother again, and Demetrius was poisoned and killed, probably by Philip's order in 181 BC. Romans killed 15,000 Ligurians in a battle; peace was made, and 40,000 Ligurians were moved to Samnium land, though occasional revolts continued in Liguria. In a series of revolts in Spain by the Celtiberians more than a hundred thousand of them were killed before they were pacified to accept Roman rule. Sempronius Gracchus received the surrender of more than a hundred towns in Spain, carrying off much of the population into slavery.
Censors like Marcus Cato had brought some reforms and large public projects, such as an improved sewer system to Rome. Two feuding censors elected in 179 BC were urged to end their quarrel by Caecilius Metellus, who quoted the proverb that "our friendships should be immortal, but our enmities should be mortal."7 Overwhelmed by grief and remorse over the death of his son Demetrius, Philip V died and was succeeded by Perseus, who ordered the man Philip had come to prefer, Antigonus, put to death. In 177 BC Roman forces led by consul Sempronius Gracchus killed or captured 80,000 Sardinians. The Achaeans had banned Macedonians, which resulted in runaway slaves fleeing safely to Macedonia. Some in the Achaean council wanted this policy changed, but Callicrates accused Perseus of preparing for war against Rome, of turning the northern Bastarnae tribes loose on the Dardanians, and of subduing Dolopia by force; so the matter was delayed.
Carthaginians complained to the Roman senate that Masinissa's Numidians had taken over by force more than seventy towns in their territory. In Liguria in 173 BC Roman consul Popillius Laenas subjugated the Statielli; after they capitulated and were disarmed, he destroyed their town and sold them as slaves and their property. The senate ordered him to release the prisoners and restore their property; but Laenas, escaping punishment himself, kept many as slaves, and the rest were deported north of the Po River. The same year two Epicurean philosophers were expelled from Rome. Three Roman officials accused of extortion in Spain were given perfunctory trials and avoided punishment by fleeing. Similar charges against Roman praetors in Chalcis came to trial; Lucretius Gallus was fined a million asses, but Hortensius went on to exploit and abuse Abdera in Thrace the next year and was again reprimanded by the senate and forced to liberate the free citizens he had enslaved.
When Eumenes II complained he was attacked at Delphi by assassins sent by Perseus, the Roman senate declared war on Macedonia and mobilized against Perseus' army of 43,000. Perseus lost possible allies, such as the Gauls, because of his reluctance to give them money. Eventually King Gentius in Illyria, having received ten of a promised 300 talents, arrested the Roman envoys. According to Polybius, Perseus offered Eumenes 500 talents to abstain from helping the Romans or 1500 talents to end the war, but his failure to make a payment ended the deal. It took the Roman armies about three years before the forces led by Aemilius Paulus in 168 BC finally met and defeated the Macedonian army at Pydna, killing about 20,000 and capturing 11,000. Once again the steel of Rome's Spanish swords proved superior to the iron Macedonian pikes. Within two days of the battle all of Macedonia had submitted. Aemilius Paulus advised his officers to show moderation in their good fortune, noting that fools only learn by their own misfortunes, the wise learn from those of others. The Illyrian army was defeated, and Gentius was captured.
In Rome the senate decided that Macedonia and Illyria should be allowed to be free to show that Romans did not enslave but liberated people. Macedonia was divided into four governing districts, but half the tribute they had been paying to their king was now to go to Rome. Illyria received similar treatment and was divided into three districts. Envoys from Rhodes, feeling imperiled because they had tried to get both sides in the war to make peace, argued their case in Rome, which ordered Rhodian governors be withdrawn from Lycia and Caria. Making Delos a free port punished Rhodes and rewarded Athens. Towns such as Aeginium, Agassae and the city of the Aenii, which had opposed Rome, were sacked. In Epirus 150,000 Molossians were sold into slavery, and seventy cities were plundered so that each Roman soldier could receive 200 denarii (a denarius equaling a day's wage). So much gold and silver came to Rome from this war that the land tax on Roman citizens was eliminated for more than a century. A thousand prominent Achaeans, including the historian Polybius, were taken to Italy and were detained there as prisoners without trial; 700 died there, and the rest were released after seventeen years.
Analysis of Rome's institutions by Polybius noted that the senate controlled the most important spending on public buildings by the censors and the investigation of the crimes of treason, conspiracy, and murder. Foreign affairs and the imposing of penalties or rewards on other nations were also the prerogative of the senate. Nonetheless the people were responsible for conferring honors and punishment, bestowing of offices, passing or repealing laws, declaring war or peace, and ratifying treaties. Tribunes could still veto decrees of the senate and could even prevent them from meeting. By this time the rise of "new men" to the consulship from the plebeians ennobled their families so that now there were many noble plebeian families and more plebeians in the senate than patricians. The senate usurped more power by nullifying new laws that did not give due regard to existing laws and by appointing judicial commissions with unlimited punitive power. According to Polybius all citizens were supposed to serve at least ten years in the army except for the poorest, who served in the navy, and no one could hold office before completing ten years of military service.
When Seleucid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes invaded Egypt and besieged Alexandria in 168 BC, Rome's envoy Popillius Laenas handed Antiochus a decree from the senate, drew a circle around him, and demanded his answer before he moved out of the circle. Antiochus withdrew his army to Syria, and the Roman commissioners confirmed the reign of Ptolemy VI in Egypt and Ptolemy VII in Cyrene. Having restored order in Alexandria, Popillius next ejected the Seleucid navy from the island of Cypress, which was transferred to Ptolemy VII.
Attalus was welcomed in Rome as a friend; but his brother King Eumenes II, who had wavered during the war, was excluded by a new law prohibiting any king from visiting Rome. By obeying the senate and condemning to death those hostile to Rome, Rhodes eventually secured an alliance with the dominant power. A Roman commissioner named Octavius was killed in Syria during a riot after zealously burning Seleucid ships and killing their elephants to enforce their treaty of Apamea; but when his murderer Leptines was sent to Rome, the senate refused to punish him. The summary of Livy's lost books claims that when Cappadocian king Ariarathes was deprived of his kingdom by Seleucid king Demetrius, the senate restored it to him, and the Dalmatians were punished by Roman legions for encroaching on the Illyrians.
Cato attempted to lessen the impact of Greek philosophy on Rome in 155 BC when he got the three philosophers representing Athens as diplomats dismissed, because he feared their effect on ancient Roman discipline. In 154 BC, five years after Eumenes II died, Rome sided with his brother Attalus II and made Bithynia's Prusias II pay 500 talents in war damages and give twenty ships to Pergamum. Prusias was hated for his cruelty, and Roman envoys' feeble attempts to restrain Attalus from supporting the rebellion of Prusias' son Nicomedes did not stop the murder of Prusias in the temple of Zeus; Nicomedes was confirmed as king by the Roman senate. In 139 BC astrologers and Jews were expelled from Rome. After ruling Pergamum for five years Attalus III died in 133 BC and left his kingdom to Rome in his will, stipulating that Pergamum and the Greek cities should be exempt from tribute.
Cato visited Carthage and began ending every speech with the imperative that Carthage must be destroyed. Rome's bias toward Numidian king Masinissa in his conflicts with Carthage, his frequent encroachments, and his standing army of 50,000 led to war between these African states in 150 BC. He besieged Oroscopa, and 25,000 Carthaginians led by Hasdrubal marched against the Numidians and were joined by many more. According to Appian 110,000 engaged in the battle, and most of the 58,000 disarmed men returning to Carthage were slain by order of Masinissa's son Gulassa after the surrender. Utica asked for Rome's protection; accusing Carthage of violating its treaty, Rome declared its third and last Punic war, mobilizing an army of 80,000 infantry and 4,000 cavalry. Carthage asked for peace, sent 300 hostages to Rome via Lilybaeum, and surrendered arms for 200,000 men and 2,000 catapults; but when the Romans demanded that the mercantile Carthaginians all move ten miles inland, they refused and began making more weapons. At Nepheris as many as 70,000 African soldiers and civilians were killed, while 10,000 were captured and only 4,000 escaped. Carthage held out under siege for three years until they were starved into surrender; 50,000 were sold as slaves, and Carthage was burned to the ground in 146 BC. Rome annexed the Tunisian peninsula as the province of Africa.
In Greece Andriscus, claiming to be a son of Perseus, raised an army that ravaged Thessaly in 149 BC; but the next year a Roman army led by Caecilius Metellus chased him out of Macedonia into Thrace, and the senate decided to annex Macedonia as a province that included Thessaly and Epirus. Roman attempts to break up the Achaean league stimulated a proletarian revolution led by Critolaus, who was appointed dictator by Corinth; this was also squelched by the legions of Metellus. Corinth, having beaten up Roman envoys, was also razed to the ground in 146 BC, and its inhabitants were sold into slavery. The Roman army broke down the walls and took the armaments of every city that had resisted Rome before sending the advisory commission, which then ended the democracies and established governments based on property qualifications. The national leagues of the Achaeans, Phocians, and Boeotians were all broken up. The governor of Macedonia was authorized to settle any conflicts between the isolated city states, now mostly ruled by the wealthy class.
Not finding trustworthy native leaders and wanting their mineral wealth, the provinces Hispania Citerior and Hispania Ulterior were ruled by two Roman praetors. Sempronius Gracchus founded Gracchuris, and after many wars Spain had a quarter century of peace until 154 BC when Roman oppression stimulated revolts by the Celtiberians and invasion by Lusitanians. In spite of the senate's wishes Marcellus conciliated the Spaniards for eight more years in Hispania Citerior. In 151 BC so many men resisted conscription into the army that the tribunes even arrested the consuls for refusing to grant exemptions; the same thing happened again thirteen years later. Greedy for fame and money, Lucullus invaded the Vaccaei with a Roman army without any provocation or authorization by the senate. After a battle with losses on both sides, the Vaccaei retreated into their city and asked for a settlement. Two thousand Roman soldiers were allowed in to garrison the city; but they began killing all the men there, and very few of the 20,000 escaped. Lucullus also attacked other Celtiberians, who turned out not to have any gold or silver, and he was never held to account for his crimes.
Lusitanian leader Viriathus won several victories over five Roman commanders and even survived the massacre of three groups by governor Galba after they had surrendered their arms. The wealthy Galba distributed some of the plunder to his soldiers and kept the rest for himself; he was eventually prosecuted but avoided punishment by an emotional plea for mercy. In 149 BC the tribune Calpurnius Piso proposed establishing a permanent court of senators for cases of extortion, and its judgments could not be appealed to the people or the tribunes. Viriathus, who considered self-sufficiency his greatest wealth, freedom his country, and eminence won by bravery his securest possession, made a treaty with Fabius Servilianus and the senate which was broken by his brother Caepio and the senate; though Viriathus had been declared a friend of the Romans, he was assassinated while sleeping. Numantia, the central city of Spain, defied Roman authority for nine years until Rome broke another treaty and then sent Scipio Aemilianus with 60,000 soldiers, who built a wall around the city, while he disciplined the lax troops and expelled 2,000 prostitutes from the camp. Numantia was destroyed, and the inhabitants were sold into slavery in 133 BC.
After the lex Claudia of 218 BC prohibited patricians from participating in shipping commerce and Hannibal's ravaging Italy and the conscription of so many farmers into the army of about 100,000, small landholders were replaced by larger farms with vineyards and olive groves and cattle ranches in the second century BC, as aristocratic estates expanded and slave labor increased. The war with Hannibal had produced 75,000 slaves, and many were imported from Asia after the war with Antiochus. Greek slaves brought their culture and education as teachers, physicians, and artisans, and these, as in Greece, might earn their freedom; but increasing numbers of slaves working on plantations or in the mines had little chance of gaining freedom.
In Sicily a revolt inspired by a psychic Syrian slave named Eunus in 135 BC took over the city of Enna and declared him King Antiochus, stimulating the Cilician Cleon to raise an army and overrun Acragas. The two armies of liberated slaves joined, and the revolt lasted three years; as their numbers grew to about 70,000 they also controlled Agrigentum, Tauromenium, and Catana. They killed slave owners but spared those who had been kind to slaves. Diodorus noted, "Even among slaves human nature needs no instructor in regard to just repayment, whether of gratitude or revenge."8 Other slave outbreaks occurred then in Italy, Attica, and at Delos, the center of the slave trade. The empire of republican Rome now stretched from the Atlantic coast of Spain to Asia Minor, but the increased militarism and social inequities were beginning to erupt in what would be a century of revolution and civil wars.
Notes
1. Livy 8:21 tr. Betty Radice.
2. Livy 30:42 tr. Aubrey de Selincourt.
3. See Toynbee, Hannibal's Legacy, Vol. 2, p. 320-321.
Romans and Barbarians 1-500 AD
The aim of this sub-project is to describe the social upheaval that took place among the elite of the Germanic ‘Barbaricum' at the end of the second century AD, as a natural consequence of the Roman-Germanic relations.
The first five centuries AD were dominated by the Roman Empire, which in its search for resources and tribute had already established its border towards the northern Barbaricum along the rivers Rhine and Danube around the beginning of our era. This put the Roman Empire in a defensive rather than an offensive position vis-à-vis the Germanic tribes, and until the end of the fifth century this border was to divide Europe into a centralist, imperial society to the south and a more loosely organized chieftainship society to the north.
In the first and second centuries AD Barbaricum was divided into many small, short-lived chieftainships, but at the end of the second century – during the waging of the so-called Marcomannic wars between the Romans and Germanic tribes – a social development began that laid the foundations for the establishment, around 500 AD, of a central monarchy in southern Scandinavia. The many small chieftainships were now swallowed up by mighty dynastic power centres like Himlingøje in East Zealand and later Gudme in southeastern Funen. These power concentrations, which appear in the archaeological material as sites with expensively furnished graves and very extensive, long-lasting settlements, represented generations of influential princely families which through among other things agricultural improvements and trade obtained an economic basis for protecting themselves and expanding with the aid of regular, well organized armies.
Probably the most important driving force behind the development of the military aristocracy system from which the monarchy grew was the aristocracy's ability to maintain peaceful as well as belligerent relations internally and – not least – with the Roman Empire. This is most clearly illustrated at Himlingøje, which for more than 150 years controlled the import and distribution of some of the most prestigious symbols of rank of the Germanic aristocracy – Roman bronze and glass vessels as well as ornaments of precious metal – to large parts of northern Europe.
What the Romans got in exchange for this we can only guess; but it is not unlikely that the aim from the Roman side was partly defensive: to reduce the threat against the marches by supporting one or more strong power structures in the Germanic hinterland. In addition there was of course the fact that the Romans were in constant need of new supplies of agricultural products, skins, cloth etc. for the many thousand soldiers posted along the border of Barbaricum – and these were things that the strongly centralized and efficient southern Scandinavian farmers and craftsmen were able to supply.
In the period from the second to the fifth century southern Scandinavia formed the setting for a succession of hostile engagements which are manifested in the archaeological material in the form of the so called war booty offerings: ritual deposits in lakes and bogs of the equipment of an attacking but defeated army. The war booty offerings reflect the power struggles that culminated in the emergence of the monarchy, and give us detailed insight into the structure of the Germanic army with the richly equipped prince at its head as general followed by a number of mounted officers and the large mass of soldiers on foot. The finds furthermore show that the armies were organized against the background of the aristocracy's encounters with and thorough familiarity with the Roman army.
The same structure and the same equipment of the army leadership as we see in the war booty offerings are reflected in much of Barbaricum in the grave finds of the period, from Norway and Sweden in the north to the marches of the south. This means that despite the regional differences that can be noted in Barbaricum in the 2nd-5th centuries, there was a shared aristocratic identity, very probably created the moment Roman-Germanic relations were put to one of their greatest tests: the Marcomannic wars and the time that followed.
germania as in pre roman and after roman times
hi there all here is a small essay written by my friend his name is michael anthony i have used this with his permission a history of germania
Germania and Its People
Rome's traditional foe was Gaul; they came from France and northern Italy. These were eventually subdued, as were the Celts, who inhabited much of the Spain and France. Enemies on the eastern and southern borders; Persians, Parthians, Carthaginians, Macedonians, all came and went, but it was the tribes which originated from Scandinavia and northern Germany that eventually overran the Roman Empire in the west.
By no means a single people, the Germans were made up of many tribes, with their territory reaching from France to eastern Europe, and into Scandinavia. Usually it was the ones on the borders with the Empire that caused conflict, although many of the tribes most influential in history came from the north and east, migrating for expansion or to escape some new tribe that had settled near them.
They appear to have been warrior-orientated, favouring raids and plunder over organised agriculture. Currency was not used among the various tribes, although Roman coins were coveted for their gold or siver value. However, they were relatively civilised; Tacitus describes them as holding the principle of monogamy in very high regard, exercising unrestrained punishments for adultery, and their strong morals can be compared with the more licentious attitudes of the Romans.
There were no major conurbations, nor large defence works; the people favoured living on isolated sites, and occasionally in small groups. This seems quite territorial, although in general land was held in common. This communistic attitude within the tribes is demonstrated by the fact that there were no absolute monarchs, or even single leaders within tribes; people in administrative positions were not really any wealthier than others.
In appearance the Germanic people were quite plain (unlike the decorative Celts), with a drab cloak or pair of trousers, and not much ornamentation. They had lightish hair which was usually short or shaven, although the Suebi are said to have tied their long hair into a knot.
For an apparently warrior orientated race, the Germans had a relatively primative army. Like most scattered and non-centralised people, tribesmen were called to battle when needed, as opposed to the Romans who at this time employed a professional army. The warriors themselves as a rule had no body-armour, no helmet, and used a thrusting spear. Swords and cavalry were rare and generally only used by people who could afford them, and the spear, or framea, often was only a pointed stick.
Nevertheless, the Germans were well known for their wildness and ferocity. Later on they adapted the Frankish francisca - throwing axe, and the Saxon Sax - a dagger.
The absence of a standing army and therefore of the ability to train soldiers meant that most of the time a warrior would go into battle looking for personal glory. This would mean not keeping to rank, and simply charging the enemy, hoping to kill as many people as possible.
This factor meant that the Romans - who used highly trained and disciplined legionaries with full body-armour, a helmet, two javelins and a sword - generally came out best in battle by working as a team for common, rather than personal, achievement.
After Julius Caesar's conquest of Gaul in the mid-first cenury BC, it was Augustus who made the first and last proper attempt to conquer Germania. The campaign hadn't gone too badly, and the boundary had been pushed back around a hundred miles east of the Rhine, when a disaster ended all attempts to subdue the region. In AD 9 an incompetent commander, Quinctilius Varus, responded to a minor disturbance involving the Germans by taking three whole legions through the Teutoberg Forest, where, unable to coordinate themselves, they were of course ambushed and massacred. After this Augustus recommended that future emperors didn't try to invade Germania.
The many and varied German people, while originating from northern central Europe, eventually came not only to overthrow the Western Roman Empire, but to be at the foundations of Russian, British and central European civilisation. This is demonstrated in some some interesting ways.
The religious beliefs commonly held in Germania had Woden as the principle god, equivalent to Mercury and of course behind our 'Wednesday'. Tiw was the war god, known as Mars to the Romans, and gave his name to 'Tuesday', while Thursday and Friday originate from Thor (eqv. to Jupiter) and Frigg (a fertility godess).
After Augustus the Germans were held mostly at bay, and didn't cause too much trouble except for isolated conflicts such as the Marcomannic Wars, and the killing of Emperor Decius by the Goths. However, events in the Germanic world during the third century AD caused large-scale migrations, and some tribes to seek refuge in Roman-held territory. This period almost saw the Empire overrun, but after a series of strong emperors it fought off the invaders, who weren't just coming from the north, and there was relative peace for a while.
The most consequential event occurred during the fourth century AD. The Huns were a nomadic people, originating from north central Asia, and short, with a Mongolian appearance. Having been barred from China after the erection of the Great Wall in the third century BC, they moved west, crushing the Ostrogoths who lived by the Black Sea. The Visigoths appealed to be let within the Empire's borders to escape the Huns, and were allowed. However, they weren't treated well and quarrels broke out, leading to the Visigoths destroying a Roman army at Adrianople in AD 378. After this time German peoples could not be forced out of the Empire and took up permanent residence within the borders.
The Huns meanwhile continued to cause mass migrations; the Suebi, Vandals and Alans were pushed over the Rhine, as described in the 'World' pages, ending in the reduction of the territories in the west before the Visigoths sacked Rome in AD 410, effectively spelling the end of the Western Empire.
The Huns themselves went on campaign in the mid-fifth century under their king Atilla, invading Italy in AD 452.
It was of course the Germans who took over the constituent parts of the Western Empire after the fall of Rome. Gaul went to the Franks, Spain to the Visigoths and Suebi, Romanised Britain to the Saxons, Africa to the Vandals and Italy to the Ostrogoths. The Byzantine Empire made up what remained of the Roman World.
In this way Germanic influence was spread over the whole of modern Europe. The Dutch, Flemish, Frisian and English languages are all related to Old West German, and the feudal system and patterns of settlement in existence in mediaeval Europe were shaped around those adopted by the Germanic settlers after the fall of Rome, and the beginning of the Dark Ages.
Hakonarson
08-27-2003, 03:48
Quote[/b] ]hi there all here is a small essay written by my friend his name is michael anthony i have used this with his permission a history of germania
??
This article is hosted at http://www.acutecomics.uklinux.net/gladius/ (via the link titled "Germania and Rome") - which is part of a personal site by a guy who calls himself Tom (http://www.geocities.com/siteoftom/ - via the link "Gladiator")
Here's what he says about "Behind Gladiator" on his links page:
Behind Gladiator - by me Looks at the history and characters, as well as topics raised such as gladiators, Roman weapons, and Germania.
The acutecomics page at http://www.acutecomics.uklinux.net/ has no mention of a Michael, or an Anthony - indeed it appears to be a project by senior students at a girls school - an impression furthered by Tom's description:
Acute Comics, the Girls' School's YE project, which I created for them, so defeating the purpose of the exercise. Actually, they provided the content.
How very strange
indeed very strange hak maybe you should email them to make them acknowldge the original author's work see what reply you get.
unless you implying that i lied about my fellow worker writing that. Now that is very unsporting of you to call someone who actually acknowledged his worker's work. you were the one who pointed out few topics back dozens of sites that post same info some acknowldge different people and some dont. I would like to hear your so called expert reply to that.
Hakonarson
08-27-2003, 11:15
Thanks - I've never been told I'm an expert before.
You've got the address - if I was you I'd tell your friend about it so he can take it up with them since it is his work after all.
Sadly there are far too many unattributes copys out there, and so I can only address those that cross my path.
It's not like I'm on a crusade or anything.
bhutavarna
08-27-2003, 21:30
khurjan guy,
i appreciate your effort dude. i know sum ppl are picky about the acknowledgement thingy, but i don't give a crap. as long as your intention was not malicious, no problem dude.
those who dwell in details miss the larger picture.
Ithaskar Fëarindel
08-27-2003, 22:13
Let's not have this out here guys, Khurjan/Hako - you know where you can talk about this.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.