The Republican Roman Army

A Sourcebook

Michael M. Sage

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• eBook ISBN: 9781134682881
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Ancient History
• Index: History

The Republican Roman Army assembles a wide range of source material and introduces the latest scholarship on the evolution of the Roman Army and the Roman experience of war. The author has carefully selected and translated key texts, many of them not previously available in English, and provided them with comprehensive commentaries and essays.

This wide-ranging survey of documents recreates the social and historical framework in which ancient Roman warfare took place – from the Archaic and Servian period through to the Late Republic. The topics addressed extend beyond the conventional questions of army mechanics such as strategy and tactics, and explore questions such as the army's influence on Roman society and its economy.

Complete with notes, index and bibliography, The Republican Roman Army provides students of Ancient and Military History with an unprecedented survey of relevant materials.

1

Rome’s Earliest Armies: The Archaic and Servian Period

Political and Social Institutions

By the beginning of the sixth century Rome had become one of the largest cities in Italy and the western Mediterranean. Despite the heterogeneous origins of its population it had a common culture and a typical political structure. In the Forum, the Lapis Niger or black stone dating from the second quarter of the sixth century and the earliest extant official document shows that Latin was the official language and that the writing and the carving of inscriptions were already a part of Roman practice. Appearing on that inscription is the Latin word for “king.” It is also found on a fragment of pottery found under the Regia of a somewhat earlier date. These finds support the Romans’ view that their earliest form of government was a monarchy. The traditional chronology that developed listed seven kings from the first Romulus to the last Tarquinius Superbus and assigned 254 years to the kings. The number of kings and the duration of their reigns have an artificial look to them. Except for the founder, Romulus, the names of these kings and certain of their actions may have some historical foundation, but the veracity of these accounts is anything but assured. Nevertheless, certain of their acts seem to have a historical foundation.

Although kings are common in early Italy, it is an unusual feature of Roman kingship that it was not hereditary, but elective. The most basic attribute of the king was his imperium. It denoted the ability to exercise supreme command, especially in wartime. After the expulsion of the kings it denoted the sum total of particular magistrates’ powers, both civil and military. At its base this power had a strong religious element, for imperium was joined with auspicium, the right to consult the will of the gods with regard to an activity. This link is also manifest in the need for imperium to be conferred by religious act, which signified that the holder was acceptable to the gods. Closely tied to the king and the transmission of kingship were the composition and nature of the regal Senate. It seems clear that the regal Senate was in origin a council of advisors to the king. It seems likely that parallel to other such councils the members of the Senate were chosen by the kings themselves.

Citizens who are labeled as patrician raise a particular problem. During part of the fifth and the fourth century patricians monopolized political and religious office in the state. However, it is clear from the non-patrician names appearing in the list of early consuls that they did not hold a monopoly in the earliest days of the Republic or probably during the monarchy. Patrician status may have its origin in the standing and power of the heads of leading families. Over time because of their power and influence they came to monopolize certain prerequisites especially of a religious nature which in turn gave them access to political office.

Of direct importance for the study of Roman military history has been the idea that the patricians formed the original Roman cavalry. But at Rome cavalry service was later based upon wealth and not any other form of status, and that the state unlike Greek city-states supplied horses would seem to indicate that the early Roman cavalry, though it probably did include patricians, was not exclusively a patrician body.

The Structure of the Archaic Army

The Infantry

1 VARRO, ON THE LATIN LANGUAGE 5.89.1

The ancient tradition universally linked the earliest structure of the Roman army to an original tribal system whose creation was attributed to the first king, Romulus. In the Republican period the names of these tribes which are of uncertain origin are found as the names of a special group of cavalry centuries known as the sex suffra-gia. There is also a striking prevalence of multiples of three in later Roman military formations that makes clear how central this division is to Roman military organization and supports the authenticity of a three tribal system. The size of the army is not incompatible with what appears to be the population of regal Rome.

[They are called] soldiers [milites] because at first the legion was composed of 3,000 men, the individual tribes of the Titenses, Ramnes and Luceres each contributing 1,000 soldiers.

2 PLUTARCH, ROMULUS 13.1

Plutarch, writing at the end of the first century AD, exemplifies the tendency of ancient Greek and Roman authors to ascribe the origins of institutions to specific dates and to view them as the work of a particular historical figure. In the Republic and Empire the term “legion” referred to the basic military unit of the Roman army, but it also could be used of the army as a whole. Plutarch’s reference to selection as the origin of the term is explained by the fact that in Latin the verb meaning “to select” is legere.

After Romulus had founded the city, he divided up those capable of bearing arms into military units. Each unit consisted of 3,000 infantry and 300 cavalry. The unit is called a legion because the men selected were chosen for their warlike character from the entire population.

The Cavalry

Information on the early Roman cavalry is more detailed than that concerning the infantry. The cavalry usually plays a decisive role in accounts of early battles. This must surely have been the result of the perennial association of the horse in combat with the elite that is visible in the Mediterranean area and elsewhere. That association was fostered not only by the advantages that the horse conferred in battle, but also by the wealth necessary to raise and support it.

The date when true cavalry, that is cavalry fighting from horseback, originated is a contentious issue. Some scholars have argued that true cavalry only appeared at Rome during the Samnite wars of the last half of the fourth century. They view the pictorial representations of riders that we have as representing mounted infantry. In part, this is the result of a peculiar feature of our historical narratives of early battles. In most of them at some point in the battle the cavalry dismount to engage the enemy. The true cavalry probably appeared around 600 at Rome in Etruria as the result of Greek influence. It was at this time that the Greeks also began using true cavalry. Significantly, the western Greek states, which were in most immediate contact with the Italic peoples, were especially strong in mounted formations.

The origin of the Roman cavalry

3 LIVY, 1.13.8

Livy’s account of the creation of the cavalry formations represents one of the two traditions. It is at least in part the same as that given by Varro (1). However, Livy’s account does not make clear whether these names refer to the cavalry centuries alone or to the three tribes. He mentions the creation of the curiae (geographical groupings of clans, thirty of which made up the earliest assembly at Rome) but not the tribal system. This must have been an inadvertent omission, as he never mentions the creation of the army by Romulus. He seems to have placed the passage at this point because of the etymology of the Titenses, which is linked to the wars against the Sabine king of the town of Cures, Titus Tatius. The names seem to have been of Etruscan derivation. This can best be explained by assuming that the tribal system was created around 600, when men with strong Etruscan affinities occupied the kingship. This would fit with the view mentioned above that true cavalry appeared about the beginning of the seventh century under Greek influence.

At the same time [when the wars against the Sabines were concluded], [Romulus] enrolled three centuries of horse. One was named Ramnenses after Romulus, the second was called Titienses after Titus Tatius and the last was known as the Luceres. However, the origin and name of the last is uncertain.

4 DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS,ROMAN ANTIQUITIES 2.13

Dionysius presents the other major ancient tradition on the creation of the cavalry. In this version the cavalry is the result of the formation of a royal guard. It may be that this story arose from speculation on the origin of the tribunus celerum (literally “fast” or “speedy”), who in historical times was an officer associated with the mounted portion of the ceremonies that marked the beginning and end of the campaigning season. It seems likely that these tribunes once had a military function, perhaps controlling the cavalry, who might well have been at first named celeres, the speedy ones. The centurions mentioned by Dionysius as commanding units of one hundred men seem to be an artificial creation based upon the etymology of the name. Cavalry units of one hundred seem far too large. Valerius Antias was a historian of the first century BC.

After Romulus had established the Senate from one hundred men, he saw that he had need of a formation as a guard for his own person and for service in pressing matters. He chose three hundred men from the most distinguished families who were the most physically fit. The curiae selected them as they had done the senators; each curia chose ten men and Romulus constantly kept them around his person. They were called celeres, a name given them according to the majority of writers because of their speed in carrying out their tasks. However, Valerius Antias claims that they were so called because that was the name of their commander. This leader (Celer) was an extremely distinguished man, who had three centurions under him. In the city they followed Romulus about and executed his orders, and on campaign they were in the vanguard and the king’s companions in arms. They fought on horseback in suitable terrain and on foot where the ground was rough and unfit for cavalry.

5 VARRO, ON THE LATIN LANGUAGE 5.91.1

Varro’s etymology of turma is incorrect. The real derivation of the word is unknown. Each unit of thirty men was presumably under the command of a tri-bunus celerum and three decuriones of lesser rank each commanding a troop of ten horsemen. There is a good chance that this pattern of command does in fact stretch back to the kings. The turma remained the standard unit of legionary cavalry through the imperial period. There were originally three military tribunes assigned to the infantry of the legion and these would parallel the three tribunes of the cavalry. Later the tribunus celerum disappeared as a military office and one of the three decuriones became the commander of the unit as a whole.

Turma, a troop of cavalry is from terima (the E changed to a U), because it is composed of three times ten troopers, each ten raised from each of the three tribes; that is the Titenses, Ramnes, and Luceres. The leaders of eachgroup of ten cavalry [decuria] are called decuriones from this and even now there are three to each turma.

Light Cavalry?

6 VARRO, ON THE LATIN LANGUAGE 7.57

Varro is the only source that calls the ferentarii “cavalry.” In the second century the term was used of a type of light infantry. There is a grave stone from Clusium in Etruria which shows a rider armed with a javelin, but with no body armor, and seems to portray a light cavalry trooper. It is possible that the figure is a ferentarius. Plautus is the famous Roman comic playwright who wrote at the beginning of the second century. The shrine mentioned was the only temple of Asclepius (originally a Greek god of healing) in Rome, on the Tiber Island and built in the early third century.

[Plautus] writes in his play the Trinummus: “I see that a ferentarius friend has been found for you.” Ferentarius is from the verb fero, that is empty and without profit: or because cavalry were so called who bore only those weapons which are used up such as the javelin. I have seen cavalry of this type in an old shrine of Asclepius and they are labeled ferentarii.

Changes in Cavalry Forces Before the Mid-Sixth Century

The tradition concerning the increase in the Roman cavalry before the reign of Servius Tullius is confused and uncertain. The problem is centered on the reigns of two kings, Tullus Hostilius, the third king, and Tarquinius Priscus, the sixth. There is a much greater probability that Tarquinius is historical, but many scholars also accept the historicity of Tullus and the reality of certain events of his reign. Hostilius is presented as the incarnation of the warlike sprit in the sources. He is a counterpart to the first king, Romulus, and a foil to the peaceful Numa, who preceded him. The core event that can be accepted to his reign is his successful war against Alba Longa, southeast of Rome in the Alban Hills, whose early archaeological history is closely related to that of Rome. Tradition made it the mother-city of all of the Latins. The site continued after its conquest by Rome as the religious center of the Latins. If we accept the historicity of the war, although not its course as described by the sources, then it is possible that around this period Roman forces were increased as a result of the acquisition of immigrants from Alba. This increase is to some extent supported by reports that Tullus added new regions to the city.

7 LIVY, 1.30.3

The acquisition of population is to some extent supported by independent attestation that certain noble Roman families such as the Julii, the family of Julius Caesar, claimed an Alban origin, as well as by the fictitious sequence of Alban kings who were ancestral to those of Rome. Some ancient sources assign the increase to Romulus’ reign.

In order to increase the strength of all orders with the addition of new population, Tullus added ten turmae of cavalry from the men of Alba, and created supplements for existing legions, as well as creating new ones.

Tarquinius Priscus

Priscus is the first Roman king claimed to be of Etruscan origin. His father was supposedly an immigrant Greek, Demaratus, and his mother, Tanaquil, is said to have been from Tarquinii in Etruria, though it has reasonably been suggested that the family actually came from Caere because of the much fuller archaeological attestation of a family of the same name there. However, given doubts about whether the family from Caere was related it is probably safer to accept the ancient tradition.

The tradition records that two of the last three of the Roman kings were Etruscan and there are hints that Servius Tullius, the sixth king, was Etruscan as well. It has been natural to see the last century of the monarchy as dominated by an Etruscan dynasty, and some scholars have even claimed that the Etruscans conquered the city. However, there is no trace of such a conquest in our sources nor is there any need to postulate it. Given Rome’s position as a frontier city at the borders of Etruria and Latium, as well as the hill peoples living to its northeast, it must have had a mixed and open aristocracy from the start. That one of its elements was Etruscan should occasion no surprise.

The traditional dates for the reigns of the last three kings are marked by major construction in the city, including the start of the Capitoline temple to Jupiter and the draining and first paving of the Forum. There are hints as well of growth in population and of at least some Roman military successes in Latium and its vicinity. These developments form a plausible context for the cavalry reform ascribed to the first Tarquin, even if the historicity of the numbers given cannot be established.

8 CICERO, DE RE PUBLICA 2.36

The core of this passage is formed by the explanation of a statue and stone in the Forum supposedly of Attus Navius, as Livy’s parallel account makes clear. It is also an explanation of the importance of augury or the taking of omens in political affairs. The number and names of centuries remained constant for these six cavalry centuries for the rest of the Republic. They became a special voting group as the native Roman cavalry lost its military functions. The story is an attempt to explain the fact that three are called prior and three are called posterior centuries.

Then [Tarquinius Priscus] organized the cavalry in the form which it retains to the present. He was not able to change the names of the three centuries, Titenses, Ramnes, and Luceres, because Attus Navius that most renowned of augurs would not agree ... nevertheless, he added additional troops to the centuries and doubled their number to twelve hundred.

9 FESTUS, 247 L

Festus, a second-century AD writer, draws on an antiquarian writer, Verrius Flaccus, a grammarian of Augustan date, who is a learned, if not always accurate, source. Given the general ignorance of our sources on the realities of early warfare it is hard to assess the truth of this passage.

Paired horses: that is the two horses that the Romans were accustomed to use in battle, so that they could change to a fresh horse when their first mount began to sweat.

10 GRANIUS LICINIANUS, 26.12

Granius is probably a writer of the mid-second century AD. The use of multiple horses is known elsewhere, and later additional pay was awarded to cavalrymen who maintained multiple mounts. There appears to be some archaeological evidence of this style of fighting. An archaic frieze from the Roman Forum shows several riders apparently galloping to the attack. The riders are arranged in pairs, with an armored rider paired with an unarmored one. This would seem to imply ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Abbreviations
• Introduction
• Rome's Earliest Armies The Archaic and Servian Period
• The Development of the Manipular Army
• The Army of the Late Republic
• Suggested Readings
• Index