The Republican Roman Army 2nd Century BC (Men-at-arms) [Illustrated] [Paperback]

Like almost all osprey books, this one is extraordinary; the archeological evidence is solid enough, the angus mcbride plates, altough not the best, are quite good and informative.

But after this favorable review why didn't I gave a 5 stars? Because Mr. Secunda is partial...He portrays the Romans like the "bad guys", he doesn't lie about what the romans did, but he forgets to mention that their foes were as vicious (sometimes worst) as the romans were.

All in all is a good book and I recommend it...

This is an `old-fashioned' Osprey - large text, excellent colour plates showing a wide variety of activities and equipment, but managing to show you the important stuff for painting toy soldiers - concentrating on the army but not its enemies.

The Contents are -
P03: Introduction
P04: Infantry Equipment
.The Roman shield; helmets; The cuirass; Greaves; The pilum; The Spanish sword (gladius).
P11: Organization of the Legions
.The levy; The legion; The cohort; The maniple; The century; The principales.
P18: tactics
.The velites; The hastate; The antesignani; The principes; The triarii.
P36: Other Arms
.Cavalry; Allied contingents.
P40: The Roman Legion in Battle
P42: Bibliography
P44: The Plates
P48: Index

The colour plates (pp25-32)
A: Roman Legionaries, Spain, Second Punic War, 218-201 BC. Hastatus, Triarius, Veles, standing `at attention', facing us, all wearing white tunics and with white shields, though with a `wolf's head' painted on the shield boss - which actually looks like Felix the Cat to me. The velite (`veles') has a fur cover to his helmet, which looks like an animal's head, but not a full wolfskin hanging down his back, as is often portrayed. The hastatus has a bronze pectoral plate for chest armour, while the triarius has a mail shirt in the Celtic style.
B: Cavalry, Thessaly, Second Macedonian War, 200-197 BC. This shows wo cavalrymen and one `veles' (wearing a badger on his head). Everyone in white tunics, one cavalryman appears to be armoured, each has a different shield type and helmet.
C: Roman Infantry, the Battle of Pydna, 168 BC. This shows a side view of the advancing Roman line meeting the Macedonian phalanx; white tunics and shields all round, the first line is wearing muscled cuirasses, the second wearing mail shirts, but it is not clear if the entire line is wearing the same type of armour, though the first line appears to be wearing a different helmet-type from the second.
D: Standard Bearers. This shows five figures, 1-4 of the four Urban Legions, with differing animals on each standard, and the 5th figure as a hastatii maniple's standard bearer. Everyone wears a bearskin, with the paws tied at neck and waist.
E: Mounted General in Wartime. This shows a general in red cloak and tunic, with two lectors in red and two scribes in white tunics.
F: Antesignani in combat with Acheaen Cavalry, Acheaen war, 146 BC. The Antesignani are the troops who fought in front of the standards - the velites and hastatii. This shows two unarmoured infantry (white tunics) armed with sword and round shield facing an unarmoured Acheaen cavalryman (red tunic), armed with spear, shield an helmet.
G: The army towards the end of the period. This shows a tribune, two infantrymen, and one cavalryman.
H: The Army during the Jugurthine War, 110-105 BC. This shows a centurion, a legionary and a cavalry officer.

There is a lot of `we don't really know' about the army of this period (hence the large font and large illustrations), but the author and artist manage to pack all they can into a small package.

Contentious points - "Another significant factor in Rome's victories was the brutality of her soldiery... Brutality and massacre were hallmarks of Roman methods of warfare, and the capture of a Greek city was normally followed by mass rape and massacre from which even the dogs were not spared." It was a dog's life in the Greek army. This view has been challenged by Eckstein in his Mediterranean Anarchy, Interstate War, and the Rise of Rome (Hellenistic Culture and Society), where he argues that Rome was not unique in her violence and brutality, but that ALL her neighbours were just as bad as each other. He sees Roman success as due to her manpower reserves, and our author here, in his final paragraph, comes to the same conclusion - "Perhaps the most important factor in Roman success was, however, her superiority in manpower. When Hannibal invaded Italy with less than 20,000 men, Polybius tells us that the Romans and their allies were capable of mustering, at least on paper, 700,000 foot and 70,000 horse. It was Rome's capability to mobilize such huge armies which defeated Macedon, rather than any innate superiority of the Roman military system. No matter how many armies the incompetence of Roman military commanders might lose, there was always a near-inexhaustible reservoir of manpower to draw on. The first years of the Third Macedonian War saw many Roman reverses, but these didn't matter; all that mattered was the last battle". (Note - that paragraph is also a direct quote from the author's Hellenistic Infantry Reform in the 160s BC (Studies in the Ancient and Medieval Art of Warfare)).

Not discussed here, or in any of the Ospreys on this period of Roman history, is the use of elephants by the Romans. They were significant in the defeat of the Macedonian phalanx at Pydna and Cynoscephalae.

Further reading:
Roman Battle Tactics 390110 BC (Elite)
Roman Centurions 75331 BC (Men-at-arms)
Early Roman Armies (Men-at-arms)
Early Roman Warrior 753321 BC
Roman Republican Legionary 298-105 BC (Warrior)

Mediterranean Anarchy, Interstate War, and the Rise of Rome (Hellenistic Culture and Society)
Andrea Palladio and the Architecture of Battle with the Unpublished Edition of Polybius' Histories
New Perspectives on Ancient Warfare (History of Warfare (Brill))

This book will help you to decide how to construct and paint wargames armies, as well as being a very reasonable source for historical study of the Roman Army in the Second Century BC (and slightly earlier). This is the Army that fought Hannibal and was later reformed under Marius.

The text is both readable and scholarly - no mean feat. Well done the author!

Why only 3 stars? Well, there is very little information on the detailed stuff we wargames really care about - things like shield colours and patterns of decoration. The reason is almost certainly because the information does not exist so no blame to the author.