Pre Marian Legion Organisation

[Quintius Clavus]

Gregory Daly, in "Cannae, the Experience of Battle in the Second Punic War," uses the possibility of the light troops (Velites) indeed being at the rear of the army behind the Triarii once they are done with their skirmishing role at the front. He uses this placement to explain why the assault of the Carthaginian cavalry on the rear of the Roman army at Cannae was so disasterous.

The light troops were unarmored and relatively unarmed as well, though some may have still had light javelins, but, with the attack of the cavalry, most of them would have panicked. They had only one way to run during such an attack from the rear, and that was in the direction of the Triarii, who presumably were facing forward. The panicked velites running full tilt into the rear of the forward facing triarii would have thrown their ranks into confusion and disarray, rendering them incapable of effectively countering the horsemen.

The Carthaginian cavalry did not need to actually come in contact with the light troops, the mere fact of their charge would have been enough to panick the young, unarmored velites. Because the velites would have been loosely ordered at the rear, certainly not drilled to hold to ranks as the hastati, principes and triarii were, they could not present the appearance of a solid block to the horses. In turn, the triarii were also not able to do so.


Quinton/Marcus Quintius Clavus, Optio Secundae Pili Prioris Legionis III Cyrenaicae

[Mitra]

Polybius has Scipio deploying the Velites between the Manipuli of Hastati in Book XV, Chapter 9, but what is interesting is that he describes them as being in Cohorts, which he describes in Book XI Chapter 23 as being three Manipuli.

Hi Matthew

In book XI 23 Polybius use (two times) the word semeia for what you translate how cohort; but this word are equivalent to latin signum (standard in english), synonymous of military unit and especially manipulus. The same word is used also in Zama battle's description.
In the next famous passage the greek historian use the word speirai also used for maniple by Polybius but much more generic (used also for other armies). The phrase isn't so clear how on can think: on can translate "three speirai, a combination (syntagma) of foot soldiers called cohort (koortis)" but also "three speirai, a formation (syntagma) of foot soldiers called cohort (koortis)" where the explication is for the single speirai not on the three speirai combined.
If on view Livius's Ilipa description on can think the last is the latin author's interpretation.
I dont think the legion at this historical moment have cohort internal system but on the extremities of Scipio army (the starting point of Polibyus description) we have the socii, enlisted for cohorts (and why not fighting for cohorts).

ciao

[Matthew]

Salve Davide,

Thanks very much for clearing that up, that's exactly the kind of information I was looking for (my Ancient Greek is very bad).

Let me see if I have this straight:

Polybius, Book XI, Chapter 22:

Two uses of the Greek Semeia with regard to the Hastati, Principes and Triarii in general, rendered Cohorts in the translation, but more likely to be Manipuli.

Polybius, Book XI, Chapter 23:

One use of the Greek Speirai, perhaps Manipulus, but not necessarily so, being a term used for describing other armies. It's relation to Koortis being that it might be directly equivalent or one third of said unit. I have to say that my feeling is still that three Speirai = one Koortis, but I can see how this might be rendered otherwise and also that Speirai itself remains ambivalent.

Polybius Book XV, Chapter 9:

This bit I am not clear about. XV.9.9-10 read:

ta de diastêmata tôn prôtôn sêmaiôn aneplêrôse tais tôn grosphomachôn speirais, parangeilas toutois prokinduneuein, [10] ean d' ekbiazôntai kata tên tôn thêriôn ephodon, apochôrein, tous men katatachountas dia tôn ep' eutheias diastêmatôn eis toupisô tês holês dunameôs, tous de perikatalambanomenous eis ta plagia paristasthai diastêmata kata tas sêmaias.

The intervals between the front maniples he filled up with maniples of velites, who were ordered to begin the battle; but if they found themselves unable to stand the charge of the elephants, to retire quickly either to the rear of the whole army by the intervals between the maniples, which went straight through the ranks, or, if they got entangled with [p. 145] the elephants, to step aside into the lateral spaces between the maniples.

I take it that in this passage sêmaiôn refers to the Hastati and speirais to the Velites. Now here is a quandry, for, assuming that the numbers of Hastati and Velites are relatively similar [i.e. in proportions of 12 to 12, 12 to 10, 16 to 12, 16 to 10, etc...], we must assume the spaces between the sêmaiôn to contain something of the order of 100 or more Velites, units of which are here described as speirais. This, in my opinion, lends weight to the reading 'three Speirai = one Koortis or rather three Manipuli = one Cohort, where a Manipulus may be anywhere from 60 men (in the case of Triarri) to 160 men (in the case of reinforced Manipuli of Hastati and Principes), but most likely 120 (being the default size of Manipuli of Hastati or Principes ).

I think I agree, though, that a Cohort was not at this time a fixed grouping of Manipuli.

Matthew James Stanham

[Mitra]

The problem is that Polibyus can has used here speira of velites only for make difference from the hastati's semeia: he can has used a much generic term for make sure the reader dont think the velites are in maniples; is not a question of dimension: other time speira are used for maniple with certitude. We can think at unit of 100,200,500,1000,ecc men each time we read speira, in this passage we can have 120 men speira,60 men speira, 20 men speira,ecc. Polibyus dont specificies the number of units of velites.

[Matthew]

I didn't mean to indicate that a Speirai was of any particular uniform size generally, only that in these two passages (Polybius, XI, Chapter 23 and Polybius, XV, Chapter 9) he probably has in mind a similar order of magnitude when using Speirai to designate a unit (based on the context). I do understand that Speirai had no determinate number, but it seemed to me that here Polybius had very similar numbers in mind, but ti is true that the more I look at it, the less certain it seems.

Polybius, XV, Chapter 9

[6] plên ho men Poplios ethêke tas taxeis tôn idiôn dunameôn ton tropon touton. [7] prôton men tous hastatous kai tas toutôn sêmaias en diastêmasin, epi de toutois tous prinkipas, titheis tas speiras ou kata to tôn prôtôn sêmaiôn diastêma, kathaper ethos esti tois Rhômaiois, alla katallêlous en apostasei dia to plêthos tôn para tois enantiois elephantôn: teleutaious d' epestêse tous triarious. [8] epi de tôn keratôn etaxe kata men to laion Gaion Lailion, echonta tous Italikous hippeas, kata de to dexion meros Masannasan meta pantôn tôn huph' heauton tattomenôn Nomadôn. [9] ta de diastêmata tôn prôtôn sêmaiôn aneplêrôse tais tôn grosphomachôn speirais, parangeilas toutois prokinduneuein, [10] ean d' ekbiazôntai kata tên tôn thêriôn ephodon, apochôrein, tous men katatachountas dia tôn ep' eutheias diastêmatôn eis toupisô tês holês dunameôs, tous de perikatalambanomenous eis ta plagia paristasthai diastêmata kata tas sêmaias.

Scipio placed his men on the field in the following order: the hastati first, with an interval between their maniples; behind them the principes, their maniples not arranged to cover the intervals between those of the hastati as the Roman custom is, but immediately behind them at some distance, because the enemy was so strong in elephants. In the rear of these he stationed the triarii. On his left wing he stationed Gaius Laelius with the Italian cavalry, on the right Massanissa with all his Numidians. The intervals between the front maniples he filled up with maniples of velites, who were ordered to begin the battle; but if they found themselves unable to stand the charge of the elephants, to retire quickly either to the rear of the whole army by the intervals between the maniples, which went straight through the ranks, or, if they got entangled with [p. 145] the elephants, to step aside into the lateral spaces between the maniples.

My interpretation would be (given that Polybius is reconstructing the battle within his text according to his own conventions and in the case of one Legion) 10 Manipuli / Semeia of probably 120-160 Hastati (1200-1600 / 10) interspaced with 9-11 Speira of 1000-1200 Velites (1000-1200 / 9,10 or 11) suggests that a Speirai, in this particular instance, is something of the order of 100-120 Velites


Polybius, Book XI, Chapter 23

XXIII. strephein epi doru, tôi d' euônumôi tanantia. kai labôn autos men apo tou dexiou, Leukios de Markios kai Markos Iounios apo tôn euônumôn treis ilas hippeôn tas hêgoumenas, kai pro toutôn grosphomachous tous eithismenous kai treis speiras -- touto de kaleitai to suntagma tôn pezôn para Rhômaiois koortis -- [2] plên hoi men ep' aspida periklasantes toutous, hoi d' epi doru, proêgon orthious epi tous polemious, energê poioumenoi tên ephodon, aei tôn hexês epiballontôn kai kata periklasin hepomenôn. [3] epei de toutous men ou polu sunebaine tôn polemiôn apechein, tous d' Ibêras en têi kata prosôpon pleurai topon hikanon eti diestanai tôi badên poieisthai tên epagôgên, proseballon tois kerasin amphoterois hama tois tôn hupenantiôn orthiais tais Rhômaïkais dunamesi kata tên ex archês prothesin. [4] hai de meta tauta kinêseis, di' hôn sunebaine tous hepomenous, epiparemballontas epi tên autên eutheian tois hêgoumenois, sunkathistasthai tois polemiois eis tên machên, tên enantian eichon diathesin allêlais, kai katholou to dexion keras tôi laiôi kai kata meros hoi pezoi tois hippeusin. [5] hoi men gar epi tou dexiou kerôs hippeis meta tôn euzônôn, ek doratos epiparemballontes, huperkeran epeirônto tous polemious, hoi de pezoi tounantion ex aspidos pareneballon: [6] tôn de kata to laion hoi men en tais speirais ek doratos, hoi d' hippeis meta tôn grosphomachôn ex hênias. [7] egegonei men oun ek tôn hippeôn kai tôn euzônôn amphoterôn tôn keratôn ek tautês tês kinêseôs to dexion euônumon. [8] hou mikron logon themenos ho stratêgos tou meizonos epoiêsato pronoian, tou kata tên huperkerasin, orthôs logizomenos: [9] eidenai men gar dei to ginomenon, chrêsthai de tais pros ton kairon harmozousais kinêsesin.

Scipio with the three leading squadrons of cavalry from the right wing, preceded by the usual number of velites and three maniples (a combination of troops which the Romans call a cohort), and Lucius Marcius and Marcus Junius with a similar force from the left wing, turned the one to the left the other to the right, and advanced at a great speed in column upon the enemy, the troops in succession forming up and following in column as they wheeled. When these troops were within a short distance of the enemy,--the Iberians in the line direct being still a considerable distance behind, because they were advancing at a deliberate pace,--they came into contact with the two wings of the enemy simultaneously, the Roman forces being in [p. 68] column, according to Scipio's original plan. The movements subsequent to this, which resulted in the troops on the rear finding themselves in the same line as the troops in front, and engaged like them with the enemy, were exactly the converse of each other--taking the right and left wings in general, and the cavalry and infantry in particular. For the cavalry and velites on the right wing came into line on the right and tried to outflank the enemy, while the heavy infantry came into line on the left; but on the left wing the heavy infantry came into line by the right, the cavalry and velites by the left. The result of this movement was that, as far as the cavalry and light infantry were concerned, their right became their left. Scipio cared little for this, but was intent on something more important, namely, the outflanking of the enemy. For while a general ought to be quite alive to what is taking place, and rightly so, he ought to use whatever movements suit the circumstances.

Looking at this passage again, it is not entirely clear to me what Polybius is designating a koortis; it seems to me he could well mean a combination of Equites, Velites and whatever the three Speira are composed of. However, it is noticable that in the translation there appears to be a usual number of Velites attached to a Cohors, which suggests some sort of division for Velites. On the other hand, Polybius' imprecision might imply no such divisions existed. Which leads us back to the passage in Book VI, why bother dividing the Velites amongst the Manipuli if they are on all other respects treated as an indivisable mass?

In the extant text, as far as I can tell, Polybius uses Speira on 28 occasions. Has any sort of study been done on the context and likely meaning for each occurance? I would imagine it would be really useful for understanding the role of the Velites here.

[Mitra]

Matt, if you think to 10 speirai you cannot avoid to create a magnitude's hypothesis, but in the fact the speirai can been 20 (60 men) or 30 (40 men) in this context (at Ibera at example the velites are divided fron hastati and principes lines).

Looking at this passage again, it is not entirely clear to me what Polybius is designating a koortis; it seems to me he could well mean a combination of Equites, Velites and whatever the three Speira are composed of. However, it is noticable that in the translation there appears to be a usual number of Velites attached to a Cohors, which suggests some sort of division for Velites. On the other hand, Polybius' imprecision might imply no such divisions existed. Which leads us back to the passage in Book VI, why bother dividing the Velites amongst the Manipuli if they are on all other respects treated as an indivisable mass?

Polibyus use the term pezon (foot-soldiers) for syntagama so the equites cannot be make part of combination. The "usual number" (which precede the cavalry not the speirai) can to refer to an usual number associated to tre turmae cavalry in fighting situation (the two corps have fighted together in the preceding chapter and in the next) , we dont have direct evidence of logic association from speirai and velites in the phrase.

Which leads us back to the passage in Book VI, why bother dividing the Velites amongst the Manipuli if they are on all other respects treated as an indivisable mass?

Administrative duties?We dont have information on velites centurions or decurions, but for camp duties or administration of the legion they must have a point of reference in the legion; but in fighting and recoinassance situations the velites make team the much more with cavalry or alone than with the maniples.

ciao
Davide

[Matthew]

Salve Davide, thanks for your response.

Matt, if you think to 10 speirai you cannot avoid to create a magnitude's hypothesis, but in the fact the speirai can been 20 (60 men) or 30 (40 men) in this context (at Ibera at example the velites are divided fron hastati and principes lines).

True enough, but it is Polybius himself who creates this. The reality might have been quite different (and indeed it probably was), but I am chiefly interested in what Polybius has in mind when he makes these divisions.

I suppose he could mean multiple Speira are interspaced between the Manipuli of Hastati, but I rather expect that he would mention that. Given the generic usage of Speira, it seems most likely to me that he is referring to 9-11 units in this passage. I take your point, though.

Polibyus use the term pezon (foot-soldiers) for syntagama so the equites cannot be make part of combination. The "usual number" (which precede the cavalry not the speirai) can to refer to an usual number associated to tre turmae cavalry in fighting situation (the two corps have fighted together in the preceding chapter and in the next) , we dont have direct evidence of logic association from speirai and velites in the phrase.

Good, wasn't sure about that.

As we indeed see elsewhere, the Velites are often combined with Equites for operations preceding or seperate to battles. It wouldn't surprise me at all for there to be a usual number asscociated with a Turmae. If we think about the disposition of a Legion, the Velites outnumber the Equites 4:1, which makes for a nice equation [i.e. 1 Unit of 30 Equites typically associated with 1 Unit of 120 Velites. If Velites were indeed divided in this way, they would presumably use similar dispositions when operating in front of the Hastati. Given 40 Velites were informally attached to each Manipuli (1200 / 30), that works rather well in depth as well (i.e. Triarii Velites + Principes Velites + Hastati Velites = 120 Velites)

What might cause problems for this interpretation would be the Socii Horse, as they were three times the number of the Roman Equites. Depending on how they were deployed and what the composition of Socii Foot was, the above supposition aout Velites may not be viable.

As for the composition of a Cohors, well I'm still happiest with it being three Manipuli, but I have to concede the ambiguity of the phrasing makes it difficult to say much.

Administrative duties?We dont have information on velites centurions or decurions, but for camp duties or administration of the legion they must have a point of reference in the legion; but in fighting and recoinassance situations the velites make team the much more with cavalry or alone than with the maniples.

Well, the English translation of Polybius indicates only the disposition of the Equites, Triarii, Principes and Hastati in the camp. The absence of a prescribed place for the Velites in combination with Polybius' indication that they are divided amongst the Manipuli suggests that they are stationed with them, but it is not necessarily the case. The fact that the Triarii are encamped at half the width of the other Manipuli might, indeed, preclude it. The translation also indicates that the principle duty of the Velites is to guard the Vellum and the entrances (the latter of which they apparently do in groups of 10).

I am, of course, only making suppositions as to the role of the Velites, as envisinged by Polybius and only by way of the translation (except where corrected). I do think there is a case to be made for them operating in units, rather than as a mass, though it is not a particularly strong one. I think 1200 to a Legion divided into sub units of 120, divided into sub units of 40, then 20, then 10 fits the evidence best, but I am very interested in other opinions and grateful for the debunking of my ideas when untenable.

My interpretation of the 'best fit', so far:

1,200 Velites divided amongst 30 Manipuli of Foot in units of 40. Not reinforced when the Legion strength is raised from 4,200-5,000 (obviously there are problems with this interpretation, which I outlined in the first post)

When interspaced with Hastati, the Velites operate in 3 units of nominally 40 men or rather 10 Units of 120 (very similar to the strength of the other Foot units).

When operating with Horse, 1 Unit of 120 Velites operates with each unit of Equites. This works out nicely if you then divide each unit of Equites into the three 10 man Files Polybius indicates, as then each File is associated with 40 Velites.