DOCSLIB.ORG

The Roman Army

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Roman Army The Roman army Name: ......................................... Date: ............................................ The Roman army The growth of the Roman Empire was due, in large part, to the success of the Roman army. The Roman army was incredibly well-trained and organised and relied on the complete obedience of its soldiers. The Roman army was made up of two different types of soldiers – legionaries and auxiliaries. Legionaries were strong and healthy Roman citizens, above the age of 17. They were well-trained and more highly paid than the auxiliaries. Legionaries agreed to fight for the army for 25 years and, in return, were rewarded with a plot of land to call their own after they left the army. Auxiliaries were not Roman citizens and were paid less than half of a legionary’s salary. They were used to complete the less important and most dangerous jobs, such as defending forts and heading into battle first. A legion was made up of around 5000 legionaries and was commanded by a legate. Each legion was further divided into smaller groups of around 80 legionaries, called centuries and led by a centurion. Centurions carried a short stick which identified him as the leader of his century and could also be used to beat any disobedient legionaries! There were also artillery soldiers, who used bows and arrows or were in charge of catapults, firing heavy objects at enemies and cavalry soldiers, who rode into battle on horses. Roman legionaries used their three weapons – a sword, spear and dagger – to fight with but also used their shields, known as a scutum, to fight with, as well as to defend themselves. Roman soldiers went into battle in tight formations, each using their scutum to protect themselves and those around them. This was known as testudo – the Latin word meaning tortoise! © www.teachitprimary.co.uk 2019 35193 Page 1 of 5 The Roman army Name: ......................................... Date: ............................................ Glossary (a) Complete the glossary by writing the correct definition next to each word. Definition artillery auxiliary cavalry centurion century legate legion legionary scutum testudo © www.teachitprimary.co.uk 2019 35193 Page 2 of 5 The Roman army Name: ......................................... Date: ............................................ Glossary (b) Complete the glossary by cutting and sticking the correct definition next to each word. Definition artillery auxiliary cavalry centurion century legate legion legionary scutum testudo © www.teachitprimary.co.uk 2019 35193 Page 3 of 5 The Roman army Glossary (b) – cut and stick definitions Cut out the definitions and stick next to the correct word The soldier in charge of a legion. The Latin word for tortoise, describing the soldier’s formation going into battle. A group of around 5000 soldiers. A less well-trained soldier, not a Roman citizen. A soldier who rides a horse into battle. A smaller group of 80 legionaries. A Roman soldier’s shield. The soldier in charge of a century. Weapons such as bows and arrows and catapults. A well-trained, well-paid soldier who is a Roman citizen. © www.teachitprimary.co.uk 2019 35193 Page 4 of 5 The Roman Army The Roman army – teaching notes Introducing the topic Explain to the children that the following text contains information about the Roman army, in the context of the AD43 invasion. Less confident readers may need adult support with the text. Introducing the activity Explain to the children that they will be writing a glossary to show their understanding of the terms used in reference to the Roman army. Share examples of glossaries from non-fiction books, ideally related to the topic of Romans. Differentiation Two versions of the activity are provided to support less confident learners. Rounding off Ask children to share their definitions, celebrating examples of clear examples. Image credits © No machine-readable author provided. MatthiasKabel assumed (based on copyright claims). - No machine-readable source provided. Own work assumed (based on copyright claims)., CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=191461 © Neil Carey www.flickr.com/photos/ncarey/ [CC BY-SA 2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)] © www.teachitprimary.co.uk 2019 00000 Page 5 of 5 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Legionary Philip Matyszak
    LEGIONARY PHILIP MATYSZAK LEGIONARY The Roman Soldier’s (Unofficial) Manual With 92 illustrations To John Radford, Gunther Maser and the others from 5 Group, Mrewa. Contents Philip Matyszak has a doctorate in Roman history from St John’s College, I Joining the Roman Army 6 Oxford, and is the author of Chronicle of the Roman Republic, The Enemies of Rome, The Sons of Caesar, Ancient Rome on Five Denarii a Day and Ancient Athens on Five Drachmas a Day. He teaches an e-learning course in Ancient II The Prospective Recruit’s History for the Institute of Continuing Education at Cambridge University. Good Legion Guide 16 III Alternative Military Careers 33 HALF-TITLE Legionary’s dagger and sheath. Daggers are used for repairing tent cords, sorting out boot hobnails and general legionary maintenance, and consequently see much more use than a sword. IV Legionary Kit and Equipment 52 TITLE PAGE Trajan addresses troops after battle. A Roman general tries to be near the front lines in a fight so that he can personally comment afterwards on feats of heroism (or shirking). V Training, Discipline and Ranks 78 VI People Who Will Want to Kill You 94 First published in the United Kingdom in 2009 by Thames & Hudson Ltd, 181a High Holborn, London wc1v 7qx VII Life in Camp 115 First paperback edition published in 2018 Legionary © 2009 and 2018 Thames & Hudson Ltd, London VIII On Campaign 128 All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording IX How to Storm a City 149 or any other information storage and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher.
    [Show full text]
  • Aus: Zeitschrift Für Papyrologie Und Epigraphik 103 (1994) 223–228
    MICHAEL F. PAVKOVIČ SINGULARES LEGATI LEGIONIS: GUARDS OF A LEGIONARY LEGATE OR A PROVINCIAL GOVERNOR? aus: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 103 (1994) 223–228 © Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn 223 SINGULARES LEGATI LEGIONIS: GUARDS OF A LEGIONARY LEGATE OR A PROVINCIAL GOVERNOR? In a recent article Dr. N.B.Rankov discusses the famous inscription of Ti.Claudius Maximus from the village of Grammeni near Philippi in Macedonia. Rankov pays particular attention to the rank of singularis legati legionis, interpreted by Prof. M.P.Speidel in his commentary as a guardsman of the legionary commander. Rankov is likewise concerned with the implications that can be drawn from the existence of such guards for the legionary legates.1 The substance of Rankov's argument is that mention of singulares legati legionis does not mean that Claudius Maximus was a bodyguard of the legate in his capacity as legionary commander but rather that the legate was at the time serving as a temporary governor for the province of Moesia.2 Rankov's hypothesis rests on two basic assumptions. The first is that there were extraordinary circumstances which caused the legate to be raised temporarily to the rank of governor. He places this unusual situation in the year A.D. 85 when the Dacians invaded the province and killed the consular governor, Oppius Sabinus.3 Rankov then argues that the governor's death meant heavy casualties amongst his guards, the singulares, which in turn necessitated the formation of a new guard unit for the acting governor. Claudius Maximus was chosen for service in the new guard, but the legionary legate was only an ad hoc governor, retaining his rank, and hence Maximus is styled singularis legati legionis.4 This leads us to Rankov's second premise, which concerns those officers with the right to singulares.
    [Show full text]
  • The Military Reforms of Gaius Marius in Their Social, Economic, and Political Context by Michael C. Gambino August, 2015 Directo
    The Military Reforms of Gaius Marius in their Social, Economic, and Political Context By Michael C. Gambino August, 2015 Director of Thesis: Dr. Frank Romer Major Department: History Abstract The goal of this thesis is, as the title affirms, to understand the military reforms of Gaius Marius in their broader societal context. In this thesis, after a brief introduction (Chap. I), Chap. II analyzes the Roman manipular army, its formation, policies, and armament. Chapter III examines Roman society, politics, and economics during the second century B.C.E., with emphasis on the concentration of power and wealth, the legislative programs of Ti. And C. Gracchus, and the Italian allies’ growing demand for citizenship. Chap. IV discusses Roman military expansion from the Second Punic War down to 100 B.C.E., focusing on Roman military and foreign policy blunders, missteps, and mistakes in Celtiberian Spain, along with Rome’s servile wars and the problem of the Cimbri and Teutones. Chap. V then contextualizes the life of Gaius Marius and his sense of military strategy, while Chap VI assesses Marius’s military reforms in his lifetime and their immediate aftermath in the time of Sulla. There are four appendices on the ancient literary sources (App. I), Marian consequences in the Late Republic (App. II), the significance of the legionary eagle standard as shown during the early principate (App. III), and a listing of the consular Caecilii Metelli in the second and early first centuries B.C.E. (App. IV). The Marian military reforms changed the army from a semi-professional citizen militia into a more professionalized army made up of extensively trained recruits who served for longer consecutive terms and were personally bound to their commanders.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of the Roman Army (200 BC – AD 476)
    Impact of Empire 6 IMEM-6-deBlois_CS2.indd i 5-4-2007 8:35:52 Impact of Empire Editorial Board of the series Impact of Empire (= Management Team of the Network Impact of Empire) Lukas de Blois, Angelos Chaniotis Ségolène Demougin, Olivier Hekster, Gerda de Kleijn Luuk de Ligt, Elio Lo Cascio, Michael Peachin John Rich, and Christian Witschel Executive Secretariat of the Series and the Network Lukas de Blois, Olivier Hekster Gerda de Kleijn and John Rich Radboud University of Nijmegen, Erasmusplein 1, P.O. Box 9103, 6500 HD Nijmegen, The Netherlands E-mail addresses: [email protected] and [email protected] Academic Board of the International Network Impact of Empire geza alföldy – stéphane benoist – anthony birley christer bruun – john drinkwater – werner eck – peter funke andrea giardina – johannes hahn – fik meijer – onno van nijf marie-thérèse raepsaet-charlier – john richardson bert van der spek – richard talbert – willem zwalve VOLUME 6 IMEM-6-deBlois_CS2.indd ii 5-4-2007 8:35:52 The Impact of the Roman Army (200 BC – AD 476) Economic, Social, Political, Religious and Cultural Aspects Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop of the International Network Impact of Empire (Roman Empire, 200 B.C. – A.D. 476) Capri, March 29 – April 2, 2005 Edited by Lukas de Blois & Elio Lo Cascio With the Aid of Olivier Hekster & Gerda de Kleijn LEIDEN • BOSTON 2007 This is an open access title distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC 4.0 License, which permits any non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
    [Show full text]
  • The Samnite Legacy
    THE SAMNITE LEGACY: AN EXAMINATION OF THE SAMNITIC INFLUENCES UPON THE ROMAN STATE WILLIAM DOBERSTEIN Bachelor of Arts, University of Lethbridge, 2014 A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of the University of Lethbridge in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS History Department University of Lethbridge Lethbridge, Canada © William Doberstein, 2014 THE SAMNITE LEGACY: AN EXAMINATION OF SAMNITE SOCIETY AND ITS LASTING INFLUENCES UPON THE ROMAN STATE WILLIAM DOBERSTEIN Date of Examination: Dr. Christopher Epplett Associate Professor Ph.D Supervisor Dr. Kevin McGeough Associate Professor Ph.D Thesis Examination Committee Member Dr. David Hay Associate Professor Ph.D Thesis Examination Committee Member Dr. Heather Ladd Assistant Professor Ph.D Chair. Thesis Examination Committee Abstract The objective of this thesis is to fully deconstruct and isolate the considerable Samnite contributions to the Roman state during the period of the Samnite Wars. Although the literary sources have espoused a Samnitic origin for many Roman institutions, very little academic focus has been directed towards these claims. Scholars have generally tended to focus on one or two of these claims only as part of a larger argument. Thus no comprehensive examination of Romano-Samnite interactions exists, with the majority of studies depicting a unilateral process of Romanization. Since the Romanization of the Samnites has been widely documented, this study will focus on the reverse process, a “Samnitization” of Roman society. This will be achieved by examining the potential Samnite origins of the Roman military oath, gladiatorial munus, and the manipular organization and its armaments. Although the available literary and archaeological evidence prevents any definitive conclusions, these institutions appear to have significant Samnite elements; this illustrates a vibrant society which was not dominated by Roman society, but actively interacted and integrated with it.
    [Show full text]
  • Roman Forts and Fortresses Introductions to Heritage Assets Summary
    Roman Forts and Fortresses Introductions to Heritage Assets Summary Historic England’s Introductions to Heritage Assets (IHAs) are accessible, authoritative, illustrated summaries of what we know about specific types of archaeological site, building, landscape or marine asset. Typically they deal with subjects which have previously lacked such a published summary, either because the literature is dauntingly voluminous, or alternatively where little has been written. Most often it is the latter, and many IHAs bring understanding of site or building types which are neglected or little understood. This IHA provides an introduction to Roman forts and fortresses (permanent or semi- permanent bases of Roman troops). These installations were a very important feature of the Roman period in Britain, as the British provinces were some of the most heavily militarised in the Roman Empire. Descriptions of the asset type and its development as well as its associations and a brief chronology are included. A list of in-depth sources on the topic is suggested for further reading. This document has been prepared by Pete Wilson and edited by Joe Flatman, Pete Herring and Dave Went. It is one of a series of 41 documents. This edition published by Historic England October 2018. All images © Historic England unless otherwise stated. Please refer to this document as: Historic England 2018 Roman Forts and Fortresses: Introductions to Heritage Assets. Swindon. Historic England. HistoricEngland.org.uk/listing/selection-criteria/scheduling-selection/ihas-archaeology/ Front cover: Whitley Castle auxiliary fort, Northumberland (near Alston in Cumbria), from the east in 2007. Introduction Roman forts and fortresses (as opposed to camps) were the permanent or semi- permanent bases of Roman troops.
    [Show full text]
  • Portraying the Legionary
    Portraying the Legionary Historical background for members of the Legio Praesidiensis - 400AD By John Conyard INTRODUCTION As a disclaimer I should say that some of the information given here is very subjective, and the nature of early 5th Britain can only be given cursory examination in such an article. However this article is aimed at giving the level of information often requested by members of Comitatus, portraying the very real members of the Praesidiensis that lived 1,600 years ago. BACKGROUND The Roman army of Late Antiquity was divided into two. The field army or comitatenses consisted of relatively well-paid, well-motivated troops held centrally and able to respond rapidly to major threats. The static frontier troops or limitanei were more than just part time soldiers or soldier farmers, as some writers seem to believe. They were drilled and capable of dealing with small-scale incursions and routine policing actions. On occasion they were called to serve with the field army and such units were called pseudocomitatenses. All ranks were basically career soldiers in an army of over 500,000 men, with a well-defined path set out in front of them. The Praesidiensis served the Western Emperor Honorius, who reigned from 393- 423AD. He is often considered ineffectual and weak, but he ruled for thirty years of Rome’s most turbulent history. By 400AD our Emperor would have been 16 years old. The power in the West was Stilicho, the magister militum or magister peditum praesentalis. His character and motives have been much questioned, but he was certainly not a Vandal barbarian.
    [Show full text]
  • Ross Burns Justinian's Fortifications East of Antioch
    Ross Burns Justinian’s Fortifications East of Antioch Almost fifty years ago, Dillemann put the issues starkly – fortifications were a useless distraction: The Notitia Dignatatum, at the beginning of the 5th Century, only speaks of units, generally cavalry, with their bases. In [Procopius’] Buildings, the only issues are fortified positions with no mention of units. Defence policy has reached sclerosis. Previously, positions were surrounded by walls of light construction, like enclosures, which attracted Procopius’ disapproval. For good reasons Justinian’s predecessors judged it useless to raise solid ramparts; it was a nonsense to condemn cavalry to defend them. The latter only had to be given shelter from the blows of marauders and pillagers; they did not imagine they had to withstand a siege.1 Is it true, as Dillemann has argued, that Justinian put too much faith in fortresses and not enough in manpower and élan? As a corrective, we have Liebeschuetz’s observation that while fortresses did not in themselves amount to an impermeable physical barrier, they prevented permanent occupation of territory by an enemy. In the sixth century there was no way in which the Persians could be prevented from penetrating into the Empire. The only way to check an invasion was by means of a field army strong enough to defeat or at least to threaten the invading force. Fortified cities provided no kind of barrier and most of them could be captured easily. Nevertheless, they too had an important function. They provided shelter for the inhabitants, their corn and their animals. They also provided bases for Roman armies operating in the neighbourhood…[The Persians] could not remain in permanent occupation while the cities were not in their hands.2 It is well recognised that no line of fortresses can operate as an effective line of defence in its own right.3 Nevertheless, the distribution of forts could mark out the extent of territory a state sought to control for most purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Roman Warfare and Fortification
    Roman Warfare and Fortification Oxford Handbooks Online Roman Warfare and Fortification Gwyn Davies The Oxford Handbook of Engineering and Technology in the Classical World Edited by John Peter Oleson Print Publication Date: Dec 2009 Subject: Classical Studies, Ancient Roman History, Material Culture Studies Online Publication Date: Sep 2012 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199734856.013.0028 Abstract and Keywords This article concentrates on the role of technology in improving the operational capabilities of the Roman state. It reviews the organizational and weapon system developments that enabled Roman armies to engage their enemies with confidence in the field, alongside the evolution of fortification schemes that enabled economies of force, which were essential to imperial security. Roman weapons and equipment include the spear, sword, missiles, artillery, shields, helmets, and body armor. Although the Roman army was often on the attack and made use of complex siege technology, it was also highly skilled in the preparation of defensive fortifications. The Romans diligently applied themselves to the arts of war. Their successful mastery of battlefield techniques and their adoption, where appropriate, of equipment and technologies first introduced by their opponents allowed Roman armies to sustain the state over several hundreds of years of challenge and change. Keywords: Roman armies, Roman warfare, Roman fortification, spear, sword, missiles, artillery, shields, helmets, body armor Warfare and the Romans A message relayed to the Roman people by Romulus after his translation to the heavens, stands as an unambiguous endorsement of Roman military prowess. “Tell the Romans that it is the gods' will that my Rome shall be the capital of the world; therefore let them cultivate the arts of war and let them know and teach their children that no human force can resist Roman arms” (Livy 1.16.7).
    [Show full text]
  • Jews and the Roman Army: Perceptions and Realities1
    JEWS AND THE ROMAN ARMY: PERCEPTIONS AND REALITIES1 Jonathan P. Roth Scholars, including military historians, often project the conventions of Talmudic, or even modern, Judaism back into previous periods. This is particularly true in general assumptions about Jews in the military 1 This note contains a select bibliography, some titles of which will be cited in the following footnotes. S. Applebaum, ‘Three Roman Soldiers of Probably Jewish Origin,’ in M. Rozelaar and B. Shimron, eds., Commentationes ad antiquitatem classicam pertinentes in memoriam B. Katz (Tel Aviv 1970). ——, ‘Ein Targhuna,’ in S. Applebaum, Judaea in Hellenistic and Roman Times: Historical and Archaeological Essays (Leiden 1989), 66–69. B. Bar-Kochva, The Seleucid Army: Organization and Tactics in the Great Campaigns (Cam- bridge 1976). P. Bilde, Flavius Josephus between Jerusalem and Rome (Shef\ eld 1988). M. Gichon, ‘Aspects of a Roman Army in War According to the Bellum Judaicum of Josephus’, in D. Kennedy and Ph. Freeman, eds., The Defence of the Roman and Byzantine East I. BAR International Series 297, I (Oxford 1986), 287–310. A. Goldsworthy, ‘Community Under Pressure: The Roman Army at the Siege of Jeru- salem,’ in A. Goldsworthy and I. Haynes, The Roman Army as a Community. Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplemental Series 34 (Portsmouth RI 1999). R. González Salinero, ‘El servicio militar de los judíos en el ejército romano,’ Aquila Legionis 4 (Madrid 2003), 45–91. M.H. Gracey, ‘The Armies of the Judaean Client Kings,’ in D. Kennedy and Ph. Free- man, eds., The Defence of the Roman and Byzantine East I. BAR International Series 297, I (Oxford 1986).
    [Show full text]
  • According to Suetonius, Which Roman Historian Advi
    2010 TSJCL Certamen Advanced Level, Round One TU#1: According to Suetonius, which Roman historian advised the future emperor Claudius in a letter that he, too, should write history? LIVY B1: In what year was Livy born? 59 BC (SOME SOURCES SAY 57 BC) B2: For what reason did the emperor Augustus once fondly refer to Livy by the nickname 'Pompeianus'? LIVY HAD PRAISED POMPEY THE GREAT IN HIS WRITING (OR, IN GENERAL, THE REPUBLIC) TU#2: What was the eventual profession of the talented slave who was freed by his master Terentius Lucanus some time prior to 160 BC? (COMEDIC) PLAYWRIGHT B1: What is the meaning of the title of Terence's play Hecyra? MOTHER-IN-LAW B2: Which of the six plays of Terence is the story of twins who were separated, confused, then reunited? NONE OF THEM TU#3: What fundamental change in government and public relations did the plebeian tribune Gaius Terentilius Harsa propose in 462 BC, according to the third book of Livy? THAT ROME WRITE DOWN/PUBLISH/FORMALIZE ITS LAWS B1: When the Decemviri met in 451 BC to write up the laws, how many tables did it publish that year? TEN B2: Name both the killer and the victim in the murder that led to the removal of the Decemviri. VERGINIA, BY HER FATHER VERGINIUS TU#4: Using only two Latin words, say in Latin, "Let's go to the country." EMUS RS B1: Using only two Latin words, say in Latin, "Let us live in the country." HABITMUS (VIVMUS) RRE B2: Using only two Latin words, say in Latin, "Let them see Pompeii." VIDEANT POMPIS TU#5: Listen carefully to the following passage, which I will read twice.
    [Show full text]
  • Make a Roman Soldier's Shield
    A UNESCO World Heritage Site Make a Roman Soldier’s Shield If you were a soldier in the Roman army, your shield would be very important to you. When you were fighting enemies armed with swords and spears, your shield offered much needed protection. The Roman Army was divided into two different elements - the auxiliaries and the legionaries. To be a legionary soldier, you had to be a Roman citizen. Legionaries were expected to fight, but they also built essential facilities such as forts, bridges and roads. Auxilia means help and so auxiliary soldiers assisted the legionaries by providing extra manpower and, in particular, specialised fighting techniques. They were non-Roman citizens, but received their citizenship after being a soldier for 25 years. The legionary soldiers had curved rectangular shields, whereas the auxiliary soldiers tended to have oval shaped shields. Both shields had a bulge on the front, called a boss, made out of iron or bronze to protect the hand holding the shield. Whether you were left or right-handed, shields were always held in the left hand when the soldier was fighting. If you were a soldier in the Roman army, your shield would be very important to you. When you were fighting enemies armed with swords and spears, your shield offered much needed protection. 1 Make a Roman Soldier’s Shield A UNESCO World Heritage Site Roman soldiers would paint their shields with something that was important to them or to their unit. Below are some designs which soldiers had on their shields along with explanations on what they symbolised.
    [Show full text]