The influence of the Roman army on the military

[FlorivsVirilis]

Salvete Omnes,

I came across a quote yestrday (I can't find it at the moment, but I will give the link when I do) stating that the Roman army has had the most out of any other ancient force upon the modern military's structure and professionalism. To what extent would you say that this is the case?

- Virilis/Lorenzo

[arklore70]

Well, I think you can certainly draw comparisons for sure, but I am not so certain you can directly link them.

For example, in the Modern U.S. Army, which I know a bit about, there is nothing I have that says we do this today because the Romans did it. The Modern U.S. Army traces it organization and roots back to the British, French and Germans(Prussians) to a lesser degree.

That said if you look at how say a Roman Army is organized, you do see similarities, such as it was a professional standing Army that did have a structured rank system, a retirement system of sorts, organized medical care, set expectations for behavior, a somewhat meritocracy in promotions and awards, disciplinary standards, recruitment standards, salaried wages, its own dreadful bureaucracy, a logistics infrastructure, and the breath and span of controls of units and sub units is strikingly similar.
R/

[john roberts]

I would think that at most you could say that the Roman concept of a permanent, standing professional army under central governmental command served as an inspiration for the modern military.
However, modern military organization and chain of command developed gradually beginning with the armies of the Reformation-era religious wars. Loose companies under ill-defined captains had been around forever, but in that period companies began to band together in regiments under colonels, and regiments into armies under generals. For the next 400 years organization progressed with the addition of battalions, brigades, divisions, corps and so forth and finally crowned with the concept of the general staff, with a direct chain of command going from the Marshal of the army right down to the lowliest private. The Romans had nothing like this.

[Gaius Colletti]

For the next 400 years organization progressed with the addition of battalions, brigades, divisions, corps and so forth and finally crowned with the concept of the general staff, with a direct chain of command going from the Marshal of the army right down to the lowliest private. The Romans had nothing like this.

So a Roman Legion (the size of a modern brigade) was not split up into a Centuria (a modern sized "company") or cohorts (a modern sized battalion), nor were there 8 man contubernium (modern squad)?. Further more, did the army not have a legatus and senior staff, did proconsuls, or consuls, or empererors have what would be a chain of command?

Were there not "Corps" like the legion, marines, auxillary, Praetorian Guard Frumentarii? Did the Roman's not have an army or navy?

Think again, the Roman's developed the first professional army that conquered lands across 3 continents, they were not just advanced for their time, they were simply advanced, period.

[JeffF]

All armies had a chain of command from bottom to top. The Romans were indeed formidable and the foremost military of their time but the concept of the army corps was not developed and perfected until the Napoleonic era and the concept of a professional general staff responsible for the development of strategy and guiding the war fighting efforts of a nation to achieve its national objectives was not created until just after the Napoleonic era. As great as the Roman military achievements were they had nothing like that that we know of.

[ValentinianVictrix]

Surely the fact that Vegetius was held in high reguard even upto the time of Napoleon suggests that the Romans did influence fairly modern armies. And its interesting that my original copy of Vegetius was printed in 1944 by the US army!

[spqr95]

Looking through the dictionary it seems all the military ranks were derived from Latin, though I admit, this is not really a direct influence of the Roman army. Military terms such as military, medic, defilade, enfilade, etc are also derived form latin.
Vincent

[Sean Manning]

Looking through the dictionary it seems all the military ranks were derived from Latin, though I admit, this is not really a direct influence of the Roman army. Military terms such as military, medic, defilade, enfilade, etc are also derived form latin.
Vincent

Checking a dictionary with etymologies is a good idea, but if you look more closely you will see that most of them entered English through French. This is because there was no existing jargon, and French culture was very prestigious at the time, so the English copied French words.

The Greeks, Macedonians, and Romans were a major influence on the development of modern armies, but so were many other things. The armies of 15th century Europe had a lot to contribute too.