Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 September 2012
That the close connection between military organization and state-organization has received little attention in this country is less to be wondered at, because this country is an exception to the rule. Being protected by its insular situation, it has had no need of a large standing army within its boundaries. On the Continent the connection appears clearly. Feudal organization was bound up with the art of fighting by knights, and was upset as much by the invention of guns and gunpowder as by economic development: monarchy was supported by mercenary armies, and the men who introduced compulsory service have more than others contributed to the founding of democracy.
But I leave it to others to judge modern history according to their own opinions, and turn to ancient history, which I know better and where the connection is more obvious, because warfare was an almost constant occupation in ancient states and military service a duty imposed upon the citizens.
page 1 note 2 See my paper, ‘Die Hoplitentaktik und das Staatswesen’ in Klio xxii, 1928, p. 270 ffGoogle Scholar. Because the Chigi vase is somewhat peculiar in style, it does not afford a good clue to the date; but the hoplite-phalanx appears on the Macmillan lekythos and the lekythos from Rhodes in Berlin, which is attributed to the first part of the seventh century B.C. by K. Friis Johansen, Les vases sicyoniennes (see p. 184 and pl. xxxi and xxxii). The lapse of time between this date and that here suggested for the introduction of hoplite-tactics at Rome—the forties of the fifth century B.C. —is only natural; for innovations in the art of fighting are only learnt from an enemy with whom a people is constantly warring—e.g. the Romans took over manipular tactics during the Samnite wars. There was no immediate contact between the Romans and the Greeks, and wars between Greeks and Etruscans were waged in Campania only when the Etruscans attempted to conquer that province. It may reasonably be suggested that the Etruscans learnt to know and took over the phalanx at this time, viz. the sixth century B.C. Thus the date here suggested for its introduction at Rome will appear to be reasonable. McCartney, E., ‘The Military Indebtedness of Rome to Etruria’ in Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, I, 1917, p. 156Google Scholar, refers the reform to ‘one of the Tarquins, whom we shall call Servius Tullius,’ but relies solely upon the traditional connection of the so-called Servian class-system with King Servius Tullius. That is obviously no good reason.
page 2 note 1 That the change came about gradually is justly remarked by Kromayer in Kromayer und Veith, Kriegführung der Griechen und Römer (Handbuch der Griechen und Römer (Handbuch der klass. Altertumswissenschaft, iv. Abt., 3. Teil, 2. Bd., p. 22.; cf. p. 28); but this of course, does not impair the sharp contrast in discipline.
page 2 note 2 Cf. the oath of the young Athenian citizens in Pollux viii, 105: οὐδ̕ ἐγκαταλείψ τὸν παραστάτην ᾧ ἄν στοιχῶ.
page 3 note 1 This paper owes much to Professor Ed. Meyer's illuminating article, ‘Das römische Manipularheer, seine Entwicklung und seine Vorstufen,’ first printed in the Abhandlungen der preuss. Akad. der Wiss., 1923, no. 3, and reprinted with additions in his Kleine Schriften ii, p. 193 seqq.; but the connection between the reform of the military organisation and the constitutional reform is made on my own responsibility.
page 3 note 2 Helbig, W., ‘Die Castores als Schutzgötter des römischen Equitatus’ in Hermes xl, 1905, p. 100Google Scholar; Zur Geschichte des römischen Equitatus in Abhandlungen der bayer. Akad. der Wiss., phil. hist. Klasse xxiii, no. 2, 1902.Google Scholar Cf. Kromayer and Veith, loc. cit., p. 235.
page 3 note 3 Ineditum Vaticanum iii; Hermes xxvii, 1892. Diodors römische Annalen, herausgeg. von A. B. Drachmann (Lietzmann's Kleine Texte no. 97), p. 67.
page 4 note 1 For a contrary view see Ed. Meyer, loc. cit., p. 261. n. 1.
page 4 note 2 Ed. Meyer, loc. cit., p. 272.
page 4 note 3 Diodorus xii, 64; Livy transferred to T. Manlius Torquatus in. 340 B.C. in Livy viii, 7—cf. Periocha 54.
page 4 note 4 I am not unaware of the chronological difficulties, but I share the opinion of prominent scholars of recent years that the fasti are better than they are generally supposed to be, and I do not consider an attempt to correct the conventional dates essential in this connection.
page 6 note 1 Accordingly I cannot accept the reasoning of A. Rosenberg, Untersuchungen zur römischen Zenturienverfassung, p. 23, who tries to show that the first class comprised really wealthy men. His use of modern statistics is more specious than sound.
page 6 note 2 Cf. Ed. Meyer, loc. cit., p. 270 and n. 3.
page 7 note 1 Especially by A. Rosenberg, loc. cit., p. 3 seqq.; cf. Ed. Meyer, loc. cit., p. 270, n. 1.
page 8 note 1 Diodorus xi, 53; Livy ii, 49 seqq.
page 8 note 2 K. J. Neumann, Die Grundherrschaft der röm. Republik, die Bauernbefreiung und die Entstehung der servianischen Verfassung, Akademische Rede, Strassburg, 1900; and in Weltgeschichte (herausgeg. von Pflugk-Hartung), I, 374 seqq.
page 9 note 1 Meyer, Ed. ‘Der Ursprung des Tribunats und die Gemeinde der vier Tribus,’ in Hermes xxi, 1895Google Scholar, 1 seqq; reprinted in his Kleine Schriften, i, 2nd ed., p. 333 seqq.
