Talk:Strategy of the Roman military

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Strategy of the Roman military article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Roman & Byzantine / Classical

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Roman and Byzantine military history task force
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

Classical Greece and Rome High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Typos on 'Grand Strategy' image[edit]

The image under the Grand Strategy section reads for 'Operational Strategy': 'within tactical capabilities and costraints', and for 'Tactics': '...for acheiving of operational goals...'. 177.40.168.191 (talk) 20:52, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A good overall structure[edit]

A good overall structure. There is enough here to do a full-blown stand-alone article on Roman grand strategy, particularly in the later stages of the empire-- the struggles with the Germanics, the fortifications, the Rhine frontier, the Pratorian Guard, weak emperors, the rise of the cavalry, the Eastern frontier, the internal turmoil, battles with Atilla, etc. etc. Enriquecardova 20:22, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, the article as it stands I wrote just because as I've been trying to figure out the coverage of all the articles on the roman military and impose some kind of structure on it I was really surpirsed to find nothing on its strategy and only a little on its tactics (confined to infantry tactics alone). The article is still very much in early stages. Topics like the limes and others you mention obviously deserve pretty huge coverage since this is a large area, I just hadn't had time to expand it yet. Im fairly new to wikipedia and find that I get pulled into trying to improve far too many articles - I need to learn to focus on really improving just one or two! I will be doing further work on this article but obviously if you or anyone else are able and have time to contribute thena ll the better :-) - PocklingtonDan 22:03, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Time, time the old story. On the tactics page the discussion is confined to the demise of the infantry but there is a whole other "big picture" side to it. Well keep up the good work! Enriquecardova 06:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with such an article is that it covers a period of a millenia, this is basically a description of the Roman Army of the Late Republic-Early Empire, the Pre-Marian Roman Army and the Catpharacti of the late Empire, although sharing the same lineage and similarities are rather different animals.Koonan the almost civilised 16:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article doesn't cite enough sources[edit]

The only citation is for a quote. Anything else? 68.173.113.106 (talk) 22:39, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]