FOE Preview Two
Contents
Introduction
The Roman Government System
Roman Units Preview
Romans in Battle
Introduction
Welcome to the second FOE preview. This edition looks at all things Roman, and amongst the goodies, we are outlining the new form of Roman Governmental System that is being introduced in the FOE campaign. A system that we feel not only closer reflects the reality of the day but also injects new challenges into the game. FOE Preview Two also includes a look at rendered images of the new Roman units, which you will be using (or facing!) in battle, and some screen shots of them in action.
The Roman Government System
Roman government is notoriously difficult to simulate. The way in which Rome dealt with its friends and enemies is virtually unique in antiquity. Many cities retained a semblance of independence whilst being under the control of the senate in matters of foreign policy. So how does a region retain independence and yet still be a part of your empire?
The team felt the current system was just not realistic enough and after much debating and consultation with roman historians we now present our system which we hope will provide you with more of a challenge of how to control your empire as it expands.
The government tree replaces the barracks in so much as the choice of building will determine the units available for recruitment. It will also influence the happiness of your citizen subjects as well as other things that we will leave you to discover.
Finally, the full tree won’t be available in every region. In order to preserve some historical accuracy and traditional usage, the buildings available in the government tree will vary from region to region. This will not be the final version of this system either, there are plans for further enhancements as and when future campaigns are released.
deditio in fidem populi Romani
(literally ‘handing themselves over to the faith of the Roman people’)
This building represents the site of a community’s formal and unconditional surrender into the good faith of the Roman people. Its construction is a mandatory precursor for the construction of any other government building and provides an immediate law bonus.
Many or most of Rome’s subjects come under her sway, not always after defeat, by deditio in fidem populi Romani (literally ‘handing themselves over to the faith of the Roman people’), a form of unconditional surrender in which the very helplessness of the surrendered party is supposed to oblige the victor to exercise moderation.
The surrender is made to the bearer of imperium on the spot who also determines the conditions that apply. The deditio typically specifies the handing over of settlement, fields, water, boundaries, temples and sacred vessels; divina humanaque omnia or all things human and divine (Livy 1.38, Polybius 29.9.10-10.9, 36.4.1-4). Indemnities or taxes might also be imposed and the extraction of hostages is a typical feature of the deditio (Livy 36.39.3, 30.37.6; Polybius 21.32.10, 21.42.22; Caesar De Bello Gallico 6.3.2). These hostages help to ensure that the specified conditions are met as well as helping Rome to cultivate politically valuable allies among those taken.
Rome regularly restores to the dediticii their cities and lands, often declaring them amici or friends and sometimes concluding treaties which invariably require the provision of military contingents upon demand (Polybius 6.21.4). In practice Rome often prefers to allow the dediticii to manage their own affairs without direct intervention or supervision.
Features
Build time - 1 turn
Build Cost - low
Recruitment - none
Law - 5%
Culture - 5%
Buildable anywhere by roman republic
civitas sociorum
This building represents the self governing Latin and Italian states as well as the Latin colonies. A civitas sociorum government building is required to allow the recruitment of infantry and cavalry units for the allied wings of a Roman field army. Its construction also brings cultural and happiness bonuses for the community. However any attempt at direct Roman rule is likely to cause significant unrest amongst the population and jeopardise the benefits conferred by civitas sociorum status.
A major landmark for Roman territorial expansion in Italy is reached with victory in the Bellum Latinum (Livy 8.2 - 8.13). The resultant dissolution of the Latin League in 338 BCE heralds the application of the political principles that come to underpin the later Roman hegemony (Livy 8.14). The emerging Roman Commonwealth, largely forged during the next seventy- five years in a series of bloody campaigns against the Bruttians, the Etruscans, the Lucanians, the Picentes, the Sabines, the Samnites and the Umbrians etc, is a variegated patchwork of communities with different rights and obligations that can be broadly divided into three categories: the cives Romani (optimo iure or sine suffagio- with or without suffrage), the socii nominis Latini (Allies of the Latin Name) and the socii Italici (Italian Allies).
The minority of Latin cities not directly incorporated into the Roman state, such as Praeneste and Tibur, continue to exist as sovereign communities. However Latin status is now no longer principally ethnogeographic but is rather juridical; defined by mutual privileges with Rome such as conubium (marriage) and commercium (commerce).
Roman annexation of new lands is accompanied by an intensified programme of colonization, with the majority of Latins now living in Coloniae Latinae established outside of Latium itsef. These colonies play an important strategic and political role, holding down conquered territory and providing a strong bulwark against enemy incursions. Coloniae Latinae are also powerful factors in the process of Romanization. Many of the settlers, perhaps the greater part, are cives Romani who, attracted by generous land grants, chose to give up their citizenship (Livy 9.26.4, 34.42.5-6, 42.4.3-4; Cicero Pro Caecina 98 )
The condition of the socii Italici varies according to the manner in which they come to acknowledge the Roman imperium and the nature of the resulting foedus or treaty (Livy 9.20.4 and 8, 9.41.20, 9.45.18, 28.45.20). The use of the foedus aequum and more commonly the foedus iniquum – the treaty between equals, and the treaty between unequal partners - unites the independent states of Italy under the leadership of the Roman Republic; although exceptionally the use of indutiae (truces) seems to have governed relations with the Etrurian states (Livy 4.35.3, 5.27.6 and 15, 7.20.8, 7.22.5 9.37.12, 10.37.4 and 10.46.12).
The Italian civitates foederatae (allied states) stand further off from the Roman Republic than the socii nominis Latini but similarly enjoy the freedom to manage their own affairs; whilst some may have enjoyed at conubium, and possibly commercium as well (Diodorus 37.15.2; Livy 35.7.5).
The most important obligation of the socii nominis Latini and socii Italici is to provide the Republic with military contingents to help fight its wars. The number of troops required is determined by the consuls according to the numbers recorded on the formula togatorum (‘the list of those who wear the toga’) (Livy 22.57.10: 27.10.3, 34.65.6; Polybius 2.23.9 and 6.21.4). On campaign the allied forces are divided into two wings (Livy 31.21 and 35.5.1) with the infantry divided into cohorts and the cavalry into turmae (Livy 28.45.20, 23.17.8, 23.17.11, and 30.41.5)
The status of the allies remain unchanged until political unrest amongst the socii, caused by an increasingly exploitative system that allows Rome to accrue disproportionate benefits during the transmarine expansion of the second century, explodes into open warfare in 91 BCE. The Bellum Marsicum causes the Republic to usher in two enabling laws, the lex Julia and the lex P. Papira, enfranchising loyal Latin and Italian communities in order to reduce the number of potential insurgents (Cicero Pro Balbus 21, Cicero Pro Archia 7, Sisenna fragment 119, Appian Bello Civili 1.49, Velleius, 2.16.4). The final enfranchisement of all the Italian peoples is delayed by a violent dispute about tribal distribution but is likely to have occurred in either 87 or 84 BCE (Livy Per. 80 and 84; Licinianus 21). What is certain is that by 84 there are no more references to enfranchisement and that therefore the states of Italy must all hold the status of civitas Romana.
Features
Build time - 8 turns
Build Cost - low
Recruitment - full AOR
Happiness - 5%
Culture - 10%
Buildable only in Latin settlements
civitas sine suffragio
This building represents the self-governing municipia (towns) of unfranchised Roman citizens in Italy. A civitas sine suffragio government building is required to allow the recruitment of citizen infantry for the legions. Its construction also brings cultural and law bonuses. However sine suffragio is accompanied by latent unhappiness reflecting popular discontent with ‘second class’ citizenship.
The term civitas refers to the citizen body of an individual state, implying a political community that is both sovereign and independent. At the heart of the Roman political orbit are the cives Romani, those possessing the full public and private rights of citizenship. The early military expansion of the Republic is accompanied by the direct incorporation of defeated states, such Tusculum in 381 BCE (Livy 6.26.8, 6.33.6, 6.36.2, 8.14.4; Dionysius of Halicarnassus 14. 6, Plutarch Camillus 38.5). However this apparent generosity in reality marks the political annihilation of independent political communities, allowing the Republic to increase its manpower pool.
Early grants of citizenship are likely to have been optimo iure (with suffrage), although Tusculum did retain the right of internal self-governance and can therefore be considered the first municipium (Cicero Pro Plancio 19). Following the Bellum Latinum, the political settlement of 338 BCE provides for the extension of civitas optimo iure to Lanuvium, Aricia, Nomentum and Pedum (Livy 8.14.2-3), and also probably for Velitrae and Antium despite punitive action by Rome (Livy 8.14.5 – although Livy mistakenly refers to the Veliternians as already holding Roman citizenship; 8.14.8 )
However a striking new innovation is applied to those communities lying outside the boundaries of Latium Vetus, the imposition of civitas sine suffragio or citizenship without suffrage. The initial recipients are the Campanian cities of Capua, Suessula and Cumae and the Volscian towns of Fundi and Formiae (Livy 8.14.10), to which Acerrae is added in 332 BCE (Livy 8.17.12) and Privernum in 329 BCE (Livy 8.21.10)
The cives sine suffragio are liable to all the burdens and obligations of full citizens – especially military service in the legions (Festus 126) – but posses no political rights. They cannot stand for office or vote in the popular assemblies. Instead they retain their local institutions, becoming self-governing muncipia. They do however enjoy the private rights of citizenship, including conubium (marriage) and commercium (commerce).
Some sources suggest sine suffragio military forces, in particular the Campanian horse and foot, fought in separate ethnic contingents (Dionysius of Halicarnassus 20.1.2, Livy 10.26.14, 23.4.8, Lyv Per. 15). It is conjectured that linguistic differences may have made it initially more practical for sine suffragio trrops to serve in their own distinct units. Cumae, for example, did not use Latin officially until 180 BCE (Livy 40.32.13). Apart from the direct testimony of Festus, the main evidence suggesting sine suffragio troops regularly serve in the legions by the time of the Hannibalic war is the fact that the ratio between citizen and allied troops is approximately equal (Polybius 3. 107.12, 6.26.7, 6.30.2). This ratio would be highly unlikely if sine suffragio contingents serve in the socii alae. Moreover Polybius, doubtless using Roman census returns, explicity conflates Roman and Campanian numbers (Polybius 2.24.14)
Detailed information about the administration of sine suffragio communities and the attitude of the local population is lacking. It is possible the earliest recipients may regard grants of civitas sine suffragio as a privilege although full local autonomy is highly valued and Roman citizenship, certainly prior to the second century BCE, is often viewed as a gross imposition and is greatly resented. The willingness of the Aequi to go to war in 304 BCE is evidence of such an attitude (Livy 9.45)
The concept of civitas sine suffragio is adapted to changing circumstances during the period of Roman expansion between 338 – 268 BCE, but is invariably connected to defeat in war and is used as an instrument of Roman aggression. In areas where there are no special traditions of local autonomy, or where the population is insufficiently Latinized, the civitas sine suffagio is accompanied by more direct Roman influence in local affairs.
Use of civitas sine suffragio grants are not attested after the first half of the third century BCE and the question of when existing communities are enfranchised remains unresolved. The sources only record three instances of upgrading: the Sabines in 268 (Velleius 1.14.5), the Campanian equites (Livy 23.5.9) and the Volscian muncipia of Fundi, Formiae and Arpinum in 188 (Livy 38.36.7-9). Some authorities (P A Brunt: Italian Aims at the Time of the Social War) believe the civitates sine suffragio are progressively eliminated prior to the outbreak of the Bellum Marsicum in 91 BCE, whilst others (A.N. Sherwin-White: The Roman Citizenship) argue that at least some survived until the universal enfranchisement of all the Latin and Italian peoples ((Livy Per. 80 and 84; Licinianus 21). No definitive conclusions can be drawn.
Features
Build time - 12 turns
Build Cost - medium
Recruitment - limited Faction
Happiness - 5%
Law - 10%
Culture - 15%
Buildable only in Latin settlements
imperium populi Romani
This building represents the power and domination of the Roman people and the requirement for the local population to acknowledge it. The presence of this government building marks the assertion of the commander’s imperium in his provincia. Its construction will result in localized unhappiness but will generate other bonuses, such as cultural or financial, and will also allow the recruitment of a limited number of AOR troops.
The phrase imperium populi Romani means fundamentally the "sway" or "supremacy" of the Roman people over other states. Those defeated in war, or otherwise rendered deditii (surrendered), are obliged to acknowledge and obey the dominion of the Roman people (Livy38.11.2; Polybius 3.4.3, 21.32.2) which is exercised through the power (imperium) of the commander on the spot.
The determination of areas of responsibility (provincia) and of power (imperium) is designated by the Senatus Populusque Romanus (Livy 5.52.16, 26.18-19, 29.13.7, 30.1.1-2, 31.50.10, 32.27.6, 32.28.11, 43.12.1). However in practice decisions as to who should command which troops and where and how they should fight are often subject to ad hoc arrangements that are resolved in theatre (Livy 34.19.3, 39.30.1)
There is no good evidence that the period of expansion presaged by the bellum Hannibalicum results in the formal and immediate "annexation" "creation" or "organization” of overseas provinciae. The Roman aim during the second century is one of exacting obedience, compelling other peoples to obey orders, rather than strictly enforcing geographical areas of control. Providing the local communities acknowledge the imperium populi Romani they are left a considerable degree of freedom or self-regulation.
For example following Scipio’s victory at Ilipa in 206 BCE the senate announces that a regular series of annual magistrates will be sent to keep the peace in Spain (Appian 38.152) and in 197 it instructs the praetors to determine the boundaries of their provinciae (Livy 32.28.11). However there is no systematic organization of relationships with local communities. Military concerns in the strategically important Spanish provinciae are paramount and the apparatus of ‘provincial administration’ flows gradually and insensibly out of these.
Similarly the establishment of a permanent Roman presence in Macedonia after the defeat of Philip ‘Andriscus’(Livy Periochae 44, 45) is unlikely to evolve because of any desire for territorial annexation and direct rule. It is rather more probable that the decision to assign regular commanders is motivated by a need to defend the Macedonian frontier from hostile incursions by tribes such the Scordistae (Livy Periochae 54, 56), thereby maintaining the imperium populi Romani in the region. Accordingly the Roman hegemony prevails in Greece with no need of a permanent Roman presence or its regular assignment as a provincia until 27 BCE (Plutarch Cimon 2.1-2)
The administrative and judicial functions of Roman commanders in their provinciae develop over a long period of time, often evolving from essentially military origins. Whilst a lex provinciae (provincial statute) might be decreed for some provinces, perhaps defining specific jurisdictional limits, the surviving details are limited and in no way suggest the whole scale or uniform juridical arranging of individual provinciae (Cicero In Verrem 2.2.32; 2.2.34; 2.2.37; 2.2.38; 2.2.40; 2.2.42; Pliny Epistulae 10.79; 112, 114,, 115). Likewise the work of the senatorial commissions that are attested assisting the commander order affairs in newly assigned provinciae are not directly formulating or implementing a policy of annexation (Livy 45.17.1, Strabo 14.1.38 ).
During the main period of Roman expansion it is potentially misleading to conceive of imperium and provincia as having a predetermined spatial extent. Rather the senate and the people of Rome are more concerned with the perseverance and enhancement of Rome’s power and supremacy – the imperium populi Romani
Features
Build time - 12 turns
Build Cost - high
Recruitment - limited AOR
Happiness -5%
Law - 5%
Income - 15%
Culture 5%
Not available in Latin settlements
civitas Foederata
Free & Allied City or Allied Community
This building represents a privileged community granted a treaty of alliance with Rome. The construction of a civitas foederata building will produce a range of bonuses including happiness and culture. In addition its presence will allow full access to AOR units. However local autonomy and self-government is important to this community and the presence of a Roman commander or troops will produce significant unrest.
The establishment of Roman supremacy in Italy results in the regularisation of relations with the defeated Italian states by use of the foedus aequum and more commonly the foedus iniquum - the treaty between equals, and the treaty between unequal partners (Livy 9.20.4 and 8, 9.41.20, 9.45.18, 28.45.20). The rights and obligations a civitas foederata are detailed in the foedus, which is ratified by the Senatus Populusque Romanus and engraved on bronze tablets (Livy 2.33.9), displayed either in public (Cicero Pro Balbus 53) or kept in temples or other public buildings (Livy 4.7.12)
However early relations with overseas communities lack clear legal definition and connections appear to be based more on the informal ties of amicitia (friendship). Despite some unreliable testimony about an ancient foedus aequum (Justin 43.5.3, 43.5.10) it is likely Massilia originally falls into this category since there is no firm evidence of any legal treaty existing during the Hannibalic War (Livy 21.20.8, 34.9.10; Polybius 3.95.7). An inscription from Lampsacus (Syll 591 lines 53-54) dating to 196 BCE suggests the subsequent ratification of a foedus, which Pliny plainly believes to be the case (Pliny Natural History 3.5.4). However other sources continue to indicate looser ties of friendship (Strabo 4.1.5; Livy 34.9.10; Florus 1.37.3; Orosius 5.15.25).
Similar uncertain provenance is attested for the status of Saguntum, which places itself under the fides (protection) of Rome sometime before the Bellum Hannibalicum without there being clear evidence of a treaty (Polybius 3.30.1; Livy 28.39.1-22); whilst it appears the original treaty with Gades, made when the city surrenders in 206 BCE, is no more than a military convenience. A foedus is only legally ratified by the Senatus Populesque Romanus in 78 BCE (Livy 32.2.5; Cicero Pro Balbo 34)
Informal connections based on amicitia (friendship) dominate Rome’s early relationships with the states of the Hellenistic east. Military cooperation, with or without foedus, makes the partner an amicus (friend) and even former enemies defeated in war can be described as allies (socii), friends (amici) or allies and friends (socii et amici) (Polybius 21.42.1; Livy 43.6.5-10; Appian Mithridatica 61; lex Acilia de repetundis line 1)
Rome’s first allies in mainland Greece are the members of the Aetolian League (Livy 26.24.8-13) but after making common cause with Antiochus III, they are compelled in 189 BCE to accept a treaty as subject allies of Rome (Polybius 21.32.2-4; Livy 38.11.2-3). The Achaean League concludes a foedus with Rome in the late 190s or early 180s (Polybius 18.42.6-7, 23.4.12; Livy 35.50.1-2, 39.37.10) but total defeat in the Bellum Achaicum results in the sacking of Corinth and the landmark settlement of 146 BCE (Polybius 39.3, 39.5, 39.6; Cicero In Verrem 2.1.55; Pausanias 7.16.9-10). However the Roman hegemony in Greece prevails with no need of a permanent Roman presence or its regular assignment as a provincia until 27 BCE (Plutarch Cimon 2.1-2;Dio 53.12.4; Strabo 17.3.25)
During the period following L. Mummius' settlement of Greece attested treaties of alliance in the east are restricted to minor Hellenistic states, who view a foedus as something more tangible and flattering than mere enrolment on the formula amicorum (Sherk 16B 25-26; Inscriptiones Graecae IV 1.63). However Rome has little real interest in using treaties of alliance as a foundation for its eastern hegemony and the indulgence of these states merely affirms the consolidation of the imperium populi Romani.
In the west military commanders regularly conclude treaties on the spot which are not formally ratified by the senate and the people. (Livy 27.7.2, 28.24.4; Polybius 10.38.5; Appian Iberike 43). In Spain Phoenician coastal cities and tribal leaders alike are referred to using the legally imprecise terms 'socii' and 'amici', suggesting many states reside somewhere between civitas libera and civitas foederata status. In a later period, when the subjugation of the Spanish peoples is complete, of the 399 towns enumerated in the provinciae only 4 are civitates foederatae (Pliny Natural History 3.6-30, 4.113-18 ).
Civitates foederatae generally enjoy a high level of autonomy, with their civic and judicial institutions remaining intact and protected from the arbitrary jurisdiction of the Roman commander. Localised patterns of taxation continue and typically there is no requirement to pay tribute to Rome. (Cicero In Verrem 2.3.13). In return the community is expected to furnish the Roman commander with supplies of manpower and other material support during military operations in the region (Livy 28.13.3, Periochae 50; Appian Mithridatica 19, 30; Iberike 44).
By the period of the late Republic the status of the civitates foederatae is reduced to a subordinate position with Rome favouring the greater malleabilty of the liberae. The resultant broad conflation illustrates the now nominal freedom of both communities. However the more efficient provincial command structure of the Principate leads to a growing realisation among civic leaders that a lessening of control over their own affairs will be off-set by the material benefits of the imperium Romanum. Citizenship rather than foedus is now the ultimate privilege
Features
Build time - 8 turns
Build Cost - medium
Recruitment - full AOR
Happiness - 10%
Law - 25%
Culture 5%
Not Available in Latin Settlements
civitas Libera
This building represents a free and self-governing community. The construction of a civitas libera building will produce a range of bonuses including happiness and culture. The building is cheap to build and maintain, but will only allow limited access to AOR units. Local autonomy is important to this community and the presence of a Roman commander or troops will produce significant unrest.
The widespread recognition of civitates liberae enables Rome to secure the political control of large areas of the Hellenistic world without alienating relations with the local elites or requiring the cumbersome apparatus of direct rule. Individual civitates liberae generally enjoy a high level of autonomy, with their civic institutions remaining untouched. An associated immunity from tribute is well attested but by the period of the late Republic immunitas is not the norm (Cicero In Verrem 2.3.13). In particular the arrangements made by L. Cornelius Sulla in Asia and Greece after the first Bellum Mithridaticum appear to have increased the number of cities liable to tribute as well as providing for punitive war indemnities (Appian Mthridatica 61, 62, Bella Civilia 1.102, Plutarch Sulla 25.2)
Outside of the Hellenistic world the political importance attached to the concept of libertas is less pronounced. Nevertheless Rome recognises the benefits of granting communities libera status rather than agreeing to the ostensibly less flexible conditions of a mutual foedus (treaty). Hence in addition to the civitates liberae of Sicily, the African cities which support Rome during the third Bellum Punicum also have their freedom acknowledged; although in Spain, where freedom has less propaganda value, civitates liberae remain rare (lex agraria lines 7, 79, 81; Pliny Natural History 3.7, 5.25; Festus Breviarium 4; Appian Punica 135.639-41)
The eventual conflation of the civitates liberae with the civitates foederatae (states with a treaty) illustrates the nominal and conditional freedom of both types of privileged communities during the late Republic. However the more efficient provincial command structure of the Principate leads to a growing realisation among civic leaders that a lessening of control over their own affairs will be off-set by the material benefits of the imperium Romanum. Citizenship rather than independence is now the ultimate privilege.
Features
Build time - 6 turns
Build Cost - low
Recruitment - limited AOR
Happiness - 5%
Culture - 10%
Not available in Latin settlements
civitas Stipendiaria
This government building represents the non-privileged tributary paying states scattered throughout the Roman hegemony. The construction of a civitas stipendiaria building will produce a range of bonuses, including a significant boost to local income. In addition its presence will allow access to an increased number of AOR units. However civitas stipendiaria status will also give rise to measurable unhappiness amongst the indigenous population.
In the same way the provincia is not originally seen as a territorial space the population is not considered as a homogenous unit. The inhabitants are either Roman citizens (cives Romani) or non-citizens (peregrini). Some of the latter might be described as allies (socii), friends (amici) or allies and friends (socii et amici), regardless of whether there is any treaty (foedus), but all are under the sway of the Roman people (imperium populi Romani) (lex Acilia de repetundis line 1; Livy 43.6.5-10; Appian Mithridatica 61).
Broadly speaking foreign states (civitates peregrinae) can be divided into three main categories; they are either states with a treaty (civitates foederatae) or free states (civitates liberae) or else tributary states (civitates stipendiariae). However these categories are not the invention of Rome but belong to the accepted pattern of diplomatic relations, particularly in the Hellenistic east.
The Romans adopt whatever local forms of taxation they come across during the period of transmarine expansion. The first basic category of direct tax is the stipendium, which comes to be consolidated into a fixed annual amount. The responsibility for collection resides with the commander’s quaestor. The second category is the decuma (tithe), which for Asia, by the provisions of the lex Sempronia de censorial locatione, C. Gracchus arranges to be sold to the publicani under five-year contracts. (Cicero In Verrem 2.3.12, Letters to Atticus 1.17.9; Diodorus 34/35.25.1). This system is apparently extended by C. Pompeius to the provinciae he later organises. Exploitation and corruption cause growing resentment in Asia and in 48 BCE C. Iulius Caesar’s response is to convert the decuma, at a reduced rate to, a fixed stipendium (Dio 42.6.3; Appian Bella Civilia 5.4.19)
All indirect taxes (vectigalia) are also farmed by the publicani, who buy the right to levy the amounts due at auction (Cicero lege Agraria 1.7). These include customs dues (portorium)(Livy 32.7.3,40.51.4), pasturage dues (scriptorium) (Appian Bella Civilia 1.7) and revenues raised from the iron and silver mines (Polybius 34.9; Livy 34.21.7)
The other main obligation of a civitas stipendiaria is to furnish the Roman commander with supplies of manpower when they are requested (Appian Mithridatica 19, 30; Appian Bella Civilia 1.79; Dio 55.29.2). This obligation is an inevitable corollary of the imperium populi Romani and any rejection of the commander’s request for military aid is rarely likely to be tenable (Appian Iberike 44).
A natural desire for freedom and autonomy, ideally protected by foedus (treaty) remains an important aspiration, particularly in the Hellenistic east. Whilst civitas stipendiaria status might be viewed as conferring an unwelcome subordinate position for the community, at the mercy of opportunistic and often venal Roman commanders, many of these very same communities will later develop into the flourishing municipia of the Principate, whose civic leaders accept the reality and the benefits of being part of the orbis Romanus (Strabo 4.1.5, 6.4.2; Plutarch Moralia 470C; lex Irnitanna, table 21)
Features
Build time - 10 turns
Build Cost - high
Recruitment - increased AOR
Hapiness - 25%
Law - 10%
Income - 25%
Culture - 5%
Not available in Latin settlements
civitas Romana
This building indirectly represents the Senatus Populusque Romanus, a noun describing the whole of the citizen body and its institutional system. The civitas Romana government building personifies the cives Romani in the original urban and rural tribes and the government apparatus that directs their affairs. It also symbolizes the extension of full citizenship rights to both Italian and provincial communities; as well as the spread of overseas colonies during the late Republic. The construction of this building provides a range of significant bonuses and allows the recruitment of citizen foot and horse.
Although Roman society is heavily stratified by wealth and class there is no good evidence that citizenship is ever linked to property ownership. Citizenship is the birthright of the legitimate children of a Roman male citizen but the Roman citizenship is not exclusive. The absorption of conquered peoples into the citizen body is a major factor in increasing the manpower pool during the period of aggressive expansion of the fourth century. (Livy 5.30.8; 6.4.4, 6.5.8, 6.26.8, 6.33.6, 6.36.2, 8.14.4; Diodorus 14.102.4, Dionysius of Halicarnassus 14. 6; Plutarch Camillus 38.5)
Following the Bellum Latinum, the political settlement of 338 BCE provides for the extension of civitas optimo iure (with the franchise) to Lanuvium, Aricia, Nomentum and Pedum (Livy 8.14.2-3), and also probably for Velitrae and Antium despite punitive action by Rome (Livy 8.14.5 – although Livy mistakenly refers to the Veliternians as already holding Roman citizenship; 8.14.8 ). A striking new innovation is applied to those communities lying outside the boundaries of Latium Vetus, the imposition of civitas sine suffragio or citizenship without the franchise, allowing Rome to increase the numbers liable for legionary service without a commensurate extension in political rights (Livy 8.14. 10, Festus 126)
The Roman census for 280/79 BCE records 287, 222 citizens (Livy Periochae 13), a figure probably representing all adult male citizens with or without the franchise. This figure is broadly in line with the totals recorded for 225 BCE, when 49,200 citizens are on active service in the legions along with an additional 3,100 citizen cavalry. Modern studies of the ancient sources (Polybius 2.24, Diodorus 25.13, Pliny Natural History 3.138, Livy Periochae 20, Eutropius 3.5 and Orosius 4.13.6) suggest that in the period immediately prior to the bellum Hannibalicum the number of adult male citizens amounts to approximately 34% of the total adult male population of Italy, excluding the Bruttians and the Greeks (P A Brunt Italian Manpower 225 BC – AD14)
The period of transmarine expansion during the second century results in increasing numbers of Italian businessmen appearing in the overeas provinciae. However the numbers permanently domiciled abroad are not significant, with even fewer likely to be cives Romani (note use of the term, ‘Italici’ in Sallust Bellum Jugurthine 26.47, Diodorus 34.2.27, 32, 34) and there is no evidence for peasant emigration. It appears the first overseas settlement of citizen colonists occurs at Carthage in 123-122 BCE (Velleius 1.15.4) although quasi Latin colonies are established at Carteia in 170 (Livy 43.3.1-4) and Corduba in 152 (Strabo 3.2.1, Pliny 3.10), along with a small number of unofficial veteran settlements, such as Italica in 205 (possibly drawn mainly from the socii; Appian Iberike 38 ). Enfranchisement of provincials is numerically insignificant.
In Italy political unrest amongst the socii, caused by an increasingly exploitative system that allows Rome to accrue disproportionate benefits, explodes into open warfare in 91 BCE. The Bellum Marsicum causes the Republic to usher in two enabling laws, the lex Julia and the lex P. Papira, enfranchising loyal Latin and Italian communities in order to reduce the number of potential insurgents (Cicero Pro Balbus 21, Cicero Pro Archia 7, Sisenna fragment 119, Appian Bella Civilia 1.49, Velleius, 2.16.4). The final enfranchisement of all the Italian peoples is delayed by a violent dispute about tribal distribution but is likely to have occurred in either 87 or 84 BCE (Livy Per. 80 and 84; Licinianus 21). What is certain is that by 84 there are no more references to enfranchisement and that therefore the states of Italy must all hold the status of civitas Romana.
Roman citizenship is later extended to the Gallic and Venetic peoples north of the Po, collectively termed the Transpadani, by Caesar in 49 BCE (Dio 41.36). However wholesale grants of citizenship under the Republic do not occur outside of Italy, not withstanding notable exceptions such as Gades in 49 BCE (Dio 41.24.1) Utica (Dio 49.16) and Tingi (48.45.3). Following the Bellum Civile, Caesar is the first to organize overseas colonization on a large scale (Seutonius Divus Iulius 42, Pliny. 3.10-12, Liv 34.9.3). Though some coloni are veterans, the majority are the urban poor, the proletarii. By contrast the transmarine colonies later founded by Augustus are principally veteran settlements.
Once he is established as master of the state, Augustus is inclined to caution about extending citizenship rights and it is not until two hundred years later, during the reign of Caracalla, that the Constitutio Antoniniana offers Roman citizenship to all free inhabitants of the empire (Dio 78.9.5, Ulpian Digest 1.5.17)
Features
Build time - 10 turns
Build Cost - high
Recruitment - full faction
Happiness - 10%
Law - 10%
Income - 5%
Culture - 20%
Available anywhere
Velites
In a Roman legion, the Velites were the youngest and poorest of the serving soldiers. Generally, unable to afford to equip themselves as infantry, they relied upon their speed and daring to get them through a battle. Unlike the infantry, the Velites were not organised, instead it seems that they attached themselves to each century or maniple of infantry.
Velites were ordered to carry a sword, a clutch of javelins and a shield, called a parma, measuring 3ft in diameter, which offered good protection from the dangers of battle. For ease of identification and to mark themselves out, they would wear a wolf’s skin over a plain helmet, which allowed their commanding officers to judge if they fought pluckily or not.
Historical Background
Polybius, in his "Histories" (Book 6, 21.6 – 22) describes at length the accoutrements of a serving Veles: “The wooden shaft of the javelin measures about two cubits in length and is about a finger's breadth in thickness; its head is a span long hammered out to such a fine edge that it is necessarily bent by the first impact, and the enemy is unable to return it. If this were not so, the missile would be available for both sides.”
The role of the Velites was probably formed from the earlier, now amalgamated Rorarii and Accensi classes, though historical documentation is unclear as to the exact function of these classes. It is only with the appearance of the Velites, that the role of the lowest class of citizen in the Roman Army becomes more apparent. Velites would have all but disappeared with the reforms of Gaius Marius, which enabled the Head Count (capite censi) to serve in the Roman army, whilst turning the State into the provider of equipment.
Therefore, those who would have previously served as Velites through a lack of class, age and equipment, could now serve as infantry in a post-Marian army.
Funditores
While Funditores were highly skilled missile troops they found themselves at a huge disadvantage in hand-to-hand combat, especially against cavalry. They would maintain a sustained and concentrated barrage on enemies and then fall back rapidly to avoid hand-to-hand combat.
Slingers carried a shoulder bag with many pieces of lead shot (they also used stones picked up on the battlefield) and several spare slings including slings of different length for greater or lesser range. Other than a knife and a small shield, they had no other equipment.
During the pre-Marian Reforms time period, the Romans trained groups of slingers, Funditores, and may have occasionally included them in units of velites.
Hastati
The Hastati were the youngest and, excepting the Velites, the poorest men serving in a pre-Marian Republican legion. In the traditional deployment of an army of this period, they were the first line of infantry, and were expected to wear down the enemy, and if not able to defeat them, then to retreat behind the lines of the Principes, in order for the Principes to continue the fight.
The Hastati were armed with what the Romans considered to be full panoply of armour, which was the scutum, gladius, helmet, pila and, in the case of the Hastati, the pectoral, as opposed to the chain mail armour of the Principes and Triarii.
Though assumed to be relatively inexperienced, in battle, the Hastati were expected to give a good account of themselves, and were naturally imbued with the Roman fighting spirit.
Historical Background
Polybius (Book 6, 23) states that "the next in seniority (to the "Velites") called Hastati are ordered to wear a complete panoply", and that along with the Velites, Principes and Triarii, the Hastati made up the names, among the Romans, of the four classes in each legion, distinct in age and equipment. They divided them so that the senior men known as Triarii numbered six hundred, the Principes twelve hundred, and the Hastati twelve hundred, the rest, consisting of the youngest, being Velites.
Literally, the Hastatus is a "hasta-user", referencing the hasta, a spear with which these soldiers were originally equipped prior to the fourth century. While the gladius varied in design throughout its usage, the Gladius Hispaniensis was the most commonly and widely used, being adopted after Roman contact, in Iberia, with the Celtiberians.
The scutum, or shield, was semi-rectangular in shape and provided good protection for almost the entire body. The pilum (pila pl.) was the javelin thrown before charging the enemy, of which, the Hastati were equipped with two.
It has been often said that the pilum was designed to bend on impact, thus rendering it incapable of being re-used by the enemy, but this is not the full story. This was not its prime function, but merely a useful consequence of the design. It existed as a close-range javelin that used weight, rather than velocity, to provide its penetrative power. The earliest known examples of the pilum are representations on 4th century frescoes from the Gigoli tomb at Tarquinia, and a socketed example recovered from a 5th century tomb at Vulci in Etruria.
The Montefortino helmet was the head protection of choice in the Republican era and received its name after archaeological finds in the Italian town of Montefortino. Earlier examples may have been more decorative due to the fact that equipment (including helmets) would have been passed down through the generations of a family. However, post-Marius, the enlisted Head Count soldiers couldn’t afford to equip themselves and, therefore, relied on the State to provide them with standardised, though less decorative, equipment.
Principes
The Principes were armed similarly to the Hastati who, traditionally, deployed in front of them in battle. However, due to their higher social status and age, the Principes were able to equip themselves more adeptly. They wore chain mail armour, as opposed to the "pectoral" seen on Hastati, as well as greaves, the gladius, scutum, pila and the ‘Montefortino’ helmet. It should be noted though, that because of the self equipping nature of the Roman Army of this period, the equipment of each individual would naturally vary.
In battle, Principes demonstrated model discipline, as well as a stubborn resolve to fight to the last, due to innate courage and training. The Principes were usually described as "the foremost", perhaps in the sense of being the best fighters, or in our terms, those on whom the battle depended.
Historical Background
Polybius (Book 6, 21.6) states that the Principes were in the "prime of life" and that along with the Velites, Hastati and Triarii, made up "the names among the Romans of the four classes in each legion distinct in age and equipment. They divided them so that the senior men known as Triarii number six hundred, the Principes twelve hundred, the Hastati twelve hundred, the rest, consisting of the youngest, being Velites.
The gladius varied in design throughout its usage and the gladius Hispaniensis was the most commonly and widely used, being adopted after Roman contact, in Iberia, with the Celtiberians. The scutum or shield was semi-rectangular in shape, and provided good protection for almost the entire body. The pilum (pila pl.) was the javelin thrown before charging the enemy, of which they had two.
The armament of the Principes was similar to that of the Hastati, as each were within the same class level (classis) or property ownership for the levy. Finds in Numantia, among other places, confirm the standard equipment of legionary pila, heavy oblong scutum, gladius, and armour (a pectoral, or, for wealthier soldiers, a shirt of lorica hamata). (20.11.2) Some have used Dionysius' statement from Roman Antiquities, 20.11.2 ("Those who fight with cavalry spears ... the Romans call Principes") to claim that the Principes fought with a hasta similar to the Triarii. It is, however, more likely that Dionysius was using a Pyrrhic era source, or mistakenly wrote "Principes" when he should have written "Triarii".
Triarii
The Triarii were the oldest and most experienced soldiers, who along with the Velites, Hastati and Principes, make up the full foot contingent of Romans in a Republican army. They were armed similarly to the Principes although, rather than a gladius, their weapon of choice was commonly a hasta, a long spear. Other than this, they carried all the accoutrements of a typical Roman foot soldier: greaves, the gladius and scutum. However, the Triarii did away with the pila, as they weren’t practical in addition to being armed with the hasta.
The proverb "ad triarios perventum est", used in relation with an extremely serious situation, is indicative of the role usually assigned to these men, of final line of defence. That they should engage at all was usually seen as being a last resort, since it meant the the two previous lines, the Hastati and the Principes had been broken.
Historical Background
Polybius (Book 6, 21.6) says the Triarii were "the oldest of all" and that, because they were worth more than 10,000 drachmas, were able to wear a coat of chain mail instead of the simple sheet of metal worn over the chest by the common soldiers (Polybios, Historiai, 6.23.14). Along with the Velites, Hastati and Principes, the Triarii made up the names among the Romans of the four classes in each legion distinct in age and equipment. They divided them so that the senior men known as Triarii numbered six hundred, the Principes twelve hundred, the Hastati twelve hundred, the rest, consisting of the youngest, being Velites.
Equites
The Equites were a caste of the Roman elite, who served as cavalry in a Roman legion of this time, and were formed from the 18 centuries of Equites, which were created by the Roman King, Servius Tullius. Those serving were provided with a Public Horse (equus publicus) by the state, and the money for its upkeep.
There were also those who were Eques, who were a class below the 18 centuries of Equites. They did not receive a Public Horse but had to provide their own. Due to the Equites superior wealth, they were able to arm themselves with good quality equipment, namely a chain mail suit, a slightly longer sword for slashing downwards to foes below, as well as a long spear. Nevertheless, in comparison to their Eastern counterparts, the Equites were lightly armed, making them mobile, yet vulnerable in close combat. Because of this, their role in battle was mainly confined to chasing down fleeing enemies, supporting skirmishers, or driving off enemy skirmishers.
Not natural horsemen, the Romans soon began to favour the use of allied cavalry.
Historical Background
Taken from Smith’s Dictionary:
In the constitution of Servius Tullius all the Roman citizens were arranged in different classes according to the amount of their property, and it may therefore fairly be presumed that a place in the centuries of Equites was determined by the same qualification. Dionysius (iv.18) expressly says, that the Equites were chosen by Servius out of the richest and most illustrious families; and Cicero (De Rep. II.22) that they were of the highest census (censu maximo). Livy (i.43) also states that the twelve centuries formed by Servius Tullius consisted of the leading men of the state.
None of these writers, however, mention the property which was necessary to entitle a person to a place among the Equites; but it was probably of the same amount as in the latter times of the republic, that is, four times that of the first class. Every one, therefore, who possessed the requisite property, and whose character was unblemished (for this latter qualification appears to have been always necessary in the ancient times of the republic), was admitted among the Equites of the Servian constitution; and it may be presumed that the twelve new centuries were created in order to include all those persons in the state who possessed the necessary qualifications.
Niebuhr (Hist. of Rome, vol. I p427, &c.), however, supposes that the qualification of property was only necessary for admission into the twelve new centuries, and that the statement of Dionysius, quoted above, ought to be confined to these centuries, and not applied to the whole eighteen. He maintains that the twelve centuries consisted exclusively of plebeians; and that the six old centuries (that is, the three double centuries of Ramnes, Tities and Luceres, priores and posteriores), which were incorporated by Servius into his comitia under the title of the sex suffragia, comprised all the patricians, independent of the amount of property which they possessed.
This account, however, does not seem to rest on sufficient evidence; and we have, on the contrary, an express instance of a patrician, L. Tarquitius, B.C. 458, who was compelled on account of his poverty to serve on foot (Liv. III.27). That the six old centuries consisted entirely of patricians is most probable, since the plebeians would certainly not have been admitted among the Equites at all till the Servian constitution; and as by this constitution new centuries were created, it is not likely that any plebeians would have been placed among the ancient six. But we have no reason for supposing that these six centuries contained the whole body of patricians, or that the twelve consisted entirely of plebeians.
We may suppose that those patricians, who belonged to the six, were allowed by the Servian constitution to continue in them, if they possessed the requisite property; and that all other persons in the state, whether patricians or plebeians, who possessed the requisite property, were admitted into the 12 new centuries. That the latter were not confined to plebeians may be inferred from Livy, who says that they consisted of the leading men in the state (primores civitatis), not in the plebs.
As vacancies occurred in the eighteen centuries, the descendants of those who were originally enrolled succeeded to their places, whether plebeians or patricians, provided they had not dissipated their property; for Niebuhr goes too far when he asserts that all vacancies were filled up according to birth, independent of any property qualification. But in course of time, as population and wealth increased, the number of persons, who possessed an equestrian fortune, also increased greatly; and as the number of equites in the 18 centuries was limited, those persons, whose ancestors had not been enrolled in the centuries, could not receive horses from the state, and were therefore allowed the privilege of serving with their own horses amongst the cavalry, instead of the infantry, as they would otherwise have been obliged to have done.
Roman Allies
Historical Background
Rome forced the many different peoples of Italy – whether they be Etruscans, Samnites, Umbrians, Marsi, Campanians or even Greek Italiots – into subordinate alliances. The Italian ‘allies’ (socii) and Latin cities (nomen Latinum) enjoyed near-total sovereignty in the domestic sphere. Each maintained their own forms of government and laws; each retained its own language and the right to manage its own economy by levying taxes and minting its own coinage; and none was called upon to accept a Roman garrison.
The sole obligation of the "allies" was to contribute to Rome’s military or naval needs. The vast majority of Roman "allies" were bound by treaties which required them to contribute armed contingents on request up to a stipulated maximum. The units were raised and financed by the allied states and served under their own officers. The register of military obligations is conventionally termed the "formula togatorum".
Although the socii originally provided contingents to Roman armies that were armed in their traditional native style, in time they increasingly came to be equipped and disciplined like their Roman counterparts. This was an evolutionary process, as regional variations in Italic military equipment came to be replaced by a largely homogenous panoply and method of fighting by the middle of the third century BC.
This process of homogenisation of military equipment occurred through a process of interaction with, and adoption of equipment and tactics from other Italic peoples, and not simply the result of Roman design. The Samnites, in particular, were a significant influence in the development of Roman arms and tactics.
Italic Hastati
Recruited from amongst Rome's "allies", the lightly equipped Italic Hastati formed the front line of infantry of the pre-Marian Republican legions.
Italic Principes
Recruited from amongst Rome's "allies", the heavily armed Italic Principes formed the second line of infantry of the pre-Marian Repubican legions.
Italic Triarii
Italic Triarii were the oldest and most experienced infantry, who made up the third line of the pre-Marian Repubican legions.
Romans in battle
Here we see screen shots of the Romans in battle. Taken from a custom battle, using an early Alpha of Fate of Empires, it shows some of the action on a wet summer's day, that endeed in a thunderstorm, between a Republican Legion and its Italic allies, and a strong attacking Carthaginian force. Although hard pressed on both flanks the Romans eventually won.
Left click on the images to see them full size!
Velites take on the elephants
Hastati versus the Sacred Band
Principes under attack
Outflanking manoeuvre
Hastati under pressure
Defending the Eagle
On the left flank
"Run them down!"
We were hoping to have been able to include a look at the map of the fledgling Roman Empire but, unfortunately, our guys are still hard at it setting up their political starting point for the beginning of the campaign, so it will have to wait for another edition! As I write this, the
Team-RTR developers are also putting together the first
FOE beta: so, soon, we shall be able to get stuck in and start the process of bug hunting and polishing. Therefore, I hope that these previews will be able to bring you regular progress reports, from the front lines - so to speak, in future editions.
This brings us to the end of our second
FOE Preview, which has been dedicated to the Romans. All that remains is for me to thank everyone for all the contributions that have made this edition possible (you didn't think I did it all myself, didja?
), from both within the team and without, and also to thank you for all the possitive feedback that we have been having from you since we announced
FOE , just over two weeks ago. Future previews will continue to introduce you to the factions, their fighting men and their political affiliations, as well as to new elements of gameplay.
RTR VII: Fate of Empires - Preview Two
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Tony83
I wasn`t wrong about the slinger you know. 
I did the renders from an early alpha and didn't notice that they were being used as a placeholder. I've put a temporary image of the correct unit there now, which I'll replace with a proper render once I have the CAS and DDS files to hand.
