Nameless city in Africa taken by Scipio

[Steven James]

I am still exploring the numbers in relation to the new cavalry doctrine I have uncovered. Before departing to capture Cartagena in 209 BC, Polybius has Scipio leave Silenus with 3,000 infantry and 500 cavalry. Livy allocates Silenus 3,000 infantry and 300 cavalry. So a difference of 200 cavalry. Scipio's army follows the organisation of the naval legion. The source both historians are using must be detailed and has included all guard cavalry. Polybius has made the mistake of adding Scipio's consular bodyguard cavalry to the total, whereas Livy has not. Both historian's numbers have been rounded.

In 67 AD, Titus had 200 chosen horsemen when he entered Gamala, and this is the exact number.

The role of the sesquiplicarius now makes sense.

Julian's 200 bodyguard cavalry at Strasbourg in 357 AD, when given the same cavalry doctrine process results in Julian having 240 bodyguard cavalry.

I have M. Speidel as a follow on Academia, and will give him the update for his evaluation. So far this cavalry doctrine is holding up from the republic to the end. However, precisely when it was introduced has yet to be positively determined. Probably 362 BC for the consul's bodyguard cavalry and the third samnite war for the introduction of cavalry left to guard the camp. This doctrine of large forces both infantry and cavalry saved the Romans at Beneventum in 279 BC and the Trebbia in 217 BC. At Beneventum, Dionysius states the Roman army was three times that of Pyrrhus. Here again we find the source that multiplies the Rome's enemy by three.  My opinion is the source is Alimentus.

I wonder is this posting will get me another negative rating?

[Paralus]

Yet Scipio chooses 300 as his cavalry "guard" in Sicily (29.1).

[Steven James]

Yet Scipio chooses 300 as his cavalry "guard" in Sicily (29.1).

Ok, we are now jumping to a completely new campaign. And this might interest Michael Taylor. Scipio selected 300 men from the maniples and centuries, and these 300 cavalrymen are curious as to why they were not included in the centuries, the centuries of cavalry that is.

At Zama, Appian (The Punic War 41), "in this way his cavalry, Laelius commanding the right wing, and Octavius the left, while he and Hannibal took their stations in the centre, out of respect for each other, having a body of horse with them."

Doesn't sound like much, but all my research shows that sub commanders are also allocated a number of guard cavalry. Three of the Roman commanders at Cannae were allocated guard cavalry. Appian allocates them 1,000 men, but has taken the 300 cavalry and instead of dividing it among the commanders, has allocated the whole lot to every commander. The figure of 300 cavalry for the Sicilians is also a rounded number. To arrive at 300 cavalry, the total number of squadrons has been rounded.

[Michael Collins]

"...in this way his cavalry,..." is actually, "In this way was his cavalry disposed."

Appian refers here to the right and left wings of the infantry, not to the cavalry stationed on the Roman army`s flanks, which Appian tells us is all Numidian.

"He stationed his Numidian horse on his wings because they were accustomed to the sight and smell of elephants. As the Italian horse were not so, he placed them all in the rear, ready to charge through the intervals of the foot-soldiers when the latter should have checked the first onset of the elephants. To each horseman was assigned an attendant armed with plenty of darts with which to ward off the attack of these beasts. In this way was his cavalry disposed. Laelius [Gaius Laelius, Scipio's friend and second-in-command.] commanded the right wing and Octavius the left.
In the middle both Hannibal and himself took their stations, out of respect for each other, each having a body of horse in order to send reinforcements wherever they might be needed. Of these Hannibal had 4,000 and Scipio 2,000, besides the 300 Italians whom he had armed in Sicily."

I find it interesting in that wings are a means of command and control and also that it conflicts with Polybius` description of Laelius` command role in the battle.

[Steven James]

each having a body of horse in order to send reinforcements wherever they might be needed.

The body of horse each had and used to sent in reinforcements are guard cavalry. I don't think Appian quite understands how they were used. Guard cavalry have been referred to as "the pick of the army," "those of his command," and "the best about his person." In the early republic they could be combined with the other legionary cavalry. Dionysius and Livy for the years 495 BC and 449 BC, include the guard cavalry in the total number of Roman cavalry. Plutarch numbers the guard cavalry for 168 BC at 120 men, which is correct.

[Hanny]

Hello, I have a question about a rather obscure episode of the Second Punic War. In book 29 of his Ab Urbe Condita Libri, Livy tells us about Scipio's arrival in Africa. In particular, soon after disembarking: "Scipio non agros modo circa vastavit sed urbem etiam proximam Afrorum satis opulentam cepit...", which roughly means that in addition to pillaging the surrounding land, he captured a fairly rich Carthaginian city. What's odd is that he doesn't give a name for it. He's clearly not talking about Utica, as that siege came a bit later and the Romans failed to take it by storm anyway. Any idea or theories about the name of the city that you know of? I couldn't find anything about it outside of Livy.

Livy tells us its name in book 25, it’s Emporia. So sad SJ was to busy making up false history instead of answering the question correctly.

[Steven James]

Hanny wrote:

Livy tells us its name in book 25, it’s Emporia. So sad SJ was to busy making up false history instead of answering the question correctly.

 

Livy in book 29 25 mentions that before departing for Africa Scipio gave the pilots of the fleet “instructions to make for Emporia.” At book 29 25 Scipio moved fleet to Utica. At book 29 29 Scipio captured “fairly opulent city in immediate neighborhood (of Utica?).

 

You cannot presume the opulent city was Emporia as there is no evidence. If it was Emporia, then why wasn’t it named?

 

[removed by mod]

[Hanny]

Hanny wrote:

Livy tells us its name in book 25, it’s Emporia. So sad SJ was to busy making up false history instead of answering the question correctly.

 

Livy in book 29 25 mentions that before departing for Africa Scipio gave the pilots of the fleet “instructions to make for Emporia.” At book 29 25 Scipio moved fleet to Utica. At book 29 29 Scipio captured “fairly opulent city in immediate neighborhood (of Utica?).

 

You cannot presume the opulent city was Emporia as there is no evidence. If it was Emporia, then why wasn’t it named?

 

[removed by mod]

It is named, you just to unfamiliar with history to know it’s name.Lets not forget you deny any city was taken and it’s all made up.

Scipio goes to the port of Emporia and lands S of Cape Bon to secure it, at Porta Ferinea according to  Livys source, coelius, same invasion route as had Regulus and Agathocles taken. Livy even tells us the Africans of this city had not seen A Roman Army since Regulus invasion 50 years earlier.The Army takes 2 weeks to secure emporia, and defeat  the carthaginians trying to relieve it,  the fleet having left to return to Sicily, and return after a stormy crossing.Only then does Scipio head for Utica having established a base ofsupply and port for safe harbour in Africa.

RAT has a number of well informed posters, whose posts are pleasure to read, and vey helpful to anyone wanting to find answers to any questions, then there is your vast number of [oh come on now] that are of no use to man or beast.Example post 4 you mis use the source for H B strength on arrival in Italy, contradicting what you had already said the number was in another thread into the bargain, post incorrect claims for livys numbers for Scipio invasion force, Livy gives several different authors numbers, Livy says 2 Roman plus allied legions, each Roman legion being 6500 strong was his view, and tells us he gives no total number as there is to much confusion to give a total number in book 29, which you cannot add up to get him saying 7000 even if you ignore him explaining he cannot give a total number.

[Robert Vermaat]

Gentlemen, last warning. Discuss on the edge but not across it. I have now removed bad language twice, a third time will mean a ban.