Military of ancient Rome

At its height, protecting over 7,000 kilometers of border and consisting of over 400,000 legionaries and auxiliaries, the army was the most important institution in the Roman world.

[1] At the time of the two historians, Roman society had already evolved an effective military and had used it to defend itself against the Etruscans, the Italics, the Greeks, the Gauls, the maritime empire of Carthage, and the Macedonian kingdoms.

During the Roman Republic, the function of the military was defined as service to the "Senatus Populusque Romanus" – an agency designated by SPQR on public inscriptions.

The equipment used by the military altered greatly in type over time, though there were very few technological improvements in weapons manufacture, in common with the rest of the classical world.

Expansions were infrequent, as the emperors, adopting a strategy of fixed lines of defense, had determined to maintain existing borders.

However, he notes that these figures were probably subject to inflation due to the practice of leaving dead soldiers "on the books" to continue to draw their wages and ration.

The soldiery of the era ranged from lightly armed mounted archers to heavy infantry, in regiments of varying size and quality.

[citation needed] The British historian Peter Heather describes Roman military culture as being "just like the Marines, but much nastier".

In the legions of the Republic, discipline was fierce and training harsh, all intended to instill a group cohesion or esprit de corps that could bind the men together into effective fighting units.

Unlike opponents such as the Gauls, who were fierce individual warriors, Roman military training concentrated on instilling teamwork and maintaining a level head over individual bravery − troops were to maintain exact formations in battle and "despise wild swinging blows"[5] in favor of taking shelter behind one's shield and delivering efficient stabs when an opponent made himself vulnerable.

[citation needed] Loyalty was to the Roman state but pride was based in the soldier's unit, to which was attached a military standard − in the case of the legions a legionary eagle.

Successful units were awarded accolades that became part of their official name, such as the 20th Legion, which became the XX Valeria Victrix (the "Valiant and Victorious 20th").

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

[6] Although early in its history, troops were expected to provide much of their equipment, eventually, the Roman military became almost entirely funded by the state.

[10] As tax revenue was plagued by corruption and hyperinflation during the Crisis of the Third Century, military expenditures began to become a "crushing burden"[11] on the finances of the Roman state.

First, substantial rewards were paid to "barbarian" chieftains for their good conduct in the form of negotiated subsidies and the provision of allied troops.

[11] Of the western empire's taxable population, a larger number than in the east could not be taxed because they were "primitive subsistence peasant[s]"[11] and did not produce a great deal of goods beyond agricultural products.

Such reserves were only re-established during the late empire when the army was split into a border defense force and mobile response field units.

[citation needed] The Roman military was keen on the doctrine of power projection – it frequently removed foreign rulers by force or intimidation and replaced them with puppets.

This was facilitated by the maintenance, for at least part of its history, of a series of client states and other subjugate and buffer entities beyond its official borders, although over which Rome extended massive political influence and military threat to keep them loyal.

[21] The empire's system of building an extensive and well-maintained road network, as well as its absolute command of the Mediterranean for much of its history, enabled a primitive form of rapid reaction, also stressed in modern military doctrine.

Policing was split between the city guard for low-level affairs and the Roman legions and auxiliary for suppressing higher-level rioting and rebellion.

The Roman army had derived from a militia of main farmers and the gain of new farmlands for the growing population or later retiring soldiers was often one of the campaign's chief objectives.

However, Rome is offered by Edward Luttwak and others as an early example of a state that possessed a grand strategy which encompassed the management of the resources of an entire nation in the conduct of warfare.

Elements of Rome's strategy included the use of client states, the deterrent of armed response in parallel with manipulative diplomacy, and a fixed system of troop deployments and road networks.

Within the bounds of classical military technology, however, Roman arms and armor were developed, discarded, and adopted from other peoples based on changing methods of engagement.

However, Luttwak points out that whilst the uniform possession of armour gave Rome an advantage, the actual standard of each item of Roman equipment was of no better quality than that used by the majority of its adversaries.

Later in Rome's history, it adopted practices such as arming its cavalry with bows in the Parthian style and even experimented briefly with niche weaponry such as elephants and camel-troops.

[citation needed] During a time of peace, the Roman army would have had a typical diet consisting of bacon, cheese, vegetables, and beer to drink.

As Rome started to expand, it slowly embraced the Greek culture, causing an influx of medicinal information in Roman society.