Geographical Concepts and Intelligence
Bookmark this page

·        Did Romans have necessary topological skill to accurately map boundaries etc for strategy. – Madaba Mapo – would modern military planners find this serviceable.  Little knowledge of geography for strategic purposes. Any info after the event.

·        Roman intelligence rudimentary at best in East – ample evidence to show Romans head East without knowing where they were going.

·        Dependence on local guides show Romans did not possess adequate geographical information before embarking on major foreign campaigns. – Aelius Gallus attempt in Southern Arabia.

·        Neither Pliny nor Starbo found information from military campaigns trustworthy.

·        People who look at large scale maps for conclusions regarding strategy – using concepts and methods not available to the Romans..  Romans thought of population not geography in their thinking.  Didn’t think primarily of defence either.

·        No evidence either of military or state police to spot revolts within Empire or even in the army.

·        BUT BYZANTINE period Rome and Persia paying travellers to spy for the state on affairs there.

·        Byzantium 600 – only purpose of intelligence to gather information about enemy strength and movements in order to prevent surprise.  Military handbooks show General must know if he can get to supplies in short distance – how do they obtain this info?

·        Stressed people should be captured to give information – but only good during campaign.  Byzantine handbook no mention of geography – no stress that info needed before incursion.

Other Notes in this Category

1. Benjamin issac – the limits of empire
2. Conclusions and Epilogue
3. Decision Making and War aims
4. Fall of the Old Order
5. Geographical Concepts and Intelligence
6. Natural Barriers
7. Overview
8. People and Territory
9. Social and Economic Base
10. The Islamic Conquests

Didn't find this useful?

• Visit Coursework.Info for over 14,000 GCSE, A-Level and University Essays