+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Roman camp building (/showthread.php?tid=27319)
Roman camp building - Vuk - 06-15-2016
Hello guys,
pretty straight-forward questions : did the roman army during the late republic build fortified camps on every spot they would stop for the night ? And did they still build them when in "friendly territory" ? For instance on the 10th of january 49 bc, just before the 10th legion (is it the 10th ?) crossed the Rubicon, did they construct a fortified camp ?
Thanks,
Vuk
RE: Roman camp building - Nathan Ross - 06-16-2016
(06-15-2016, 10:34 PM)Vuk Wrote: before the 10th legion (is it the 10th ?) crossed the Rubicon, did they construct a fortified camp ?
It was the 13th legion that crossed the Rubicon with Caesar.
I've often wondered about the fortified camps myself. Cisalpine Gaul (north of the Rubicon) was not part of Italy at this point; it was a province, which is why Caesar could legally keep his troops there. So would it be 'friendly territory' or not?
My guess would be that a regular camp would be established - you'd need somewhere to put c.5000 men, unless you were billeting them on the locals - and a camp would need a perimeter, tent lines etc. I suspect that the camp would not be fortified as strongly as it might be in enemy territory, but a commander would want to keep his men in practice!
RE: Roman camp building - Renatus - 06-16-2016
I suspect that the purpose of the camp was as much to keep the men in as to keep anyone else out.
RE: Roman camp building - Vuk - 06-16-2016
(06-16-2016, 11:39 AM)Nathan Ross Wrote:(06-15-2016, 10:34 PM)Vuk Wrote: before the 10th legion (is it the 10th ?) crossed the Rubicon, did they construct a fortified camp ?
I've often wondered about the fortified camps myself. Cisalpine Gaul (north of the Rubicon) was not part of Italy at this point; it was a province, which is why Caesar could legally keep his troops there. So would it be 'friendly territory' or not?
My guess would be that a regular camp would be established - you'd need somewhere to put c.5000 men, unless you were billeting them on the locals - and a camp would need a perimeter, tent lines etc. I suspect that the camp would not be fortified as strongly as it might be in enemy territory, but a commander would want to keep his men in practice!
Thanks for your answer. Its sounds reasonable.
RE: Roman camp building - MonsGraupius - 08-08-2016
(06-15-2016, 10:34 PM)Vuk Wrote: Hello guys,
pretty straight-forward questions : did the roman army during the late republic build fortified camps on every spot they would stop for the night ? And did they still build them when in "friendly territory" ? For instance on the 10th of january 49 bc, just before the 10th legion (is it the 10th ?) crossed the Rubicon, did they construct a fortified camp ?
Thanks,
Vuk
Having studied the subject at length all I can really say with any certainty is that we don't know. However, it is possible to trace some lines of camps, and what is often intriguing is that they do not appear to start or end where expected. This may be because the "usual" starting places are now heavily populated areas where all traces of early camps have been obliterated by medieval ploughing and later housing - or it may be because there were no camps, but another possibility is that the form of camp changed to one that didn't leave any archaeological traces (i.e. no ditch).
However, perhaps as intriguing is what happened to the "occupants" of any site. After all, the roman legion moving around was a bit like a giant with huge feet hundreds of meters across - and any tree, animal or human caught under that foot would be annihilated (or at least have their property wrecked). That might be acceptable in enemy territory, but imagine finding enough space to put a camp without destroying homes in a friendly territory!