User:Ifly6/Marian reforms
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Marian reforms
This page is a soft redirect.
The Marian reforms refer to putative changes to the composition and operation of the Roman army during the late Roman republic commonly attributed to Gaius Marius (consul in 107, 104–100, and 86 BC[2]). The term is used as shorthand to describe a series of reforms in the second century BC, most especially changes in the socio-economic background of the soldiery, but also including introduction of the cohort, institution of a single form of heavy infantry with reformed uniform equipment, adoption of the eagle standard, and abolition of the citizen cavalry.[3]
It is commonly claimed that Marius changed the soldiers' socio-economic background by allowing citizens without property to join the Roman army, a process called "proletarianisation".[4] The dropping of the property requirement was believed have created in a semi-professional class of soldiers motivated by land grants which in turn became clients of their generals, who then used them to overthrow the republic.[5] There is, however, little ancient evidence for any permanent or significant change to recruitment practice in Marius' time.[6][7][8]
Other reforms occurring around the time of the late second century BC have also been attributed to Marius, including changes in equipment, equipment procurement, tactical unit organisation, and army operations. Many of the other reforms commonly attributed to Marius also have no basis in the ancient sources[9] or are otherwise wrongly dated and misattributed, a position which has found general scholarly agreement.[10] Changes in the Roman army of the late republic came from many people and were driven more by structural factors in Rome's available manpower and military demands from the Social War and following civil wars.
Belief in comprehensive Marian reforms – changing the Roman army's recruitment, organisation, tactics, and equipment – emerged in 1840s German scholarship, which posited that any changes in the Roman army between the times of Polybius and Marius were attributable to a single reform event. This belief was spread relatively uncritically and was accepted as largely proven by the 1850s until the late 1940s. The re-evaluation then starting – though slowly diffusing, especially in Anglophone scholarship,[11] – has largely disproved the narrative of comprehensive reform. Such reform is no longer widely accepted by specialists[12][13] and is viewed as a construct of modern historiography.[14][15]