11-08-2020, 09:33 PM
Ref A: “Greece and Rome at War”, Connelly 1981
Ref B: “Roman Battle Tactics 390-110BC”, Fields 2010
Ref C: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Ro...us/6*.html – Thayer 1927
In an earlier life I have enjoyed such books as Ref A (and its abridged “The Roman Army” companion) along with several others that showed the organisational structure of the Roman Legion/Army; such things, throughout military history, being of simple interest. A recent acquisition (Ref B) continues that interest, but with much greater focus.
Both references show the Hastati, Principes & Triarii maniples/centuries pictorially. Ref A shows the Velites distributed at 40 per maniple, even though the Triarii ones are at ‘half-strength’, which always looked odd to me – why would the ‘reserve’ have such a number of light troops, except for equal dispersal when the century/contubernia numbers don’t match? In addition, each century has a: Centurion; Optio; and Signifer.
Ref B doesn’t show the Velites, but does show that every century has a: Centurion; Optio; Signifer; and Cornicen. In both cases they are quoting: 4200 total for a Legion; 1200 Hastati; 1200 Principes; 600 Triarii; and therefore deducing 1200 Velites to add to the total.
Both references mention the ‘larger Legion’, Ref A only as a number with regards to the Allies, but Ref B states that the Hastati & Principes increase from 1200 to 1600 (thus detailing all of the 800 increase and suggesting no additional Velites) and that the maniples must enlarge.
Given the numbers they use and also depict, both references seem to imply that the attached ‘officers’ are in addition to the 4200. For Ref A it’s 180 and Ref B 240 in total. Does this mean that the actual size of a Legion is either 4380 or 4440? Just as ‘Nick’ recently quoted in the Zama thread; the: “4200 total for a Legion; 1200 Hastati; 1200 Principes; 600 Triarii; and therefore deducing 1200 Velites to add to the total” – seem to be otherwise generally accepted.
It’s when I finally got round to finding and actually reading myself the original ancient source (Ref C will be used and subsequent posts are from there) that I really saw the detail from which these authors had written; and then immediately wondered if what I had seen previously was incorrect?
There seem to be only 3 parts of Polybius Book 6 that matter:
Q1 - 6.20.8/9 – (8) “When they have chosen the number determined on — that is when the strength of each legion is brought up to four thousand two hundred, or in times of exceptional danger to five thousand — (9) the old system was to choose the cavalry after the four thousand two hundred infantry, but they now choose them first, the censor selecting them according to their wealth; and three hundred are assigned to each legion.”
Q2 – 6.21.9 – “They divide them so that the senior men known as triarii number six hundred, the principes twelve hundred, the hastati twelve hundred, the rest, consisting of the youngest, being velites. If the legion consists of more than four thousand men, they divide accordingly, except as regards the triarii, the number of whom is always the same.”
Q3 – 6.24.1-6 –( 1) From each of the classes except the youngest they elect ten centurions according to merit, and then they elect a second ten. (2) All these are called centurions, and the first man elected has a seat in the military council. The centurions then appoint an equal number of rearguard officers (optiones). Next, in conjunction with the centurions, they divide each class into ten companies, except the velites, and assign to each company two centurions and two optiones from among the elected officers. The velites are divided equally among all the companies; these companies are called ordines or manipuli or vexilla, and their officers are called centurions or ordinum ductores. (6) Finally these officers appoint from the ranks two of the finest and bravest men to be standard-bearers (vexillarii) in each maniple.
Now when I read this I thought I had finally understood and it all started to make sense for the first time. Q1 told me that there were 4200 men in a legion and 800 more in a ‘larger legion’; Q2 gave me the expected numbers for the heavy infantry – but specifically didn’t mention the number of Velites. It then strongly suggested that the infantry numbered 4000 and not 4200, so that the Velites numbered 1000 and not 1200. That meant, that with ‘equal distribution’ the Triarii maniples would probably have had half the complement of Velites just as the heavy infantry component is half-size as well. Adding in Q3 and the 180 ‘officers’ came out of the remaining 200 ‘missing’ and that left only 20 unaccounted for. Whilst Polybius doesn’t detail the ‘Cornicen’ position, it is strongly indicated as existing from elsewhere in his pages, but certainly not in a per century capacity as in Ref B. Assigning 20 per legion, however, might certainly be reasonable. Finally the numbers made sense.
I am suggesting, therefore, that the standard Roman Legion equates to 4200 men total. That they are divided in to 50x 80-man centuries with each century consisting of 60x heavy infantry and 20x Velites. Because, for tactical purposes, the Triarii are divided into half-centuries, there are then 60x 3-man ‘officer’ attachments; the total accounted for are 4180 and the remaining 20 are quite possibly ‘Cornicens’.
So, Ladies and Gentlemen of RAT, please may I ask for your critique? I have no wish to suggest that previous researchers have ‘got it wrong’; especially as I cannot read the originals in Latin (a choice at secondary education that I have more than occasionally come to regret, but German was more immediately useful when I joined the Army!).
The question being, however, is whether I have made a silly mistake? Or, perhaps, it’s at least not an unreasonable re-interpretation?
Thanks in advance - simpler and shorter queries being easier to answer.....
Ref B: “Roman Battle Tactics 390-110BC”, Fields 2010
Ref C: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Ro...us/6*.html – Thayer 1927
In an earlier life I have enjoyed such books as Ref A (and its abridged “The Roman Army” companion) along with several others that showed the organisational structure of the Roman Legion/Army; such things, throughout military history, being of simple interest. A recent acquisition (Ref B) continues that interest, but with much greater focus.
Both references show the Hastati, Principes & Triarii maniples/centuries pictorially. Ref A shows the Velites distributed at 40 per maniple, even though the Triarii ones are at ‘half-strength’, which always looked odd to me – why would the ‘reserve’ have such a number of light troops, except for equal dispersal when the century/contubernia numbers don’t match? In addition, each century has a: Centurion; Optio; and Signifer.
Ref B doesn’t show the Velites, but does show that every century has a: Centurion; Optio; Signifer; and Cornicen. In both cases they are quoting: 4200 total for a Legion; 1200 Hastati; 1200 Principes; 600 Triarii; and therefore deducing 1200 Velites to add to the total.
Both references mention the ‘larger Legion’, Ref A only as a number with regards to the Allies, but Ref B states that the Hastati & Principes increase from 1200 to 1600 (thus detailing all of the 800 increase and suggesting no additional Velites) and that the maniples must enlarge.
Given the numbers they use and also depict, both references seem to imply that the attached ‘officers’ are in addition to the 4200. For Ref A it’s 180 and Ref B 240 in total. Does this mean that the actual size of a Legion is either 4380 or 4440? Just as ‘Nick’ recently quoted in the Zama thread; the: “4200 total for a Legion; 1200 Hastati; 1200 Principes; 600 Triarii; and therefore deducing 1200 Velites to add to the total” – seem to be otherwise generally accepted.
It’s when I finally got round to finding and actually reading myself the original ancient source (Ref C will be used and subsequent posts are from there) that I really saw the detail from which these authors had written; and then immediately wondered if what I had seen previously was incorrect?
There seem to be only 3 parts of Polybius Book 6 that matter:
Q1 - 6.20.8/9 – (8) “When they have chosen the number determined on — that is when the strength of each legion is brought up to four thousand two hundred, or in times of exceptional danger to five thousand — (9) the old system was to choose the cavalry after the four thousand two hundred infantry, but they now choose them first, the censor selecting them according to their wealth; and three hundred are assigned to each legion.”
Q2 – 6.21.9 – “They divide them so that the senior men known as triarii number six hundred, the principes twelve hundred, the hastati twelve hundred, the rest, consisting of the youngest, being velites. If the legion consists of more than four thousand men, they divide accordingly, except as regards the triarii, the number of whom is always the same.”
Q3 – 6.24.1-6 –( 1) From each of the classes except the youngest they elect ten centurions according to merit, and then they elect a second ten. (2) All these are called centurions, and the first man elected has a seat in the military council. The centurions then appoint an equal number of rearguard officers (optiones). Next, in conjunction with the centurions, they divide each class into ten companies, except the velites, and assign to each company two centurions and two optiones from among the elected officers. The velites are divided equally among all the companies; these companies are called ordines or manipuli or vexilla, and their officers are called centurions or ordinum ductores. (6) Finally these officers appoint from the ranks two of the finest and bravest men to be standard-bearers (vexillarii) in each maniple.
Now when I read this I thought I had finally understood and it all started to make sense for the first time. Q1 told me that there were 4200 men in a legion and 800 more in a ‘larger legion’; Q2 gave me the expected numbers for the heavy infantry – but specifically didn’t mention the number of Velites. It then strongly suggested that the infantry numbered 4000 and not 4200, so that the Velites numbered 1000 and not 1200. That meant, that with ‘equal distribution’ the Triarii maniples would probably have had half the complement of Velites just as the heavy infantry component is half-size as well. Adding in Q3 and the 180 ‘officers’ came out of the remaining 200 ‘missing’ and that left only 20 unaccounted for. Whilst Polybius doesn’t detail the ‘Cornicen’ position, it is strongly indicated as existing from elsewhere in his pages, but certainly not in a per century capacity as in Ref B. Assigning 20 per legion, however, might certainly be reasonable. Finally the numbers made sense.
I am suggesting, therefore, that the standard Roman Legion equates to 4200 men total. That they are divided in to 50x 80-man centuries with each century consisting of 60x heavy infantry and 20x Velites. Because, for tactical purposes, the Triarii are divided into half-centuries, there are then 60x 3-man ‘officer’ attachments; the total accounted for are 4180 and the remaining 20 are quite possibly ‘Cornicens’.
So, Ladies and Gentlemen of RAT, please may I ask for your critique? I have no wish to suggest that previous researchers have ‘got it wrong’; especially as I cannot read the originals in Latin (a choice at secondary education that I have more than occasionally come to regret, but German was more immediately useful when I joined the Army!).
The question being, however, is whether I have made a silly mistake? Or, perhaps, it’s at least not an unreasonable re-interpretation?
Thanks in advance - simpler and shorter queries being easier to answer.....
