military organization Roman Republic played a huge role in its history. About meaning armies of Rome testified to the creation of centuriate assemblies, consisting of armed soldiers.
The enormous expansion of its limits, achieved by armed means, testified both to the role of the army and to the growth of its political significance. And the very fate of the republic was largely in the hands of the army.
Rome's initial military organization was simple. There was no standing army. All citizens from 18 to 60 years old who had a property qualification were required to participate in hostilities (moreover, clients could perform military duties instead of patrons). Warriors on a campaign had to come with their weapons, corresponding to their property qualification, and food. As noted above, each category of wealthy citizens put up a certain number of centuries, united in legions. The senate gave command of the army to one of the consuls, who could transfer command to the praetor. At the head of the legions were military tribunes, centurions were commanded by centurions, detachments of cavalry (decuria) were led by decurions. If hostilities lasted more than a year, the consul or praetor retained his right to command the army.
Great military activity led to changes in the military organization. From 405 BC volunteers appeared in the army, who began to pay salaries. In the III century. BC. in connection with the reorganization of the centuriate assembly, the number of centuries increased. Up to 20 legions were formed on their basis. In addition, legions appear from the allies, municipalities organized by Rome and provinces annexed to it. In the II century. BC. they already accounted for up to two-thirds of the Roman army. At the same time, the property qualification, which was associated with military duty, was lowered.
The duration and frequency of wars makes the army a permanent organization. They also caused growing dissatisfaction with the main contingent of soldiers - the peasantry, distracted from their farms, falling into decay because of this. There is a need to reorganize the army. It was carried out by Marius in 107 BC.
Military reform Maria, while retaining the military service of Roman citizens, allowed the recruitment of volunteers who received weapons and salaries from the state. In addition, the legionnaires were entitled to part of the military booty, and from the 1st century. BC. veterans could receive lands in Africa, Gaul and Italy (at the expense of confiscated and free lands). The reform significantly changed the social composition of the army - most of it now consisted of people from the poor and the poor, whose dissatisfaction with their own position and the existing order was growing. The army professionalized, became permanent and became an independent declassed political force, and the commander, on whose success the well-being of the legionnaires depended, became a major political figure.
The first consequences came soon. Already in 88 BC. under Sulla, for the first time in Roman history, the army opposed the existing government and overthrew it. For the first time, the Roman army entered Rome, although according to ancient tradition, the carrying of weapons and the appearance of troops in the city was prohibited.
The military organization of the Roman Republic was based on the principle of compulsory and universal conscription of citizens (see § 14). The right to serve in the army - and, consequently, the opportunity to count on a share of military booty, land plots - was even an honorary right of a citizen. Such a structure of the army was one of the important guarantees of the subordination of the legions to the people's authorities and magistrates, a guarantee of the inseparability of the army and the Roman community.
At the turn of II-I centuries. BC e. In the organization of the Roman army, the first important shift took place. After the Allied Wars and the granting of citizenship rights to the majority of the population of Italy, the allies received the right to serve in the legions on a par with the Romans, and soon they began to make up to 2/3 of all legions. The quantitative growth of those able to serve in the army led to the gradual replacement of compulsory service by voluntary service - on the basis of recruitment, which was carried out by special overseers. A special part of the army began to be made up of auxiliary troops recruited from provinces outside of Italy. As a result reforms of Gaius Marius (107 BC), caused, among other things, by difficulties with recruiting into the main legions, everyone began to be taken into the Roman army (citizens and non-citizens, including insolvent and slaves); the old census principles are a thing of the past. The troops began to pay increased and regular salaries, switched to the state supply of weapons and equipment. Although conscription was not formally abolished, in reality there was a transition to a standing army.
The final transition to a professional army took place during the period of the principate. Volunteers were recruited into the legions from among any inhabitants of the empire, citizens and non-citizens. For service, in addition to the usual salary and awards, veterans were given land in the provinces. For a professional army, therefore, the commander, the head of the army (especially successful and generous) began to be of greater value than, in fact, subordination government bodies authorities. This contributed to the formation of a regime of personal power and, in the end, a military monarchy. In addition, under Augustus, the army as a whole was divided into territorial (legions in the provinces) and internal. The core of the latter was made up of specially recruited - already, as a rule, from non-Romans - 9 thousandth detachments and horse guards - the so-called cohors pretoria, or praetorians. These elite units, subordinate to Roman officers and personally to the emperor, became the main pillar of his power, sometimes influencing both political decisions and the fate of the emperor's heirs.
Under the emperor Septimius Severus (II century), the Praetorians became even more detached from the state organization and the Roman population. They stopped recruiting Italians, and the way was opened for the nominees from the provinces to the officer positions of centurions. The soldiers were allowed to marry and live with their families outside the camp. The salaries of the legionnaires increased significantly, many officers now possessed significant fortunes, formed special clubs, colleges, which served to rally the army only around profitable, "soldier emperors".
It is obvious that such an army could not be significant in size and provide for the new political and military tasks of the empire. Under Diocletian, a recruitment of soldiers from the latifundists was introduced; barbarian mercenaries began to be regularly recruited to serve in the Roman army. This contributed, on the one hand, to reconciliation with the bordering peoples and semi-states, and on the other hand, to the erosion of the military-political unity of the empire. The army became a completely independent force, the organization and actions of which were increasingly moving away from the state administration.
At the beginning of the IV century. the organization of the army changed even more in the direction of increasing the role of non-Roman mercenaries. An insignificant part of the army (from the 3rd century onwards, up to 72 legions and 600 thousand soldiers) were citizens of the empire. The majority were mercenaries from the allied peoples (the so-called federals) or from the semi-free population. The barbarization of the army led to the fact that even the praetorian cohorts, the personal guard of the emperor, were recruited from the alien population, which had no attachment, except for profit, to Rome and to the tasks of the state. Barbarians began to make up the majority of officers and even top commanders. Many legions were already built in the tradition of organizing not the Roman army, but according to the combat skills of the allied peoples - mainly the Danubian and Germanic tribes. There were frequent cases when such an army preferred to manifest itself not in military operations, but in solving political affairs, deposing emperors. Army participation in palace coups became perhaps the most important indicator of the general political crisis of the Roman Empire by the 5th century.
The army became one of the accelerators of the objective collapse of the Roman Empire. At the end of the IV century. (395) the eastern part completely separated under the name of Byzantium, laying the foundation for its own thousand-year statehood (see § 40). The fate of the western part of the empire with its center in Rome was different.
At the beginning of the 5th century The Roman Empire began to experience a constant onslaught of nomadic tribes and Germanic peoples from the north, pushed by the Great Migration of Peoples, which stirred up in the 4th-5th centuries. Asia and Europe. The social crisis within the empire itself, the collapse of the military organization made Rome incapable of a real rebuff to the new forces. In 410, the army of the Visigoth tribe, led by the leader Alaric, destroyed the city, power in the Western Empire came under the control of the German leaders. The small northern Italian city of Ravenna became the capital of the empire. The empire gradually disintegrated, only Italy and part of the Gallic provinces remained under the rule of the emperors. In 476, the German leader Odoacer overthrew the last Roman emperor, who, by a strange whim of history, was also called Romulus. The Western Roman Empire and millennial statehood ceased to exist.
ALLIED WAR
The death of Drusus clearly showed the Italians that all ways of legal satisfaction of their demands had been exhausted. There was only one way left - the uprising. Apparently, even before the assassination of Drusus, there were secret alliances among the disenfranchised population of Italy, which set themselves the task of achieving the rights of citizenship. Now these unions have turned into militant organizations.
The uprising broke out at the end of 91 on an accidental occasion and began somewhat prematurely. Praetor Gaius Servilius, having learned that the inhabitants of the city of Ascula in Picenum were exchanging hostages with neighboring communities, came to the city with a small detachment. He addressed the residents gathered in the theater with a defiant speech full of threats. This played the role of a spark that fell into a barrel of gunpowder. The crowd here, in the theater, killed the praetor and his legate, after which all the Romans who were in the city were killed and their property was plundered.
The Asculans were immediately joined by the mountain tribes of Mars, Peligni, Vestins, and others. The leading role among them was played by the brave Mars, led by Quintus Poppedius Silon, a close friend of the late Drusus. The second leader of this northern group was Picen Gaius Vidacilius.
Following the example of the northern federation, a southern one was formed, which included the Samnites, Lucans and other tribes of southern Italy with their leaders Gaius Papius Mutilus, Pontius Telesinus and others.
However, before moving on to open hostilities, the leaders of the uprising made a last attempt at reconciliation. They sent a delegation to Rome and promised to lay down their arms if the rebels were given the rights of citizenship. The Roman government refused. At the suggestion of the tribune Quintus Varius, and with the support mainly of the equestrians, a criminal commission was created for cases of high treason. She was tasked with investigating a conspiracy allegedly organized by Drusus, which resulted in a rebellion. Investigations and lawsuits began, from which many people who were or were considered supporters of Drusus suffered. At the same time, both hostile camps were energetically preparing for war.
The so-called "Allied" (or "Mars") war was one of the most formidable uprisings that Rome had to deal with throughout its history. The uprising broke out in Italy itself, and its center was in close proximity to Rome. It covered most peninsulas, Only Umbria and Etruria remained unaffected by the uprising, where the land and money aristocracy, which held the side of Rome, was strong. In Campania and in the south, only allied Greek cities remained loyal to the Romans: Nola, Naples, Rhegium, Tarentum, and others. Most of the Latin colonies also did not join the uprising. But compared to the area covered by the movement, it was not much.
The rebel troops numbered a total of about 100 thousand people - the same number as the Romans put up (not counting the garrisons in the fortresses). At the same time, the Italians were in no way inferior to their opponents in military art and weapons. As for courage, stamina and devotion to the common cause, in this they greatly surpassed the Roman citizenship and auxiliary provincial troops. They had no shortage of talented generals and experienced officers. It should not be forgotten that the Italics went through the same harsh military school in the allied forces as the Romans, and since the time of Marius, many of them served on an equal footing with citizens and in the legions.
The Italians, who fell away from Rome, created their own state organization, reminiscent of the Roman one. The city of Corfinius was made the capital of the general Italian federation in the region of the Peligni, in the very center of the uprising. They called it Italy. Here was the government: a senate of 500 members and officials - 2 consuls and 12 praetors. Apparently, there was also a popular assembly, but it is not clear who it consisted of: whether it was permanent representatives of the communities that were part of the federation, or all the citizens of the federation, since they could practically gather in Corfinium. The answer to this question (a similar question can be raised in relation to the Senate) would be very important, since it would make it possible to answer another question: did the new Italian federation apply the representative principle of government, or was it built according to the old type of federation of policies. The latter seems more likely to us.
The Italic state issued coins according to the Roman model, but with the legend "Italy". (One of these coins depicts a bull, a totem of the Samnite tribes, trampling a Roman she-wolf.)
The military forces of the rebels consisted of detachments of separate communities, united in two groups: the northern (Martian), commanded by Poppedius Silon, and the southern (Samnite) led by Papius Mutilus.
One of the main advantages of Rome in this war was that it had the old centralized state organization and old management skills, while the Italic federation was young and decentralized. The war on the part of the Italics often took on the character of a large guerrilla struggle, which had its weak points, since the Romans, acting in large army masses, beat the rebels one by one. The territory of the uprising was rarely continuous: it was interspersed with numerous civilian and Latin colonies. The first always, and the second in most cases, were the backbone of Rome, and the Italians had to spend a lot of time and effort on their siege. The weakest point of the Italics was their lack of internal unity. The rich and aristocratic strata were drawn to Rome. The Samnite tribes were most irreconcilably disposed, they continued the struggle most stubbornly and for the longest time. The lack of unity among the rebels, as we will see below, made it easier for the Romans to defeat the movement.
The periodization of an allied war is naturally determined by the course of the uprising: its upward curve falls on the 90th year, its downward curve on the 89th. By 88, the uprising in most areas was crushed.
The first year of the war was marked by great setbacks for the Romans. Military operations, which began in the winter of 91/90, unfolded on a large scale in the spring and summer. The first object of attack was the Roman fortresses located on the territory of the uprising. Started almost immediately field war. The southern Roman army under the command of the consul Lucius Julius Caesar (one of his legates was Sulla) operated in Campania and Samnium. At the first attempt to advance, the Romans were driven back by the Samnites with heavy losses. The result of this defeat was the transition to the side of the rebels of the large city of Venafra on the border of Latium and Samnium. This made it easier for the rebels to lay siege to the fortress-colony of Ezernia in northern Samnium, which capitulated a few months later due to lack of food. The Samnites, led by Mutil, invaded Campania, which caused a number of Campanian cities to join the movement: Nola, Salerno, Pompeii, Herculaneus, Stabiae, and others.
At the same time, hostilities were taking place in the northern theater. The second Roman consul, Publius Rutilius Lupus, operated here. Among his legates were Marius, who had returned from the East, and Gnaeus Pompey Strabo, father of Gnaeus Pompey, the future rival of Gaius Julius Caesar. In June 90, the Marsians unexpectedly attacked the consul while crossing the river. Tolen in the former region of the Equi. The Romans lost 8 thousand people, including the consul himself. Only Mary, who replaced Lupus as commander-in-chief, managed to improve the dangerous situation that had developed in the immediate vicinity of Rome.
Strabo at this time was active in Picenum. At first he was defeated and was locked up in the city of Firma. This made it possible for the northern rebel army to transfer part of its forces to the south. Vidacilius invaded Apulia and forced a number of large cities to go over to his side: Venusia, Canusia, etc. Meanwhile, the situation in Picenum improved. The combined Roman forces succeeded in freeing Strabo and locking up the rebels in Asculum.
The Roman failures of the first months of the war were even reflected in the mood of the Umbrian and Etruscan communities: some of them joined the uprising, others hesitated. There were panic rumors in Rome. On the occasion of the defeat at Tolen and the death of the consul, the officials were dressed in mourning.
The Roman government understood the extreme danger of the situation and decided to make concessions. At the end of 90, the consul Julius Caesar passed a law (lex Julia), according to which the inhabitants of those allied communities that had not yet separated from Rome received the right to Roman citizenship. This law stopped further distribution uprisings, influencing in a positive way the vacillating Umbrian and Etruscan cities.
Another law, probably adopted at the beginning of 89, caused a split among the rebels. At the suggestion of the tribunes of the people, Mark Plautius Silvanus and Gaius Papirius Carbon, it was decided that every member of the allied community who, within two months, submitted an application to the Roman praetor about the desire to join the ranks of citizens, received the rights of Roman citizenship (lex Plautia Papiria). True, the new citizens were not evenly distributed among all 35 tribes, but were recorded only in 8 tribes. 1 This significantly diminished their legal capacity, since when voting in the comitia tributa, new citizens always found themselves in a minority compared to the old citizenship. 2
For Cisalpine Gaul, which in this era actually did not differ much from the rest of Italy, a special law (lex Pompeia) was passed by the consul of 89, Pompey Strabo. He gave (more precisely, confirmed the law already given by Julius) the right of full Roman citizenship to the Latin colonies located in Cispadan Gaul, and the Latin right to the communities lying on the other side of the Po, and the Gallic tribes assigned to them.
Having made the minimum necessary concessions, the Senate the more energetically led the fight against the stubborn. The second year of the war was disastrous for the Italians. Etruria and Umbria quickly calmed down. A large detachment of Mars in 15 thousand people made an attempt to break through to help the Etruscans, but was utterly defeated by Strabo and almost completely died.
Major operations unfolded around Asculus, which had been besieged by the Romans the previous year. Vidacilius came to the rescue with an army of Piceni. A fierce battle took place under the walls of the city. The Romans were victorious, but Vidacilius managed to break into the city with part of his forces. The siege resumed. When, after a few months, the situation became hopeless, Vidacilius ordered the execution of his political opponents, that is, supporters of the agreement with Rome, and then took poison. The city surrendered to the Romans. The command staff and all prominent citizens were executed, the rest were expelled from the city.
The fall of Asculus fatally affected the course of the uprising in central Italy. The Northern Federation was completely defeated. First, the Marrucins and Marses were conquered, then the vestins and peligns. "Italy" again turned into a modest Corfinius. After the fall of Corfinius, Poppedius Silon armed 20 thousand slaves, and the capital of the Italic federation was moved at the beginning of 88 to the city of Ezernia in Samnia. Meanwhile, the Roman troops entered Apulia. A detachment of the Samnites came to the aid of the Apulians, but after some success was defeated, the Romans fully restored their power in Apulia.
In the south, Sulla, who succeeded Caesar, acted with great skill and merciless cruelty. His army penetrated southern Campania. Pompeii, Herculaneus and Stabiae were taken. Sulla moved to Samnium, which was the main stronghold of the movement, and forced the main Samnite city of Bovian to surrender.
By the beginning of 88, the uprising was held only in the city of Nola in Campania and in certain areas of Samnium, Lucania and Bruttia. At this difficult moment for them, the rebels) entered into relations with the king of the Pontic kingdom, Mithridates VI, who began a war against Rome in Asia Minor. But Mithridates could not help them directly, and it was already too late. Although in some places the uprising held out until 82, it was mostly defeated by 88.
Sulla, elected consul for 88, began the siege of Nola, but at that time major events broke out in Rome that prevented the siege from being completed.
The end of the Allied War and the beginning of the uprising in the east extremely sharpened all the old contradictions, adding new ones to them. A severe economic crisis erupted in Rome. Many people were in debt, and creditors were inexorable, since the horsemen had lost a lot as a result of the falling away of the east and now did not want to make any concessions.
Back in 89, an incident occurred that showed the extent to which passions played out. The city praetor Aulus Sempronius Azellion, yielding to the pleas of the debtors, tried to alleviate their position by deferred payments. In addition, he renewed the old laws against usury, which in fact had not been observed for a long time. Embittered creditors attacked the praetor while he was sacrificing in the forum and killed him.
But not only debtors and creditors were in the ranks of the dissatisfied. Italics also belonged to them, although they received citizenship rights, but were enrolled only in 8 tribes. A significant part of the Italics did not receive any rights at all (these were those rebellious communities that refused to submit and submitted only to the force of arms). The veterans of Mary were also embittered, still waiting for the land allotments promised to them. Marius, who reappeared on the political horizon, failed to really prove himself in the Allied War and had to give way to Sulla.
All these internal difficulties were joined by very serious external complications.
(All dates are BC)
Peace treaty of Spurius Cassius 493 BC (end of the First Latin War) brought Rome into the Latin Union, and over the next 160 years, the development of its military system went in parallel with the rest of the Latin states. Livy assures that the military organization of the Latins and the Romans was the same at the time when Rome put forward demands for recognition of its dominance in the Union (Second Latin War 340-338 BC)
All Roman citizens from 17 to 45 years old were considered liable for military service and were part of . Only the poorest population was exempted from military service. Legion (lat. Legere - to choose, collect) originally denoted the entire Roman army. When the need arose to convene an army, each city centuria put up the required number of people. At the end of hostilities, the army disbanded. The warrior himself was supposed to provide himself with equipment, which led to a great variety in weapons and armor.
The army was divided into two parts, serving according to age. Veterans, warriors aged 45-60, made up the garrisons, and the young ones participated in military campaigns. Only those persons who participated in 20 military campaigns while serving in the infantry or 10 campaigns while serving in the cavalry were exempted from military service. Evasion of military service was punished very strictly, up to sale into slavery.
The entire Roman army was divided into two legions, each of which was subordinate to one of the consuls. The wars waged by the Roman Republic became more and more frequent and gradually ceased to be simple raids, taking on the character of planned military operations. In the 4th century BC. two legions were already subordinate to each consul, and their total number, respectively, increased to four. If necessary, a military campaign could be recruited and additional legions.
In the second half of the 4th century BC. led to a significant expansion of the contingent from which the army was recruited. Military reform became inevitable. A salary was established for the soldiers, at the expense of which uniforms, weapons and food were issued. This equalized the position of the haves and have-nots of warriors and served as an impetus for the introduction of uniform weapons. Uniform armament, in turn, made it possible to reorganize the legion, making it more uniform and functional.
From 331, a military tribune stood at the head of each legion. The internal structure of the legion became more complex. Instead of the phalanx adopted from the Etruscans, the legion was built in a new battle order (possibly adopted from the Samnites), in three lines. The total number of the legion, at the same time, was about 4,500 people.
Structure of the early Republican Roman legion The front line consisted of heavy infantry - hastati(lat. Hastati - spearmen). It was made up of younger warriors, divided by 15 maniples(lat. Manipula- a handful) for 60 - 120 people. Each of the maniples was divided into two centuries commanded by centurion appointed from among the most distinguished soldiers. One of the centurions was senior and commanded the entire maniple. In addition, each hastati maniple was given 20 lightly armed warriors - lewis or velites who had a spear and a dart.
The middle line also consisted of 15 maniples of heavy infantry - principles. But these were already the cream of the army - fighters in the prime of life.
Artist Andrey Karashchuk The back line consisted of 15 rows, each of which was divided into three parts - vexillas. The best of the veterans stood in front, . Behind them are young, not so distinguished warriors, roraria, and behind them - the least reliable soldiers, excise. Each of the three vexillas consisted of 60 warriors, two centurions and a standard-bearer - vexillaria who carried a flag-like standard.
Akcensy (outside the qualification) were armed only with a sling, which corresponded to the 5th property class according to the military reform. They had no armor or any other protection.
Roraria were armed with a spear for close combat and a javelin. They corresponded to the fourth property class of the reform of Servius Tullius. Armor was not worn.
The triarii were armed with spears and swords. Originally from the first property class, they had full protective armament.
Artist Andrey Karashchuk In battle, maniples were usually staggered - maniples principles covered the gap between hastati, and those were covered by maniples triarii.
In addition to the infantry, the legion also included cavalry. Heavy cavalry - equities- originally was the most prestigious branch of the military. The cavalryman himself bought weapons and equipment - a round shield, helmet, armor, sword and spears. The legion consisted of approximately 300 cavalrymen, divided into divisions - turms- 30 people per team decurion. They were located on the flanks of the legion - five towers on each. The light cavalry was recruited from less wealthy citizens and young wealthy citizens who did not fit the age of other units.
Initially, the legionnaires were armed with round shields - clypeus. But during (405-392 years) larger shields were introduced - scutums reinforced with iron edging. At the same time, the phalanx was also abandoned. The reason for this could be the defeat at the Battle of Allia (390), where the Romans were literally "trampled into the ground." Much attention began to be paid to command and control of troops and the organization of the rear. The troops began to include one century of clerks and buglers, as well as two centuries of blacksmiths and carpenters, parks of siege engines and centuries of engineers.
Pilum throwing From that time on, legionnaires began to be paid. A Roman infantryman received two coins a day, a centurion twice as much, a horseman six obols. The Roman infantryman received allowances in the form of 35 liters of grain per month, the rider - 100 liters of wheat and 350 liters of barley (taking into account the feeding of the horse and groom). A fixed payment for these products was deducted from the salary of both foot and mounted warriors. Deductions were also made for clothing and items of equipment requiring replacement.
The main striking weapon of the legionnaire of the new army became a throwing spear - pilum. The triarii, rorarii, and excense were still ordinary spearmen, but about a third of the entire army advanced, armed with pilums to defeat the approaching enemy.
The battle began with the levis, who sought to disrupt the enemy's battle order with the help of light darts. When the opposite side launched an offensive, lightly armed warriors retreated at intervals in the ranks, and the hastati went into battle. At first, they threw pilums, and then went to approach the enemy in order to meet hand-to-hand. If the hastati were unable to defeat the enemy, they also retreated into the gaps between the detachments of the principles. If both lines were defeated, the hastati and principes retreated behind the triarii, who closed ranks; then the whole army retreated. The old Roman saying "it came to the triarii" meant that everything turned out as badly as possible.
While the hastati and principes fought, the triarii knelt down on one knee, pushing their left foot forward. They leaned their large oval shields against their left shoulder so that they covered them from enemy projectiles. The inlet of the spear was stuck into the ground, and the tip was tilted forward "like a palisade" (Livy). The triarii did not engage in battle until all other parts of the army were defeated. The banners were located behind the rear line, so that the retreating detachments could see which of the ranks they should retreat to.
The Romans were defeated more than once in the first 200 years of the Republic. The patriotic Livy usually says on such occasions that the battle was "interrupted by bad weather." The biggest defeat fell to the lot of the Romans in the battle of Allia. Perhaps it is because of this that the legion of the 4th century BC. has a pronounced defensive character. The mobile structure of the hastati-principles appeared, apparently, in response to the light and mobile armies of the Celts and Samnites. The spear-throwing squads on the front flank were specially designed to withstand the attack of the Celts.
In addition, the Roman army was strengthened by the so-called "allies" - the troops of conquered neighbors who did not have Roman citizenship. The Allies were required to field an auxiliary armed force. Usually, for one Roman legion, the allies put up 5,000 infantry and 900 horsemen who were kept at their own expense. Allied troops lined up on the flanks of the Roman legions in units of 500 people. Such units are called "cohort" (lat. cohors - retinue, string). The cohorts were subordinate to the Roman high command, and the composition of the junior commanders was determined by the allies themselves.
One-third of the Allies' best cavalry and one-fifth of their best foot soldiers were selected to form a special fighting unit, the extraordinarii. They were a striking force for special assignments and were supposed to cover the legion on the march. The internal organization of the allied troops for this period is not described in the sources, but most likely it was similar to the Roman one, especially among the Latin allies.
Thus, the legion, with its heavy infantry, cavalry, additional allied cavalry, light infantry, siege weapons and engineers, included all branches of the land forces and was a cumbersome, but self-sufficient army unit.
It was in this form that the Roman legions entered the period of great wars.
Preparation for military operations occupied the most important place in the life of the Romans from ancient times. As you know, the war was a regular, everyday occupation of the Romans during the period of the decomposition of the tribal system and the genesis of the state. Every spring, an army was recruited from full-fledged community members, who went on a campaign to rob booty from neighboring communities and peoples or protect their own territory. In the period of the early Republic, in addition to these causes of wars, the desire to expand the landed possessions of Rome (ager publicus) and to establish his hegemony in Latium and Central Italy gradually comes to the fore. The summer campaign ended in autumn, when the returning army disbanded with proper rites.
A huge role in all actions related to the war was played by their sacred legal design. The army embodied the sovereignty and guarantee of the well-being and security of the community, personified its power as a whole in the face of a hostile world. Consequently, its functioning and the results of its activities had to be considered fair and legitimate, which justified the inevitable cruelty in the eyes of not only the surrounding tribes, but also the gods who bestowed their favor on the Romans. Therefore, from the early stages of the development of the Roman community, the concept of “legitimate war” (bellum iustum) was formed, that is, one that took place in compliance with all necessary legal procedures (Barnes, 1986. P. 40-59; Sini, 1991. P. 189 -199), and since
157
Since the line between sacred and public law was still too blurred, it is not surprising that the mentioned procedures objectively took the form of sacred rituals and ceremonies. These include the procedure for declaring war, the observance of which was in charge of a special board of fetials (Sabatucci, 1988; Penella, 1987. P. 233-237; Mayorova, 2001. P. 142-179), established by Numa Pompilius, and the organization of military recruitment, the most important role in which was played by the lustration (see: Melnichuk, 2002 b), and sacred ceremonies associated with the awakening of divine forces and entrusting them with the recruited troops, and much more.
Over the centuries, a system of legal relations between the Roman military organization and the civilian community has evolved. On the one hand, the army was, as it were, a continuation of the political and social system, and military service at least until the reform of Gaius Marius at the end of the 2nd century. BC e. was a right-duty of all full-fledged citizens (see Mayak, 1996; 1998 b). On the other hand, the army, as an armed force, opposed the civilian collective in that it was subject not to law, but to military discipline.
Even T. Mommsen expressed an opinion about the fundamental difference between civil and military law. Mommsen believed that in civil law the law was in force, and in military law - the ax and fascia, that is, the sole and unlimited power of the military leader (Mommsen, 1936. R. 246 et seq.). Thus, Mommsen, and after him modern researchers, based Roman military discipline mainly on fear and coercion.
The development of military law and the era of archaic
As a rule, in historiography, military discipline is regarded as a kind of universal reality, independent of the level of development of the military organization and separated from the evolution of the Roman constitution. Therefore, historians often draw parallels between the relationship between soldiers and commanders, troops and the civilian community in the period of the early Republic up to the reforms of Gaius Marius and the high discipline of the professional army of the late Republic. But let's take into account that the latter was based on clear legal norms, and the soldier was considered as a kind of object of law. More
158
Polybius describes the relationship between soldiers and commanders in the Roman army in the first half of the 2nd century BC. BC e. as based on legal principles with a fairly clear definition of the duties of soldiers and the prerogatives of superiors, as well as with a full range of misdemeanors and their corresponding punishments, the procedure for applying which was almost identical to a civil criminal process, adjusted for military specifics.
During the period of the empire, the historian and jurist Lucius Cincius actively developed the theory of military law, who left the work in at least six books under the title “De re militari”. Unfortunately, it has not been preserved, and only numerous but meager quotations from Gellius, Festus and Macrobius have come down to us. In its final form, the legal system of the relationship between the state and the warrior, the commander and the soldier was formed in the era of the empire in the laws of Trajan, Septimius Severus and was brought together in the 16th title of section XLIX "Digest", also known as "De re militari". However, the origins of military discipline lie in the archaic period.
For example, in the "Digests" it is recorded that "one who has done something forbidden by the commander or who has not carried out his order is punishable by death even if his action had favorable consequences" (D. 49. 16. 3. 15). But such sanctions are reflected in the messages of the written tradition about cases of execution in the 5th-4th centuries. BC e. consuls even their sons for violating the prohibition to leave the battle formation and engage in battle without an order. In 432 BC. e. the dictator Aulus Postumius ordered his victorious son to be flogged and beheaded before the ranks because he, without an order, “left his place, carried away by the opportunity to distinguish himself in battle” (Liv. IV. 29). In 340 BC. e. a similar act was performed by the consul Titus Manlius Imperios (Liv. VIII.7). He ordered his son to be beheaded before the line of soldiers for an equestrian duel with the head of the Tusculan horsemen, Geminus Mescius, who was killed, and his armor was thrown by the victor at the feet of his father-consul. Moreover, in both cases, it was about punishing commanders for successful battles, but committed without the order of the highest commander.
The remark of Livy, uttered by Titus Manlius, that his son, “not honoring either the consular empire or paternal authority, contrary to the ban, without an order, fought the enemy and that ...
159
Dorval obedience in the army, on which the Roman state has been based until now, and put me before a choice: forget either about the state, or about ourselves and our loved ones, then let it be better that we be punished for our act (in Livy: “misconduct”, delictum. - V. T.), than the state will become a dear price to atone for our sins ... ”(Liv. VIII. 7. 15-17). And then Livy puts into the mouth of the consul Manlius a characteristic maxim that it was necessary either by the death of his son "to fasten the sacred power (of empires) of the consul in war, or to undermine it forever, leaving ... unpunished." By the way, “Manliev Pravezh”, although it caused shock and curses among the soldiers, but, according to the same Livy, “such a cruel punishment made the army more obedient to the leader; everywhere they began to carefully carry out guard and sentinel service and change sentries, and in the decisive battle, when they came face to face with the enemy, this severity of Manlius also proved to be beneficial ”(Liv. VIII. 8). Thus, in these passages, two aspects are revealed that go beyond the scope of military discipline proper, but turn out to be its basis. This is a demonstration of the "father's power" and the maintenance of the sovereignty of the empire of the consul as the most important instrument for regulating military discipline.
However, the above examples of the execution of their sons-commanders by commanders testify, in my opinion, not to the cruelty of discipline in the army of the early Republic, but, on the contrary, to its legal underdevelopment (see: Skripilev, 1949, p. 178 et seq.). After all, despite the harsh reprisal of Titus Manlius over his son Mark, soon another head of the cavalry detachment fought again without permission. We are talking about the head of the cavalry, Mark Fabia. According to Livy, in 325 BC. e., when the dictator Lucius Papirius Cursor was absent from the army on the occasion of the performance of state auspices, Fabius entered into battle with the Samnites and brilliantly won it, capturing huge booty and many booty (Liv. VIII. 30-35). And here the basis of the accusation of him by the dictator was not so much a violation of discipline as such, but an encroachment on the empires of the dictator and the will of the gods, which determined the hierarchy of magistrates.
This position is clearly formulated by Livy in the diatribe of Postumius (Liv. VIII. 32. 4-7):
160
it was necessary to repeat bird fortune-telling in order not to do anything, not being sure of the will of the gods? .. And you, correcting my power, with unreliable fortune-telling, with ambiguity in signs, had impudence contrary to the military custom bequeathed to us from our ancestors, contrary to the will of the gods to fight the enemy! » Thus, the dictator appeals to the violation of: a) his empire; b) state sacred auspices; and consequently, c) to insult the gods, whose will determined all the actions of military leaders and troops. As you can see, in the first place in military discipline is, of course, empires, then auspices, and all this rests on a solid sacred foundation mores maiorum. In other words, in the archaic legal mentality of the Romans, military discipline is in close connection with the sacred and constitutional foundations of civitas.
This is confirmed by the following maxim of the dictator Postumius as presented by Livy: “It is worth once to violate military discipline, as the warrior no longer obeys the order of the centurion, the centurion is the tribune, the tribune is the legate, the legate is the consul, the head of the cavalry is the dictator, as respect for the people and veneration disappears. gods, as they do not obey either the orders of the leader or the orders of the priest; warriors roam arbitrarily both in peaceful and hostile lands; forgetting about the oath (sacramentum), according to their arbitrariness, they leave the service when they want; they leave the orphaned banners and do not run when they are told; and they do not make out whether they fight during the day or at night, in the right place or in the wrong place, by order of the military leader or without it, they do not wait for a sign, do not observe the ranks, and at the place of military service, consecrated by custom and oath (pro sollemni et sacrata militia), turns out to be like robbery, blind and disorderly” (Liv. VIII. 7-10).
Before us is a kind of manifesto of Roman military discipline, which acquires the features of a sacred service and suggests that the Romans understood discipline not only as a military art as such, and not so much as a warrior’s routine in the ranks. The essence, the core of military discipline in the archaic period was the definition and consecration of the relationship of the warrior with society as a whole, his subordination to the legal and sacred institutions of the community and, above all, the empire of the military leader.
Military empires and the power of the warlord
Cicero gives the empire a universal and cosmic power, comparing it with a higher law (fas) (Cic. Leg. III. 1. 2-3). D. Cohen
161
not unreasonably traces the connection of empire with primitive "mana", the belief that it endows a person with supernatural power (Cohen, 1957. P. 307, 316 f.; Palmer, 1970. P. 210).
Based on this, the Roman empire (imperium, from impero - “command”) can be interpreted as a magical power that is transmitted from the gods to the leader, so that he can lead his people to prosperity, and the army to victories (Meyer Ernst. 1948. S. 109; Mazzarino, 1945. P. 63 f.). It embodied the power of the entire community, its prosperity.
After the overthrow of the kings, the form and content of the powers of the magistrates (potestas) changed, but not the essence and quality of the empire. It was limited to one year only (Cic. Resp. II.31.53; D.1.2.16). The second most important limitation of the empire in the era of the republic was the right to provocation under the laws of Valerius Poplicola of 509 BC. e. and Valerius-Horace 449 BC. e. (D. 48. 6. 7; Ulp. De off. procons. VIII. 2202). But it worked only in the city. Hence the passionate desire of the consuls and the senate to withdraw the troops from the city as soon as possible. Note that dictators were free from subjection to provocation even in Rome itself (Liv. II.18.8; Zonar. VII.13; D.1.2.18). Unlike consuls, dictators in tradition are never prosecuted after the fall of the empire for bad command, which emphasizes the sacred nature of their power.
The empire was considered the property of all citizens and only temporarily passed to the magistrate. The united and indivisible empire, as is known, was handed over by a special curate law on the empire (lex curiata de imperio) only to kings and high magistrates - consuls and dictators, as well as consular tribunes, in other words, to military leaders (Cic. Leg. III. 3. 6 -9, see more: Smorchkov, 2003, pp. 24-39). Moreover, if the consuls had equal power (potestas), then the highest empire (imperium summum) at any given moment was in the hands of only one of the consuls. Cicero summed up the scope of the empire: “The bearers of the empire, the bearers of power (potestas) and legates - after the decision of the senate and the command of the people - let them leave the City, justly wage just wars, protect allies, will themselves be restrained and restrain their own; May they exalt the glory of the people and return home with honor. Let all magistrates have the right of auspices and judicial power, and let them constitute the senate” (Cic. Leg. III. 3. 9).
162
The military empires included the following rights: to recruit troops, appoint military commanders, wage war, conclude a truce, distribute booty, receive a triumph, and also perform military auspices (ius auspicandi) (for more details, see: Tokmakov, 1997, pp. 47-48; 2000. S. 139 et seq.). And this, perhaps, was considered the main thing. After all, formally, military command was carried out by the will of the deities, and the consul acted only as an intermediary and implementer of this will.
The auspices consisted of observing the flight of birds and reading the entrails of animals. At the same time, it was necessary to carefully observe the once and for all established ritual, even if it eventually became incomprehensible to the performers themselves. The hidden meaning of rituals, the meaning of verbal formulas, the names of non-personalized or chthonic deities could be forgotten, but the tradition had to be observed, because any deviation from it entailed the danger of discontent or anger from the side of the missed gods.
The auspices themselves in the sacral-legal views of the Romans were public acts of transmitting the will of the gods through the bearer of the empire endowed with the corresponding revelation (Smorchkov, 2003.
pp. 24-26). To some extent, they freed the magistrate from responsibility for the outcome of the event, but at the same time increased the requirements for his competence in the interpretation of signs. Therefore, there were frequent cases when erroneously conducted auspices threatened with the re-election of consuls or influenced the course of a military campaign (as in the same Postumius). And such competence, according to the Romans, until the IV century. BC e. possessed only by members of the original, sacred curiat organization, i.e. patricians.
The consul conceded part of the rights to his subordinates, but only with observance of all sacred procedures, which in the archaic period acted as a kind of legal acts. Consequently, the violation of the order, according to the views of the Romans, was considered not just as an offense, but as an encroachment on the sacred empire of the consul and on divine auspices, in other words, on the interpretation of the will of the gods, which was manifested in sacred signs.
So, the conduct of even a successful battle by a commander who did not have the right to auspices, without performing auspices, with unfavorable auspices or contrary to the order of a person endowed with an empire based on higher auspices, meant in the sacral-legal tradition of the Romans disobedience to the supreme leaders of the military
163
sky forces - to the gods. It becomes clear that for the representative of the divine forces in the army, that is, for the commander of the Sith imperio, it was necessary to atone for the perfect sacrilege as soon as possible, without waiting for God's punishment. And the result of sacrilege, perhaps beneficial for the Romans, or kindred feelings no longer played a role.
With the development of public law, this sacred-legal archaic norm was modified into a purely legal one. Moreover, the sacred aspects of the violation are no longer mentioned. Note that this purely Roman principle (we do not find anything similar in Greece) formed the basis of military law and military regulations in Europe for two thousand years to come.
Imperius endowed its bearer with supreme power and power over the life and death of subordinates (the right coercio et iudicatio) (Cic. Leg. III. 3. 6; D. 1. 2. 18). This right found its external expression in the announcer's fascias with axes. In its universal form, it can be found in the same Digests. They say that “one who left an advanced post (exploratione emanet) or left a ditch in the face of an advancing enemy (i.e. in a combat situation) should be subjected to the death penalty” (D. 49. 16. 3. 4) ; and in another place a similar sin is interpreted more mildly: “Those who leave the system are either punished with sticks or transferred to another part, depending on the circumstances” (Ibid. 3. 16). But even two centuries before compiling the Digest, Livy also formulates, in the form of a legal norm, which quite likely already really existed in the archaic era, that “the one who flees from the battlefield or leaves the post deserves to be beaten with sticks to death (!)” ( Liv. V. 6.4).
Polybius describes the procedure for such punishment for the 2nd century. BC e. Those guilty of sleeping while guarding the camp were punished with sticks by decision of the council of the tribunes of the legion. It is curious that during the investigation a kind of judicial procedure is observed: both the accused guards and the centurion of the checking patrol, who calls his companions as witnesses, give their testimony (Polyb. VI. 36. 8-9). The decision, as we see, is made collectively by the council of tribunes, and not by the commander alone, as in the early Republic. Punishment, says Polybius (VI. 37. 2-4), is carried out as follows: the tribune takes a stick and, as it were, just touches the condemned with it, and after that all the legionnaires beat him with sticks and stones (something “painfully” resembles punishment with gauntlets in Russian
164
armies of the 19th century). If any of the punished remains alive, then he is deprived of fire and water; he is forbidden to return home, and relatives - to take him to their house. In other words, sanctions are identical to a civil judgment. The system of maintaining discipline in the description of Polybius is based on the personal responsibility of the chief of each rank for the misconduct of his subordinates (VI. 37. 5-6).
One of the extreme manifestations of the right to punish warriors was decimation, or the execution of every tenth warrior by lot in the event of a shameful flight of soldiers from the battlefield. Polybius speaks of the merciless punishment with sticks of those who fell by lot, and of penalties against the rest in the form of replacing wheat with barley in the diet and taking their tents out of the camp rampart (Polyb. VI. 38. 2-4). But decimation dates back to the early Republic. The first of them, according to tradition, was produced in 471 BC. e. consul Appius Claudius (Liv. II.59; Dionys. IX.50). Moreover, Frontin (Frontin. IV. 1. 33) specifies that Claudius personally killed every tenth with a club. Consequently, the decimations of the archaic era appear more like a massacre of unbridled leaders according to ancient customs than a legal act. Also at the beginning of the 4th c. BC e. Mark Furius Camillus executed the soldiers who fled from under the walls of the city of Veii (Liv. V. 19. 4).
Decimation, of course, had the source of the already mentioned sacred norms and taboos: by such a kind of sacrifice of soldiers desecrated by a violation of the will of the gods, they sought to atone for the shame of defeat and restore the strength of the army. Therefore, only a commander endowed with an empire could initially carry out such a decimation. Only over time this arbitrariness was formalized in public law as the right to summon the offender (ius prensionis) and the right to arrest (ius vocationis). This is the difference between the archaic sacred decimation and the secular legal procedure of punishment from the time of Polybius, which is led by a military tribune, who combines the functions of a judge and an executor. I note that the severity and exclusivity of punishments in the period of the early Republic (which caused them to be recorded in the annals of history) rather testifies to the weakness at that time of military discipline proper and that the process of legal formalization of the principles of the relationship between soldiers and the commander as subjects or parties of law is still just started with genesis
165
catfish of the Roman civitas, in a period when the concepts of "warrior" and "citizen" practically coincided.
The above-mentioned complete and unconditional subordination of soldiers to the power of the military leader in early Rome had its origin in the fact that, from a legal point of view, a soldier in a field army was, as it were, alienated from civil rights, ceased to be a member of the community and completely fell under the authority of the patron-commander. As a member of the community, a citizen was protected by laws, by the people's assembly, of which he was a full participant, and also under the protection of customary law and sacred cults. The aforementioned right of provocation is evidence of this. But, going on a campaign, the Romans crossed the border of Rome, and this marked their transformation from law-abiding and pious citizens, which they were supposed to be inside the pomerium, into evil-filled robbers, rapists and murderers. And in this sense, the warriors were, as it were, tabooed, and the civil community was removed from the actions of its members, stained with blood, clearly opposing itself to the military organization. And only the magistrate, endowed with an empire, remained the link between them.
The restriction of civil rights is confirmed by the closure of courts for the duration of a military campaign, the absence of assemblies in the army, the right to provoke (Cic. Leg. III.6; Liv. III. himself with the Roman community. Let us add here the regular comparisons in the sources of military service with slavery (Liv. II.23.2; IV.5.2; V.2.4-12). Isn't that why in the first two centuries of the republic riots and uprisings broke out so often in the troops (see topic 7, item 3)?
All this was typical for the period of the formation of the Roman patrician-plebeian state, when we do not find in the reports sources of either complete humility or high military discipline as a conscious and legally mediated behavior of soldiers and commanders (see topic 12).
War preparation rituals in early Rome
Undoubtedly, the transition of citizens-communists into the state of warriors-"non-citizens", especially taking place every year, could not do without sacral purification (lustration). The word itself comes from the verb luo ("purify, liberate, redeem"). In other words,
166
it represented the cleansing of warriors from the filth of bloodshed and at the same time atoned for the violation of the “divine peace” (see also: Melnichuk, 2002, pp. 73-87). From the time of Servius Tullius, lustration with the sacrifice of a boar, a ram, and a bull (Liv. I. 44.2; Dionys.
IV. 22. 1-2) and the commission of auspices were carried out after each qualification and annually after a review of the recruited troops on the Field of Mars before they went on a campaign.
The complex of ceremonies of paramilitary lustration also included numerous religious holidays, coming from the depths of centuries and associated with the curiat-tribal system. They began with a horse race on February 28, dedicated to Mars Gradiva - Equiria. Mars himself on a chariot leads these races (Ovid. Fast. II. 860-861), which testifies to the deep antiquity of the ritual of deification of the horse and rider (Mayak, 1983, p. 116; Shtaerman, 1978, p. 58). The rest of the festivities that open March - the month of preparation for a military campaign - are also associated mainly with Mars and one of the oldest priestly colleges - the Salii (for more details, see: Tokmakov, 1997 a; 2001).
Salii are called in the sources the guardians and guardians of the sacred shield of Mars Gradiva, which, according to legend, fell from the sky during the reign of Numa Pompilius (end of the 8th century BC). To commemorate the miracle, on the orders of the king, the legendary blacksmith Veturius Mamurius forged 11 more shields, identical in shape and appearance to the one that fell from the sky, in order to hide the real one among them and thereby protect it from the danger of abduction. Shields of a rounded curved shape (like the number 8) were called ancilia. For this, Veturius Mamurius was honored in their songs (Dionys. II. 70. Plut. Numa. 13. 11; Ovid. Fast. III. 389-392). Among the objects of the Salii cult, one can meet Janus, and Jupiter, and Minerva, as well as Larov, Penates and whole line chthonic deities, which subsequently died out and became archaic and incomprehensible even to the ancient authors themselves.
The sacred rituals of the Salii consisted of solemn processions of members of this college through the whole city. The first procession is recorded in the sources on March 1, the day after the Equirium. According to John Lyd (Ioan. Lyd. Mens. IV. 49), on March 15, the procession and dances of the Salii took place again. The salii performed these dances with weapons, which consisted of a copper breastplate over a tunic embroidered with purple, a copper belt on the hips, a copper helmet, a sword and a spear in the right
167
hand (Plut. Numa. 13; Dionys. II.70.2; Liv. I.20.4). According to other sources, it was a rod or a stick, like a spear, with knobs at both ends. During the processions, the salii used it to hit the sacred shields of the ancilia, which were the most important attribute of their rituals. Thus, they clearly demonstrated the safety of the shields, the readiness of the community to renew the agreement with Mars and encourage him to lead a loyal army. And the dances of the Salii themselves belong to the rituals of awakening the divine forces associated with the war. With the same purpose of attracting the attention of the deities, “sacred trumpeters” (tubicines sacrorum) performed before the salii.
The Salii performed rituals throughout the month of March (Polyb. XXI.13.12). So, during the festivities of March 9, 14 (Mamuralia) and March 17 (Agonalia), the salii with weapons and accompanied by a choir descended in a procession with dances and songs from the Palatine to the Forum, and then went around Rome along the perimeter of the ancient pomerium. And it was not just a procession. Servius reports that they walked around the altars (Serv. Ad Aen. VIII.285). One of them can be considered the altar of Hercules Ara Maxima near the Forum, the other - the altar of Janus. Undoubtedly, there were also altars of other ancient tribal gods, which marked the sacred boundaries of the city of the times of Septimontius. This detour was a kind of magic circle. Luxurious feasts were held along the route of the Salii, the abundance of which eventually became a proverb among the Romans.
On March 19, the Salii participated in the Quinquatrus (Fest. P. 305 L; Ovid. III. 809-847), dedicated to Minerva. During this feast on the Comitium, in the presence of the Pontifex Maximus and the tribune of the Celers, the Salii made their ritual leaps (as appears from the Fast). At the same time, sacred purification of weapons was carried out, but, perhaps, only ancilium. On March 23, the Salii were the main protagonists in the sacral rite of "cleansing the pipes" (Tubilustrum) (Varro. LL. VI.14; Fest. P. 480 L; Ovid. Fast. III. 849-850), which marked the final preparation the Roman community to war, and its troops recruited by that time to go on a campaign. The presence of Salii (and certainly with Ancilia) was also recorded during the mandatory lustration of the troops. There is also indirect evidence that the salii took part in ceremonies and cults even after the end of the March period, in particular, in the rite of Regifugia on February 24 and in the cults of the Arval brothers.
168
During the military review on the Field of Mars, the soldiers, by centuries, offered solemn oaths and vows to the gods. The addressees of these oaths are again Mars Gradivus (Liv. II.45.14), the patroness of youth of military age Juno Sororia (Liv. I.20.4) and Jupiter Feretrius (Fest. R. 204 L), as well as Janus as god of the Roman frontiers and patron of their defenders. Apparently, it was Mars that symbolized the military empires of the warlord. Not without reason, before setting off on a campaign, the king (and then the consul) entered Regia, where the sacred spear of Mars was kept (Cic. De div. I. 17; Plut. Rom. 29. 1; Clem. Alex. Protr. IV. 4. P. 35, 23 st.) and ancilian shields, and set them in motion with the words: “Mars, watch!” (Serv. Ad Aen. VIII. 3). (By the way, spontaneous oscillation of the spear of Mars was considered an omen of war or natural disasters -Liv. XXII.1.11; XL.19.2.) with an army. This increased the significance of the ritual side of these procedures and the requirements for the person responsible for their correctness.
The supreme leaders of the host are Jupiter and Mars (Liv. II.45.14). According to legend, Romulus (who himself was considered the son of Mars and was deified under the name of “peaceful Mars” - Quirinus, see: Serv. Ad Aen. III. 35; VI. 895), according to legend, established a sanctuary to Jupiter Feretrius on the site of the ancient refuge ("Bringer of victory") (Liv. I. 10. 6-7). However, the promotion of Jupiter to the fore still occurs in the late royal period, during the reign of the so-called "Etruscan" dynasty, when a temple is built on the Capitoline under Tarquinius by the Proud Jupiter, Juno and Minerva (Liv. I. 53. 3; Dionys. IV. 43 .2).
It was Mars who acted as the original patron of the warriors and the symbol of the power of the community, especially in the form of Mars Gradiva (“Walker [into battle]”). At first, he was the god of all living things, the productive forces of nature with a pronounced masculine, creative principle, which explains the worship of him in the agricultural cult of the archaic collegium of the Arval brothers (Shtaerman, 1987, pp. 65-67). Since the time of the republic, Mars has acted as the patron of warriors, the guardian of the community's borders and the symbol of its military power (Smorchkov, 2001, p. 232 et seq.; Sini, 1991, p. 215).
169
Characteristically, the annual circle of military rituals ended in October at the end of the campaign with the sacrifice of a horse's head to Mars after horse games (October equus) (Ovid. Fast. IV. 231-234; Fest. P. 190 L). The reverse transformation of warriors placed under the power of the gods and the consular empire was also arranged with religious ceremonies. They were embodied in the rite of purification of weapons, the Armilustrum (October 19) (Varro. LL. VI.22; V.153; Fest. P. 17L; Ioan. Lyd. Mens. IV.34). On that day, the blood-stained warriors returning to the city passed by the altar of Janus and under the Sister Beam, where they were cleansed of the filth of murder and returned to the bosom of civilian citizenship.
According to legend, during the reign of Tullus Hostilius and the war with Alba Longa, Horace, who won the duel, upon returning to Rome, stabbed his sister with a sword, who was engaged to one of the Curiatii and dared to express her grief. To atone for the guilt of Horace, at the entrance to Rome, the Sister Bar (Sororum tigillum) was installed. R. Palmer rightly connects this custom with the period of domination of the curate system (Palmer, 1970, p. 137, 185). The altar of Janus Curiatius was placed near the sanctuary of Juno Sororia (Dionys. III. 22. 5). Very early his cult was united with that of Quirinus (Ianus Quirinus - Serv. Ad Aen. VII.610). In the Salian hymn, Janus is called "the god of the gods" and "the good creator" (Macrob. Sat. I. 9. 14-18). The inclusion of Janus in the formula for the declaration of war by the fetials along with Jupiter is characteristic (Liv. I. 32.6-7; 10).
So, in Rome there was a whole complex of rituals, ceremonies and religious taboos associated with the preparations of the community for annual military operations and rooted in the depths of primitiveness and tribalism. The whole life of a Roman was permeated with sacred norms, even when divine law (fas) began to be forced out of social and political practice by human law (ius). The Romans treated their military organization with immense awe and reverence, considering it not only as a guarantee of the power and prosperity of the civitas, but also as a divine institution under the close patronage of the gods and their direct guidance. Therefore, everything related to the structure, functioning and management of military
170
forces, acquired a bright religious coloration, and people acted not so much as creators of victories as executors of the higher will of the gods. Hence such an increased attention to the ritual side of the training of the army, its organization, maintaining discipline and conducting a military campaign.
Prepared by edition:
Tokmakov V.N.Army and state in Rome: from the era of the kings to the Punic Wars: tutorial/ V. N. Tokmakov. - M.: KDU, 2007. - 264 p.
ISBN 978-5-98227-147-1
© Tokmakov V.N., 2007
© Publishing house "KDU", 2007
Those who were selected for service in the foot army were divided into tribes. From each tribe, four people of approximately the same age and physique were selected, who appeared before the stands. First he chose the tribune of the first legion, then the second and third; the fourth legion got the rest. In the next group of four recruits, the first soldier of the tribune of the second legion was chosen, and the first legion took the last one. The procedure continued until 4,200 men were recruited for each legion. In the event of a dangerous situation, the number of soldiers could be increased to five thousand. It should be pointed out that in another place Polybius says that the legion consisted of four thousand foot soldiers and two hundred horsemen, and this number could increase to five thousand foot and three hundred horse legionnaires. It would be unfair to say that he contradicts himself - most likely these are approximate data.
The set was completed, and the newcomers took an oath. The tribunes chose one man who was to come forward and swear to obey their commanders and to the best of their ability to carry out their orders. Then everyone else also stepped forward and vowed to do the same as he ("Idem in me"). Then the tribunes indicated the place and date of the assembly for each legion, so that all were distributed to their squadrons.
While recruiting was taking place, the consuls sent orders to the allies, indicating the number of troops required from them, as well as the day and place of the meeting. Local magistrates recruited and swore them in - just as in Rome. Then they appointed a commander and treasurer and gave the order to march.
Upon arrival at the appointed place, the recruits were again divided into groups according to their wealth and age. In each legion, which consisted of four thousand two hundred people, the youngest and poorest became lightly armed warriors - velites. There were one thousand two hundred. Of the remaining three thousand, those that were younger formed the first line of heavy infantry - 1,200 hastati; those who were in their prime became principles, there were also 1,200 of them. The older ones formed the third line of battle order - the triarii (they were also called saws). They numbered 600 people, and no matter what size the legion was, there were always six hundred triarii. The number of people in other divisions could increase proportionally.
From each type of army (with the exception of the velites), the tribunes chose ten centurions, who, in turn, elected ten more people, who were also called centurions. The centurion chosen by the tribunes was the senior. The very first centurion of the legion (primus pilus) had the right to participate in the council of war along with the tribunes. Centurions were chosen based on their stamina and courage. Each centurion appointed himself an assistant (optio). Polybius calls them "hurricanes", equating them with the "closing line" of the Greek army.
The tribunes and centurions divided each type of army (hastati, principes and triarii) into ten detachments-maniples, which were numbered from one to ten. Velites were distributed equally among all maniples. The first maniple of the triarii was commanded by a primipilus, a senior centurion.
