The Roman Army: A Social and Institutional History - Karatunov.net

20
The Roman A rmy
freedom and independence in the 170s and 160s bc, which Rome had guaranteed
, but then found that she could guara n tee it on ly by outri ght annex a ti on
and direct administration. There is no certain evidence as to the date of Polybius’s
birth, perhaps at the end of the third century bc, or the beginning of the
second. His home was Megalopolis in Arcadia, part of the Achaean League in
which his father played an important political role. Polybius was probably destined
for a political career and may have already written works of history when
he came into contact with Rome after the battle of Pydna in 168 bc. This battle
was the culmination of Rome’s third war with Macedon, and the victory signified
the end of autonomy not only of Macedon, but of all the Greek states. Anti-
Romans began to make some efforts to resist, but it was too late. The Romans
made a point of rewarding those who were well disposed to them, and they were
powerful enough to punish those who obstructed them. One method they used
to ensure cooperation was to remove the leading men and important individuals
of an area and take them to Rome, where they were in effect held as hostages.
Po lybius was among the thousand men taken from the Ach ae a n s . He was
lodged at the house of the Scipio family, where he became a close friend of their
adopted son, Scipio Aemilianus, the natural son of the victor of Pydna, Aemilius
Paullus.
Polybius has been accused of a strong bias in favor of the Scipio family. Although
he did overemphasize the military exploits and political prominence of
the Scipios, it cannot be denied that this family did play a very large part during
the Punic Wa rs , and Po lybiu s’s saving grace is that his work is sti ll the be s t
source we have for the Republican army, which he saw firsthand. He accompanied
Scipio Aemilianus on his military service in Spain in 151 bc and may have
been among Scipio’s en to u ra ge at the siege of Nu m a n tia nearly two dec ade s
later. Thus, he was better qualified than most to write about the Roman army.
He used older sources, some of which he acknowledged, and he weighed the evi
den ce pre s en ted by the va rious aut h ors , occ a s i on a lly pausing to ex press his
opinion that certain well-worn theories were rubbish, and then going on to give
his own considered version. He was not an active serving soldier, but he was far
f rom being an arm chair historian—he made a point of traveling thro u gh the
Alps in order to find out what it was like for Hannibal when he crossed with his
army and his famous elephants.
In chapters nineteen to forty-two in the sixth book of his Histories, Polybius
describes in minute detail how the army was assembled, how the officers were
a ppoi n ted , h ow the men were arm ed , h ow the military camps were laid out ,
how the watch was kept, the nature of offenses, punishments, training, decorations
and awards, and how the Romans struck camp and organized the march.
Wri ting in Greek for a Greek audien ce , Po lybius devo ted great atten ti on to
those aspects of the Roman army that he thought his readers would not immediately
understand, so it is usually assumed that the things he did not describe