06-11-2019, 02:09 PM
Through no real design, the discussion between Michael and I went off line. In this thread I made reference to the legions being transported by fleet had a different organisation. One translation I have of Livy (22 57) mentions a naval legion, the third at Ostia in 216 BC under the command of Furius Philus (size of fleet not given). Another translation has “the third fleet,” so not sure which is the accurate translation. This fleet raided Africa so would definitely be a naval legion and the legion would conform to the fleet organisation. The reason is because the standard legion organisation is not compatible with the mathematical arrangement of the fleet.
Besides Furius Philus in Ostia, Livy has Titus Otacilius at Sicily given an additional 25 quinqueremes to his fleet of 50 ships, bringing his total to 75 ships. If it was advantageous to the state, Titus Otacilius was to sail to Africa. However, in the same year (216 BC), Livy has Furius Philus return with his fleet from Africa to Lilybaeum in Sicily. Therefore, Titus Otacilius did not go to Africa. Both commanders should be each commanding 25 ships, which means Livy or his source has double counted one of the Roman fleets. Livy also mentions two Carthaginian fleets around Sicily, which could have added to the confusion. What is interesting about these fleet numbers, and many more such examples, is they omit the light ships in the Roman fleet. Diodorus and Polybius mention light ships as part of the fleet in their histories, but one source continually fails to include them. And it’s not just the fleets; I have examples of this occurring in the land armies for the Second Punic War. This source only appears for the Second Punic War.
Returning to the Roman light ships, my theory is the light ships do not have the corvus, and relied on ramming and sheering as their tactics of choice. Depending on the size of the fleet, the number of light ships has helped determine the formation and frontage of a Roman fleet. Some naval battles I have studied suggest on occasion, half the light ships were at the front of the fleet and the other half at the rear of the fleet. The problem I have found is Polybius’ account of Ecnomus, he has in some places confused the legion organisation of the fleet with the squadron organisation, and it is not hard to do. I understand that this is not evidence, but having a few copies of the Avalon Hill boardgame Trireme, we have set up some Roman naval battles on a one to one ratio. The Roman light ships can cripple or damage their opponents, leaving the corvus ships to come forward to grapple and board the damaged opponents.
Florus claims the Roman fleet resembled that of a land army, and he is correct. The Roman fleet has a narrow frontage and a greater depth, and more in the style of the Roman formation at Cannae. It was pointed out to me by a colleague it matches the formation Gellius’ terms a tower. I also have evidence that legions sent to Sicily as garrison legions or for the protection of Sicily did not conform to the fleet organisation, but followed the standard legion organisation.
After 14 years of research and writing, my passion for the Romans completely waned. I never wanted to see another book, documentary or movie on the Romans ever again. However, working on the Roman fleet for some reasons has restored my passion.
