Roman Military (Classics)

Introduction

The Roman army evolved from a small citizen yeoman force into a tool of international diplomacy, the mercenary blade in the hands of rival warlords, and finally a provincial police force that occasionally asserted itself in political events. It is often called the first professional army, but the key to the longevity of its study lies in the fact that it was the first army with a professional attitude which trained to a degree that modern armies seek to attain. It is no accident that Vegetius, a late Roman writer who drew heavily on earlier writers, is still read in military colleges. A humanities-based tradition of Roman military scholarship grew up that eschewed the grittier side of combat, contenting itself with fairly anodyne tactics and strategy. Although a pan-European interest from the Renaissance onwards, by the beginning of the 20th century, it was a German specialty, with British and French scholars striving to keep up. The publication of John Keegan’s Face of Battle in 1976, however, had a profound effect on the discipline despite its containing no explicit examination of ancient combat, but it has served to even the balance in the subject. Books on the Roman army fall into three broad categories. There are straightforward academic publications with the usual scholarly apparatus, with either endnotes or footnotes or a Harvard-type referencing system. There are popular or “coffee-table” books designed to appeal to the casually interested reader. But then there is a further category that fits in between: books that eschew any sort of note or reference system and prefer some sort of suggested reading list, yet tackle subjects that have an academic appeal, often deriving from doctoral work and clearly aimed primarily at an informed readership. This last category includes monographs intended for specialist audiences such as modelers and wargamers, frequently including colorful reconstruction paintings. Nevertheless, all three belong within this bibliography. Given the nature of the literature and the available sources, it is inevitable that the Principate forms the principal focus of any study of the Roman army, but military tradition ensured a continuity that subdividing the army into convenient time periods tends to negate.

General Overviews

No general overview of the Roman army encompasses all of its aspects and developmental history. There is a tendency to separate the Republican, Imperial, and Late Roman armies into distinct niches and to ignore the organic evolution of the institution in a way that might puzzle the Romans themselves, to whom the development presumably would all have appeared seamless. The starting point for any reading list has to be the magisterial Webster 1998. Goldsworthy 2003 attempts to remedy the temporal compartmentalization but is inevitably weighted toward the army of the Principate. Tomlin 2000, and Southern and Dixon 2000 cover the Dominate, while Campbell 1984 takes a wholly different, and very refreshing, approach to the place of the army within the state. James 2002 provides a thoughtful overview of the state of scholarship on the subject.

Campbell, Brian W. 1984. The emperor and the Roman army, 31 BC–AD 235. Oxford: Clarendon.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Examines the relationship between army and state in an intriguing and readable way that defies classification by subject. That relationship is aptly summed up by Campbell in Tiberius’s phrase, likening it to “holding a wolf by the ears.” Essential reading for the student of the Roman army.
Find this resource:
Goldsworthy, Adrian. 2003. The complete Roman army. London: Thames & Hudson.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A good general introduction, but very clearly intended for a popular audience. Despite visually attractive two-page spreads and a somewhat overly ambitious title, it is well written and up to date. Nevertheless, it is not equipped with notes, so the factual basis for statements is not always necessarily readily apparent.
Find this resource:
James, Simon T. 2002. Writing the legions: The past, present, and future of Roman military studies in Britain. Archaeological Journal 159:1–58.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
James contemplates the position of specifically British contemporary Roman military scholarship, but this article has a much wider application. It shows where Roman army studies have been and where they are, and speculates where they might go.
Find this resource:
Southern, Pat, and Karen R. Dixon. 2000. The late Roman army. London: Routledge.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This volume is complementary to Webster 1998, or even Le Bohec 1994 (cited under Textbooks), covering the sources, recruitment, service conditions, equipment, fortifications, siege warfare, and morale. A narrative of the army between Constantine and Justinian touches on many other crucial matters, such as “barbarization.” Well-referenced, although lacking notes, it resists adopting a negative “decline and fall” approach.
Find this resource:
Tomlin, Roger S. O. 2000. The legions in the Late Empire. In Roman fortresses and their legions: Papers in honour of George C. Boon, FSA, FRHistS. Edited by Richard J. Brewer, 159–181. Occasional Papers of the Society of Antiquaries of London 20. Cardiff, UK: Society of Antiquaries of London and National Museums & Galleries of Wales.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Despite the title of the volume, this paper provides a wide-ranging consideration of the later Roman army, which covers the survival of legions, frontier and mobile legions, fragmentation of units, specialist detachments, Constantine’s “grand strategy,” unit size, and 4th-century legionaries as heavy infantry.
Find this resource:
Webster, Graham. 1998. The Roman imperial army of the first and second centuries A.D. 3d ed. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Reprint of the 1985 edition with a new introduction and updated bibliography by Hugh Elton. This, the standard modern work on the army of the Republic and Principate, had its origins in a 1956 booklet, The Roman Army (reprinted in 1973). It is both dated and idiosyncratic but remains the best overall survey of the army and should be essential reading for all would-be exercitologists.
Find this resource:
Reference Works

There is a dearth of reference works devoted to the army, although corpora such as the Corpus inscriptionum latinarum (conventionally abbreviated CIL), The Roman Inscriptions of Britain (RIB, Collingwood and Wright 1965), and Inscriptiones latinae selectae (ILS, Dessau 1892–1916) inevitably include vital reference material. Devijver 1976–1980, an impressive project to document all equestrian military officers, is scarcely bedtime reading, but one has to ask why more works of this kind do not exist. Domaszewski 1967, often known as Domaszewski-Dobson, takes something good and makes it even better, while the compilation of military diplomas started by Margaret Roxan (Roxan 1978) and continued by Paul Holder makes these vital resources available to a wide audience.

Collingwood, Robin G., and R. P. Wright. 1965. The Roman inscriptions of Britain. Oxford: Clarendon.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Initiated by British scholar Frances Haverfield (who had assisted on the CIL), this began with a volume on the stone inscriptions from Britain found up to 1965, but in recent times has moved on to cover other media and culminated in the issuing of a supplement with more recent stone inscriptions. Includes all British military inscriptions.
Find this resource:
Corpus inscriptionum latinarum. 1853– . Berlin: Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An attempt to record all the known Latin inscriptions from the Roman Empire, in seventeen volumes in seventy parts, established by the German scholar Theodor Mommsen. It was inevitably out of date before it was completed, but obviously includes all of the then-known military inscriptions. Now largely superseded by the Epigraphische Datenbank Heidelberg, although an eighteenth volume is planned.
Find this resource:
Dessau, Hermann. 1892–1916. Inscriptiones latinae selectae. Berlin: Weidmann.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A selection of the best of the inscriptions gathered in CIL and other corpora compiled into three volumes by the German scholar Hermann Dessau. Includes many military inscriptions.
Find this resource:
Devijver, Hubert. 1976–1980. Prosopographia militiarum equestrium quae fuerunt ab Augusto ad Gallienum, pars 1, Litterae A–I. Louvain, Belgium: Pers Leuven.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In Latin. A series that attempts to list all the equestrian officers recorded in the Roman army. The principal volumes deal with A to I (Part 1), L to V (Part 2), an index (Part 3), and two supplements (Parts 4 and 5).
Find this resource:
Domaszewski, Alfred von. 1967. Die Rangordnung des römischen Heeres. 2d ed. Edited by B. Dobson. Beihefte der Bonner Jahrbücher 14. Cologne: Böhlau Verlag.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. The second, heavily revised edition of von Domaszewski’s original 1908 volume, now available online. This reviews the evidence for the various known military ranks, as the title suggests.
Find this resource:
Roxan, Margaret M. 1978. Roman military diplomas 1954–1977. London: Institute of Classical Studies.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Roman discharge records on bronze tablets, commonly known by the modern term “diplomas,” provide snapshots of army lists from various provinces. They supply details about units, individuals (both known and unknown), and dates. They thus supplement and enhance the written and epigraphic records for the various provinces and army units. The first volume was followed by a series of updates that attempted to keep pace with new discoveries. In 1985 came Roman Military Diplomas 1978–1984 (Institute of Archaeology Occasional Publication 9, London: Institute of Classical Studies); in 1994, Roman Military Diplomas 1985–1993 (UCL Occasional Publication 14, London: Institute of Classical Studies); in 2003, Roman Military Diplomas IV (London: Institute of Classical Studies); and finally, Paul Holder, Roman Military Diplomas V (BICS Supplement 88, London: Institute of Classical Studies, 2006).
Find this resource:
Textbooks

There is no one excellent textbook on the whole subject of the Roman army, although there are a few very good ones that tackle major portions of it. Erdkamp 2007, an edited volume, is the inevitable (and proverbial) curate’s egg. Keppie 1998 crosses a boundary that many scholars prefer to leave well alone, between Republic and Empire, while Le Bohec 1994 examines the army in its entirety. Watson 1985 produced what is now an old-school textbook that is still supremely readable and admirably documented. Elton 1997 examines the later Roman army and confronts many of the issues raised by Ferrill 1988. The mobile field army of the later Empire is considered by Hoffmann 1969–1970.

Elton, Hugh. 1997. Warfare in Roman Europe, AD 350–425. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This volume deconstructs notions about the poor quality of the later Roman army and about notions of its barbarization as it seeks to show that the “fall” of Rome had less to do with military shortcomings than it did with broader political issues around the power base. As such, Elton is at odds with Ferrill 1988.
Find this resource:
Erdkamp, Paul, ed. 2007. A companion to the Roman army. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470996577Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
As marked by its deficiencies as by its strengths, some major subject areas are ignored completely (military equipment studies, for example) and others dealt with cursorily, while some peripheral matters are given too much prominence for a work of this compass. Nevertheless, there are some good papers.
Find this resource:
Ferrill, Arther. 1988. The fall of the Roman Empire: The military explanation. London: Thames & Hudson.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Examines the case of the late Roman army as one of the principal causes of the fall of the Roman Empire, a notion found in late Roman writers like Vegetius. Diametrically opposed to the view of Elton 1997.
Find this resource:
Hoffmann, Dietrich. 1969–1970. Das spätrömische Bewegungsheer und die Notitia dignitatum. Epigraphische Studien 7. Düsseldorf: Rheinland-Verlag.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. A study of the mobile field army of the late Empire, as opposed to the static frontier armies, using the lists of units in the Notitia dignitatum.
Find this resource:
Keppie, Lawrence. 1998. The making of the Roman army: From Republic to Empire. London: Routledge.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A sound account of the evolution of the Roman army from the Republican period into the early Principate. This amply demonstrates the sort of approach that needs to be adopted for the whole of the Roman army’s period of existence before a credible overall work can be accomplished.
Find this resource:
Le Bohec, Yann. 1994. The imperial Roman army. London: Batsford.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Translation of L’armée romaine sous le haut empire (Paris: Picard). A workmanlike examination of the army of the Principate but, sadly, not actually better than the by now dated Webster 1998 (cited under General Overviews). It looks at the organization, activities, and role of the army.
Find this resource:
Watson, George R. 1985. The Roman soldier. London: Thames & Hudson.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This erudite work provides a fully documented account of the life of the everyday life of the Roman soldier from recruitment through to retirement. A lengthy note section and comprehensive bibliography mean this is still one of the most important books written on the Roman army, despite almost completely ignoring combat.
Find this resource:
Sources

Certain central texts are key to Roman military studies, such as the writings of Polybius, Josephus, Pseudo-Hyginus, and Vegetius. These are reinforced by numerous shorter passages in a variety of authors of different kinds, as well as by a vast body of epigraphic evidence, alluded to under Reference Works.

Literary, Subliterary, and Epigraphic Sources

Bowman 1994 considers the Vindolanda writing tablets. Campbell 1994 is an invaluable companion to the study of the army, while Fink 1971 on papyri proves a useful foil to Bowman’s volume. Gilliver 1993, a translation of Pseudo-Hyginus, is important to many aspects of the study of castrametation, not least for its comparisons with those parts of Vegetius that deal with fortification, included within Milner’s translation of that author (Vegetius 1995). Rawson 1971 examines the reliability of the literary sources for the Republican army, while Sage 2008 provides them in translation.

Bowman, Alan K. 1994. Life and letters on the Roman frontier. London: British Museum Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The Vindolanda writing tablets are an important recent addition to our knowledge of the army, and this volume seeks to put them into their context. It provides a brief introduction, then explores various aspects touched on by their content, including the army itself, its officers and men, frontier life, and literacy. The texts of the tablets, together with much related information, are available online.
Find this resource:
Campbell, Brian. 1994. The Roman army, 31 BC–AD 337: A sourcebook. London: Routledge.
DOI: 10.4324/9780203312339Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Most of the crucial texts, both literary and subliterary, are gathered in this one convenient volume. Sources are grouped by topic, including soldiers, officers, the emperor, the army in the field and in peacetime, its role in the local community, in politics, veterans, and last the later Roman army. Each section has its own introduction and each selection a brief commentary.
Find this resource:
Fink, Robert O. 1971. Roman military records on papyrus. American Philological Association Monograph 26. Cleveland, OH: Case Western Reserve Univ. Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The Roman army thrived on bureaucracy and evidently generated vast amounts of it, only a tiny proportion of which survives. Detailed texts, translations, and commentaries are provided. The volume is themed by the Republican period (no relevant records actually survive), and then from the Imperial period individual records, unit documents, accounts, correspondence, the Feriale Duranum, and miscellaneous fragments.
Find this resource:
Gilliver, Catherine M. 1993. The de munitionibus castrorum: Text and translation. Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 4:33–48.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A parallel Latin text and English translation of the Pseudo-Hyginus document. Although ostensibly describing the layout of a campaign camp, his terminology and reasoning get applied much more widely to the arrangement of Roman military fortifications of all kinds. The document is not without its difficulties, not least the problem of its date.
Find this resource:
Rawson, Elizabeth. 1971. The literary sources for the pre-Marian army. Papers of the British School at Rome 39:13–31.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An appraisal of the reliability of the various literary sources up to the mid-2nd century BCE, with due prominence given to Polybius and Livy.
Find this resource:
Sage, Michael M. 2008. The Republican Roman army: A sourcebook. Routledge Sourcebooks for the Ancient World. New York and London: Routledge.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This volume provides sources in translation for the Republican army from the earliest period through to its end and the rise of the Principate. It covers the earliest armies, the rise of the manipular army, and the later Republican period.
Find this resource:
Vegetius Renatus, Flavius. 1995. Epitome of military science. Translated by N. P. Milner. Liverpool, UK: Liverpool Univ. Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
If there is one definitive (if perplexingly flawed) source on the Roman army, it is Vegetius’s Epitoma rei militaris. Milner provides an English translation (but no Latin text) that is much better than the 18th-century one by John Clarke, as well as a commentary. The translation still has problems of clarity at times, and there is an assumption that it is a late Roman text (other commentators see it as more complex).
Find this resource:
Iconographic Sources

Images of the Roman army come from both official and unofficial sources, the former as propaganda sculpture, and the latter mainly as figural tombstones. They are an important source of information on how the Roman appeared and, indeed, how the soldiers were perceived. The study of the Roman army is dominated (perhaps even dogged) by the images on the helical frieze running up Trajan’s Column, and Cichorius’s photographic reproduction and textual description of one of the sets of casts (Cichorius 1896–1900) are key. The view of the Column in Richmond 1982, together with a companion piece on the Adamclisi monument, are now contained within one volume. Balty and van Rengen 1993 gives some hint of the richness of legionary figural tombstones, while Schleiermacher 1984 deals with provincial auxiliary cavalry tombstones.

Anderson, Alastair Scott. 1984. Roman military tombstones. Shire Archaeology 19. Princes Risborough, UK: Shire.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A brief introduction to military tombstones that, while concentrating on British examples, uses Continental examples to demonstrate the range of types. Issues such as funerary practices, the types of tombstone, inscriptions, sculptured reliefs, and dating are outlined.
Find this resource:
Balty, Jean C., and Wilfried van Rengen. 1993. Apamea in Syria: The winter quarters of legio II Parthica; Roman gravestones from the military cemetery. Brussels: VUB Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This little book summarizes and assesses the excavation and partial dismantling of one of the towers on the city wall at Apamea, which led to the discovery of some 3rd-century CE military tombstones belonging to legio II Parthica (which was based next to the city for a while), many of them bearing depictions of the deceased, along with their career inscriptions.
Find this resource:
Cichorius, Conrad. 1896–1900. Die Reliefs der Trajanssäule. Berlin: Reimer.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. Cichorius published two (out of an intended three) volumes of text, accompanied by photographic plates, detailing the casts of the helical frieze that runs up Trajan’s Column and illustrates the two Dacian Wars of that emperor. These 19th-century casts preserve detail that has since been lost on the monument as a result of atmospheric pollution. His division into scenes has become the standard system of referencing the reliefs.
Find this resource:
Richmond, Ian A. 1982. Trajan’s army on Trajan’s Column. London: British School at Rome.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Two classic papers on complementary monuments illustrating the Dacian War, one on Trajan’s Column and the other about the Tropaeum Traiani at Adamclisi in Romania, originally published in 1932 and 1967. These provide a useful contrast on two impressions of the same conflict, as seen from Rome and on the frontier.
Find this resource:
Schleiermacher, Mathilde. 1984. Römische Reitergrabsteine: Die kaiserzeitlichen Reliefs des triumphierenden Reiters. Bonn, Germany: Bouvier.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. A comprehensive examination of “rider” or Reitertyp cavalry tombstones (as distinct from Totenmahl stones). These generally bear depictions of the deceased riding down a cowering barbarian and are common all over the Empire.
Find this resource:
Archaeological Evidence

The archaeology of the Roman army is a major component of its study, but an overall account of the subject is, as in so many other areas, lacking. Thus, a number of different archaeological studies of survey, excavation, and synthesis will have to suffice to demonstrate the importance of the archaeological record. It must of course be remembered that techniques are continually evolving: all such work should be seen in its context, and care should be exercised in comparisons between, say, a modern report like Hanson 2007 and one detailing excavations from twenty years earlier, like Pitts and St. Joseph 1985. An example of the sort of synthesis that is possible using archaeological data is provided by Jones 1975, while Taylor, et al. 2000 shows what can be done without excavation and by comparison with excavated data.

Hanson, William S. 2007. Elginhaugh: A Flavian fort and its annexe. Britannia Monograph Series 23. London: Roman Society.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Open-area “rescue” excavation of virtually the whole of an auxiliary fort of the 1st century CE, demonstrating how stereotypes of Roman fortification can mislead. This should be compared with the trenched research excavation of Inchtuthil (Pitts and St. Joseph 1985). A typical modern excavation report.
Find this resource:
Jones, Michael J. 1975. Roman fort-defences to A.D. 117, with special reference to Britain. British Archaeological Reports 21. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A comprehensive examination of the archaeological evidence for the various components of early imperial fortifications, including ditches, ramparts, towers, and gateways. Iconographic and experimental evidence is used to reinforce the archaeology.
Find this resource:
Pitts, Lynn F., and J. K. St. Joseph. 1985. Inchtuthil: The Roman legionary fortress excavations 1952–65. Britannia Monograph Series 6. London: Roman Society.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The examination of an entire 1st-century CE legionary fortress by trenching (as opposed to open-area, for which see Hanson 2007) and aerial photography. It is important for the opportunity afforded to examine an uncomplicated site plan (most fortresses are complex palimpsests that can only ever be examined in fragments). It is inevitably a product of its time, and techniques have moved on.
Find this resource:
Taylor, J. D. A., J. Robinson, and J. A. Biggins. 2000. A report on a geophysical survey of the Roman fort and vicus at Halton Chesters. Archaeologia Aeliana 28:37–46.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The use of remote sensing in Roman military archaeology has burgeoned, thanks to its noninvasive character and (by comparison with excavation) economy of effort. It can be employed to inform on the extent of a site and, with selective trenching, can even provide outline phasing, so is an invaluable reconnaissance tool. This report illustrates the sort of detailed analysis that is possible, as well as underlining some of the shortcomings of the technique.
Find this resource:
Experimental Archaeology

Informed reconstruction can prove valuable, just so long as it is remembered that experimental archaeology can only ever show what might have been done, not what actually happened. It is most active in the area of arms and armor (Haines, et al. 2000; Junkelmann 1986), with structural reconstruction (Hobley 1967) tending to be hampered by modern building regulations.

Haines, Tim, Graham Sumner, and John Naylor. 2000. Recreating the world of the Roman soldier: The work of the Ermine Street Guard. Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 11:119–127.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A review of the research and experimental work of the first Roman military reenactment group, the Ermine Street Guard.
Find this resource:
Hobley, Brian. 1967. An experimental reconstruction of a Roman military turf rampart. In Roman frontier studies 1967: Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress Held at Tel Aviv. Edited by S. Appelbaum, 21–33. Tel Aviv: Students’ Organization of Tel Aviv University.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Excavated and representational evidence is used to reconstruct part of the 1st-century CE turf-and-timber defenses of the Roman fort at the Lunt, Baginton.
Find this resource:
Junkelmann, Marcus. 1986. Die Legionen des Augustus: Der römische Soldat im archäologischen Experiment. Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 33. Mainz, Germany: von Zabern.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. One of the first systematic documented accounts of experimental reconstruction of legionaries’ equipment and life, undertaken prior to a march across the Alps from Germany. Thorough and painstaking.
Find this resource:
Junkelmann, Marcus. 1996. Reiter wie Statuen aus Erz. Zaberns Bildbände zur Archäologie–Antike Welt, Sonderband. Mainz, Germany: von Zabern.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. Junkelmann’s complementary examination and re-creation of Roman cavalry of the Principate, with large numbers of illustrations of original artifacts and replicas, as well the items in use.
Find this resource:
Soldiers

Recruitment and discharge are key to understanding the geolocation of soldiers in terms of both their origins and ultimate place of residence. The vexed question of pay shows the differentiation in status between the troop types, while the award system was a key motivational tool for troop morale in warfare.

Recruitment and Discharge

The army recruited both legionaries and auxiliaries from throughout the empire (and even beyond it): the first from traditional citizen sources, the second from loyal tribes with useful specialties such as cavalry or archers. As time progressed, more recruits came to be locally sourced. Mann 1983 and Mann 1963 provide an overall survey of recruitment and settlement and examine the special case of newly raised imperial legions. A useful summary of recruitment and discharge can be found in Wesch-Klein 2007, while Keppie 1983 concentrates on veteran settlement.

Keppie, Lawrence. 1983. Colonisation and veteran settlement in Italy, 47–14 B.C. London: British School at Rome.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Illustrates the important role of Italy in veteran settlement in the late Republic and early Principate.
Find this resource:
Mann, John C. 1963. The raising of new legions during the Principate. Hermes 91:483–489.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Shows that new legions were raised in Italy during the Imperial period, separate from the usual legionary recruitment system.
Find this resource:
Mann, John C. 1983. Legionary recruitment and veteran settlement during the Principate. London: Institute of Archaeology.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A comprehensive survey of the evidence for recruitment patterns from around the empire, which also deals with veteran settlement in colonies.
Find this resource:
Wesch-Klein, Gabriele. 2007. Recruits and veterans. In A companion to the Roman army. Edited by Paul Erdkamp, 435–450. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470996577Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A brief overview of recruitment and veteran settlement, mainly concentrating on the legions.
Find this resource:
Pay and Awards

The subject of army pay was reviewed in the original editions of Graham Webster (see General Overviews) and G. R. Watson (see Textbooks) and is outlined in Herz 2007. Important reconsideration of the evidence in the light of new finds is to be found in Speidel 1992 and Alston 1994, while the army system of awards is covered by Maxfield 1981.

Alston, Richard. 1994. Roman military pay from Caesar to Diocletian. Journal of Roman Studies 84:113–123.
DOI: 10.2307/300872Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An alternative view to that put forward by Speidel 1992.
Find this resource:
Herz, Peter. 2007. Finances and costs of the Roman army. In A companion to the Roman army. Edited by Paul Erdkamp, 306–322. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470996577Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A serviceable overview of the subject of pay as part of a wider summary of the whole question of military finances.
Find this resource:
Maxfield, Valerie A. 1981. The military decorations of the Roman army. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The standard work on the awards system of the army, graded according to the type of bravery exhibited. Comprehensive and readable.
Find this resource:
Speidel, Michael A. 1992. Roman army pay scales. Journal of Roman Studies 82:87–106.
DOI: 10.2307/301286Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A revision of the accepted military pay system deduced from a frustratingly limited body of evidence. Compare this with Alston 1994.
Find this resource:
Command and Control

The officer classes were largely career politicians gaining vital military experience. The centurionate, on the other hand, provided vital experience and continuity of tradition; the very best centurions rose into the officer classes, but they were a minority. Junior officers supplied expertise fueled by ambition and literacy. On the battlefield, standards and musical instruments were the vital means of controlling troop bodies.

Senatorial and Equestrian Officers

The officer classes of the army as a whole (as distinct from individually) do not seem to attract the same attention as those lower down the system, despite the literary and epigraphic record being much richer for the upper classes. Birley 1990 looks at just one legion, while Devijver 1989 studies one particular class.

Birley, Anthony R. 1990. Officers of the Second Augustan legion in Britain: The Third Annual Caerleon Lecture. Cardiff and Caerleon, UK: National Museum of Wales.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An interesting perspective on the officers of the Second Augustan legion.
Find this resource:
Devijver, Hubert. 1989. The equestrian officers of the Roman imperial army. Mavors Roman Army Researches 6. Amsterdam: Gieben.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A collection of papers relating to the study of the various members of the army derived from (or becoming part of) the equestrian class.
Find this resource:
Centurions

Although often compared to noncommissioned officers in modern armies, centurions were in fact the backbone of the army. Birley 1936 provides an epigraphic and literary study of one, and Phillips 1975 an iconographic and epigraphic study of another. Breeze 1969 examines routes into the ordinate, while Dobson 1978 looks at the highest-ranking centurions.

Birley, Eric. 1936. Marcus Cocceius Firmus: An epigraphic study. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 70:363–367.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Literary and epigraphic records are used to examine the possible career of a legionary centurion.
Find this resource:
Breeze, David J. 1969. The Rome cohorts and the legionary centurionate. Epigraphische Studien 8:100–117.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
While many centurions rose from the ranks, it is shown here how promotion direct from Rome was an alternative route into the ordinate.
Find this resource:
Dobson, Brian. 1978. Die Primipilares: Entwicklung und Bedeutung, Laufbahnen und Persönlichkeiten eines römischen Offiziersranges. Bonn, Germany: Rheinland-Verlag.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. The definitive work on the senior legionary centurions, the primi pili, ordinary soldiers who rose to high rank through ability and achievement.
Find this resource:
Phillips, E. J. 1975. The gravestone of M. Favonius Facilis at Colchester. Britannia 6:102–105.
DOI: 10.2307/525991Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A study of the figural tombstone with the earliest epitaph and depiction of a centurion of the Twentieth legion recorded from Roman Britain.
Find this resource:
Junior Officers

The clerical and command structure under the centurions, which included the standardbearers and optiones, were key to the smooth running of the army in their support of the ordinate. Breeze 1971 and Breeze 1974 cover the various aspects of the function of the junior officer class.

Breeze, David J. 1971. Pay grades and ranks below the centurionate. Journal of Roman Studies 61:130–135.
DOI: 10.2307/300012Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Outlines three basic groups of junior officers: the immunes (exempt from fatigues), the centurial staff, and other specialist posts.
Find this resource:
Breeze, David J. 1974. The organisation of the career structure of the immunes and principales of the Roman army. Bonner Jahrbücher 174:245–292.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Based on Breeze’s doctoral thesis, this paper reviews the evidence for the various posts for each of the Praetorian Guard, Equites Singulares, legions, and the auxilia.
Find this resource:
Standards, Music, and Signaling

Musical instruments and standards were naturally used for morale purposes (the standards were even venerated as deities) but also served a vital role in tactical signaling on the battlefield, when spoken orders could be inaudible. Speidel 1976 looks at both these roles, while Stoll 1991 examines one particular legionary eagle. Actual examples of standards are rare (no legionary eagles have survived, despite Rosemary Sutcliff’s famous novel Eagle of the Ninth), but Rostovtzeff 1942 covers a vexillum and Coulston 1991 the draco. The strategic role of signaling is covered by Woolliscroft 2001.

Coulston, J. C. N. 1991. The “draco” standard. Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 2:101–114.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Looks at all the evidence for the draco (snake, rather than dragon) standard, including a surviving example designed to make a noise when used.
Find this resource:
Rostovtzeff, Michael Ivanovitch. 1942. Vexillum and Victory. Journal of Roman Studies 32:92–106.
DOI: 10.2307/296463Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Description of the only surviving vexillum from the Roman world, decorated with a painted image of Victory standing on a globe.
Find this resource:
Speidel, Michael P. 1976. Eagle-bearer and trumpeter. Bonner Jahrbücher 176:123–163.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The roles of the aquilifer and musicians examined through tombstones.
Find this resource:
Stoll, Olivier. 1991. Der Adler im “Käfig”: Zu einer Aquilifer-Grabstele aus Apamea in Syrien. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 21:535–538.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. Makes the case for the eagle in a cage shown on a tombstone from Apamea being in a transport case that served as a portable shrine.
Find this resource:
Woolliscroft, David J. 2001. Roman military signalling. Stroud, UK: Tempus.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
More concerned with strategic than tactical signaling, Woolliscroft assesses sites for their inter-visibility and considers the practicality of Roman signaling systems as they are understood.
Find this resource:
Troop Types

Rome’s armies always had a “them and us” aspect. In the Republic it was pairings of citizen and allied legions, in the Principate it was provincial auxiliaries (as infantry and cavalry) supporting citizen legions, and in the Dominate that distinction gave way to alliances between Roman troops and former barbarian enemies (some of whom, like Stilicho, rose to high office). Guard units provided a military presence at the center of power, although their use in the field was limited but did occur.

Legions

Rome’s armies are most famous for its citizen troops, the legionaries: heavy infantry with a talent for engineering works. Better adapted to set-piece battles than low-intensity warfare, the legions nevertheless persisted from the Republican period through to the late Empire. Ritterling 1925, a monumental study of the evidence for all of the legions, was updated by Le Bohec and Wolff 2000, while Parker 1992 studies their history and development and Speidel 1992 rethinks how the legion was organized. Breeze 1969 looks at two particular parts of the legion.

Breeze, David. 1969. The organization of the legion: The first cohort and the equites legionis. Journal of Roman Studies 59:50–55.
DOI: 10.2307/299846Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Examines the question of the enlarged nature of the first cohort of the legion and whether legionary cavalry were a separate body or carried on the books of centuries.
Find this resource:
Le Bohec, Yann, and Catherine Wolff, eds. 2000. Les légions de Rome sous le Haut-Empire: Actes du congrès de Lyon (17–19 septembre 1998). Paris: de Boccard.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Multiple languages. A multi-author attempt to update Ritterling 1925 that lacks the consistency of the original but is more up to date.
Find this resource:
Parker, Henry M. D. 1992. The Roman legions. Rev. ed. New York: Dorset.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
First published 1957 and still a fundamental work on the history of Rome’s legions but now showing its age, particularly in its brief section on weaponry. It examines the development of the legions from the Republic to Empire, deployment, recruitment, officers and terms of service.
Find this resource:
Ritterling, E. 1925. Legio. In Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft 2.12. Edited by August Friedrich von Pauly Georg Wissowa, and Wilhelm Kroll, 1186–1829. Stuttgart: Alfred Druckenmuller.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. Detailed account of each of the known legions with a brief history, epigraphic records and archaeological evidence considered. Now out of date but a vital starting point in the study of any legion.
Find this resource:
Speidel, Michael P. 1992. The framework of an imperial legion: The Fifth Annual Caerleon Lecture. Cardiff and Caerleon, UK: National Museum of Wales.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An important (and controversial) reconsideration of the way in which the legion was organized with a careful consideration of the familiar sources like Vegetius.
Find this resource:
Auxiliaries

As their name implies, the auxilia were the support troops for the legions. For their imaginative use in battle, see Gilliver 1996 (cited under Tactics). The definitive account remains Cheesman 1914, supplemented by Holder 1980 and Spaul 2000. Saddington 1982 looks at the early development of the auxilia, while Southern 1989 studies the irregular numeri.

Cheesman, George Leonard. 1914. The auxilia of the Roman imperial army. Oxford: Clarendon.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Begun as a prize-winning undergraduate essay, this book, despite being out of date, remains the most important study to date of the auxilia.
Find this resource:
Holder, Paul A. 1980. Studies in the auxilia of the Roman army from Augustus to Trajan. British Archaeological Report S70. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A limited attempt to update some aspects of Cheesman 1914, concentrating on the early Principate.
Find this resource:
Saddington, Denis. 1982. The development of the Roman auxiliary forces from Caesar to Vespasian: 49 B.C.–A.D. 79. Harare: Univ. of Zimbabwe.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A holistic examination of the origins and development of auxiliary forces, again concentrating on the early Imperial period.
Find this resource:
Southern, Pat. 1989. The numeri of the Roman imperial army. Britannia 20:81–140.
DOI: 10.2307/526158Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A detailed examination of the numeri and other irregular forces who served with the Roman army.
Find this resource:
Spaul, John E. H. 2000. Cohors 2: The evidence for and a short history of the auxiliary infantry units of the imperial Roman army. British Archaeological Report S841. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A book that seeks to update the original Realencyclopädie entry on cohors, using epigraphic, subliterary, and literary sources to detail each known unit.
Find this resource:
Cavalry

The cavalry was a distinct branch of the auxilia in the main, although there were some cavalry units within each legion and they were vital on the field (mainly for pursuit) and in scouting. Dixon and Southern 1997 gives a basic introduction, while Hyland 1990 and Hyland 1993 go into more depth and examine their training. Davies 1971 looks at the special case of part-mounted cohorts, while Spaul 1994 again details the evidence for all the units.

Davies, R. W. 1971. Cohortes equitatae. Historia 20:751–763.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An examination of part-mounted cohorts. Sound in the main, although the comparison with dragoons should be treated with caution.
Find this resource:
Dixon, Karen R., and Pat Southern. 1997. The Roman cavalry: From the first to the third century AD. London: Routledge.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A basic but serviceable introduction to Roman cavalry, intended for a general audience.
Find this resource:
Hyland, Ann. 1990. Equus: The horse in the Roman world. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A detailed consideration of the place of the horse in Roman society and in particular in the cavalry.
Find this resource:
Hyland, Ann. 1993. Training the Roman cavalry: From Arrian’s Tactica. Stroud, UK: Alan Sutton.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The cavalry section of Arrian’s Tactica explained in terms of equestrian realities and the available equipment and experience.
Find this resource:
Spaul, J. E. H. 1994. Ala 2: The auxiliary cavalry units of the pre-Diocletianic imperial Roman army. Andover, MA: Nectoreca.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The companion volume to Spaul 2000 on cohorts (cited under Auxiliaries).
Find this resource:
Fleets

By the time of the Principate, fleets were used more for transport and communication than for combat at sea. Starr 1960 is the classic monograph on Roman naval matters. Mason 2003 looks at one of the provincial fleets, while D’Amato and Sumner 2009 looks at the personnel. Roman shipping is examined in Viereck 1975, and an account of the excavated fleet base at Köln-Alteburg is given in Carroll-Spillecke 1999.

Carroll-Spillecke, Maureen. 1999. New excavations at the base of the Classis Germanica in Cologne (Alteburg). In Roman frontier studies 1997. Edited by Nicolae Gudea, 317–324. Zalau, Romania: Sălaj County Council.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Excavations in the fleet base at Köln-Alteburg.
Find this resource:
D’Amato, Raffaele, and Graham Sumner. 2009. Imperial Roman naval forces 31 BC–AD 500. Oxford: Osprey.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The uniforms and equipment of naval personnel, both combat and sailing crews.
Find this resource:
Mason, David J. P. 2003. Roman Britain and the Roman navy. Stroud, UK: Tempus.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Detailed yet readable analysis of the evidence for the British fleet.
Find this resource:
Starr, Chester G. 1960. The Roman imperial navy: 31 B.C.–A.D. 324. 2d ed. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The definitive account of Roman fleets in the Imperial period. Dated but still fundamental.
Find this resource:
Viereck, H. D. L. 1975. Die römische Flotte: Classis romana. Herford, Germany: Koehler.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. Consideration of the types of ships used in the Roman period (including naval vessels), with reconstructions of the vessel types.
Find this resource:
Praetorians and Imperial Guards

The Praetorian Guard, supported by the equites singulares, was often the power behind the throne and, latterly, auctioned off the highest office in the empire. Coulston 2000 provides an overall survey of troops in Rome, while Durry 1938 examines the guard and Speidel 1994a and Speidel 1994b the equites singulares. Kennedy 1978 reflects on a detail of guard accommodation.

Coulston, Jonathan. 2000. “Armed and belted men”: The soldiery in imperial Rome. In Ancient Rome: The archaeology of the eternal city. Edited by Jonathan Coulston and Hazel Dodge, 76–118. Oxford: Oxbow.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Covers the archaeological evidence for the Praetorian Guard, equites singulares, the urban cohorts, and all the other military elements that would be present in the city.
Find this resource:
Durry, Marcel. 1938. Les cohortes prétoriennes. Paris: de Boccard.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In French. A classic study of the Praetorians and the evidence for them. Dated but still valuable.
Find this resource:
Kennedy, D. L. 1978. Some observations on the Praetorian Guard. Ancient Society 9:275–301.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A paper considering the accommodation of the Praetorians, concluding that two-story barracks may have been used.
Find this resource:
Speidel, Michael P. 1994a. Riding for Caesar: The Roman Emperor’s horseguards. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
General work on the equites singulares.
Find this resource:
Speidel, Michael P. 1994b. Die Denkmäler der Kaiserreiter: Equites singulares Augusti. Cologne, Germany: Rheinland-Verlag.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. Detailed publication of the tombstones of the equites singulares from the city of Rome.
Find this resource:
Fortifications

The Romans developed their more substantial forts and fortresses from the temporary camps they dug for short-term protection, and these were organized into strategic networks and frontiers to protect their lines of communication and provide a response to external threats. Garrisoning these posts provided somewhere to keep the army when it was not in the field.

Camps

The Roman army’s habit of constructing a camp every night when on the march (so-called marching camps, although the terminology frequently gets muddled) was arguably as much a matter of discipline as of self-protection. However, it is likely that most of the surviving examples are longer-term campaign (or temporary) camps, and it is such a fortification that Pseudo-Hyginus describes in his De metatio castrorum, translated into English by C. M. Gilliver (see Literary, Subliterary, and Epigraphic Sources). Some of the earliest examples are described by Dobson 2008. The catalogues of English (Welfare and Swan 1995) and Welsh (Davies and Jones 2006) examples provide details of all of the known sites and include valuable background discussions. See also Tents.

Davies, J. L., and Rebecca H. Jones. 2006. Roman camps in Wales and the Marches. Cardiff, UK: Univ. of Wales Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A catalogue of camps comparable to Welfare and Swan 1995, this time from Wales, but the introductory material demonstrates how much temporary camp studies had progressed in a decade.
Find this resource:
Dobson, Michael. 2008. The army of the Roman Republic: The second century BC, Polybius and the camps at Numantia, Spain. Oxford: Oxbow.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Important reconsideration of the structure of the Republican army based on a careful examination of the archaeology of the Roman siege works and encampments around Numantia and the text of Polybius.
Find this resource:
Welfare, Humphrey, and Vivien Swan. 1995. Roman camps in England: The field archaeology. London: HMSO.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Detailed catalogue of temporary camps in England with introductory material that covers the types of fortification encountered and their likely significance.
Find this resource:
Forts

Networks of cohort-sized forts covered the frontier zones of the empire. Their significance is much debated, but their nature and diversity are by now well studied. Bidwell 1997 provides a good introduction, while Campbell 2009 and Connolly 1991 supply good basic introductions with reconstructions. The most thorough study to date is arguably Johnson 1983.

Bidwell, Paul T. 1997. Roman forts in Britain. London: Batsford.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A basic introduction to the topic of forts, the various kinds, and what is known about them.
Find this resource:
Campbell, Duncan B. 2009. Roman auxiliary forts 27 BC–AD 378. Oxford: Osprey.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An illustrated introduction to forts. Aimed at the wargaming and modeling market, it is nevertheless readable and written by an acknowledged scholar.
Find this resource:
Connolly, Peter. 1991. The Roman fort. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A different perspective by a reconstruction artist. Intended as a children’s book, it is as academically sound as any other work here.
Find this resource:
Johnson, Anne. 1983. Roman forts of the 1st and 2nd centuries AD in Britain and the German provinces. London: A. & C. Black.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The definitive study of cohort-sized forts, but also covering other areas such as temporary camps and legionary fortresses where they serve to make a point or provide supporting evidence. Fully equipped with a critical apparatus and detailed bibliographies.
Find this resource:
Fortresses

As the imperial army settled around the periphery of the empire, legions were set up within military bases, usually called “legionary fortresses” in English. They were later to evolve into one legion for each base after the revolt of Saturninus in 89 CE showed the flaw in allowing two legionary pay chests to reside in one location, but to start with, many legions were paired in large fortifications. Brewer 2000 contains papers that examine various aspects of recent research on fortresses, while Campbell 2006 supplies the best overview yet of their form and function. Farnum 2005 attempts to track legionary movements and relate these to bases. The internal structures within a fortress are thoroughly examined by Petrikovits 1975, and Shirley 2001 looks at the many processes involved in the construction of a fortress.

Brewer, Richard J., ed. 2000. Roman fortresses and their legions: Papers in honour of George C Boon, FRHistS, FSA. Occasional Papers of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London 20. London: Society of Antiquaries of London.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A Festschrift volume that includes a number of important papers on legionary fortresses, the most noteworthy being those by S. von Schnurbein on the Augustan origins of the type, by J. Wilkes on fortresses in the Danube regions, and by S. T. Parker on eastern examples.
Find this resource:
Campbell, Duncan B. 2006. Roman legionary fortresses 27 BC–AD 378. Oxford: Osprey.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This is by far the best general introduction to legionary fortresses, considering their development from the Augustan through to the late Roman periods, as well as various aspects of their form.
Find this resource:
Farnum, Jerome H. 2005. The positioning of the Roman imperial legions. BAR International Series 1458. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A comprehensive, if flawed, examination of legionary dispositions around the empire through time.
Find this resource:
Petrikovits, Harald von. 1975. Die Innenbauten römischer Legionslager während der Prinzipatszeit. Abhandlungen der Rheinisch-Westfalischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 56. Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. The definitive examination of the function of the various internal buildings of legionary fortresses, despite believing that immunes and principales were accommodated separately from the centuries.
Find this resource:
Shirley, Elizabeth A. M. 2001. Building a Roman legionary fortress. Stroud, UK: Tempus.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Using the excavated site of Inchtuthil as its focus, this study examines the logistics of constructing a legionary fortress from a quantity survey perspective.
Find this resource:
Frontiers

The study of imperial frontiers sets the Roman army in historical and geographical context. Baatz 1993, and Breeze and Dobson 1987 examine two particularly thoroughly examined areas and serve as useful case studies, while Klose and Nünnerich-Asmus 2006 provides an overall account for the whole empire. A theoretical basis is provided by Elton 1996.

Baatz, Dietwulf. 1993. Der Römische Limes: Archäologische Ausflüge zwischen Rhein und Donau. Berlin: Mann.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. Covers the area between the Rhine and the Danube and is as much a pocket guide as an academic summary.
Find this resource:
Breeze, David J., and Brian Dobson. 1987. Hadrian’s Wall. 3d ed. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Arguably the ultimate description and analysis of a frontier. Scholarly yet readable and still authoritative.
Find this resource:
Elton, Hugh. 1996. Frontiers of the Roman Empire. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Deals with the development of frontiers, the use of buffer states, consolidation, the frontier army, commercial activity, and relations beyond the frontiers.
Find this resource:
Klose, Gerhild, and A. Nünnerich-Asmus, eds. 2006. Grenzen des römischen Imperiums. Zaberns Bildbände zur Archäologie, Sonderbände der Antiken Welt. Mainz, Germany: von Zabern.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. Essays cover all the frontier provinces of the empire. Although intended as a coffee-table book, it is a workmanlike introduction by leading scholars.
Find this resource:
Garrisoning

In the early Imperial period, the Roman army found itself fighting fewer set-piece battles and more commonly conducting police actions, when controlling provinces. The way in which this came about and what it meant is examined in Bishop 1999. Alston 1995, and Morillo and Aurrecoechea 2006 serve as case studies for the army in two key provinces. These may be compared with J. C. N. Coulston’s examination of the garrisoning of Rome itself (see Coulston 2000 under Praetorians and Imperial Guards).

Alston, Richard. 1995. Soldier and society in Roman Egypt: A social history. London and New York: Routledge.
DOI: 10.4324/9780203272633Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A thorough examination of the role of the army in Egypt, with an appendix on the archaeology of the various sites.
Find this resource:
Bishop, M. C. 1999. Praesidium: Social, military, and logistical aspects of the Roman army’s provincial distribution during the early principate. In The Roman army as a community. Edited by Adrian Goldsworthy and Ian Haynes, 111–118. JRA Supplementary Series 34. Portsmouth, RI: Journal of Roman Archaeology.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Examines the origins of and motivations for Roman provincial garrisoning and the distribution of units in occupied areas, focusing on the logistical reasons and the resultant policing and counterinsurgency roles that replaced the traditional set-piece battles for which the army became famous.
Find this resource:
Morillo Cerdán, Ángel, and Joaquin Aurrecoechea, eds. 2006. The Roman army in Hispania: An archaeological guide. León, Spain: Univ. of León.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A useful survey of the Roman army’s presence in the Iberian Peninsula, with summaries of the principal issues and most of the sites.
Find this resource:
Equipment

The Roman army had a wide range of equipment with which it waged war, from giant stone-hurling and smaller bolt-shooting torsion artillery, through a complex range of siege engines for taking cities, down to the diverse arms and armor of the individual soldiers. Frequent campaigning meant a need for tents, set up within the temporary camps they constructed. The dress of the soldiers, never a uniform as such, varied with time and status and marked them out within Roman society.

Artillery and Siege Machines

Although siege machines had long been a vital part of warfare, artillery was added in the Hellenistic period and became a crucial part of Roman military offensive and defensive tactics. The survival of detailed (if occasionally obtuse) technical treatises, along with archaeological finds of key artillery components, has ensured much interest in the subject, particularly among those with an engineering bent. Schramm 1980 was one of the first to combine scholarly interest with practical experimental archaeology; this work was carried on by Marsden 1969, Baatz 1994, and Wilkins 2003, which also, along with Campbell 2003, usefully summarizes the state of our knowledge.

Baatz, Dietwulf. 1994. Bauten und Katapulte des römischen Heeres. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. Dietwulf Baatz, like Schramm, was based at the Saalburg. Having served in the artillery himself as a boy soldier, Baatz became a practicing archaeologist and published many of the key finds of artillery components after Schramm and Marsden. This volume is a convenient collection of these papers with additional new material.
Find this resource:
Campbell, Duncan B. 2003. Greek and Roman artillery 399 BC–AD 363. Oxford: Osprey.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A good illustrated introduction to the topic. As with all Osprey books, not intended for an academic market, but nevertheless worth reading.
Find this resource:
Marsden, Eric William. 1969. Greek and Roman artillery: Historical development. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Marsden produced two key volumes of Greek and Roman artillery, this being a historical overview of the range of types and their development. A second volume followed in 1971, with translations and critical apparatus for all the major literary sources. A classicist, Marsden also undertook reconstructions to demonstrate his theories.
Find this resource:
Schramm, Erwin. 1980. Die antiken Geschütze der Saalburg. Bad Homburg vor der Höhe, Germany: Saalburg-Museum.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. Reprint of the 1918 edition with a new introduction by Dietwulf Baatz. Schramm, an artillerist who served under Kaiser Wilhelm II, was an early pioneer of experimental archaeology, using the available literary, iconographic, and (at the time, very limited) archaeological evidence to produce full-sized, fully functional replicas of the artillery pieces described in the surviving classical artillery manuals. Baatz adds an introductory modern perspective and bibliography.
Find this resource:
Wilkins, Alan. 2003. Roman artillery. Shire Archaeology 86. Princes Risborough, UK: Shire.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A useful popular summary by a writer with wide experience researching and reconstructing Roman torsion artillery. Contains a select bibliography and a list of museums and sites of relevance.
Find this resource:
Arms and Armor

It is difficult to study an army without understanding its military equipment, although that has not stopped many scholars from doing precisely that in the past. Now, thankfully, more information is available and, largely at the instigation of Robinson 1975, a seminal volume on armor, the subject thrives. Outlines can be found in Bishop and Coulston 2006, and Feugère 2002, while particular aspects are dealt with by Garbsch 1978, namely cavalry “sports” equipment. James 1988 reviews the change in production methodology in the later empire.

Bishop, M. C., and J. C. N. Coulston. 2006. Roman military equipment from the Punic Wars to the fall of Rome. 2d ed. Oxford: Oxbow.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A historical narrative and survey of Roman arms and armor from the Republican through the Late Roman period, preceded by a detailed analysis of the literary, iconographic, and archaeological sources for the study of military equipment.
Find this resource:
Feugère, Michel. 2002. The weapons of the Romans. Stroud, UK: Tempus.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Feugère’s study provides a useful contrast to the preceding volume, since it is subject-based rather than chronological, and draws on a slightly different range of evidence. This English version of the 1993 original French Les armes des Romains (Paris: Éditions Errance) contains a number of flaws in the translation, most notably in the failure to translate place names correctly. Like that French edition, it suffers from the absence of an index and occasional discrepancies between references in the text and the bibliography.
Find this resource:
Garbsch, Jochen. 1978. Römische Paraderüstungen: Katalog der Ausstellung, Germanisches Nationalmuseum Nürnberg 15. Dez. 1978–4. Febr. 1979, Prähistorische Staatssammlung München, Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte 16. Febr. 1979–16. April 1979. Munich: Beck
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. As so often happens, Garbsch’s volume, intended as an exhibition catalogue, has become an important landmark publication on the subject. It includes a brief discursive text to accompany the catalogue of the component parts (helmets, body armor, greaves, medallions and shield bosses, chamfrons and frontals, and standards) and the major hoards (Straubing, Künzing, and Eining). There is also a German translation of Arrian’s Techne taktika by Franz Kiechle.
Find this resource:
James, S. 1988. The fabricae: State arms factories of the later Roman Empire. In Military equipment and the identity of Roman soldiers: Proceedings of the Fourth Roman Military Equipment Conference. Edited by J. C. Coulston, 257–331. BAR International Series 394. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
James’s analysis of the arms production system in the later empire, whereby particular components were constructed in each city or fortress concerned, is key to understanding the centralized nature of the late Roman army.
Find this resource:
Robinson, H. Russell. 1975. The armour of imperial Rome. London: Arms and Armour.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
To many, the definitive modern work on Roman armor (Robinson died before he could begin a companion volume on weaponry). His radical contribution was that he was a practicing armorer, not an archaeologist, and made many replicas himself. The core of the volume is Robinson’s influential (if inevitably flawed) typology of helmets. There is a a section on body armor that considers the evidence for mail, scale, segmental, and lamellar armor, as well as “sports” (otherwise known, probably erroneously, as “parade”) armor.
Find this resource:
Tents

The Roman army spent much time sub pellibus (“under hides”), but it was only comparatively recently that the nature of their tents began to be understood. First came a paper, Richmond and McIntyre 1934, examining leather fragments from Birdoswald and trying to tie them in with the other known evidence; then van Driel-Murray 1990 used more substantial remains from Vindolanda to provide more detail and a more plausible reconstruction. Finally, Morel 1991 was able to take this knowledge and use it to hypothesize a hybrid barrack structure that incorporated such tents.

Morel, J. M. A. W. 1991. Tents or barracks? In Roman frontier studies 1989: Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies. Edited by Valerie A. Maxfield and Michael J. Dobson, 376–386. Exeter, UK: Univ. of Exeter Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Examines the evidence for hybrid barracks at the early imperial sites at Oberaden, Rödgen, and Dangstetten with timber centurions’ quarters and attached roofed areas for tents for the soldiers. This appears to demonstrate an interim phase between tented encampments and full timber barracks.
Find this resource:
Richmond, I. A., and J. McIntyre. 1934. Tents of the Roman army and leather from Birdoswald. Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society 34:62–90.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The first attempt to reconstruct Roman tents using the fragmentary evidence of leather panels, largely informed by the reliefs on Trajan’s Column, which show tents, and by the bare outline of dimensions preserved in the writings of Pseudo-Hyginus. Produces a reconstruction sometimes referred to as the “Boy Scout” tent.
Find this resource:
van Driel-Murray, Carol. 1990. New light on old tents. Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 1:109–137.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Takes the work of Richmond and McIntyre 1934 much further, thanks to substantial finds of part of the gable end of a tent at Vindolanda. Knowledge of Roman leatherworking enables van Driel-Murray to go much further than was possible for the earlier archaeologists. Produces a reconstruction that is much larger and requires a frame, rather than just poles and guy ropes.
Find this resource:
Dress

Although military equipment has attracted much attention, particularly in recent years, the more specialized but no less fascinating area of military clothing has been addressed in a number of volumes by Sumner, and the work listed here (Sumner 2009) is the most useful and detailed summary of the subject.

Sumner, Graham. 2009. Roman military dress. Stroud, UK: History Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Presents in great detail the available evidence for military clothing, particularly tunics and cloaks. It also exhaustively explores the issue of the use of and evidence for color. Referenced with a detailed bibliography.
Find this resource:
Warfare

Warfare can be divided between strategy, the movement of armies in a geographical context, and tactics, the movement of military units in a topographical context, each naturally in response to the activities of opponents. Logistics is an integral part of strategy, and military success can depend on efficacy in the provisioning and resupply of armies. These have always been the province of armchair generals, but combat—what the soldier experienced on the battlefield—is a comparatively new but no less interesting sphere of study.

Strategy

The question of whether Rome planned the conquest of its empire on a large table, moving pieces around, will not go away and is ultimately intimately connected to modern perceptions of strategy and realpolitik. Isaac 1993 and Luttwak 1976 represent opposite ends of the spectrum; as ever, the reality probably lay closer to the middle ground.

Isaac, Benjamin H. 1993. The limits of empire: The Roman army in the East. 2d ed. Oxford: Clarendon.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A radical reappraisal of the issues surrounding the extent and nature of Roman appreciation of grand strategy, seeing this as more complex and less straightforward than Luttwak 1976.
Find this resource:
Luttwak, Edward N. 1976. The grand strategy of the Roman Empire from the first century A.D. to the third. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In its time an extremely influential book that set forward the hypothesis that there was an overarching strategy in Roman international policy. Interesting for its modern agenda and its insights into the author’s perception of the Romans.
Find this resource:
Logistics

Supplying the Roman army was a major undertaking, and all modern work is inevitably influenced by the seminal Engels 1980. This is certainly true of Roth 1998. Sim and Ridge 2002 looks at a particular aspect of supply.

Engels, Donald. 1980. Alexander the Great and the logistics of the Macedonian army. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Although dealing with the logistics of Alexander’s campaigns, the methodology and critical appraisal of sources employed by Engels have wider implications and have influenced later writers on the subject, notably Roth 1998.
Find this resource:
Roth, Jonathan. 1998. The logistics of the Roman army at war (264 B.C.–A.D. 235). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Roth examines how similar principles can be applied to the study of the Roman army. This remains one of the few overviews of this important subject.
Find this resource:
Sim, David, and Isabel Ridge. 2002. Iron for the eagles: The iron industry of Roman Britain. Stroud, UK: Tempus.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A study of the issues surrounding the supply and use of iron to the Roman army, including the production of weaponry and equipment, from the point of view of a working blacksmith.
Find this resource:
Tactics

If strategy is the movement of armies on campaign, tactics concerns their movement on the battlefield, so here we move from the macro to the micro scale. The Roman army was famous for its tactics; not only do manuals like the work of Vegetius describe the theory, there are plenty of historical examples that show the reality. Bosworth 1977 looks at a theoretical case that may have been intended as a genuine plan, while Cowan 2007 looks at the overall scheme of things. Gilliver 1996 examines a specific case where the rules are broken.

Bosworth, Albert B. 1977. Arrian and the Alani. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 81:217–255.
DOI: 10.2307/311121Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An examination of Arrian (codenamed Xenophon) and his plan to deploy an army against invading Alani. It is unclear whether this action ever took place, but it at least shows his tactical thinking against an unusual enemy.
Find this resource:
Cowan, Ross. 2007. Roman battle tactics 108 BC–AD 313. Osprey Elite 155. Oxford: Osprey.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A modern appraisal of Roman battlefield tactics that fills a huge gap in the academic field. Although aimed at the wargaming and modeling market, there is sound scholarship here.
Find this resource:
Gilliver, Catherine M. 1996. Mons Graupius and the role of auxiliaries in battle. Greece and Rome 43:54–67.
DOI: 10.1093/gr/43.1.54Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Analyzes the battle of Mons Graupius, where auxiliary infantry were deployed in the battle line in place of legionaries, and compares other contemporary examples of this tactic, concluding that it related to the nature of the terrain, not the status of the troops.
Find this resource:
Combat

Once tactics have been decided, what ensues is the cut and thrust of face-to-face combat. This is an area that was woefully neglected in the past but has been given inspirational direction by John Keegan’s 1976 book Face of Battle, which, although not focusing on the ancient period, has had a huge impact on the way scholars of the Roman army have come to view the subject. Connolly 1991 takes an approach that is influenced by practical considerations arising from the detailed study of military equipment, while Goldsworthy 1998 and to a lesser extent Gilliver 1999 are clearly influenced by Keegan (although both range much more widely than their inclusion in this section may suggest).

Connolly, P. 1991. The Roman fighting technique deduced from armour and weaponry. In Roman frontier studies 1989: Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies. Edited by Valerie A. Maxfield and Michael J. Dobson, 358–363. Exeter, UK: Univ. of Exeter Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Connolly employs a deductive approach to analyze the equipment of the early imperial infantryman to reconstruct the fighting stance employed, showing how it changed with time as equipment evolved.
Find this resource:
Gilliver, Catherine M. 1999. The Roman art of war. Stroud, UK: Tempus.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
After a brief précis of Roman military organization, this work examines the army on the march, encampments, pitched battles, and siege warfare. Although primarily concerned with textual sources, use is made of archaeological evidence. Appendices summarize known Roman military treatises and provide a translation of Arrian’s battle order against the Alani.
Find this resource:
Goldsworthy, Adrian. 1998. The Roman army at war 100 BC–AD 200. Oxford: Clarendon.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Covers similar ground to Gilliver but in a very different way where the influence of Keegan is readily apparent, examining various aspects of battle from the point of view of the generals, the units, and the individual.
Find this resource:
Zhmodikov, Alexander. 2000. Roman Republican heavy infantrymen in battle (IV–II centuries B.C.). Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 49.1: 67–78.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An examination of the literary and archaeological evidence for combat in the Republican period.
Find this resource:
Siege Warfare

The Roman army was famed and feared for its conduct of siege warfare, but as with so many areas of technical expertise, it adopted proven Hellenistic practice and just improved and applied it with gusto. A useful short summary that looks at the Hellenistic background too can be found in Campbell and Delf 2003, while Davies 2004 examines Roman examples in more depth. Richmond 1962, a classic paper on Masada, brings a perceptive eye and narrative style to perhaps the best-known Roman siege.

Campbell, Duncan B., and Brian Delf. 2003. Greek and Roman siege machinery 399 BC–AD 363. Oxford: Osprey.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A good illustrated general account of the machines used in Hellenistic and Roman siege warfare. Most are based on the various surviving technical treatises.
Find this resource:
Davies, Gwyn. 2004. Roman siege works. Stroud, UK: History Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The various components of a siege (such as mines, ramps, and circumvallation) are examined and an appendix of Roman siege sites is incorporated.
Find this resource:
Richmond, I. A. 1962. The Roman siege-works of Masada, Israel. Journal of Roman Studies 52:142–155.
DOI: 10.2307/297886Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This paper is the result of Richmond’s examination of the site and matching the archaeological evidence with the known accounts.
Find this resource:
Everyday Life

Life in the Roman army was not all about warfare; indeed, many have argued that for long periods soldiers would not have known combat, and it was the everyday military and domestic tasks on which they would have been focused. Religion obviously played an important part in both private and state spheres, while their duties around camp and the possibility of outposting would have filled their lives. Their private lives remain largely obscure and only hinted at in obituaries. They were governed by a special subsection of Roman law that set them apart from the rest of society.

Religion

Religious activity played an important part in Roman military life, not least since unit standards were worshiped as deities in their own right. Useful source material may be found in Campbell 1994 (cited under Literary, Subliterary, and Epigraphic Sources), pp. 127–136. Domaszewski 1895 long provided the standard work on the subject but has been usefully supplemented by Helgeland 1978. Nock 1952 considers the Roman military calendar in the light of the discovery of the Feriale Duranum. The role of Christians in the army is examined by Helgeland 1974, and conversely the contribution of the army to Mithraism in Daniels 1975.

Daniels, C. M. 1975. The role of the Roman army in the spread and practice of Mithraism. In Mithraic studies: Proceedings of the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies. Vol. 2. Edited by John R. Hinnels, 249–274. Manchester, UK: Manchester Univ. Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Mithraism is always thought of as a cult with close military associations, and Daniels here examines the evidence for the army’s part in its spread from the East.
Find this resource:
Domaszewski, A. von 1895. Die Religion des römischen Heeres. Trier, Germany: F. Lintz.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In German. The first major study on the subject, available online.
Find this resource:
Helgeland, John. 1974. Christians and the Roman army A.D. 173–337. Church History 43.2: 149–163, 200.
DOI: 10.2307/3163949Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Considers the evidence for Christian attitudes toward military service and the presence of Christians within the Roman army.
Find this resource:
Helgeland, John. 1978. Roman army religion. In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II.16.2. Edited by H. Temporini, 1470–1505. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A modern overview of state religion and cults within the Roman army.
Find this resource:
Nock, A. D. 1952. The Roman army and the Roman religious year. Harvard Theological Review 45:187–252.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Uses the Feriale Duranum, an incomplete Roman military calendar on papyrus excavated at Dura-Europos, to reconstruct the religious rituals of an army unit in Syria during the 3rd century CE.
Find this resource:
Duties

Soldiers naturally did not spend the majority of their service lives fighting. Their various duties are described by Davies 1974, as are their dietary habits by Davies 1971, but much of the ground is also competently covered by Watson 1985 (cited under Textbooks).

Davies, R. W. 1971. The Roman military diet. Britannia 2:122–142.
DOI: 10.2307/525803Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Uses archaeological evidence to test the long-held belief that the Roman army was largely vegetarian, showing that this was far from the case.
Find this resource:
Davies, R. W. 1974. The daily life of the Roman soldier under the Principate. In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II.1. Edited by H. Temporini, 299–338. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The everyday life of the soldier is reconstructed from subliterary evidence such as duty rosters.
Find this resource:
Private Lives

The private lives of soldiers only rarely intrude into the literary, epigraphic, or archaeological record, and usually in ambiguous and disjointed ways. Birley 1936 recounts the evidence for the life story of one centurion, while Phang 2001 examines the whole question of male–female relations within the context of army life. Strassi Zaccaria 2008 provides more vignettes of a soldier’s private life.

Birley, Eric. 1936. Marcus Cocceius Firmus: An epigraphic study. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 70:363–377.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An epigraphic tour de force by Birley that tells the remarkable story of the career of the centurion Cocceius Firmus, and the theft and retrieval of his slave woman. Available online.
Find this resource:
Phang, Sara Elise. 2001. The marriage of Roman soldiers (13 BC–AD 235): Law and family in the imperial army. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This book falls into three sections, dealing with the evidence, the inscriptions, and the policy toward marriage and cohabitation in the army and the reasoning behind the official ban on marriage.
Find this resource:
Strassi Zaccaria, Silvia. 2008. L’archivio di Claudius Tiberianus da Karanis. Archiv für Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete Beiheft 26. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In Italian. Detailed examination of one of the most famous archives of letters from a soldier, considering aspects of his career, his friends, and relations, as well as his place in society and how this is reflected in his use of language.
Find this resource:
Law

Roman military law was distinct, if not separate, from that of the civil sphere by dint of those offenses and privileges that were peculiar to soldiers. It is detailed in Brand 1968, a volume by a former judge advocate.

Brand, Clarence E. 1968. Roman military law. Austin: Univ. of Texas Press.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Using the work of Rufus (referred to throughout as Ruffus), Brand (controversially, in the view of some scholars) outlines his view of Roman military law, admittedly through the eyes of a modern military jurist. Nevertheless, it is a thought-provoking book, even if it is held to be flawed.
Find this resource: