Military Discipline

[Anonymous]

I found the topic of discipline on a web site and it was said that if a soldier was AWOL and was caught, he would be demoted.<br>
Considering the strict discipline in the military, this didn't seem accurate to me. I would think the punishment would be more severe.<br>
I have some sources on discipline, but it doesn't address AWOL. Any thoughts?<br>
Julia <p></p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

Are you refering to the Roman Army or Modern? Most of the time, depending on the severity of being absent without leave, you'll end up in jail for a stint, confined to barracks, or doing general duties that stink. In the Roman Army, I tend to agree with you that it would be more harsh. I suppose it all depends on circumstance as well. <p>"Only Trajan could go to Dacia."<BR>
<BR>
Magnus/Matt<BR>
Optio<BR>
Legio XXX "Ulpia Victrix" </p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

If they caught you, I'm pretty certain they'd kill you. Maybe Sander or somebody can find the reference for me, but I remember reading that soldiers who fell asleep while on watch duty were beaten to death. <p></p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

Actually, not much has changed. I can remember hearing of the Canadian Forces policy on sleeping while on duty was also punishable by extreme measures. Definately a court martial, though this may only have been during war time. <p>"Only Trajan could go to Dacia."<BR>
<BR>
Magnus/Matt<BR>
Optio<BR>
Legio XXX "Ulpia Victrix" </p><i></i>

[Caius Fabius]

An interesting punishment I remember reading about was having the soles of the soldier's feet beaten with rods or canes. The feet would be very bruised and swollen, and the man couldn't walk for a while. This would either force someone to take care of him, (which would increase peer pressure), or put him out of it for quite some time Remember all travel was by foot! This would probably remind him to be back in the fort before lights out and prevent future AWOLs, There is a difference between going AWOL, and deserting.<br>
AWOL means you aren't where you are supposed to be, (Absent without leave) but you return. Maybe you were lying drunk in the gutter, maybe you spent the night in the vicus with your sick (unofficial) wife. Military justice probably was able to find more than one punishment for certain acts.<br>
<br>
<p>"Just before class started, I looked in the big book where all the world's history is written, and it said...." Neil J. Hackett, PhD ancient history, professor OSU, 1987</p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/ucaiusfabius.showPublicProfile?language=EN>Caius Fabius</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ROMANISROMANORVM/files/C%20Fabius%201988b.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 9/15/02 2:46:53 pm<br></i>

[Anonymous]

Greetings,<br>
<br>
I remember reading something just recently that basically said that the specific circumstances of an infraction might be taken into account when determining the punishment in the Roman army. Unfortunately I can't remember where I read it--and it is going to drive me crazy trying to find it.<br>
<br>
In 'Life of a Roman Soldier' by Don Nardo, it mentions the penalty of *fustuarium* or being beaten to death for falling asleep on duty. It also lists--lying under oath, trying to avoid one's duties by wounding oneself, abandoning one's post in battle out of fear, throwing away one's sword or shield in battle, and lying to a tribune or other officer about one's exploits in battle-- as infractions punishable by *fustuarium*. Different sources often say different things though, so...who knows really.<br>
<br>
I don't remember seeing anything specifically about punishment for soldiers being AWOL, but if I come across that information I will certainly pass it on.<br>
<br>
Aelyn<br>
<br>
"To live each day as though one's last, never flustered, never apathetic, never attitudinizing--here is the perfection of character."--Marcus Aurelius <p></p><i></i>

[Guest]

Salve,<br>
<br>
<br>
The Roman army, well into Byzantine times, considered their superior discipline to be their distinguishing hallmark. The Roman army has a reputation for quite brutal enforcement of military discipline. Ancient authors revelled in recounting harsh disciplinary measures citing examples of soldiers executed for various offences. Yet when looking at the source material there are plenty of indications that the well known stories may have represented exceptions rather than the rule. Numerous instances of indiscipline are recorded and legal codes provide a varied picture of disciplinary measures, attesting both capital punishment as well as a range of less severe measures meted out as punishment for military offenders.<br>
<br>
In antiquity the letter of the law often stipulated severe punishments in order for a magistrate to display his clemency by pronouncing more lenient sentences. Thus the death penalty was often reserved for exemplary executions with offenders receiving milder treatment in other cases. Given the difficulties faced by the army with recruitment and the dependance of emperors of the loyalty of his army soldiers were far too valuable a resource to be wasted lightly. Thus deserters and turncoats, guilty of quite serious offences which would warrant capital punishment, could according to legal codes be treated surprisingly lenient. Soldiers who as <i> emansor</i> returned to the army after several years even requested to have their back log in pay for those years restored. Though not granted as a matter of course, this was apparently ceded under certain conditions.<br>
<br>
Enforcement of strict military discipline was in practice difficult. Officers themselves, responsible for maintaining discipline, engaged in various corrupt practices, for example extorting the men under their command and cheating them in provision of supplies. Emperors were not able to stamp out such malpractices, but even regulated them in law, determining a maximum for pilfering by commanders and at times paying the centurionate out of their own pockets for exemptions from duties and leave granted to soldiers. In mutinies and civil wars the centurionate and senior officers often proved powerless to contain the behaviour of their men.<br>
<br>
This title deals with military discipline in the imperial army:<br>
<br>
Campbell, B., <i> The emperor and the Roman army 31BC-AD235</i> (Oxford 1984) 468p.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

also read a reference that stated that first offenders tended to be let off lightly.<br>
<br>
also it is notable the number of occasions when a senior person general/emperor had to instill discipline<br>
<br>
the army wasnt always the highly trained and obedient and strict organisation we often picture. <p><img src="http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mark.martin/AUXILIA/icon.gif" width="46" height="65" align="right">
</p><i></i>