jockey
06-03-2007, 13:25
Sort of. I am currently reading Grant's "History of Rome", in which he says:
"Earlier in the [3rd] century, the Roman state had begun to provide standard weapons and equipment... And so all legionaries wore helmets, breastplates and leg guards (greaves), and carried swords; and thrusting javelins had been superseded by javelins for throwing, more than six feet long, half wood and half iron.".
He also describes the legion as being organised thus:
"... a legion contained an articulated group of thirty smaller units (maniples), each of which could manoeuvre and fight separately on its own... Moreover, every maniple was formed into three lines...".
This seems to me to be a more standardised legion than the one I have been led to believe existed at this time, so I was wondering how far it is true, taking into account that although the book is more than thirty years old and not necessarily very academic, Michael Grant was a quite respected classicist and academic.
"Earlier in the [3rd] century, the Roman state had begun to provide standard weapons and equipment... And so all legionaries wore helmets, breastplates and leg guards (greaves), and carried swords; and thrusting javelins had been superseded by javelins for throwing, more than six feet long, half wood and half iron.".
He also describes the legion as being organised thus:
"... a legion contained an articulated group of thirty smaller units (maniples), each of which could manoeuvre and fight separately on its own... Moreover, every maniple was formed into three lines...".
This seems to me to be a more standardised legion than the one I have been led to believe existed at this time, so I was wondering how far it is true, taking into account that although the book is more than thirty years old and not necessarily very academic, Michael Grant was a quite respected classicist and academic.