06-03-2013, 02:56 PM
I'm sorry antiochus, I really don't understand your point. :?
Polybius describes the 'norm'. For the standard Consular army he effectively notes that from each of the Allied legions in that army it was normal for a picked force (the extraordinarii) to be selected to carry out particular roles. That force took (likely) 10 centuries of infantry and 10 (if exactly a third) turma of cavalry from each legion.
The Battle of Cannae forces are set in a particular time and place. I read nothing more into Livy's figures except that, after a period beforehand representing a number of conflicts that had reduced the size of the legions through casualties and wastage, the forces available were brought up to strength and then fielded as above. The apparent fact that the Allied cavalry was not up to the normal strength ratio vis a vis the Roman is simply (likely) due to the fact that they couldn't resupply sufficient to do so.
This is no different to the Battle of Pharsalus where Caesar only fielded 22,000 men, but that that was far less than the number of legions that were present would suggest, they were just severely understrength after all those years of campaigning. There are no organisational anomalies present in either case (most likely); they are just the figures that appertain at the time.
The 1,000 in Sicily is simply the number that is quoted. I have no reason to suggest that it is incorrect, but it could certainly be rounded. Given Livy's general approach to numbers, I am sure he is relying on the sources to give him the detail, but I suspect that it is a number in excess of 900 and less than 1,050 however if it is.
We have no idea if it's exactly 250 Roman and 750 Allied, or any other such mix. The fact that there are only 1,000 cavalry to 40,000 infantry could simply be explained by the fact that most of the infantry is occupied by garrison and fort duties and they simply don't need any more cavalry than ~1,000 to carry out scouting/patrolling and liaison duties.
In short - the Consular Army standard organisation a la Polybius is exactly that - a standard. Whilst certainly suitable to consider for the subject of standard organisational theory (hence the thesis), it has no bearing on actual figures quoted during particular campaigns when numbers would steadily fall and occasionally rise when reinforcements appear.
So, whilst I may conclude that the standard small fixed depot garrison of the Imperial period may be a 6-century auxiliary cohort and that it would most likely have 6 x 80 man centuries with a Centurion, Optio and Signifer each, plus a Cornicen and Praefectus Cohortis in command (plus super-numeries) as a standard organisation; at any time from historical snap-shots (say of pay or feeding records) it could be under-strength for many reasons (losses, illness, provincial guard or tax duties, etc).
The Battle of Cannae figures otherwise make perfect sense. If they had wanted to extract an extraordinarii of the standard size, then they could have, or they could have required a bigger one than normal.
Polybius describes the 'norm'. For the standard Consular army he effectively notes that from each of the Allied legions in that army it was normal for a picked force (the extraordinarii) to be selected to carry out particular roles. That force took (likely) 10 centuries of infantry and 10 (if exactly a third) turma of cavalry from each legion.
The Battle of Cannae forces are set in a particular time and place. I read nothing more into Livy's figures except that, after a period beforehand representing a number of conflicts that had reduced the size of the legions through casualties and wastage, the forces available were brought up to strength and then fielded as above. The apparent fact that the Allied cavalry was not up to the normal strength ratio vis a vis the Roman is simply (likely) due to the fact that they couldn't resupply sufficient to do so.
This is no different to the Battle of Pharsalus where Caesar only fielded 22,000 men, but that that was far less than the number of legions that were present would suggest, they were just severely understrength after all those years of campaigning. There are no organisational anomalies present in either case (most likely); they are just the figures that appertain at the time.
The 1,000 in Sicily is simply the number that is quoted. I have no reason to suggest that it is incorrect, but it could certainly be rounded. Given Livy's general approach to numbers, I am sure he is relying on the sources to give him the detail, but I suspect that it is a number in excess of 900 and less than 1,050 however if it is.
We have no idea if it's exactly 250 Roman and 750 Allied, or any other such mix. The fact that there are only 1,000 cavalry to 40,000 infantry could simply be explained by the fact that most of the infantry is occupied by garrison and fort duties and they simply don't need any more cavalry than ~1,000 to carry out scouting/patrolling and liaison duties.
In short - the Consular Army standard organisation a la Polybius is exactly that - a standard. Whilst certainly suitable to consider for the subject of standard organisational theory (hence the thesis), it has no bearing on actual figures quoted during particular campaigns when numbers would steadily fall and occasionally rise when reinforcements appear.
So, whilst I may conclude that the standard small fixed depot garrison of the Imperial period may be a 6-century auxiliary cohort and that it would most likely have 6 x 80 man centuries with a Centurion, Optio and Signifer each, plus a Cornicen and Praefectus Cohortis in command (plus super-numeries) as a standard organisation; at any time from historical snap-shots (say of pay or feeding records) it could be under-strength for many reasons (losses, illness, provincial guard or tax duties, etc).
The Battle of Cannae figures otherwise make perfect sense. If they had wanted to extract an extraordinarii of the standard size, then they could have, or they could have required a bigger one than normal.
