Posts: 3,063
Threads: 218
Joined: Feb 2010
Reputation:
2
Hello Karolina - welcome to RAT!
I'm afraid I know very little about the Czech Army (and certainly even less post Glasnost!) but this thread may have some information you can use:
http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/17-roma...tml#315889
But the Roman Army changed and developed considerably from the Republic to the fifth centuries so you may have to limit which era of Roman Army you wish to compare and contrast with the Czech organisation.
Moi Watson
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Merlot in one hand, Cigar in the other; body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, what a ride!
Posts: 1,973
Threads: 40
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation:
101
You may find this old thread helpful, although the emphasis is more on how the Roman army and modern armies do not relate. Nevertheless, that may still be relevant to your essay.
http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/17-roma...ences.html
Michael King Macdona
And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)
Posts: 3
Threads: 1
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation:
0
Thanks for your anwers, everythink is helpful, I will check the links :wink:
Posts: 539
Threads: 18
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation:
8
The question is very generic and perhaps difficult to answer, especially if you're unfamiliar with military structures in general.
The Roman Army of antiquity, building upon the structures of its Greek forebears, however, is often cited as the basis for the organisation for modern military structures; in the main for two basic reasons: firstly that it is considered the first truly professional and permanent military force (post-Augustan period) established to act on, effectively, the global stage; and secondly that Vegetius was almost required reading for all military studies when the composition of military structures became once more of greater interest in the pre-Napoleonic era and after the use of the mercenary condotteri armies went out of fashion and nation-based permanent armies became the norm.
Military hierarchical organisations and unit structure now form part of modern management theory as well - the general concept that one man cannot manage/command more than 6-12 'subordinates'. The basic and lowest unit of the Roman Army, the contubernia of 8 men sharing their tent/mess, is thus the same size of a modern day section of 8 (the original standard in the early 20th Century) and still that of the British Army at least.
On that basis the platoon or company level is similar to the centuriae/turmae and the cohort/ala to a battalion (all normally consisting of similar troop types). It is not unreasonable to think of a Legion as a permanent Brigade structure (perhaps similar to a US or Soviet-era Regiment, which I suspect the Czech army may still follow, although I am not as familiar with it as I am others). However, indeed as many more modern translators and writers have used, it is certainly not unreasonable to consider the Legion + Auxiliaries, including Artillery & Engineers (and so 'All Arms') structure as similar to a modern Division.
All military structures are based upon common grounds of the weapons currently used and how they can be tactically deployed, as well as consideration of the necessary hierarchy and command needs at the Operational level.
In short - the Roman Army was first and studied by all 17C-20C military scholars and thus has proven the grounding for modern military structures; especially when a good deal of common sense and practicable results are applied. If you have access to the current Czech Army structures it would be relatively simple to suggest suitable corollaries, but do not forget to apply contextual linkage.
I hope that helps...
Posts: 29
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation:
0
I think the Czech may still follow the structure of the British and similar armed forces due to their participation in NATO.
Peter