A barbarian is a human who is perceived to be either uncivilized or primitive. Alternatively, they may instead be admired and romanticised as noble savages, in idiomatic or figurative usage, a barbarian may be an individual reference to a brutal, warlike, insensitive person. The term originates from the Greek, βάρβαρος, in ancient times, the Greeks used it mostly for people of different cultures, but there are examples where one Greek city or state would use the word to attack another. In the early period and sometimes later, Greeks used it for the Turks. Comparable notions are found in non-European civilizations, notably China and Japan, during the Roman Empire, the Romans used the word barbarian for many people, such as the Germanics, Gauls, Thracians and Sarmatians. The Ancient Greek name βάρβαρος, was an antonym for πολίτης, the earliest attested form of the word is the Mycenaean Greek
In the Roman Empire, the Latin word castrum was a building, or plot of land, used as a fortified military camp. Castrum was the used for different sizes of camps including a large legionary fortress, smaller auxiliary forts, temporary encampments. The diminutive form castellum was used for fortlets, typically occupied by a detachment of a cohort or a century, in English, the terms Roman fortress, Roman fort and Roman camp are commonly used for castrum. However, scholastic convention tends toward the use of the camp, marching camp. For a list of known castra see List of castra, the term castrum appears in three Italic languages, Oscan and Latin. g. Castrum Album, Castrum Inui, Castrum Novum, Castrum Truentinum, Castrum Vergium. The plural was used as a place name, as Castra Cornelia. Castrorum Filius was one of names used by the emperor Caligula, the terms stratopedon and phrourion were used by Greek language authors to translate castrum and castellum, respectively. A castrum was designed to house and protect the soldiers, their equipment and this most detailed description that survives about Roman military camps is De Munitionibus Castrorum, a manuscript of 11 pages that dates most probably from the late 1st to early 2nd century AD.
Regulations required a major unit in the field to retire to a properly constructed camp every day, to this end a marching column ported the equipment needed to build and stock the camp in a baggage train of wagons and on the backs of the soldiers. They could throw up a camp under enemy attack in as little as a few hours. Judging from the names, they used a repertory of camp plans, selecting the one appropriate to the length of time a legion would spend in it, tertia castra, quarta castra. A camp of three days, four days, more permanent camps were castra stativa, standing camps. The least permanent of these were castra aestiva or aestivalia, summer camps, in which the soldiers were housed sub pellibus or sub tentoriis, under tents. For the winter the soldiers retired to castra hiberna containing barracks and other buildings of solid materials. The camp allowed the Romans to keep a rested and supplied army in the field, neither the Celtic nor Germanic armies had this capability, they found it necessary to disperse after only a few days.
The largest castra were legionary fortresses built as bases for one or more whole legions, legions were raised for specific military campaigns and subsequently disbanded, requiring only temporary castra. From on many castra of various sizes were established many of which became permanent settlements, from the most ancient times Roman camps were constructed according to a certain ideal pattern, formally described in two main sources, the De Munitionibus Castrorum and the works of Polybius
Roman infantry tactics
Roman infantry tactics refers to the theoretical and historical deployment and maneuvers of the Roman infantry from the start of the Roman Republic to the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The article first presents an overview of Roman training. Roman performance against different types of enemies is analyzed, the focus below is primarily on Roman tactics - the how of their approach to battle, and how it stacked up against a variety of opponents over time. It does not attempt detailed coverage of things like army structure or equipment, various battles are summarized to illustrate Roman methods with links to detailed articles on individual encounters. For in depth background on the structure of the infantry relevant to this article. For a history of Romes military campaigns see Campaign history of the Roman military, for detail on equipment, daily life and specific legions see Roman legion and Roman military personal equipment. Roman military tactics and strategy evolved from typical of a small tribal host seeking local hegemony.
This advance was affected by changing trends in Roman political and economic life, and that of the larger Mediterranean world and these elements waxed and waned over time, but they form a distinct basis underlying Romes rise. This included the reversal of status of cavalry and infantry in the Eastern Empire and this bounty of military resources enabled Rome to apply crushing pressure to its enemies, and stay in the field and replace losses, even after suffering setbacks. One historian of the Second Punic War states, According to Polybius, Brunt adjusted Polybius’ figures and estimated that the population of Italy, not including Greeks and Bruttians, exceeded 875,000 free adult males, from whom the Romans could levy troops. Rome not only had the potential to levy vast numbers of troops, Brunt estimates that Rome mobilized 108,000 men for service in the legions between 218BC and 215BC, while at the height of the war effort Rome was able to mobilize approximately 230,000 men. Against these mighty resources Hannibal led from Spain an army of approximately 50,000 infantry and 9,000 cavalry, rome’s manpower reserves allowed it to absorb staggering losses yet still continue to field large armies.
For example, according to Brunt, as many as 50,000 men were lost between 218BC and 215BC, but Rome continued to place between 14 and 25 legions in the field for the duration of the war. Put simply, the disparity in the number of available troops at the outset of the conflict meant that Hannibal had a much narrower margin for error than the Romans. This load consisted of armour, a called a gladius. There were tools for digging and constructing a castra, the fortified base camp. One writer recreates the following as to Caesars army in Gaul, Each soldier arranged his heavy pack on a T or Y-shaped rod, shields were protected on the march with a hide cover. Each legionary carried about 5 days worth of wheat, pulses or chickpeas, a flask of oil and a kit with a dish, cup
It was during this period that Romes control expanded from the citys immediate surroundings to hegemony over the entire Mediterranean world. During the first two centuries of its existence, the Roman Republic expanded through a combination of conquest and alliance, by the following century, it included North Africa, most of the Iberian Peninsula, and what is now southern France. Two centuries after that, towards the end of the 1st century BC, it included the rest of modern France and much of the eastern Mediterranean. By this time, internal tensions led to a series of wars, culminating with the assassination of Julius Caesar. The exact date of transition can be a matter of interpretation, Roman government was headed by two consuls, elected annually by the citizens and advised by a senate composed of appointed magistrates. Over time, the laws that gave exclusive rights to Romes highest offices were repealed or weakened. The leaders of the Republic developed a tradition and morality requiring public service and patronage in peace and war, making military.
Many of Romes legal and legislative structures can still be observed throughout Europe and much of the world in modern nation states, the exact causes and motivations for Romes military conflicts and expansions during the republic are subject to wide debate. While they can be seen as motivated by outright aggression and imperialism and they argue that Romes expansion was driven by short-term defensive and inter-state factors, and the new contingencies that these decisions created. In its early history, as Rome successfully defended itself against foreign threats in central and northern Italy, with some important exceptions, successful wars in early republican Rome generally led not to annexation or military occupation, but to the restoration of the way things were. But the defeated city would be weakened and thus able to resist Romanizing influences. It was able to defend itself against its non-Roman enemies. It was, more likely to seek an alliance of protection with Rome and this growing coalition expanded the potential enemies that Rome might face, and moved Rome closer to confrontation with major powers.
The result was more alliance-seeking, on the part of both the Roman confederacy and city-states seeking membership within that confederacy. While there were exceptions to this, it was not until after the Second Punic War that these alliances started to harden into something more like an empire and this shift mainly took place in parts of the west, such as the southern Italian towns that sided with Hannibal. In contrast, Roman expansion into Spain and Gaul occurred as a mix of alliance-seeking, in the 2nd century BC, Roman involvement in the Greek east remained a matter of alliance-seeking, but this time in the face of major powers that could rival Rome. This had some important similarities to the events in Italy centuries earlier, with some major exceptions of outright military rule, the Roman Republic remained an alliance of independent city-states and kingdoms until it transitioned into the Roman Empire. It was not until the time of the Roman Empire that the entire Roman world was organized into provinces under explicit Roman control
Structural history of the Roman military
From its origins around 800 BC to its final dissolution in AD476 with the demise of the Western Roman Empire, Romes military organization underwent substantial structural change. At the highest level of structure, the forces were split into the Roman Army, within the top levels of both army and navy, structural changes occurred as a result of both positive military reform and organic structural evolution. These changes can be divided into four distinct phases, phase I The army was derived from obligatory annual military service levied on the citizenry, as part of their duty to the state. During this period, the Roman army would wage seasonal campaigns against largely local adversaries, phase II As the extent of the territories falling under Roman control expanded and the size of the forces increased, the soldiery gradually became salaried professionals. As a consequence, military service at the lower levels became progressively longer-term, Roman military units of the period were largely homogeneous and highly regulated.
The army consisted of units of infantry known as legions as well as non-legionary allied troops known as auxilia. The latter were most commonly called upon to provide infantry, logistical. Phase III At the height of the Roman Empires power, forces were tasked with manning and securing the borders of the vast provinces which had brought under Roman control. Serious strategic threats were common in this period and emphasis was placed on preserving gained territory. The army underwent changes in response to new needs and became more dependent on fixed garrisons than on march-camps. Phase IV As Rome began to struggle to control over its sprawling territories, military service continued to be salaried. However, the trend of employing allied or mercenary elements was expanded to such an extent that these came to represent a substantial proportion of the armed forces. At the same time, the uniformity of structure found in Romes earlier military disappeared, soldiery of the era ranged from lightly armed mounted archers to heavy infantry, in regiments of varying size and quality.
This was accompanied by a trend in the empire of an increasing predominance of cavalry rather than infantry troops. In this period there was focus on smaller units of independently-operating troops, engaging less in set-piece battles and more in low-intensity. According to the historians Livy and Dionysius of Halicarnassus, writing at a far date, Historian Theodor Mommsen referred to it as Romes curiate army, named for its presumed subdivision along the boundaries of Romes three founding tribes, the Ramnians and Luceres. This armys exact structure is not known, but it is probable that it resembled a warrior band or group of bodyguards led by a chieftain or king. Mommsen believes that Roman military organization of this period was regimented by the Laws of King Italus but these laws, the army consisted, according to Livy, of exactly 3,000 infantry and 300 horsemen, one third from each of Romes three founding tribes
Civil wars and executions continued, culminating in the victory of Octavian, Caesars adopted son, over Mark Antony and Cleopatra at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC and the annexation of Egypt. Octavians power was unassailable and in 27 BC the Roman Senate formally granted him overarching power, the imperial period of Rome lasted approximately 1,500 years compared to the 500 years of the Republican era. The first two centuries of the empires existence were a period of unprecedented political stability and prosperity known as the Pax Romana, following Octavians victory, the size of the empire was dramatically increased. After the assassination of Caligula in 41, the senate briefly considered restoring the republic, under Claudius, the empire invaded Britannia, its first major expansion since Augustus. Vespasian emerged triumphant in 69, establishing the Flavian dynasty, before being succeeded by his son Titus and his short reign was followed by the long reign of his brother Domitian, who was eventually assassinated.
The senate appointed the first of the Five Good Emperors, the empire reached its greatest extent under Trajan, the second in this line. A period of increasing trouble and decline began with the reign of Commodus, Commodus assassination in 192 triggered the Year of the Five Emperors, of which Septimius Severus emerged victorious. The assassination of Alexander Severus in 235 led to the Crisis of the Third Century in which 26 men were declared emperor by the Roman Senate over a time span. It was not until the reign of Diocletian that the empire was fully stabilized with the introduction of the Tetrarchy, which saw four emperors rule the empire at once. This arrangement was unsuccessful, leading to a civil war that was finally ended by Constantine I. Constantine subsequently shifted the capital to Byzantium, which was renamed Constantinople in his honour and it remained the capital of the east until its demise. Constantine adopted Christianity which became the state religion of the empire. However, Augustulus was never recognized by his Eastern colleague, and separate rule in the Western part of the empire ceased to exist upon the death of Julius Nepos.
The Eastern Roman Empire endured for another millennium, eventually falling to the Ottoman Turks in 1453, the Roman Empire was among the most powerful economic, cultural and military forces in the world of its time. It was one of the largest empires in world history, at its height under Trajan, it covered 5 million square kilometres. It held sway over an estimated 70 million people, at that time 21% of the entire population. Throughout the European medieval period, attempts were made to establish successors to the Roman Empire, including the Empire of Romania, a Crusader state. Rome had begun expanding shortly after the founding of the republic in the 6th century BC, then, it was an empire long before it had an emperor
Founding of Rome
The most familiar of these myths, and perhaps the most famous of all Roman myths, is the story of Romulus and Remus, the twins who were suckled by a she-wolf. The national epic of mythical Rome, the Aeneid of Virgil, the Aeneid was written under Augustus, who claimed ancestry through Julius Caesar from the hero and his mother Venus. This started a series of armed conflicts with Turnus over the marriage of Lavinia, before the arrival of Aeneas, Turnus was betrothed to Lavinia, who married Aeneas, starting the war. Aeneas won the war and killed Turnus, the Trojans won the right to stay and to assimilate with the local peoples. Toward the end of line, King Procas was the father of Numitor. At Procas death, Numitor became king of Alba Longa, but Amulius captured him and sent him to prison, for many years, Amulius was the king. The tortuous nature of the chronology is indicated by Rhea Silvias ordination among the Vestals, the myth of Aeneas was of Greek origin and had to be reconciled with the Italian myth of Romulus and Remus, who would have been born around 771 BC if taken as historical figures.
They were purported to be sons of Rhea Silvia and either Mars and they were abandoned at birth, in the manner of many mythological heroes, because of a prophecy that they would overthrow their great-uncle Amulius, who had overthrown Silvias father Numitor. They were abandoned on the Tiber River by servants who took pity on the infants, the twins were nurtured by a she-wolf until a shepherd named Faustulus found the boys and took them as his sons. Faustulus and his wife Acca Larentia raised the children, when Remus and Romulus became adults, they killed Amulius and restored Numitor. They decided to establish a city, they quarreled, Rome began with a fratricide, a story that was taken to represent the citys history of internecine political strife and bloodshed. The ancient Romans were certain of the day Rome was founded, April 21, even the official Fasti Capitolini offers its own date,752 BC. Recent discoveries by Andrea Carandini on Romes Palatine Hill have yielded evidence of a series of walls on the north slope that can be dated to the middle of the 8th century BC.
According to the legend, Romulus plowed a furrow around the hill in order to mark the boundary of his new city, there is no consensus on the etymology of the citys name. Jean-Jacques Rousseau suggested Greek ῥώμη, meaning strength, vigor, a modern theory of etymology holds that the name of the city is of Etruscan origin, derived from rumon, river. There is archaeological evidence of occupation of the Rome area from about 14,000 years ago. Evidence of stone tools and stone weapons attests to about 10,000 years of human presence, several excavations support the view that Rome grew from pastoral settlements on the Palatine Hill built above the area of the future Roman Forum. Between the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron age, in any case, the location that became the city of Rome was inhabited by Latin settlers from various regions and pastoralists, as evidenced by differences in pottery and burial techniques
Technological history of the Roman military
The rise of Hellenism and the Roman Republic are generally seen as signalling the end of the Iron Age in the Mediterranean. Roman iron-working was enhanced by a known as carburization. The Romans made use of the properties in their armaments. The Roman armies of the empire were much better equipped than early republican armies. Metals used for arms and armour primarily included iron, for construction, the army used wood and stone. The use of concrete in architecture was widely mirrored in Roman military technology, the Etruscans had invented the stone arch, and used it in bridges as well as buildings. Some Roman technologies were directly from Greek civilization. This included the advances that the Greeks had made, as well as all the scientific, political. However, the Romans made many significant technological advances, such as the invention of hydraulic cement and their methods were recorded by such luminaries as Vitruvius and Frontinus for example, who wrote handbooks to advise fellow engineers and architects.
Romans knew enough history to be aware that widespread technological change had occurred in the past and brought benefits and that tradition continued as the empire grew in size and absorbed new ideas. Romans thought of themselves as practical, so small-scale innovation was common, this view is being challenged by new research that shows they did indeed innovate, and on a wide scale. Thus the watermill had been known to the Greeks, but it was the Romans who developed their efficient utilisation. The set of mills at Barbegal in southern France were worked by a single aqueduct and they probably were built by the army and supplied flour to a wide region. Floating mills were used to exploit fast flowing rivers. The Romans used water power in a way during mining operations. The spectacular gold mine at Las Medulas was worked by no fewer than seven long aqueducts cut into the surrounding mountains, the outflow was channelled into sluice boxes, and the heavier gold collected on rough pavements. They developed many deep mines, such as those for copper at Rio Tinto, dewatering machines, such as Archimedean screws and reverse overshot water wheels, were found in situ, one of which is on show at the British Museum.
Another fragmentary example was recovered from the Roman gold mine at Dolaucothi in west Wales and they had the expertise to build the infrastructure of aqueducts and reservoirs, as well as control production
Colonies in antiquity
Colonies in antiquity were city-states founded from a mother-city, not from a territory-at-large. Bonds between a colony and its metropolis remained often close, and took specific forms, unlike in the period of European colonialism during the early and late modern era, ancient colonies were usually sovereign and self-governing from their inception. An Egyptian colony that was stationed in southern Canaan dates to slightly before the First Dynasty, narmer had Egyptian pottery produced in Canaan and exported back to Egypt, from regions such as Arad, En Besor and Tel ʿErani. Shipbuilding was known to the ancient Egyptians as early as 3000 BC, the Archaeological Institute of America reports that the earliest dated ship—75 feet long, dating to 3000 BC – may have possibly belonged to Pharaoh Aha. Egypt at its height controlled Crete across the Mediterranean Sea, the Phoenicians were the major trading power in the Mediterranean in the early part of the first millennium BC. They had trading contacts in Egypt and Greece, and established colonies as far west as modern Spain, from Gadir the Phoenicians controlled access to the Atlantic Ocean and the trade routes to Britain.
The most famous and successful of Phoenician colonies was founded by settlers from Tyre in 814–813 BC and called Kart-Hadasht (Qart-ḥadašt, the Carthaginians founded their own colony in the southeast of Spain, Carthago Nova, which was eventually conquered by their enemy, Rome. But in most cases the motivation was to establish and facilitate relations of trade with foreign countries, colonies were established in Ionia and Thrace as early as the 8th century BC. There were two types of colony, one known as an ἀποικία - apoikia and the other as an ἐμπορίov - emporion. The first type of colony was a city-state on its own, through this Greek expansion the use of coins flourished throughout the Mediterranean Basin. The Greeks colonised modern-day Crimea on the Black Sea, among the settlements they established there was the city of Chersonesos, at the site of modern-day Sevastopol. Another area with significant Greek colonies was the coast of ancient Illyria on the Adriatic Sea, the extensive Greek colonization is remarked upon by Cicero when noting that It were as though a Greek fringe has been woven about the shores of the barbarians.
Several formulae were generally adhered to on the solemn and sacred occasions when a new colony set forth, if a Greek city was sending out a colony, an oracle, especially one such as the Oracle of Delphi, was almost invariably consulted beforehand. A person of distinction was selected to guide the emigrants and make the necessary arrangements and it was usual to honor these founders of colonies, after their death, as heroes. Some of the fire was taken from the public hearth in the Prytaneum. After the conquests of the Macedonian Kingdom and Alexander the Great, the relation between colony and mother-city, known literally as the metropolis, was viewed as one of mutual affection. Any differences that arose were resolved by peaceful means whenever possible and it is worth noting that the Peloponnesian War was in part a result of a dispute between Corinth and her colony of Corcyra. The charter of foundation contained general provisions for the arrangement of the affairs of the colony, the constitution of the mother-city was usually adopted by the colony, but the new city remained politically independent
Roman military frontiers and fortifications
Roman military borders and fortifications were part of a grand strategy of territorial defense in the Roman Empire, although this is a matter of debate. In particular, Goldsworthy argues that the warfare of the Parthians and Persians presented a major challenge to the expansion of Romes infantry-based armies. Individual fortifications had been constructed by the Roman military from as early as the building of Romes first city walls in the 6th or 7th century BC, systematic construction of fortifications around the periphery of the empire on a strategic scale began around 40 AD under Emperor Caligula. However, it was under Hadrians rule, which began in 117 and he spent half of his 21-year reign touring the empire and advocating for the construction of forts and walls all across the edges of the empire. The coherent construction of fortifications on a strategic scale are known as the limes. The limes consisted of fortresses for legions or vexillations as well as a system of roads for the transit of troops and, in some places.
Perhaps the most famous example of these is Hadrians Wall in Great Britain, however, it is not correct to interpret other limes in the same way or to view the limes as an impenetrable barrier. Other limes would not have had a continuous man-made fortification for the entirety of their length, in places, a river, desert or natural outcropping of rock could provide the same effect for zero outlay. Additionally, an army would have been able to force a crossing of the limes using siege equipment. The limes are therefore perhaps better seen as an instrument allowing a greater economy of force in defense of a border than otherwise would be necessary to provide the level of defense. After 270, the maintenance of an impenetrable solid frontier was abandoned by Constantine I in favor of a policy, whether deliberate or forced by circumstance and this called for the maintenance of a softer, deeper perimeter area of defense, with concentrated hard points throughout its depth. In the very late Empire the frontiers became even more elastic, armies were concentrated near the heart of the empire, and enemies allowed to penetrate in cases as far inwards as the Italian peninsula before being met in battle.
After conquering much of the landmass of Great Britain, the Romans halted their northern expansion at the southern fringe of Caledonia. This left them with a border shared with a people who made repeated raids, although the border was not a continuous wall, a series of fortifications known as Gask Ridge in mid-Scotland may well be Romes earliest fortified land frontier. Constructed in the 70CE or 80CE, it was superseded by the Hadrians Wall forty years later, although records are scarce, there are indications that the border fluctuated between the various fortifications depending on the local strength of the military. These northern fortifications are sometimes styled the Limes Britannicus, the average garrison of the wall fortifications is thought to have been around 10,000 men. Along with a wall, there existed a metaled road immediately behind the wall for transport of troops. In the Empire, Roman Britannia found itself vulnerable to external aggression