In the long Roman history, the composition of the Roman army changed multiple times. In this blog, we dive into the army of the late kingdom and early Roman Republic up to the end of the 1st Punic War.
Roman Warfare in Indo-European Perspective
Roman society was deeply steeped in traditions of Proto-Indo-European origin. This remained clearly visible throughout Rome's entire history in Roman warfare culture. Here are a few examples:
Patron-Client Relations
The system of patrons and clients was fundamental to Roman society. Patrons, often the heads of powerful families, shared their wealth with less prosperous Romans (clients) in exchange for loyalty and political support. These patron-client relations were based on oath-bound reciprocity. The status of both patron and client depended on their wealth. So during the republic, the poor were often bribed with bread and money by patrons so they would vote for them in elections.
The entire Roman society was built on this system of reciprocity; most Romans were clients and most patrons were often themselves a client of an even wealthier patron. In the early Roman armies, this relationship probably also had a strong influence on someone's position. The relationship with the gods was also viewed in this way; that's why proper sacrifices were so important within Roman religion.
This important part of Roman culture finds its origin among the Proto-Indo-European steppe nomads. Thus, livestock could be lent by a wealthy herder to poor herders in exchange for a quid pro quo, often in the form of military support.
Connection Between Politics and Religion
In pagan Rome, statesmen (kings, consuls, and later emperors) were also the high priests of Roman religion. The Romans believed their empire's prosperity was directly connected to a good relationship between people and gods. The statesman was the greatest patron of society, which is why he was also best suited to be the greatest client to the gods.
In Proto-Indo-European societies, the head of the community also fulfilled both functions: in the Proto-Indo-European creation myth, the first priest was also the first king. In both cultures, the community's leader had as their most important task maintaining the cosmic order.
Citizenship
Citizenship in Roman times should not be confused with our modern concept of it. Roman citizens were not merely people born within the boundaries of the Empire, but a privileged class in society. Only citizens had legal personality and political rights. Citizenship was in most cases determined by someone's birth, and to become a citizen one had to meet certain obligations toward society. This often required a certain level of wealth.
Roman citizenship shows similarities with the Germanic and Celtic class system. This can be traced back to the Proto-Indo-European concept of a bride price. This system emerged from the tripartite class system, where citizenship corresponds with the warrior class. Initially, no distinction was made between the two.
The Ritualization of the Triumph and the Spolia Opima
After major Roman military victories, the general held a triumph through the city, where he offered the promised war booty to the gods (particularly Jupiter and Mars) but also shared it with the people. He did this by organizing large festivities at his own expense and distributing coins bearing his face, struck from captured precious metals.
This tradition finds its origin in the Indo-European Koryos ritual, where young warriors from the community were sent out to raid cattle from other tribes. This served to maintain the tribe's economy. The person who brought back the plunder was seen as a hero who had distributed wealth to the people. This encouraged other warriors to also go raid cattle and thus the tradition was maintained.
Alliances
Rome was known for its many alliances which it used very tactically, often as casus belli for wars of conquest. Initially, these were made with other peoples of the Italian peninsula and later throughout the entire empire. These alliances were an expression of oath-bound reciprocity and closely resembled the patron-client relations that Roman families had among themselves.
This practice also originates in Proto-Indo-European culture. Allies who shared in the plunder participated in the cosmic order. Allies who failed to keep their agreements or committed treason had to be destroyed according to this worldview, because they created chaos.
Reincarnation
The Romans indirectly believed in reincarnation. According to Roman religion, the soul was immortal, but where it ended up after death depended on someone's deeds in life and the way they died. That's why a strong performance culture existed, and like in Old-Norse culture, there was a preference for death on the battlefield. Someone who died in battle went to the beautiful Elysian fields, while someone who died naturally went to the Asphodel fields. The fact that Romans associated the afterlife with open fields points to their origins as steppe herders.
The Symbolic Role of Spears
The spear had important symbolic meaning for the Romans; it was the weapon of the god of war Mars. Among other things, the fetiales threw a blood-stained hasta into enemy territory to declare war. Also, a blunt spear (hasta pura) was awarded as a military decoration to experienced centurions (primipilus).
Spears had meaning beyond warfare; the celibaris-hasta was traditionally used to cut off a bride's hair. In trade and law, a spear often marked the beginning of transactions (subhastationes) or was present at court (hasta centumviralis).
The Ceremonial Status of the Military Belt
Even the belt of a warrior or legionary had ceremonial meaning: it symbolized the bond of the warrior class. This practice wasn't unique to the Romans, as seen with the Celtic Hochdorf warrior from 600 BCE. Both peoples trace the origin of this tradition to their steppe ancestors; Proto-Indo-European military belts are prominently depicted on Kurgan stelae from 3,500 BCE.
The Early Roman Army (752 -578 BCE)
Until about 550 BCE, there was no organized Roman army. Instead, war bands, formed by different clans, went into battle together. These groups maintained relations with each other, based on oath-bound reciprocity. Thus, military strength could be pooled and joint raiding expeditions organized.
It's likely that the Romans also had a strong warrior culture, because the Italic peoples had Indo-European origins in the iron Age. War and plunder between tribes were a permanent part of society and were periodically organized between clans. For warriors, this was a way to gain wealth and social status. In these small wars, individual heroic deeds were greatly emphasized, comparable to the warrior culture described in Homer's Iliad & Odyssey.
Etruscan Hoplite Armies (578 – 315 BCE)
The Etruscans and Romans were strongly influenced by the Greek trading colonies established on the Italian peninsula. The aristocracy loved Greek luxury products and the reciprocal flow of money. Through this connection, Rome began to model itself after the form of a Greek city-state.
Around 550 BCE, during the period traditionally attributed to the reign of king Servius Tullius, it appears a draft was introduced requiring men with citizen status to participate as hoplites in the phalanx. This must have been a major social transition from individually achievement-oriented warriors to a cooperating whole in phalanx formation. In this army, alongside citizen-soldiers, there were probably no professional military personnel. Besides hoplites, this army consisted of spear-throwers, rorarii (later velites) who mainly consisted of younger men with citizen status who still had to build wealth. Finally, there was a small contingent of cavalry, made up of the city's richest elite.
After the kings were replaced around 500 BCE by two annually elected consuls, the participation requirement for citizens in the army remained. The army was divided between the consuls, with each consul commanding one legion. It's likely this king was overthrown in a coup by the aristocracy, who wanted to give Rome's governance a more Greek political character. These aristocrats wanted to keep the city-state's power in their own hands and not share it with the people, so we shouldn't think the start of the Roman Republic ushered in a period of democracy.
Roman democracy was different from today. The lower classes in society had barely any influence with their votes. For political matters, they depended on their patron, with whom they maintained a client-patron relationship. These relationships were based on cosmic reciprocity and came with obligations. The more clients a patron had, the more prestige and political influence he could exercise. At the same time, it was a disgrace for a patron to let his clients live in poverty. He protected them in case of legal disputes and functioned as a bank. This client-patron relationship was voluntary and both parties could end the cooperation.
Armament and Warfare
Based on Etruscan depictions, it's assumed that early Roman infantry formed the Greek model and mainly consisted of heavily armed hoplites. These hoplites wore bronze helmets, a linothorax or muscle cuirass and greaves, used a large circular shield (hoplon or aspis) and were armed with a spear (dory) and secondarily a sword (xiphos). They fought in a phalanx formation eight or more rows deep, which with a concentrated attack could break through the enemy line. The early Romans fought in a tight formation that required extensive training, as maintaining the phalanx was crucial for success.
During major conflicts, the Romans fought in their basic unit, the centuria of 100 men. Additionally, the forces remained divided
