01-08-2014, 04:36 AM
Dear Steven:
Thanks for the post.
I'm pretty confident that the legions at Cynoscephalae were c. 4200 infantry, although in my footnotes I admit this puts me uncomfortably at odds with the likes of Frank Walbank and Nicolas Sekunda. The issue obviously hinges on how many Aetolians were in the army with a strength of somewhat over (hyper) 26,000. Most scholars agree that Plutarch is right and Livy wrong (or perhaps not Livy, but his manuscript tradition) This is in part because in other instances the Aetolians routinely mustered 4000-6000 infantry; it would also be very surprising for them to send 600 infantry but 400 cavalry, as this would be an unusually high ratio of cavalry to infantry for the Greek world.
If we assume each legion/ala has 4200 infantry and 300 cavalry (perhaps several hundred more Italian cavalry), add in 6400 Aetolians, 1200 Athamanians and 800 Cretans and Apollonians, this puts us comfortably at "hyper" 26,000.
As I noted, the fact that an infantry unit at Aous pass somewhat earlier was 4000 infantry and 300 cavalry makes me strongly feel that this was a single legion/ ala in Flamininus' army.
As to the 2000 hastati legionis which Flamininus brought with him into Boeotia : I maintain that this is simply a detachment, and its reported strength may be particularly rough.
It is true that the legions at Magnesia were 5400 infantry. However, this was after a decade of demographic recovery from the 2nd Punic War, and these were also strengthen by over 5000 Scipionic volunteers. It should be noted that it is not until 184 that Livy seems to routinely report 5200 strong legions.
You are also quite correct that my depth for the Galatians at Magnesia is a conjecture. However, if we do assume they maintained the same depth as the Phalanx, as you propose, the basic argument would not change: the legions would have a front of 430 meters, instead of 460 with gaps of 7-16 meters rather than 10-20. This would be in keeping with the paper's model of modest gaps in between maniples.
Best,
Michael
Thanks for the post.
I'm pretty confident that the legions at Cynoscephalae were c. 4200 infantry, although in my footnotes I admit this puts me uncomfortably at odds with the likes of Frank Walbank and Nicolas Sekunda. The issue obviously hinges on how many Aetolians were in the army with a strength of somewhat over (hyper) 26,000. Most scholars agree that Plutarch is right and Livy wrong (or perhaps not Livy, but his manuscript tradition) This is in part because in other instances the Aetolians routinely mustered 4000-6000 infantry; it would also be very surprising for them to send 600 infantry but 400 cavalry, as this would be an unusually high ratio of cavalry to infantry for the Greek world.
If we assume each legion/ala has 4200 infantry and 300 cavalry (perhaps several hundred more Italian cavalry), add in 6400 Aetolians, 1200 Athamanians and 800 Cretans and Apollonians, this puts us comfortably at "hyper" 26,000.
As I noted, the fact that an infantry unit at Aous pass somewhat earlier was 4000 infantry and 300 cavalry makes me strongly feel that this was a single legion/ ala in Flamininus' army.
As to the 2000 hastati legionis which Flamininus brought with him into Boeotia : I maintain that this is simply a detachment, and its reported strength may be particularly rough.
It is true that the legions at Magnesia were 5400 infantry. However, this was after a decade of demographic recovery from the 2nd Punic War, and these were also strengthen by over 5000 Scipionic volunteers. It should be noted that it is not until 184 that Livy seems to routinely report 5200 strong legions.
You are also quite correct that my depth for the Galatians at Magnesia is a conjecture. However, if we do assume they maintained the same depth as the Phalanx, as you propose, the basic argument would not change: the legions would have a front of 430 meters, instead of 460 with gaps of 7-16 meters rather than 10-20. This would be in keeping with the paper's model of modest gaps in between maniples.
Best,
Michael
