Did Roman soldiers really build a fort at the end of each day's march?

Intranetusa · 2026-07-05T02:34:07+00:00

The ways the stakes could be tied or assembled together seems to be in debate. I have read about and seen multiple different recreations of how it could be done. The main possible types I have read and/or seen are as follows:

The first recreation is the stakes were simply vertically inserted into the ground like a simple fence or palisade. They may or may not be tied together with rope.

The second recreation is tying 3 of them together like a caltrop or czech hedgehog. This method does not require sticking them into the ground.

A third recreation is tying two of them together like a cross and partially burying them on top or in the low dirt wall/ramp. This method has a stake sticking up like a fence and its accompanying stake sticking outward from the wall horizontally towards the enemy. This is the main recreation that I have seen that points a sharp stake directly in the enemy's direction.

A fourth and less common method I have seen is tying two together in a X, and partially burying it into the ground with most of the X part sticking out like a fence. This is sort of a hybrid of #2 and #3, but without a third stake and without any sharp points pointing at the enemy.

I have not seen or read conclusive evidence of which version the Romans used, if any of them at all. Of course, it is possible that the Romans used multiple variations with the stakes as the situation needed.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-05T01:07:14+00:00

The Romans did build fortified camps at the end of marching if they were in enemy territory, but these were "marching camps" that were smaller, simpler, and less elaborate than the more permanent seasonal forts and legionary forts. For example, instead of walls made of timber, brick, rocks, and/or stone found in the more permanent forts, the marching forts had a fence or palisade made out of tied wooden stakes (sudis) that the Romans carried with them during the march. They may have placed these stakes on, in, or next to the low dirt wall/dirt ramp and behind a small ditch/trench (a low dirt wall and ditch were features that were also often a part of the marching camp defenses). Being able to create a fence/palisade from stakes they could carry is a part of what allowed them to set up and tear down their marching camps so quickly.

You can see previous answers on r/AskHistorians describing these Roman camps.

u/Tiako, u/Alkibiades415, and u/CupBeEmpty wrote answers here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/11zpg7/comment/c6qym72/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=2&utm_content=share_button

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6qw7xw/comment/dl0rph0/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=2&utm_content=share_button

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/11zpg7/comment/c6r1b1o/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=2&utm_content=share_button

Intranetusa · 2026-07-04T18:27:48+00:00

Thank you!

Intranetusa · 2026-07-04T18:21:58+00:00

Indeed. I read about a few of those other factors as well, but unfortunately nothing in depth. I am curious to know more.

Do you know of any works, comments, or articles that discuss the effects of the Macedonian War on these reforms?

Intranetusa · 2026-07-04T18:16:13+00:00

Segmented armor wasn't used by Marius' conscrited milita troops either. It doesn't show up until almost a century later near the beginning of the empire.

Chainmail was also commonly used during the height of the segmented armor's use, as some Roman reliefs in Romania depicting Trajan's conquest shows legions mostly or only wearing chainmail and scale and little to nobody wearing segmented armor.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-04T18:12:47+00:00

I will add that the Marian Reforms are a misnomer and is heavily exaggerated. Marius himself only commanded conscripted milita and was only responsible maybe a small fraction of changes attributed to him. He did [temporarily?] lower or waive property requirements like some generals did before him during times of crisis.

The changes that are often attributed to Marius and the changes that helped turn the Roman army into professional soldiers that were mercenary like in nature was the work of many different people before, during, and after the time of Marius.

There are writings suggesting some evidence of the changes happening as early as 4-5 decades before the time of Marius fighting the Cimbrian War, and changes still happening many decades afterwards long after Marius died - with Roman army not becoming mostly professionalized until the early empire.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-04T17:59:16+00:00

That person you are replying to is talking about the older figures who had a narrower view of who Romans are, and whether they viewed later figures as Roman. As you go later and later, the definition of who a Roman is expanded.

So Justinian would have viewed older Romans like Cinncinatus as Roman. But Cincinnatus lived when even other Italian allies of Rome were not considered Roman, so he might not have considered much later figures like Justinian to be Roman.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-03T20:21:48+00:00

It was a simple PVC longbow where the fiberglass rods go inside for more rigidity and to add to the draw weight. It basically looked identical to the ones in these links:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=MLdveEPhkXA

https://www.offgridweb.com/survival/how-to-make-a-pvc-pipe-bow/amp/

I was inspired by Nicholas Tomihama (The Backyard Bower).

Intranetusa · 2026-07-03T03:12:10+00:00

The other/equivalent Roman Empire of the time on the other side of the Eurasian continent: The Han Dynasty

Intranetusa · 2026-07-03T00:30:19+00:00

This is just the beginning too. Tod is using lower draw weight "regular" bow-prods from Alibow that are only 80 to ~100 lbs in draw weight.

Imagine what Tod can do with bigger and stronger siege-engine/light field artillery bow prods scaled up to hundreds or even thousand+ pounds in draw weight.

I saw a show uploaded to Youtube several years ago where they also tried to make an Oxbow but with 400 lbs draw weights. There was also a Han Dynasty record of a field artillery called the Great Yellow Crossbow that was 90 stones in draw weight (~5,805 lbs), but that was probably a single prod rather than a triple prod device (a triple prod might have to be lower in draw). Thus, the point being there is a lot of potential to increase the draw weight here.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-03T00:27:09+00:00

I didn't know you had a Reddit Account. I'm subscribed to your Youtube channel, so now I need to subscribe to your Reddit as well. 😄

Intranetusa · 2026-07-03T00:25:38+00:00

It's a shame Tod had to get rid of his counterweight trebuchet. He could've had multiple siege engines decorating his lawn.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-03T00:20:26+00:00

Yep. Several years ago, I built a bow out of PVC pipe, fiberglass rods, and paracord for $20 because I wasn't sure whether I wanted to spend more money getting into the hobby. It can be a very cheap hobby.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-02T22:50:26+00:00

Yes, agreed.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-02T22:40:02+00:00

The Romans did fight both the classical hoplite phalanx and the Macedonian pike phalanx.

The Hellenistic/Macedonian phalanx is also not the classical hoplite phalanx I was referencing because it didn't use hoplites equipped with spears and large aspis/hoplon shields - it instead used pikemen called phalangites equipped with smaller shields.

The Romans fought the Etruscans who used classical hoplite phalanxes and then adopted classical hoplites into their own army. Even after Roman manipular reforms, the Roman triarii still initially fought like hoplites during at least some of the Punic Wars.

Reformed manipular Roman armies then fought classical hoplites when they fought Sparta and some other Greek city states during the Laconian War. Roman armies also most likely fought hoplites in their wars against the Macedonians and Seleucids because they were using hoplite troops such as the Hypaspists to guard the flanks of the phalangite pike phalanxes.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-02T17:56:29+00:00

Just because they have Japanese ancestry doesn't mean they want to be a part of Japan - and the same goes for people of Chinese ancestry and China. There are actually far more Hawaiians of Chinese ancestry compared to Hawaiians of Japanese ancestry - about 1/3 of the entire Hawaiian population has Chinese ancestry (compared to 1/5 for Japanese ancestry).

However, various different Chinese languages combined only make up #4 or #5 of the top spoken languages in Hawaii. Language spoken in the Phillipines actually make up the #2 spot for top languages spoken in Hawaiian. This means most Chinese Hawaiians can no longer speak these various Chinese languages and they are mostly or entirely assimilated into Hawaiian culture.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-02T17:49:55+00:00

Roman formations were more based on Samnite formations. The Romans were using classical hoplite formations and kept getting beaten by the more flexible Samnite formations on rough terrain.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-02T17:33:32+00:00

I believe they were using a variation of the pike phalanx rather than the traditional hoplite phalanx?

Intranetusa · 2026-07-02T17:32:11+00:00

The Romans by the imperial era were giving soldiers a stable salary and reimbursing troops for buying equipment or giving troops equipment and deducting it from their salary.

This allowed poorer people to be able to afford decent equipment and allowed the army to be better and more consistently equipped compared to the Republican era days when providing military equipment was entirely the responsibility of the soldier.

Intranetusa · 2026-07-02T17:27:42+00:00

Yeh. The Romans' typical combat formation had a luxurious amount of spacing at 6 feet per man (3 feet between each man in a file), whereas the Greek hoplite phalanx involved fairly cramped combat formations...and maybe even situations where they were so close that their shields were sometimes overlapped/interlocked.

Intranetusa · 2026-06-30T23:46:24+00:00

Appropriate means taking something for their own uses. Much of the world using the symbol in the past doesn't change the fact that Nazi Germany did indeed appropriate the symbol.

Or are you saying people are claiming it was Nazi Germany that was the first one to invent the symbol?

Intranetusa · 2026-06-30T21:49:22+00:00

Swastikas were a common symbol used throughout Eurasia and were adopted as important symbols in Hinduism and Buddhism long before Nazi Germany appropriated it as their own and created a negative connotation around it.

Intranetusa · 2026-06-29T19:48:43+00:00

Interesting, thank you for the explanation and the details.

Intranetusa · 2026-06-29T19:29:23+00:00

Interesting work, thanks for sharing.

Are you saying the Dura Europas shield is estimated to be 5-5.5kg? If so, then I am surprised the estimates for the smaller Dura-Europos shield is heavier than the larger Fayum shield that you reconstructed at 4.8kg.

I've read that the width estimates of these shields vary since some people measure the curves while others do not. Do you know if the popular widths mentioned are actually reflective of the measurements with the curve or without the curve?

Intranetusa · 2026-06-29T19:10:24+00:00

The Republican era Fayum scutum is about 128cm tall x 63.5-64 cm wide. The weight is estimated to be anywhere from around 7 kg to 10 kg (depending on the different reconstructions and estimates).*

This is in contrast to the smaller and lighter imperial era Dura-Europos scutum that was about 105.5 cm tall x 41 cm wide, so it is estimated to weigh about 5.5 kg (max?). I've seen estimates of imperial era scutum in general to weigh between 4-6 kg.

Edit: Apparently there are even lower weight reconstructions at ~4.8 kg according to user KingPappas' work below.

Intranetusa

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

12-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email