Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: [RESEARCH] Romans

  1. #1

    Default [RESEARCH] Romans

    Periodization and Reforms The outline for the Romans follows a few broad categories and has a few core principals behind it:
    • Gradual and more thorough reforms. Some of these units will only be mild tweeks of what came before aesthetically. Some will have larger differences from a gameplay perspective (unit sizes, morale, upkeep, and things of that nature). Through a series of campaigns (7 in the mod itself, and extra scenarios that can be downloaded - hopefully) the player will get to play through the entire Roman era into the Pax Romana/Imperial periods.
    • Servius period-Greek style hoplites for the top three classes (Hastati, Principes, Triarii), Rorarii and Accensi light troops.
    • "Camillian period"-This is where the changes begin to take place around the middle of the 4th century. The basic progress goes Shield - Maniples w/intervals - Spear and javelins (Per Livy). Sources on this period are rough and a lot of guesswork is involved. Over time, the units will develop into the 3rd century manipular/Polybian system used through the Punic Wars.
    • "Polybian period"-Basically, the climax of the early Republican system. The player will get access to extra-strength maniple units with less drawbacks in terms of equipment. This should cover through into the middle of the 2nd century. Rome's manpower was at its height, and the issues of the latter part of this era were only just creeping in.
    • Mid-to-Late Republic-This is when agrarian issues bubbled to the surface. Soldiers are campaigning in distant areas and away from their homes longer. The elites exploit the situation. It's the issue of the Republican system dealing with a massive empire and failing. The system itself was taxed to its limit and taken as far as it could go before the demagogic Gracchi brothers came on the scene. Manpower is short; equipment and morale have declined. This should be a tough period for the player with certain choices they make along the way in the campaign impacting just how tough it is to get through.
    • Late Republic-The post-Gracchi reforms and the introduction of the Lex Militares help somewhat, but wars in multiple theatres and internal conflict bring Marius to the scene.
    • Marian Reforms-The professionalization of the military is essential to maintain the territory taken, but that creates new political problems as soldiers become increasingly dependent/tied to their generals. Tension between Rome and its allies comes to a head and leads to expansion of citizenship and the end of the Socii before the end of this period.
    • "Civil War Era"-The second climax. In my view, the height of the Roman military occured under Caesar. The professionalized forces reached their peak experience levels and had the best leadership the Roman military would ever have.
    • Principate/Augustan Period
    • Imperium Romanum

    Polybius's description of the Roman Hastati/Principes/Triarii:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    The next in age, who are called the hastati, are ordered to furnish themselves with a complete suit of armour. This among the Romans consists in the first place of a shield of a convex surface; tile breadth of which is two feet and shelf; and the length four feet, or four feet and a palm of those of the largest size. It is composed of two planks, glued together, and covered first with linen, and afterwards with calves' skin. The extreme edges of it, both above and below, are guarded with plates of iron, as well to secure It against the strokes of swords, as that it may be rested also upon the ground without receiving any injury to the surface is fitted likewise a shell of iron; which serves to turn aside the more violent strokes of stones, or spears, or any other ponderous weapon. After tile shield comes the sword, which is carried upon the right thigh, and is called the Spanish sword. It is formed not only to push with at the point; but to make a falling stroke with either edge, and with singular effect; for the blade is remarkably strong and firm. To these arms are added two piles or javelins; a helmet made of brass; and boots for the legs. The piles are of two sorts; the one large, the other slender. Of the former those that are round have the breadth of a palm in their diameter; and those that are square the breadth of a palm 'likewise is a side. The more slender, which are carried with the other, resemble a common javelin of a moderate size. In both sorts, the wooden part is of the same length likewise, and turned outwards at the point, in the form of a double hook, is fastened to the wood with so great care and foresight, being carried upwards to the very middle of it, and transfixed with many close-set rivets, that it is sooner broken in use than loosened; though in the part in which it is joined to the wood, it is not less than a finger and a half in thickness. Upon the helmet is worn an ornament of three upright feathers, either red or black, of about a cubit in height; which being fixed upon the very top of the head, and added to their other arms, make the troops seem td be of double size, and gives them an appearance which is both beautiful and terrible. Beside these arms, the soldiers in general place also upon their breasts a square plate of brass, of the measure of a span on either side, which is called the guard of the heart. But all those who are rated at more than ten thousand drachmae cover their breasts with a coat of . mail. The principes and the triarii are armed in the same manner likewise as the hastati; except only that the triarii carry pikes instead of javelins.
    Hastati *Complete*
    Livy's description of 'third class:' 3rd class: 50,000 in asses, infantry self-equipped with helmet, oblong shield, spear and sword, comprising 10 centuries of seniores and 10 of iuniores.

    Hastati (Version .0 - Hoplites)


    Hastati (Version .2 - Scutum)


    Hastati (Version .5 - Maniple)


    Hastati (Version .9 - Javelins)



    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    This is almost ideal for what I'm going for. There can be some variations in things like the pectoral armor, some can have the sub armor/leather padding and some can be without. Plume color can varry along with tunic tone (see below). This is the general look I'm going for with regards to Hasatati.

    Hastati (Version 1 - First Punic War)


    Hastati (Version 2 - Second Punic War)


    Hastati (Version 3 - Late Second Punic War/Mid Republic)


    Hastati (Version 3.1 - Mid Republic 340 man units)
    • Red tunics dyed properly, but predominantly more earthy wool type reds such (click here for an example). So, intermixed.
    • Underarmor/padding, Image 2. New model required.
    • Leather thight protectors as seen in image above. New model required, goes with underarmor.
    • Greave on left leg.
    • Scutum.
    • Montefortino/Coolus type helmets with red and black feathers (3) that stick up 1.5 feet/1 cubit.
    • Square breast plate or pectoral plate such as in picture above.. Another example (no ciruclar styles) And a third, More muscled version (perhaps save this for Principes). Planer version - Click here for another sample
    • Some units unarmored, and some with just submarmor/padding.
    • Gladius Hispaniensis/Pilum


    Hastati (Version 3.2 - Mid-Late Republic 360 man units)


    Hastati (Version 3.3 - Late Republic Lex Militaris)
    • Red tunics (in general, this unit should be standardized/have relatively uniform equipment and dress along with plainer armors as state now equipping soldiers)
    • Underarmor/padding, Image 2. New model required.
    • Leather thight protectors as seen in image above. New model required, goes with underarmor.
    • Greave on left leg.
    • Scutum.
    • Montefortino/Coolus helmets with red and black feathers (3) that stick up 1.5 feet/1 cubit.
    • Square breast plate or pectoral plate standardized.
    • Gladius Hispaniensis/Pilum

    Principes *Complete*
    Camillan Principe Hoplites type pictures:
    1, Etruscan hoplite statue:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    2, Etruscan hoplite recreated:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Livy's description of 'second class:' 2nd class, with 75,000 in asses, infantry self-equipped with helmet, greaves, oblong shield, spear and sword, comprising 10 centuries of seniores and 10 of iuniores.

    Principes (Version .0 Hoplites)


    Principes (Version .2 Scutum)


    Principes (Version .5 Maniple) *Same apperance as above, basically*


    Principes (Version .9 Javelins) *Same apperance as above, basically*


    Principes (First Punic War Version 1.0)


    Principes (Second Punic War Version 2.0)
    • 'Roman red' tunics
    • Underarmor/padding with leather thigh protectors
    • Greaves on left leg.
    • Scutum
    • Montefortino/Coolus helmets with red and black feathers (3) that stick up 1.5 feet/some with
    • Alternate plume style to mix in.
    • Hloeric's lorica hamata's used sparingly.
    • Xiphos/pilum


    Principes (Second Punic War/Mid-Republic Version 3.0)


    Principes (Second Punic War/Mid-Republic Version 3.1 340 man units)


    Principes (Mid-Republic Version 3.2 360 man units)


    Principes (Mid-Republic Version 4 Manpower shortages)


    Principes (Mid-Republic Version 5 Lex Militares)

    Triarii *Completed*
    Camillan Triarii, similar to Etruscan hoplite shown in this fresco:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Livy's description of 'first class:' with 100,000 in asses, infantry self-equipped with helmet, breastplate, greaves, round shield, spear and sword, comprising 40 centuries of seniores, and 40 of iuniores.

    Triarii (Version .0 Hoplites)
    • Clean white tunics. Some with trims of Tyrian purple, blue, and red.
    • Greaves on both legs
    • Hoplon
    • Montefortino/Chalcidian/Corinthian (rare) helmet types with various styles of decorations/plumes to reflect variety.
    • Gold/bronze thorax armor breastplates as seen above in Estrucan fresco, similar to picture in line below this.
    • pectoral armors such as worn by these Samnites. / Gold thorax type armors
    • Subarmalis with leather protectors. New model required, see Hastati for pictoral examples.
    • Hasta spear, Xiphos


    Triarii (Version .1 Early Mail Armor)
    • Clean white tunics. Some with trims of Tyrian purple, blue, and red.
    • Greaves on both legs
    • Hoplon
    • Montefortino/Chalcidian/Corinthian (rare) helmet types with various styles of decorations/plumes to reflect variety.
    • Gold/bronze thorax armor breastplates as seen above in Estrucan fresco, similar to picture in line below this.
    • Gold thorax type armors
    • New model required, or modified lorica hamata? Early Etruscan style mail armor shirt/vest: Close up sample shot, - Second example.
    • Subarmalis with leather protectors. New model required, see Hastati for pictoral examples.
    • Hasta spear, Xiphos

    Example of later Triarii, soldier on left.
    Example of later Triarii shield designs (applicable to other units, as well
    Mail armored Roman soldiers/Triarii example from Altar of Domitius Ahenobarbus

    Triarii (Version 1 Scutum)
    • Roman red tunics.
    • Greaves on both legs
    • Early Scutum
    • Montefortino/Attic helmet types with various styles of decorations/plumes to reflect variety.
    • Gold/bronze thorax armor breastplates as seen above in Estrucan fresco, similar to picture in line below this.
    • Gold thorax type armors
    • New model required or modified lorica hamata?? Early Etruscan style mail armor shirt/vest: Close up sample shot, - Second example.
    • Subarmalis with leather protectors. New model required, see Hastati for pictoral examples.
    • Hasta spear, Xiphos


    Triarii (Version 2 Celtic Mail Armor)
    • Roman red tunics, some with white and yellow trims.
    • Greaves on both legs
    • Scutum
    • Montefortino/Attic helmet types with various styles of decorations/plumes to reflect variety.
    • Gold/bronze thorax armor breastplates as seen above in Estrucan fresco, similar to picture in line below this.
    • Gold thorax type armors
    • Hloeric's lorica hamata.
    • Subarmalis with leather protectors. New model required, see Hastati for pictoral examples.
    • Hasta spear, Xiphos


    Triarii (Version 2 Late Mail Armor)
    • Roman red tunics, some with white and yellow trims.
    • Greaves on both legs
    • Scutum
    • Coolus/Attic/Montefortino helmet types with various styles of decorations/plumes to reflect variety.
    • Gold/bronze thorax armor breastplates as seen above in Estrucan fresco, similar to picture in line below this.
    • Gold thorax type armors
    • Hloeric's lorica hamata.
    • Subarmalis with leather protectors. New model required, see Hastati for pictoral examples.
    • Hasta spear, Gladius Hispaniensis

    Pre-Marian Equites *Completed*
    Polybius's description of the Roman cavalry:The manner in which these troops are armed is at this time the same as that of the Greeks. But anciently it was very different. For, first, they wore no armour upon their bodies; but were covered, in the time of action, with only an undergarment. In this method, they were able indeed to descend from their horses, or leap up again upon them, with greater quickness and facility; but, as they were almost naked, they were too much exposed to danger in all those engagements. The spears also that were in use among them in former times were, in a double respect, very unfit for service. First, as they were of a slender make, and always trembled in the hand, it not only was extremely difficult to direct them with exactness towards the destined mark; but very frequently, even before their points had reached the enemy, the greatest part of them were shaken into pieces by the bare motion of the' horses. Add to this, that these spears, not being armed with iron at the lowest end, were formed to strike only with the point, and, when they were broken by this stroke, were afterwards incapable of any farther use. Their buckler was made of the hide of an ox, and in form was not unlike to those globular dishes which are used in sacrifices. But this was also of too infirm a texture for defense; and, as it was at first not very capable of service, it afterwards became wholly useless, when tile substance of it had been softened and relaxed by rain. The Romans, therefore, having observed these defects, soon changed their weapons for the armour of the Greeks. For the Grecian spear, which is firm and stable, not only serves to make the first stroke with the point in just direction and with sure effect; but, with the help of the iron at the opposite end, may, when turned, be employed against the enemy with equal steadiness and force. In the same manner also the Grecian shields, being strong in texture, and capable of being held in a fixed position, are alike serviceable both for attack and for defense. These advantages were soon perceived, and the arms adopted by the cavalry. For the Romans, above all other people, are excellent in admitting foreign customs that are preferable to their own.

    Equites 1 (Early)
    • Bleached white Tunic, with red/blue/Tyrian purple trims on some.
    • Small oxhide/leather buckler/parma
    • Attic Helmets/Chalcidian helmets.
    • Red/black/white plumes and some with feathers. Variety, colorful.
    • Spear (One-sided tip, if possible)
    • Xiphos/Kopis mix

    Recreation of Roman cavalry, ignore ridiculous shield color and focus on equipment.
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Equites 2 (Second Punic War reform)
    • Bleached white Tunic with trims. Some red with yellow and other trims.
    • Red and Tyrian purple cloaks for some soldiers.
    • New model required or modified lorica hamata?? Early Etruscan style mail armor shirt/vest: Close up sample shot, - Second example.
    • Cuirasses/Breast plates with leather thigh protection flaps similar to Triarii and Kaziel's Equites.
    • Hloeric's Scale armor
    • Kaziel's equites shields
    • Greek spear, double sided doru.
    • Boeotian helmet/Italo-Corinthian (relatively rare) mix.
    • Red/black/white plumes and some with feathers. Variety and fancy helmets in general with designs (if possible).
    • Greaves
    • Xiphos/Kopis mix

    Best depiction of Republican era cavalry.
    Altar Domitius Ahenobarbus-Cavalrymen with Boetian helmet
    Partial picture of Republican Roman cavalry of later period.
    Delphi monument Roman cavalry armor.
    Delphi monument larger shot.
    Pydna relief large shot.

    Equites 3 (Early to mid 2nd century)
    • Bleached white Tunic with trims. Some red with yellow and other trims.
    • Red and Tyrian purple cloaks for some.
    • Cuirasses/Hloeric's lorica hamata armor with with leather thigh protection flaps. Hloeric's scale armor.
    • Tarantine/large wooden shield with center boss aspis sized as seen in Delphi pictures above, and Kaziel type shields that are smaller in size.
    • Greek spear double-sided.
    • Boeotian helmet/Italo-Corinthian (relatively rare)
    • Red/black/white plumes and some with feathers.
    • Gladii Hispanienses

    Leves/Velites and Roman Light Troops *Completed*
    Livy Description of fourth, fifth, and sixth classes:
    • 4th class: 25,000 in asses, infantry self-equipped with oblong shield, spear, javelin, and sword[15] comprising 10 centuries of seniores and 10 of iuniores.
    • 5th class: 11,000 asses (12,500 in Dionysius), infantry self-equipped with sling and sling-stones (and javelin, in Dionysius), comprising 15 centuries of seniores and 15 of iuniores.
    • Supernumaries: Proletarii (poor citizens, with no estate), 1 century. Military specialists: Equites (cavalry); 18 centuries. Engineers; 2 centuries. Musicians; 2 centuries.

    Rorarii (Camillan Period)
    • Assortnment of dirty and ugly tunics (basically Kaziel's linked below). Some reddish-brown.
    • No helmets
    • Small oblong shield/parma
    • Hasta/Javelins

    Accensi (Camillan Period)
    • Assortnment of dirty and ugly tunics (basically Kaziel's linked below)
    • No helmets/Shields
    • Slings

    Kaziel's levels. VMD can pretty much be used it's entirety, I believe.

    Leves (First Punic War)
    • Tunic assortments as seen in Kaziel's. Instead of true red tunics, brownish-red color used for Hastati.
    • No helmets.
    • Underarmor/padding with leather thight protectors
    • Parma in Kaziel's style. Same material.
    • Javelins

    High quality Velite reenactor.

    Polybius's descriptions of the Velites.
    When they come to the rendezvous, they choose the youngest and poorest to form the velites...
    The youngest soldiers or velites are ordered to carry a sword, javelins, and a target (parma). 2The target is strongly made and sufficiently large to afford protection, being circular and measuring three feet in diameter. They also wear a plain helmet, and sometimes cover it with a wolf's skin or something similar both to protect and to act as a distinguishing mark by which their officers can recognize them and judge if they fight pluckily or not. The wooden shaft of the javelin measures about two cubits in length and is about a finger's breadth in thickness; its head is a span long hammered out to such a fine edge that it is necessarily bent by the first impact, and the enemy is unable to return it. If this were not so, the missile would be available for both sides.

    Velites (Middle of 3rd Century)
    • Kaziel's VMD's mostly, just with some different tunics and a few tweaks.
    • Brownish-red tunics as seen in photo above. Similar to Hastati.
    • Subarmalis for a select few.
    • Montefortino helmets plain no plumes. Some with wolf skins.
    • Parma in Kaziel's style. Same material. Perhaps some different designs.
    • Javelins
    • Daggers and short swords. Some gladii.

    Socii/Italians General Outline:
    • In 264, you start with AOR units for the Socii. These are more regional based and retain some of their particular features
    • A reform or construction of a new line of buildings - you will then have more Roman style with more standardized equipment (scutums etc.)
    • Instead of having the Roman organization of four classes/age groups, there are simply extraordinarii and pedites. The role of the extraordinarii is ambiguous. It seems possible that in order to fill the sort of role the Triarii did in the Roman infantry, they equipped the extraordinarii with spears/hasta. Since they don't appear to be picked based on class at all, but only the 'fittest' of the allies - they would have the added bonus of being more expendable than the Triarii, I suppose (speculation on my part). We never have specific mentions of allied class groups. The evidence cited for the division into the three classes is more speculative, but the most convincing fact for this is that, just like the Triarii, the Extraordinarii were 1/5th of the allied infantry per Polybius just as the Triarii were 1/5th of the Roman infantry. So, while the allies most likely fought with similar equipment and lines, and perhaps there was a further division between class, it would seem like a fairly arbitrary distinction for us to draw as there was little physical difference between Hastati/Principes themselves from an equipment standpoint let alone tactically.
    • Larger units of allies become available (this could also happen earlier in the process)
    • The physical appearance of the units becomes more Roman - colors and such.

    Phase 1 - Allied AOR Groupings (12)
    1-Latins *2 Images*
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    2-Etruscans *18 images*
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    3-Campanians *3 Images*
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    4-Umbrians
    Coming soon...
    5-Volscians *2 Images*
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    6-Marrucini
    Coming soon...
    7-Peligni
    Coming soon...
    8-Frentani
    Coming soon...
    9-Sidicini
    Coming soon...
    10-Marsi
    Coming soon...
    11-Samnites *11 Images*
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    12-Lucanians *3 Images*
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    13-Apulians *2 Images*
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    14-Bruttians
    Coming soon...

    0-Sociorum Units
    Kaziel's Socii Hastati - Example picture:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Pedites Sociorum (Version .5/240 men)
    • Tunic color mixture (like Kaziel's), replace grayish tunics with white.
    • Breast plate mixture (like Kaziel's - circular types throwns in if possible), Estrucan mail armor
    • Attic (Samnites/Lucanians), Chalcidian/Attic (Greek Socii), and Montefortino (Etruscan)
    • Plume variety
    • Kaziel's shield designs
    • Greaves on both legs
    • Xiphos/javelins

    Pedites Sociorum (Version 1 - Scutum/240 men)
    • Tunic color mixture (like Kaziel's), replace grayish tunics with white.
    • Breast plate mixture (like Kaziel's - circular types throwns in if possible), Estrucan mail armors
    • Attic (Samnites/Lucanians/Greek Socii), and Montefortino (Etruscan)
    • Plume variety
    • Early scutum (with new designs similar to Kaziel's)
    • Greaves on both legs, some just left
    • Xiphos/pilum

    Cohors Sociorum (Version 1.5 - 360 man units)
    • Tunic color mixture (like Kaziel's), replace grayish tunics with white.
    • Breast plate mixture (like Kaziel's - circular types throwns in if possible), some with hamata armors
    • Attic (Samnites/Lucanians/Greek Socii), and Montefortino (Etruscan)
    • Plume variety
    • Early scutum (with new designs similar to Kaziel's)
    • Greaves on both legs, some just left
    • Xiphos/pilum

    Cohors Sociorum (Version 2 - Romanization/360 men)
    • Red, white and blue tunics (trims thrown in - see pictures of early Italian styles)
    • Hastati/Principes/Mail armors all mixed in
    • Montefortino Helmets
    • Plume variety
    • Scutum
    • Mixture of greaves on both legs and some on left leg only
    • Gladius Hispaniensis/Pilum

    Cohors Sociorum (Version 3 - Romanization/360 men)
    • Red, white tunics (trims thrown in - see pictures of early Italian styles)
    • Hastati/Principes/Mail armors all mixed in
    • Montefortino Helmets
    • Plume variety
    • Scutum
    • Greaves left legs
    • Gladius Hispaniensis/Pilum

    Pedites Extraordinarii (Version 1)
    • Tunic color mixture (like Kaziel's), replace grayish tunics with white.
    • Breast plate mixture with thorax types more represented, hamatas mixed in
    • Attic (Samnites/Lucanians/Greek Socii) and Montefortino (Etruscan)
    • Plume variety
    • Early scutum (with new designs similar to Kaziel's)
    • Greaves on both legs, some just left
    • Hasta/Xiphos

    Cohors Extraordinarii (Version 1.5 - 360 man units)
    • Red, white tunics (trims thrown in - see pictures of early Italian styles)
    • Breast plate mixture with thorax types more represented, hamatas mixed in
    • Attic (Samnites/Lucanians/Greek Socii) and Montefortino (Etruscan)
    • Plume variety
    • Early scutum (with new designs similar to Kaziel's)
    • Greaves on both legs, some just left
    • Hasta/Xiphos

    Cohors Extraordinarii (Version 2 - Romanization/360 men)
    • Red, white tunics (trims thrown in - see pictures of early Italian styles)
    • Hamatas and breast plate mixtures
    • Montefortino
    • Plume variety
    • Scutums
    • Greaves on left legs
    • Hasta/Gladius Hispaniensis

    Equites Sociorum (Version 1)
    • Samnite style Red tunics with blue trim, white tunics with red/purple trims.
    • Cloaks of various colors. Red, white, yellow, rare purple. Some with none.
    • Linothoraxes (Etruscan/Southern Italians), breast plates (Samnites), and others with no armor.
    • Apulo Corinthian helmets, Attic helmets, Montefortino helmets
    • Plume variety-some yellow, red, white, black, some with feathers sticking out like Roman infantry units,
    • No greaves
    • Spear/Kopis

    Equites Sociorum (Version 2 - Hamatas/shields)
    • Samnite style Red tunics with blue trim, white tunics with red/purple trims.
    • Cloaks of various colors. Red, white, yellow, rare purple. Some with none.
    • Hamatas and breast plates/thoraxes.
    • Aspis sized shields and parma shield mixture
    • Apulo Corinthian helmets, Montefortino helmets, Boetian helmets
    • Plume variety-some yellow, red, white, black, some with feathers sticking out like Roman infantry units,
    • Greaves on both legs for some
    • Spear/Gladius and Kopis

    Campani Equites Sociorum (Version 1)

    Campani Equites Sociorum (Version 2)

    Equites Extraordinarii (Version 1)
    • Mixture of all tunics used in other Socii cavalry units.
    • Mixture of cloaks used in other cavalry units.
    • Apulo Corinthian helmets, 'winged' Attic helmets, Attic helmets, Montefortino helmets
    • No shields/armor
    • Apulo Corinthian helmets, Montefortino helmets, Attic helmets, 'Winged' Attic
    • Plume variety-some yellow, red, white, black, some with feathers sticking out like Roman infantry units,
    • Some with greaves and some without.
    • Spear/Kopis

    Equites Extraordinarii (Version 2-Hamatas)
    • Mixture of all tunics used in other Socii cavalry units.
    • Mixture of cloaks used in other cavalry units.
    • Apulo Corinthian helmets, 'winged' Attic helmets, Attic helmets, Montefortino helmets
    • Hamatas and breast plates
    • Aspis-sized and parma shield mixtures
    • Apulo Corinthian helmets, Montefortino helmets, Boetian helmets
    • Plume variety-some yellow, red, white, black, some with feathers sticking out like Roman infantry units,
    • Greaves on both legs
    • Spear/Gladius

    General Roman Pictures and References Simply picture showing evolution of Roman shields:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Roman Dyes:

    Earliest known Gladii, drawings/recreations without color
    Last edited by ABH2; November 23, 2014 at 07:35 PM.


  2. #2

    Default Re: [RESEARCH] Republican Roman Army

    So, the Romans above differ from other 'realistic' portrayals of the Romans (including Rome 1 mods that aimed for realism and historical) in two large respects.
    1. Tunic color-I have included red far earlier than most.
    2. The inclusion of padding underneath the armor of the Romans.

    I did this for a number of reasons. On tunic color, a bit is included in the first post under the section that details dyes. But, I'll lay out the basics of the evidence, anyway, for those who wonder about the decision.

    Red Tunic Color


    • Nearly every depiction of Italian troops we have from the 4th century (and earlier) shows soldiers in red tunics. This includes those instances we do have of Romans, but especially those of the Etruscans. This continues on through into the 3rd and 2nd century. To put is simply, when we have soldiers and colors have been preserved...the common soldiers wear red. I can go through the list of these if necessary.
    • Red dye, despite the claims of many, wasn't terribly expensive for the Romans. By the mid to late Republic they even had knock-off purple dyes. The Romans had access to wools that naturally would have had a reddish hue and they had a dye industry
    • The main reason, as I see it, that we end up with plain white tunic'ed Romans is to show that soldiers would have been providing their own equipment (itself only partially correct, the state did help equip soldiers in some respects). Yet, there also would have been an expectation for men to show up with decent equipment. Serving was, from what we know, seen as a relative 'honor' or at least a duty that men performed. They trained and drilled regularly. The Hastati, Principes, and Triarii were not poor individuals or the dregs of society, but propertied men who would have been something like the middle class of the time, as well. Rome itself would have been rather wealthy compared to some of the Greek city states at this period which were in their decline, so why wouldn't they be able to afford types of dyes that were grown locally as reds were?
    • Livy in the Third Samnite War described two 'divisions' of Samnites equipped rather colorfully in terms of shields, tunics and other equipment (supposedly even mail armor). When Livy has his Roman general address his men (supposedly intimidated by the rather fanciful Samnites before them), he specifically addresses their tunic colors. They aren't just meaningless on the battlefield, he states, but also tactically put them at a disadvantage because they would easily show blood. Red was a very common and desired color for soldiers for the very simple fact that it hid wounds on the battlefield. When Livy puts these words into the mouth of a 4th century Roman general, he obviously would have had the modern Roman soldier who wore red, but it also shows the belief or expectation that earlier Roman forces would have done the same. Was he right? Again, go back to the pictorial evidence. There is no reason to doubt him on this. This factoid is usually attributed to the Spartans, but it was not unique to them. It was basic common sense.
    • There are also quotes in the Republican period of soldiers wearing the colors of Mars - ie RED.
    • A lot of mods like to depict these varied troops because (this may sound condescending, and I apologize) they think it shows the relatively primitive systems being represented. This has always bugged me because it is more of an assumption. This is more of my personal opinion and unnecessary to the larger evidence available which clearly all points one way (with really nothing to the contrary as far as I know), but soldiers didn't only attempt to look uniform in recent times. Did the Romans provide uniforms as a modern military? No. But I'd also point out that even the American military has soldiers with various qualities of equipment. M-16's are still given out to soldiers when units run out of M-4's, only some units have high powered sights, body armor is constantly changing and you'll find units with different quality kits. But, there is still a desire for uniformity because it reinforces the concept of being part of a larger entity. The Roman system depended on each man doing his job just the same as today if not more so. Modern drill is just for show - for the Romans, it was a very real part of battle. All of this is to say that I find some of the condescending statements made about what the Romans would have done or would have been able to do rather annoying.
    • White tunics (often the color of early Romans) clearly had a ceremonial role for the Romans when worn. Various quotes and ideas have been documented on this idea. Red for battle, white for ceremonies. It matches the pictorial evidence we have and the later sources. We also know that white tunics were early on associated with the the elites. Despite being supposedly 'cheap,' it was a color used by the Consuls and other officials for their tunics. It seems rather odd to me that this would develop if it was a common color for the lower classes, but that's just theoretical speculation of mine and there are people probably more qualified to comment on this fact than myself.


    This a brief summary. Despite my last comment, the bottom line is that the evidence for uniform color all indicates one thing, and I feel people have largely decided to ignore it all. It's an instance where I think modders have gotten too cute. I don't mean to offend anyone with this as it has become the common depiction of early Roman era troops among the Total War 'community.' I just happen to disagree with it...strongly.

    If anyone has actual evidence to the contrary instead of just hypothesis about what they think Roman soldiers could have afforded, I'm all ears. But, the tired and rather non-historical theories levied about on this subject (they were providing own equipment etc.) won't phase me.

    Subarmalis
    • Underarmor or padded armor such as linothoraxes were relatively common in the Greek world by the 4th century. See Alexander the Great's army. Key areas of protection were the shoulders and thights (for good reason - they tend to be located near arteries and where soldiers can be exposed by the primary armors as well as in the modes of combat becoming more frequent)
    • Later legionaries had leather to cover their thighs and other vulnerable spots. Fighting in closer quarters with swords and scutums, they desired/needed protection of the thigh region and shoulder areas. This goes back to the point above. This wouldn't have been some revolutionary technology or terribly expensive. I have not made it uniform for all Roman troops because it is not mentioned by our best literary source on the Republican army (Polybius), but these two points are why I feel it's reasonable.
    • So, I may appear vulnerable to the same criticisms I levied above. Am I getting cute with this? Well, I believe there are depictions of soldiers in such gear. We know that it was in wide use in the later Republic and into the imperial era. That we know. Depictions of Roman soldiers in the 2nd century BC seem to depict leather thigh protectors worn underneath armor. The mail armor itself clearly extends to cover the thighs at Pydna. Some pictorial evidence indicates this was a practice as early as the 4th century. One Etruscan urn shows a soldier in mail armor with what would certainly appear to be leather flaps on underneath (there is also an early depiction of an Etruscan hoplite that seems to show a linothorax type armor). They wanted protection of the groin/thigh area. The Altar of Domitius also seems to depict these.
    • Pteryges/the leather stripes that protected the thighs were commonly depicted on the Etruscans and obviously found among the Greeks. While not all sculptural depictions show these, there are two key points to remember: 1. Some of the detail (ie paint) has naturally faded; 2. A lot of sculptures leave off armor details in general from depictions. But, we do know that they were worn.
    • The 'heart protector' plates obviously did not provide full coverage. I mean, this goes without saying. Why would the premier heavy infantry of the period, just as it was adopting tactics that brought it into closer quarters during combat not adopt relatively cheap forms of protection on the areas of the body where, if struck, the victim would be most likely to bleed out...? Since we pretty much know that forms of padding were clearly in use by the 2nd century on among the Romans, it would be kind of odd for it to have taken them 100+ years of fighting in the maniple system not to adopt it. Most mods leave off the leather thigh protection in general which I don't get.
    • Helmets had considerable padding in them (at least, from those rare cases where it has survived until now). Loose piece of evidence, admittedly.
    • The linothorax project has done some very interesting tests that have shown just how effective leather armors could be against missiles and indirect blows. Again, I'd just say that it would be...odd...for the Romans not to have known about this for 2+ centuries and to have relied upon a tiny piece of chest armor. The relatively small amount of protection provided by the heart protector is itself evidence for some sort of padded/leather armor underneath.


    Etruscan depiction of a linothorax type armor from the Francois tomb (showing Trojans, admittedly):
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Etruscan battle urns:


    Etruscan mural depicting leather armor:
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    The main question here is why Polybius wouldn't have mentioned it, but it would fly in the face of the reason (at least, in my view) for the Romans not to adopt cheap extra protection that they would have been very familiar with even before the time frame of the game. We know similar types of equipment were in use by the 2nd century, but not the 3rd? Why?


  3. #3

    Default Re: [RESEARCH] Republican Roman Army

    Unit Spacing
    Maniples:
    Rows/Ranks: Ground man stood on and then 3ft of space to each side (so 6 feet in total to each side plus ground man stood on). (Contested, but commonly accepted)
    Files: ~3ft between ranks. (Debated, but as stated by Polybius)
    Elemental organization: 12 files 10 men deep standard for maniples. When extra men added to maniples, extend number of files but ranks stay fixed at 10 (or 10 deep). So, if 240 men, 24 files x 10 ranks. If 340, 34x10 etc. Of all the organizations I've seen presented, this one makes the most sense to me based on the frontage it would provide and the ease with which larger numbers could be added to it.
    Triarii: 12 files x 5 ranks. If larger unit sizes used like, say, 300 - keep the 5 ranks, but expand outward to give Triarii comparable frontage.

    Polybius 18.30:
    Now in the case of the Romans also each soldier with his arms occupies a space of •three feet in breadth but as in their mode of fighting each man must move separately, as he has to cover his person with his long shield, turning to meet each expected blow, and as he uses his sword both for cutting and thrusting it is obvious that a looser order is required, 8 and each man must be at a distance of at least three feet from the man next him in the same rank and those in front of and behind him, p153if they are to be of proper use. 9 The consequence will be that one Roman must stand opposite two men in the first rank of the phalanx, so that he has to face and encounter ten pikes, and it is both impossible for a single man to cut through them all in time once they are at close quarters and by no means easy to force their points away, as the rear ranks can be of no help to the front rank either in thus forcing the pikes away or in the use of the sword.
    Phalanx
    Coming soon...


  4. #4

    Default Re: [RESEARCH] Republican Roman Army

    I'm currently doing research on the Socii for an overhaul project, and I'm finding that there is a lot of ambiguity and debate over how to depict the presence of Socii in the Roman army. I personally lean towards their gradual assimilation and adoption of Roman-style organization (Hastati/Principes/Triarii), yet the matter is more complex than that.

    There are, as I see, a few fundamental questions regarding the Socii:
    1. Did they fight in intermixed units (as in, Socii of one city/region mixed with another) or autonomous maniples/cohorts based on their home region?
    2. How similar was their equipment to the Romans?
    3. What does it mean when we have mentions of allied cohorts?
    4. And more of a sidenote question - what role did the Extraordinarii have on the battlefield, if any?


    We have several sources to rely on for this:
    • Polybius (typically considered the best and more reliable Republican source we have)
    • Livy
    • For the early period, Dionysius


    Distinct Socii Units
    The big two and then the relatively minor sources will be the ones I'm relying on here along with modern scholarship on the subject matter. We'll start around the Pyrrhic Wars with some quotes from Dionysius to get us started:

    Dionysius 20.4, The Pyrrhic Wars:
    The consuls arrayed on their left wing the legion called the first, facing the Macedonian and Ambraciot phalanx and the Tarentine mercenaries, and, next to the first legion, the third, over against the Tarentine phalanx with its white shields and the Bruttian and Lucanian allied forces; 5 adjoining the third army they placed the fourth, facing the Molossians, Chaonians and Thesprotians; and the second on the right wing opposite the mercenaries from Greece — the Aetolians, Acarnanians and Athamanians — and the Samnite phalanx that was equipped with oblong shields. The Latins, Campanians, substitutes, Umbrians, Volscians, Marrucini, Peligni, Ferentani, and their other subjects they divided into four divisions and mingled them with the Roman legions, in order that no part of their lines might be weak. 6 And dividing the cavalry, both their own and that of their allies, they placed it on both wings.
    So, here we have Dionysius describing the allies in this early period fighting as pretty distinct units that end up getting intermixed. This doesn't seem to be the norm, however, since it was done for this particular battle to counter the formation of Pyrrhus. We have another reference from Dionysius on distinct Campanians (who appear in other sources, as well) and some others:
    and a force of Romans under the command of Fabricius the consul had been sent against them, the Rhegians, fearing that the barbarians would send an army against them also upon the departure of the Romans, and being suspicious of the city of Tarentum, begged Fabricius to leave a force in the city to guard against the sudden raids of the barbarians, and also in case there should be any unexpected hostile plot on the part of the Tarentines. And they received eight hundred Campanians and four hundred Sidicini, all under the command of Decius, a Campanian by birth.
    From Livy, we also have two distinct references to Campanian units/forces during the Third Samnite War as well as the Second Punic War:
    Third Samnite war 10.26.14:
    The force with which the consuls had taken the field consisted of four legions and a large body of cavalry, in addition to 1000 picked Campanian troopers detailed for this war, whilst the contingents furnished by the allies and the Latin League formed an even larger army than the Roman army.

    Second Punic War Livy 23.4.8:
    The strongest tie of this nature was the presence of three hundred cavalry, from the noblest families in Capua, in Sicily, whither they had been specially sent by the Roman authorities to garrison the island. The parents and relatives of these troopers [equitibus delectis] succeeded after much difficulty in getting envoys sent to the Roman consul.

    Livy 10.29:
    The Gauls were still standing in close order behind their shield wall. Fabius, on hearing of his colleague's death, ordered a squadron of Campanian horse, about 500 strong, to go out of action and ride round to take the Gauls in the rear. The principes of the third legion were ordered to follow, and, wherever they saw the enemy's line disordered by the cavalry, to press home the attack and cut them down.
    Connolly 124, Cohorts and cohorts of allies:
    Occasionaly one maniple of hastati, one of principes and one of triarii operated together as a unit called a cohort. Polybius and Livy both use this term for the first time in the later stages of the Second Punic War where it is clearly describing a tactical unit of legionaries. In the 2nd century the term is often used for a unit of allies eg. a cohort of Marsi, a cohort of Cremona.
    Now, disclaimer - references to cohorts of particularly allies typically come from Livy - who tends to be considered less reliable than Polybius, and was writing far after. We will address this issue - the credibility of Livy on this - later. But, two of the references:
    Livy 33.36 Cohort of Marsians, Latin Cavalry.
    The Boians, quite incapable of supporting the weariness of delay, dispersed everywhere to their villages and strongholds. Suddenly Marcellus crossed the Po and invaded the Comum territory, where the Insubres had induced the natives to take up arms and were now encamped. The Boian Gauls, full of confidence after the recent fight, joined battle with him while he was actually on the march, and at first attacked with such violence that they forced the front ranks to give way. Fearing that if they once began to give ground it might end in a complete repulse, Marcellus brought up a cohort of Marsians and launched all the troops of the Latin cavalry against the enemy.

    Livy 25.14 Second Punic War Paelignian cohort:
    To make more certain of this, he prepared to send for his colleague and his army and direct their joint operations against Hanno and the Campanians. The "retire" was already being sounded when the general's plans were shattered by the angry shouts of the soldiers who spurned such feeble tactics. The Paelignian cohort happened to be in closest touch with the enemy, and their commanding officer, Vibius Accaus, snatched up a standard and flung it across the enemies' rampart, at the same time invoking a curse on himself and his cohort if the enemy got possession of the standard. He was the first to dash over fosse and rampart into the camp. Now the Paelignians were fighting inside the lines, and Valerius Flaccus, the commanding officer of the third legion, was rating the Romans for their cowardice in letting the allies have the glory of capturing the camp,
    Paul Erdkamp, 68:
    Latin and Italian communities meanwhile levied their own contingents, as specified by the terms of their alliances with the Romans and sent them tjoin the Roman forces. [NOTE: Erdkamp is drawing this information from Polybius's description of Roman recruitment] -68 It also began to include groups of support troops post-Second Punic War such as Balaeric slingers, Gallic/Iberian/Numidian cavalry...

    Nomen Latinum (Latin name?) and Socii. Furnished 'specified contingents under the terms of their agreements with Roman Republic." [NOTE: Erdkamp is referring to the fact that each 'ally' had a treaty with Rome that would have had some varriance to it - some allies were used to draw naval forces and other land, but this is also important as it could have impacted how they were organized in battle. The Campanians, for instance, seem to have had fairly favorable arrangements with the Romans and we have more references to their serving separately. We don't have a great deal of information on the particulars, though.] Formula togatorum. Greek cities of coast such as Naples, Rhegium, Locri and Tarentum supplied ships/crews. Roman and allied infantry served aboard warships as marines (Polybius 1.20.13-14, Livy 26.39 and 36.42). Latin/allied army units equipped and disciplined like their Roman counterparts, with variable numbers of infantry and cavalry assigned to each army. At points ratio of allies to Romans 2:1.

    Erdkamp on the treaties with allies:
    The foedus Cassianumn between Rome and the Latin League (traditionally dated to 493 bc) supposedly established a federal army under Roman command, but next to nothing is known about its functioning. The participation of the allied peoples was based on the treaties between their communities and Rome. The position of the Latin colonies was slightly different, because their obligations were probably based on the lex coloniae governing each Latin colony
    So, it would seem right now that there is a plethora of evidence for distinct allied units, but there is a problem. Polybius, the more reliable of the two sources, is completely silent on this matter. The only references we have from Livy (who drew, typically, on Polybius and some other Roman sources). When Polybius mentions the allies, it is only in terms of an ala (outside of his initial description of the army). What, exactly, does the silence of Polybius mean, and why did Livy go out of his way at times to mention specific allied cohorts?

    Erdkamp proposes an answer to this, and I have to admit - I find it rather convincing. I will quote parts of his argument with key parts bolded.

    Polybius seems to ignore the distinction between Romans and allies as far as the infantry is concerned...Polybius’ narrative of military operations, refers to allies as well as Romans...The answer is that Polybius described the allied troops as functioning not differently from the Roman troops. As he depicts them, the units of allies and Romans together formed one uniform army, operating in the same way and organised along identical lines. The theoretical passages in Book six and elsewhere support this hypothesis.

    While the first passage explicitly distinguishes between the units of allies and Romans, the battle formation of the second passage implies a homogenously organized army consisting of three columns. It is clear that the allies were part of the columns of hastati, principes and triarii. In his description of the formation of the consular army, Polybius tells us explicitly that the allies are organized by Roman officers. The magistrates of the allied communities were first instructed to send a certain number of troops. Polybius (6.21.5) adds that the magistrates of the allies used the same procedure as the Romans to choose their recruits, each community appointing a commander and a paymaster. At the final stage, the recruits selected from among the citizens and those from the Latin and other allies came together and were divided into units [by the Romans]. The allies having now assembled also at the same places as the Romans, their organization and command are undertaken by the of cers appointed by the consuls known as praefecti sociorum and twelve in number. (Polybius 6.26.5)

    ...

    The Roman light armed soldiers (velites) were men of little property. The three lines of hastati, principes and triarii represented different age classes. The hastati were the youngest recruits, the principes men in their prime, the triarii were seasoned veterans.19 If the allied units were organised in a similar manner, their troops had to be distinguished along similar lines. In other words, also allied troops had to be distinguished according to age and property. This is confirmed by the brief remark that we have seen above concerning the mobilisation of allied troops: the allied magistrates used the same procedure to select their recruits.

    In most cases, allies are referred to as the extraordinarii or the left or right ala. See, for instance, Livy’s account of a battle against the Boii in 193 bc: The second legion was sent forward and the extraordinarii relieved. Then the battle was restored, since fresh troops, a legion with full ranks, had entered the fight. The ala sinistra was withdrawn from the battle and the ala dextra took its place in the battle-line. (35.5.6)

    We can take this relation between numbered legions and allied contingents even further, since all the battle scenes having details on allied units also have numbered legions. Livy’s battle accounts with numbered legions, details concerning allied units and military standards in the lists of casualties and booty can be related to Valerius Antias. We may be certain that Valerius Antias was Livy’s only source for battle accounts of the late-annalistic type

    Secure evidence for ethnic allied units does not emerge before the time of Marius, but it is sparse: in the Jugurthine War, Marius commanded a cohors Paeligna (Bell. Jug. 105.2), while two cohorts from Camerinum fought at his side during the battle of Vercellae against the Cimbri (Cicero, Balb. 46; Valerius Maximus 5.2.8).
    On the Jugurthine War references, Erdkamp proceeds to argue that the units in question were more like mercenaries or auxilla. Considering the specific references, those instances aren't even debatable.

    Erdkamp suggests basically throwing out Livy's references to the earlier allied cohorts as he believes they were derived from Valerius Antias who, despite his accounts not surviving, is considered fairly unreliable and was writing in proximity to the Social War (hence, he may have had biases related to how he wanted to portray the allies). Livy certainly does not get the references from Polybius.

    Erdkamp's argues that the silence of Polybius indicates that the allies were pretty much the same or indistinguishable by the mid-Republic from the Romans themselves. I'm inclinded to agree because it clearly is the most rational explanation.

    What would a Roman triplex acies mean, as commonly depicted, if over half the troops in the battle weren't using it? The Principes, Hastati and Triarii had distinct tactical roles, and it would have been odd, to say the least, if sometimes the majority of their infantry didn't have something at least equivalent to them.

    Class was also the common dividing line in ancient militaries. You also have the fact that the Romans were the dominant political class, and imitation of them from the Italians would make sense on a political level as well as the militarial. We know that the Roman equites seem to have taken offense to the idea of serving with other Italian elites (at least, it's a working theory). They guarded their status carefully. This was the common mindset of the day. The reverse logic would seem to make sense for the Italians. If the Romans had more experienced and wealthier soldiers serving in more distinguished roles in battle (and let's face it, safer - Triarii and Principes weren't front line troops), it makes sense that a 'middle class' land owner of Umbria wouldn't want to be placed in the frontlines if he has campaign experience, and the Romans themselves clearly provided a model that over time reflected experience and elements of wealth still (per Polbyius).

    This is why my current plan for depiction moves in phases with the allies:
    1. Serving as distinct AOR troops are the very start of the campaign. They are really just allies joining the Romans in battle - which is what the sources basically describe for most of the allies. This will include more native arms and dress.
    2. Over time, probably by the Second Punic War, we have the allies duplicating Roman organizational structures (hastati, principes, and triarii etc.), equipment, and adopting elements of Roman dress.
    3. We have allies being arranged into larger units out of necessity. The early references to cohorts are of allies. The only references we seem to have to cohorts of Romans proper in battle are allied forces. It seems likely, then, that Marius adopted cohorts from the organization of the allies.
    4. In the final phase, we'll have larger bodies of allied infantry that are otherwise more or less Roman in appearance. They will be more homogeous and incorporated into the state before the Marius reforms and the Social War.


    Cohorts
    Connolly 71, Allied cohort references in Polybius and Livy:
    71-Adoption of cohorts from allies. First mentions related to Italian and Latin troops in 294, 217, and 212 before the first Roman (Polybius 11.23.1 Ilipa). Earlier mentions-Livy 10.33.1, 23.17.11, 25.14.4, 25.39.1, 27.49.4; cf. 28.45.2.

    Specific references to those quotes coming soon...

    Extraordinarii

    Edkamp on the Extraordinarii:
    Moreover, the fittest horsemen and foot soldiers [NOTE: Polybius says 1/5th of the infantry and 1/3rd of the cavalry] among the allied troops were selected by the Romans in order to form the extraordinarii (6.26.6). Ethnic units of varying size would not fit the army as he describes it, not only in book six, but also in his account of the Roman army on campaign.

    ...

    In most cases, allies are referred to as the extraordinarii or the left or right ala. See, for instance, Livy’s account of a battle against the Boii in 193 bc: The second legion was sent forward and the extraordinarii relieved. Then the battle was restored, since fresh troops, a legion with full ranks, had entered the fight. The ala sinistra was withdrawn from the battle and the ala dextra took its place in the battle-line. (35.5.6)
    This part is particularly interesting. The extraordinarii are fighting in the front ranks and getting a litte roughed up. We have the allies clearly fighting in maniples with lines of reserves that can come up and relieve them - exactly like a triplex acies. The full text from Livy 35.5:

    k. The left wing of the allied cavalry and the "special" corps were fighting in the front line, and two generals of consular rank - M. Marcellus and Tiberius Sempronius; the latter had been consul the previous year - were in command of them. The consul Merula was at one moment at the front and at another holding back the legions who were in reserve, lest in their eagerness they should go forward before the signal was given. Two military tribunes, Q. Minucius and P. Minucius, received orders to take the cavalry of these two legions outside the line and when the signal was given to deliver an attack from the open. Whilst the consul was making these dispositions a message came from Ti. Sempronius Longus informing him that the special corps were not able to withstand the onslaught of the Gauls, a great many had been killed, and the survivors, wearied out and dispirited, had lost all heart for fighting. He asked the consul, therefore, if he approved, to send up one of the legions before they were humiliated by defeat. The second legion was sent up and the special corps was withdrawn. The battle was now restored, as the legion came up with its men fresh and its maniples complete.
    This is one of the few instances we have of the extraodinarii on the battleifled. It was an an 'open and regular battle,' per Livy. So, we have the extraordinarii occupying a specific place during battle, and we have almost no other distinction made between the tactics used.


  5. #5

    Default Re: [RESEARCH] Republican Roman Army

    Below you will find nearly every reference made by Livy to allied contingents/cohorts and allies acting on their own in battle. Paul Erdkamp argues that Livy used Valerius Antias as his source for such contingents. Livy's references to them start in his books on the Second Punic War and continue through to the Battle of Pydna. As evidence of this, Erdkamp points out that the appearance of named or separate detachments of allies (named by their geographical locality of recruitment) correspond with:
    • Named legions.
    • Exact figures related to spoils and casualties.
    • Particularly intimate accounts of the battles and anecdotes that create characters and reenact their actions in rather specific detail.

    All three of these traits are common characteristics attributed to Valerius Antias and are used by Erdkamp to show their unreliability. He also included a nifty chart in his book that details all the references he is referring to along with the named legions and the 'exact' details provided by Livy.

    Another thing worth mentioning - when in battle, Livy typically refers to Romans as maniples and allies as cohorts.

    25.14, Second Punic War - Paelignian cohort:
    The Paelignian cohort happened to be in closest touch with the enemy, and their commanding officer, Vibius Accaus, snatched up a standard and flung it across the enemies' rampart, at the same time invoking a curse on himself and his cohort if the enemy got possession of the standard. He was the first to dash over fosse and rampart into the camp. Now the Paelignians were fighting inside the lines, and Valerius Flaccus, the commanding officer of the third legion, was rating the Romans for their cowardice in letting the allies have the glory of capturing the camp, when T. Pedanius, a centurion in command of the leading maniples' took a standard out of the bearer's hands and shouted, "This standard and this centurion will be inside the rampart in a moment, let those follow who will prevent its capture by the enemy."

    25.21, Second Punic War - ala/left wing of allies:
    The first legion and the left wing of the allies were drawn up in front and the line was extended far beyond its proper length.

    26.5-6, Second Punic War
    Realising their critical position and the danger of leaving a portion of their lines unprotected by concentrating their defence in any one direction, the Romans divided their force; Appius Claudius confronted the Capuans, Fulvius was opposed to Hannibal; the propraetor C. Nero with the cavalry of the six legions held the road to Suessula, and C. Fulvius Flaccus with the cavalry of the allies took up a position towards the Volturnus...

    27.1, Second Punic War:
    The Roman commander - his equal in courage, but far inferior to him in tactical skill and in numbers - hastily formed his line and engaged. The action was begun most vigorously by the fifth legion and the allies on the left wing.

    27.2, Second Punic War:
    The troops who were first engaged were, on the Roman side, the first legion and the right wing of the allies; those under Hannibal comprised the Spanish infantry and the Balearic slingers.

    27.12, Second Punic War, allied contingents and extraordinarii or 'special levies:'
    After more than two hours' fighting the allied contingent on the Roman right including the special levies, began to give way. As soon as Marcellus saw this he brought the 10th legion up to the front. They were slow in coming up, and as the others were becoming unsteady and falling back, the whole line was gradually thrown into disorder and ultimately routed. Their fears got the better of them and they took to flight. 2700 Romans and allies fell in the battle and during the pursuit

    27.14, Second Punic War:
    The contingents who had formed the Roman left and the cohorts who had lost their standards were fighting in the front line, and the twentieth legion was stationed on their right...out of the two legions some 1700 men were killed and 1300 of the allied contingents,

    27.41, Second Punic War:
    told off five cohorts strengthened with five maniples of Roman troops to mount the hill by night and take their station in the dip on the other side. He placed T. Claudius Asellus a military tribune and P. Claudius a prefect of allies in command of the party, and gave them instructions as to the moment when they were to rise from ambush and attack the enemy. At dawn of the following day he led out the whole of his force, horse and foot, to battle.

    29.2, Second Punic War, Scipio in Spain:
    Of the Romans and allies a little more than 200 fell, mainly on the left wing. The Spaniards who had been routed on the field or driven out of their camp, dispersed amongst the fields, and finally returned to their respective communities.

    31.21, 201 BC:
    By this time the consular army in Gaul had been transferred from Arretium to Ariminum, and the 5000 men of the Latin contingent had moved from Gaul into Etruria. L. Furius accordingly left Ariminum and hastened by forced marches to Cremona which the Gauls were at the time besieging...Furius had formed the allied troops into two divisions, and the right division was stationed in the first line, the two Roman legions forming the rest...
    Failing in this, they endeavoured to work round the flanks and envelop the enemy's line, which, considering their numbers and the fewness of their opponents, seemed an easy task. When the praetor saw this maneuver he extended his front by bringing up the two legions in reserve to the right and left of the allied troops, and he also vowed a temple to Diovis, in case he routed the enemy that day. He then ordered L. Valerius to launch the Roman cavalry against one wing of the Gauls and the allied cavalry against the other to check the enveloping movement.

    34.14-15, 194 BC Spain, picked cohorts:
    The cavalry on the two wings were the first to get into action, but those on the right were immediately repulsed and their hasty retirement created alarm amongst the infantry. On seeing this, the consul ordered two picked cohorts to be taken round the enemy's right and to show themselves in his rear before the infantry became engaged.

    34.47, 193 BC, picked cohorts:
    The Gauls had broken through the quaestorian gate, and after meeting with the most obstinate resistance had killed the quaestor, L. Postumius Tympanus, M. Atinius and P. Sempronius, praefects of allies, and nearly 200 men. This side of the camp was in the enemy's hands until one of the "special cohorts" which had been sent by the consul to defend the quaestorian gate drove them out of the camp after killing many of them, and stopped those who were breaking in. Almost at the same moment the fourth legion, with two of the special cohorts, forced their way out of another gate.

    35.5, 193 BC, picked cohorts:
    [35.5]The action began about eight o'clock. The left wing of the allied cavalry and the "special" corps were fighting in the front line, and two generals of consular rank - M. Marcellus and Tiberius Sempronius; the latter had been consul the previous year - were in command of them. The consul Merula was at one moment at the front and at another holding back the legions who were in reserve, lest in their eagerness they should go forward before the signal was given. Two military tribunes, Q. Minucius and P. Minucius, received orders to take the cavalry of these two legions outside the line and when the signal was given to deliver an attack from the open. Whilst the consul was making these dispositions a message came from Ti. Sempronius Longus informing him that the special corps were not able to withstand the onslaught of the Gauls, a great many had been killed, and the survivors, wearied out and dispirited, had lost all heart for fighting. He asked the consul, therefore, if he approved, to send up one of the legions before they were humiliated by defeat. The second legion was sent up and the special corps was withdrawn. The battle was now restored, as the legion came up with its men fresh and its maniples complete.

    39.30-31, 185 BC:
    The losses of the Romans and the allies in the battle amounted to 5000, and the enemy armed themselves with the spoils taken from their bodies...

    40.27-28, 181 BC, extraordinarii:
    . The military tribunes Sextius Julius Caesar and L. Aurelius Cotta were in command of this legion. Q. Fulvius Flaccus, a staff officer, was posted with the right division of allied troops at the quaestorian gate. Two cohorts and the triarii of the two legions were ordered to remain and guard the camp...
    To the four praetorian [Latin text reads extroardinariis] cohorts he added two others with M. Valerius, one of his staff officers, in command, and gave them orders to sally from the praetorian gate.

    Livy 40.31, 181 BC, picked cavalry:
    When the Roman praetor had satisfied himself that after so many days' inaction the enemy would not expect him to take the initiative, he ordered L. Acilius to take the division of allied troops and 6000 native auxiliaries, and make a circuit round the mountain which lay behind the enemy's camp. When he heard the battle-shout he was to charge down on their camp. They started in the night to escape observation. At daybreak Flaccus sent C. Scribonius, the commander of the allied troops, with his "select" cavalry up to the enemy's rampart...
    Their centre was being closely pressed by the fifth legion, but they advanced with more confidence against the Roman left where they saw that their own countrymen were posted, and it would have been repulsed had not the seventh legion come up in support. The troops left to hold Aebura appeared in the middle of the battle and Acilius was in the enemy's rear. Between the two the Celtiberi were being cut to pieces; the survivors fled in all directions. The cavalry were sent after them in two divisions and caused great slaughter among them. As many as 23,000 men were killed that day, and 4700 were made prisoners; 500 horses and 88 military standards were captured. It was a great victory, but not a bloodless one. Out of the two legions rather more than 200 Roman soldiers fell, 830 out of the Latin allies, and 2400 out of the native auxiliaries

    Livy 41.1, 178 BC, Placentia cohort:
    . On the side facing Histria the emergency cohort from Placentia was posted permanently; M. Aebutius, one of the military tribunes, was ordered to take two maniples from the second legion to the river bank between the camp and the sea to protect the watering-parties; two other military tribunes, L. and C. Aelius, took the third legion along the road leading to Aquileia to protect the foraging and wood-cutting troops...When they saw that only weak pickets were posted in front of the camp and that between the camp and the sea there was a crowd of unarmed traders busy with their traffic and without any protection either on the land side or towards the sea, they made a simultaneous attack on the pickets, the Placentian cohort and the maniples of the second legion.

    [i]Livy, 44.40-2, Battle of Pydna:
    There was a river, not a large one, near the enemy's camp from which both the Romans and the Macedonians drew their water, protected by detachments stationed on either bank. [b\On the Roman side were two cohorts, Marrucinians and Paelignians, and two squadrons of Samnite horse under the command of M. Sergius Silus. Another body was stationed in front of the camp under C. Cluvius; these consisted of Firman, Vestinian and Cremensian troops, and two squadrons of cavalry from Placentia and Aeserna.
    Whilst all was quiet at the river, neither side offering any provocation, a mule broke loose about three o'clock in the afternoon from the men in charge and escaped to the opposite bank. Three soldiers went after it through the water, which was up to their knees. Two Thracians were dragging the beast out of the river back to their own bank, when they were followed by some Romans, who killed one of them, recaptured the mule, and went back to their posts. There were 800 Thracians guarding the enemy's bank. A few of these, enraged at seeing a comrade killed before their eyes, ran across the river in pursuit of those who slew him; then more joined in and at last the whole body, and with them the . . .

    [44.41]. . . led them into battle. His men were deeply impressed by reverence for his authority, the reputation he had acquired, and, above all, his age, for though more than sixty years old, he took upon himself to a large extent the duties and dangers which are usually the lot of younger men. The interval between the "caetrati" and the divisions of the phalanx was filled up by the legion, and thus the enemy's line was interrupted. The "caetrati" were in their rear; the legion were fronting the shieldmen of the phalanx, who were known as the "chalcaspides." L. Albinus, an ex-consul, was ordered to lead the second legion against the phalanx of "leucaspides"; these formed the centre of the enemy's line. On the Roman right, where the battle had begun, close to the river, he brought up the elephants and the cohorts of allied troops. It was here that the Macedonians first gave ground. For just as most new devices amongst men seem valuable as far as words go, but when they are put to a practical test and have to be acted upon they fail to produce results, so it was with the elephants; those of the Macedonians were of no use whatever. The contingents of the Latin allies followed up the charge of the elephants and repulsed the left wing. The second legion which had been sent against the centre broke up the phalanx. The most probable explanation of the victory is that several separate engagements were going on all over the field, which first shook the phalanx out of its formation and then broke it up. As long as it was compact, its front bristling with levelled spears, its strength was irresistible. If by attacking them at various points you compel them to bring round their spears, which owing to their length and weight are cumbersome and unwieldy, they become a confused and involved mass, but if any sudden and tumultuous attack is made on their flank or rear, they go to pieces like a falling house. In this way they were forced to meet the repeated charges of small bodies of Roman troops with their front dislocated in many places, and wherever there were gaps the Romans worked their way amongst their ranks. If the whole line had made a general charge against the phalanx while still unbroken, as the Paeligni did at the beginning of the action against the "caetrati," they would have spitted themselves upon their spears and have been powerless against their massed attack.

    [44.42]The infantry were being slaughtered all over the field; only those who threw away their arms were able to make good their escape. The cavalry, on the other hand, quitted the field with hardly any loss, the king himself being the first to flee. He was already on his way to Pella with his "sacred" cavalry, and Cotys and the Odrysaeans were following at his heels. The rest of the Macedonian horse also got away with their ranks unbroken, because the infantry were between them and the enemy, and the latter were so fully occupied in massacring the infantry that they forgot to pursue the cavalry. For a long time the slaughter of the phalanx went on in front, flank and rear. At last those who had escaped out of the hands of the enemy threw away their arms and fled to the shore; some even went into the water and, stretching out their hands in supplication to the men in the fleet, implored them to save their lives. When they saw boats from all the ships rowing to the place where they were they thought that they were coming to take them up as prisoners rather than slay them, and they waded further into the water, some even swimming. But when they found that they were being killed by the men in the boats, those who could swim back to land met with a more wretched fate, for the elephants, forced by their drivers to the water's edge, trampled on them and crushed them to death as they came out. It is universally admitted that never had so many Macedonians been killed by the Romans in a single battle. As many as 20,000 men perished; 6000 who had fled to Pydna fell into the enemy's hands, and 5000 were made prisoners in their flight. Of the victors not more than 100 fell, and of these the majority were Paelignians; the wounded were much more numerous. If the battle had begun earlier and there had been sufficient daylight for the victors to continue the pursuit, the whole force would have been wiped out. As it was, the approach of night shielded the fugitives and made the Romans chary of following them over unknown country.
    25.14, Second Punic War - Paelignian cohort:
    The Paelignian cohort happened to be in closest touch with the enemy, and their commanding officer, Vibius Accaus, snatched up a standard and flung it across the enemies' rampart, at the same time invoking a curse on himself and his cohort if the enemy got possession of the standard. He was the first to dash over fosse and rampart into the camp. Now the Paelignians were fighting inside the lines, and Valerius Flaccus, the commanding officer of the third legion, was rating the Romans for their cowardice in letting the allies have the glory of capturing the camp, when T. Pedanius, a centurion in command of the leading maniples' took a standard out of the bearer's hands and shouted, "This standard and this centurion will be inside the rampart in a moment, let those follow who will prevent its capture by the enemy."

    25.21, Second Punic War - ala/left wing of allies:
    The first legion and the left wing of the allies were drawn up in front and the line was extended far beyond its proper length.

    26.5-6, Second Punic War
    Realising their critical position and the danger of leaving a portion of their lines unprotected by concentrating their defence in any one direction, the Romans divided their force; Appius Claudius confronted the Capuans, Fulvius was opposed to Hannibal; the propraetor C. Nero with the cavalry of the six legions held the road to Suessula, and C. Fulvius Flaccus with the cavalry of the allies took up a position towards the Volturnus...

    27.1, Second Punic War:
    The Roman commander - his equal in courage, but far inferior to him in tactical skill and in numbers - hastily formed his line and engaged. The action was begun most vigorously by the fifth legion and the allies on the left wing.

    27.2, Second Punic War:
    The troops who were first engaged were, on the Roman side, the first legion and the right wing of the allies; those under Hannibal comprised the Spanish infantry and the Balearic slingers.

    27.12, Second Punic War, allied contingents and extraordinarii or 'special levies:'
    After more than two hours' fighting the allied contingent on the Roman right including the special levies, began to give way. As soon as Marcellus saw this he brought the 10th legion up to the front. They were slow in coming up, and as the others were becoming unsteady and falling back, the whole line was gradually thrown into disorder and ultimately routed. Their fears got the better of them and they took to flight. 2700 Romans and allies fell in the battle and during the pursuit

    27.14, Second Punic War:
    The contingents who had formed the Roman left and the cohorts who had lost their standards were fighting in the front line, and the twentieth legion was stationed on their right...out of the two legions some 1700 men were killed and 1300 of the allied contingents,

    27.41, Second Punic War:
    told off five cohorts strengthened with five maniples of Roman troops to mount the hill by night and take their station in the dip on the other side. He placed T. Claudius Asellus a military tribune and P. Claudius a prefect of allies in command of the party, and gave them instructions as to the moment when they were to rise from ambush and attack the enemy. At dawn of the following day he led out the whole of his force, horse and foot, to battle.

    29.2, Second Punic War, Scipio in Spain:
    Of the Romans and allies a little more than 200 fell, mainly on the left wing. The Spaniards who had been routed on the field or driven out of their camp, dispersed amongst the fields, and finally returned to their respective communities.

    31.21, 201 BC:
    By this time the consular army in Gaul had been transferred from Arretium to Ariminum, and the 5000 men of the Latin contingent had moved from Gaul into Etruria. L. Furius accordingly left Ariminum and hastened by forced marches to Cremona which the Gauls were at the time besieging...Furius had formed the allied troops into two divisions, and the right division was stationed in the first line, the two Roman legions forming the rest...
    Failing in this, they endeavoured to work round the flanks and envelop the enemy's line, which, considering their numbers and the fewness of their opponents, seemed an easy task. When the praetor saw this maneuver he extended his front by bringing up the two legions in reserve to the right and left of the allied troops, and he also vowed a temple to Diovis, in case he routed the enemy that day. He then ordered L. Valerius to launch the Roman cavalry against one wing of the Gauls and the allied cavalry against the other to check the enveloping movement.

    34.14-15, 194 BC Spain, picked cohorts:
    The cavalry on the two wings were the first to get into action, but those on the right were immediately repulsed and their hasty retirement created alarm amongst the infantry. On seeing this, the consul ordered two picked cohorts to be taken round the enemy's right and to show themselves in his rear before the infantry became engaged.

    34.47, 193 BC, picked cohorts:
    The Gauls had broken through the quaestorian gate, and after meeting with the most obstinate resistance had killed the quaestor, L. Postumius Tympanus, M. Atinius and P. Sempronius, praefects of allies, and nearly 200 men. This side of the camp was in the enemy's hands until one of the "special cohorts" which had been sent by the consul to defend the quaestorian gate drove them out of the camp after killing many of them, and stopped those who were breaking in. Almost at the same moment the fourth legion, with two of the special cohorts, forced their way out of another gate.

    35.5, 193 BC, picked cohorts:
    [35.5]The action began about eight o'clock. The left wing of the allied cavalry and the "special" corps were fighting in the front line, and two generals of consular rank - M. Marcellus and Tiberius Sempronius; the latter had been consul the previous year - were in command of them. The consul Merula was at one moment at the front and at another holding back the legions who were in reserve, lest in their eagerness they should go forward before the signal was given. Two military tribunes, Q. Minucius and P. Minucius, received orders to take the cavalry of these two legions outside the line and when the signal was given to deliver an attack from the open. Whilst the consul was making these dispositions a message came from Ti. Sempronius Longus informing him that the special corps were not able to withstand the onslaught of the Gauls, a great many had been killed, and the survivors, wearied out and dispirited, had lost all heart for fighting. He asked the consul, therefore, if he approved, to send up one of the legions before they were humiliated by defeat. The second legion was sent up and the special corps was withdrawn. The battle was now restored, as the legion came up with its men fresh and its maniples complete.

    39.30-31, 185 BC:
    The losses of the Romans and the allies in the battle amounted to 5000, and the enemy armed themselves with the spoils taken from their bodies...

    40.27-28, 181 BC, extraordinarii:
    . The military tribunes Sextius Julius Caesar and L. Aurelius Cotta were in command of this legion. Q. Fulvius Flaccus, a staff officer, was posted with the right division of allied troops at the quaestorian gate. Two cohorts and the triarii of the two legions were ordered to remain and guard the camp...
    To the four praetorian [Latin text reads extroardinariis] cohorts he added two others with M. Valerius, one of his staff officers, in command, and gave them orders to sally from the praetorian gate.

    Livy 40.31, 181 BC, picked cavalry:
    When the Roman praetor had satisfied himself that after so many days' inaction the enemy would not expect him to take the initiative, he ordered L. Acilius to take the division of allied troops and 6000 native auxiliaries, and make a circuit round the mountain which lay behind the enemy's camp. When he heard the battle-shout he was to charge down on their camp. They started in the night to escape observation. At daybreak Flaccus sent C. Scribonius, the commander of the allied troops, with his "select" cavalry up to the enemy's rampart...
    Their centre was being closely pressed by the fifth legion, but they advanced with more confidence against the Roman left where they saw that their own countrymen were posted, and it would have been repulsed had not the seventh legion come up in support. The troops left to hold Aebura appeared in the middle of the battle and Acilius was in the enemy's rear. Between the two the Celtiberi were being cut to pieces; the survivors fled in all directions. The cavalry were sent after them in two divisions and caused great slaughter among them. As many as 23,000 men were killed that day, and 4700 were made prisoners; 500 horses and 88 military standards were captured. It was a great victory, but not a bloodless one. Out of the two legions rather more than 200 Roman soldiers fell, 830 out of the Latin allies, and 2400 out of the native auxiliaries

    Livy 41.1, 178 BC, Placentia cohort:
    . On the side facing Histria the emergency cohort from Placentia was posted permanently; M. Aebutius, one of the military tribunes, was ordered to take two maniples from the second legion to the river bank between the camp and the sea to protect the watering-parties; two other military tribunes, L. and C. Aelius, took the third legion along the road leading to Aquileia to protect the foraging and wood-cutting troops...When they saw that only weak pickets were posted in front of the camp and that between the camp and the sea there was a crowd of unarmed traders busy with their traffic and without any protection either on the land side or towards the sea, they made a simultaneous attack on the pickets, the Placentian cohort and the maniples of the second legion.

    [i]Livy, 44.40-2, Battle of Pydna:
    There was a river, not a large one, near the enemy's camp from which both the Romans and the Macedonians drew their water, protected by detachments stationed on either bank. [b\On the Roman side were two cohorts, Marrucinians and Paelignians, and two squadrons of Samnite horse under the command of M. Sergius Silus. Another body was stationed in front of the camp under C. Cluvius; these consisted of Firman, Vestinian and Cremensian troops, and two squadrons of cavalry from Placentia and Aeserna.
    Whilst all was quiet at the river, neither side offering any provocation, a mule broke loose about three o'clock in the afternoon from the men in charge and escaped to the opposite bank. Three soldiers went after it through the water, which was up to their knees. Two Thracians were dragging the beast out of the river back to their own bank, when they were followed by some Romans, who killed one of them, recaptured the mule, and went back to their posts. There were 800 Thracians guarding the enemy's bank. A few of these, enraged at seeing a comrade killed before their eyes, ran across the river in pursuit of those who slew him; then more joined in and at last the whole body, and with them the . . .

    [44.41]. . . led them into battle. His men were deeply impressed by reverence for his authority, the reputation he had acquired, and, above all, his age, for though more than sixty years old, he took upon himself to a large extent the duties and dangers which are usually the lot of younger men. The interval between the "caetrati" and the divisions of the phalanx was filled up by the legion, and thus the enemy's line was interrupted. The "caetrati" were in their rear; the legion were fronting the shieldmen of the phalanx, who were known as the "chalcaspides." L. Albinus, an ex-consul, was ordered to lead the second legion against the phalanx of "leucaspides"; these formed the centre of the enemy's line. On the Roman right, where the battle had begun, close to the river, he brought up the elephants and the cohorts of allied troops. It was here that the Macedonians first gave ground. For just as most new devices amongst men seem valuable as far as words go, but when they are put to a practical test and have to be acted upon they fail to produce results, so it was with the elephants; those of the Macedonians were of no use whatever. The contingents of the Latin allies followed up the charge of the elephants and repulsed the left wing. The second legion which had been sent against the centre broke up the phalanx. The most probable explanation of the victory is that several separate engagements were going on all over the field, which first shook the phalanx out of its formation and then broke it up. As long as it was compact, its front bristling with levelled spears, its strength was irresistible. If by attacking them at various points you compel them to bring round their spears, which owing to their length and weight are cumbersome and unwieldy, they become a confused and involved mass, but if any sudden and tumultuous attack is made on their flank or rear, they go to pieces like a falling house. In this way they were forced to meet the repeated charges of small bodies of Roman troops with their front dislocated in many places, and wherever there were gaps the Romans worked their way amongst their ranks. If the whole line had made a general charge against the phalanx while still unbroken, as the Paeligni did at the beginning of the action against the "caetrati," they would have spitted themselves upon their spears and have been powerless against their massed attack.

    [44.42]The infantry were being slaughtered all over the field; only those who threw away their arms were able to make good their escape. The cavalry, on the other hand, quitted the field with hardly any loss, the king himself being the first to flee. He was already on his way to Pella with his "sacred" cavalry, and Cotys and the Odrysaeans were following at his heels. The rest of the Macedonian horse also got away with their ranks unbroken, because the infantry were between them and the enemy, and the latter were so fully occupied in massacring the infantry that they forgot to pursue the cavalry. For a long time the slaughter of the phalanx went on in front, flank and rear. At last those who had escaped out of the hands of the enemy threw away their arms and fled to the shore; some even went into the water and, stretching out their hands in supplication to the men in the fleet, implored them to save their lives. When they saw boats from all the ships rowing to the place where they were they thought that they were coming to take them up as prisoners rather than slay them, and they waded further into the water, some even swimming. But when they found that they were being killed by the men in the boats, those who could swim back to land met with a more wretched fate, for the elephants, forced by their drivers to the water's edge, trampled on them and crushed them to death as they came out. It is universally admitted that never had so many Macedonians been killed by the Romans in a single battle. As many as 20,000 men perished; 6000 who had fled to Pydna fell into the enemy's hands, and 5000 were made prisoners in their flight. Of the victors not more than 100 fell, and of these the majority were Paelignians; the wounded were much more numerous. If the battle had begun earlier and there had been sufficient daylight for the victors to continue the pursuit, the whole force would have been wiped out. As it was, the approach of night shielded the fugitives and made the Romans chary of following them over unknown country.
    Last edited by ABH2; October 24, 2014 at 09:51 PM.


  6. #6

    Default Re: [RESEARCH] Republican Roman Army

    So, from the evidence we have, I can come up with a few models of Socii recruitment. None would necessarily contradict the evidence we have more than the other.

    1. The Polybian model (my nickname for it, and my preferred)
    • In 264, you start with AOR units for the Socii. These are more regional based and retain some of their particular features
    • A reform or construction of a new line of buildings - you will then have more Roman style with more standardized equipment (scutums etc.)
    • Eventually, they will be broken down/organized just as the Roman troops were - Velites/Hastati/Principes/Triarii into mixed units, so that we end up with Socii Hastati etc. There would also be an extraordinarii unit.
    • Larger units of allies become available (this could also happen earlier in the process)
    • The physical appearance of the units becomes more Roman - colors and such.
    • Alternate option. Instead of having the Roman organization of four classes/age groups, there are simply extraordinarii and pedites. The role of the extraordinarii is ambiguous. It seems possible that in order to fill the sort of role the Triarii did in the Roman infantry, they equipped the extraordinarii with spears/hasta. Since they don't appear to be picked based on class at all, but only the 'fittest' of the allies - they would have the added bonus of being more expendable than the Triarii, I suppose.

    2. The Livy model
    • Unique AOR type troops organized into maniples
    • Over time, add in an 'extraordinarii' type unit that would fill the role of Triarii or an elite reserve (though, we have instances of them being used as frontline troops per Livy).
    • Eventually, these AOR troops adopt more Roman equipment
    • They become AOR cohorts located in specific regions. So, you would have a Maruccini or Marsi cohort etc.

    Or, we could go with a simpler model of AOR troops with extraodarinii that still relatively unique until the Marian reforms. I personally prefer #1. I could live with #2.
    Last edited by ABH2; October 24, 2014 at 11:35 PM.


  7. #7

    Default Re: [RESEARCH] Republican Roman Army

    Some example shots from Petellius of the sort of spacing we are going for with the Romans (and one phalanx) shot:
    Roman maniple

    Maniple #2

    Loose checkerboard formation

    Maniple Version 2

    Maniple Version 2 Close-Up

    Phalanx


    Just some variations. Some prefer the tighter spacing, but I go back to the literary sources on this one.

    "In the battle line, each man should have three feet of space, while the distance between the ranks is given as six feet. Thus 10'000 men can be placed in a rectangle about 1'500 yards by twelve yards, and it was advised not to extend the line beyond that."-Vegetius

    Polybius
    Many considerations may easily convince us that, if only the phalanx has its proper formation and strength, nothing can resist it face to face or withstand its charge. For as a man in close order of battle occupies a space of three feet; and as the length of the sarissae are sixteen cubits according to the original design, which has been reduced in practice to fourteen; and as of these fourteen four must be deducted, to allow for the weight in front; it follows clearly that each hoplite will have ten cubits of his sarissa projecting beyond his body, when he lowers it with both hands, as he advances against the enemy: hence, too, though the men of the second, third, and fourth rank will have their sarissae projecting farther beyond the front rank than the men of the fifth, yet even these last will have two cubits of their sarissae beyond the front rank; if only the phalanx is properly formed and the men close up properly both flank and rear, like the description in Homer...

    And if my description is true and exact, it is clear that in front of each man of the front rank there will be five sarissae projecting to distances varying by a descending scale of two cubits.

    With this point in our minds, it will not be difficult to imagine what the appearance and strength of the whole phalanx is likely to be, when, with lowered sarissae, it advances to the charge sixteen deep. Of these sixteen ranks, all above the fifth are unable to reach with their sarissae far enough to take actual part in the fighting. They, therefore, do not lower them, but hold them with the points inclined upwards over the shoulders of the ranks in front of them, to shield the heads of the whole phalanx; for the sarissae are so closely serried, that they repel missiles which have carried over the front ranks and might fall upon the heads of those in the rear. These rear ranks, however, during an advance, press forward those in front by the weight of their bodies; and thus make the charge very forcible, and at the same time render it impossible for the front ranks to face about.

    But as their method of fighting admits of individual motion for each man---because he defends his body with a shield, which he moves about to any point from which a blow is coming, and because he uses his sword both for cutting and stabbing---it is evident that each man must have a clear space, and an interval of at least three feet both on flank and rear if he is to do his duty with any effect. The result of this will be that each Roman soldier will face two of the front rank of a phalanx, so that he has to encounter and fight against ten spears, which one man cannot find time even to cut away, when once the two lines are engaged, nor force his way through easily---seeing that the Roman front ranks are not supported by the rear ranks, either by way of adding weight to their charge, or vigor to the use of their swords. Therefore, it may readily be understood that, as I said before, it is impossible to confront a charge of the phalanx, so long as it retains its proper formation and strength.
    Last edited by ABH2; October 25, 2014 at 03:39 PM.


  8. #8
    The Wandering Storyteller's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    I wash my hands of this weirdness!
    Posts
    4,509

    Default Re: [RESEARCH] Republican Roman Army

    Good research, don't mind if I contribute all my research to this forum?





















































  9. #9

    Default Re: [RESEARCH] Republican Roman Army

    I don't mind contributions, but I'd rather avoid large blocks of text and unnecessary/duplicate info. If it's something we are missing, though, feel free to add.

    The Socii infantry units are now up and completed. For the time being, I want to hold-off on any concept of AOR-style Socii units (with perhaps the exception of Campanian cavalry) and just stick with the variations of the basic infantry and Extraordinarii (which will become available sometime between the First and Second Punic Wars). Tomorrow I'll finish up the cavalry and that will be it for the Pre-Marian Romans for the time being (there's enough work here to last a while).

    For the time being, I've added the 13 AOR types that I feel can be represented somewhat appropriately in the game based on geography and descriptions from Livy. There are only some images for now. In the future, I will break them down further. There will probably just be one early variation available for the Grand Campaign, but as we develop earlier scenario campaigns, I hope to expand the rosters of those groups some. But that's way down the road. In the mean time, here would be a general breakdown by region of where these people were located/recruitable:

    Based on Hannibal at the Gates regions:
    Rome-Latins and Romans (Volsci tribe just South). 338 BC, the end of the Latin league, Rome renamed the cities municipia and established coloniae inside them. This meant that the towns were now ruled by Rome (or the Roman Republic) and that the people living there were considered Roman colonists. although Roman citizens, were required to give up their citizen rights on joining a colony, and accept the status of socii. This was in order that Latin colonies could act as "watchdogs" on the other socii in the allied military formations, the alae
    Capua-Campanians (Oscian branch of Samnites, and before that Etruscan origin), submitted to Rome 338. Via Appia. .Sidicini
    Corfinium-Peligni capital, confederacy with Marsi and Marrucini.
    Tarquinii-Chief Etruscan city.
    Tarracina-Etruscan, colonia maritima by 329.
    Pisae-Etruscan, in 180 BC, it became a Roman colony, as Portus Pisanus. In 89 BC, Portus Pisanus became a municipium
    Placentia-military colony w/Latin rights May 218 BC, 6k settlers. Area/region Celtic-Gauls and prior to that Etruscans.
    Arretium-Etruscan, conquered by Romans 311.
    Spoletium-Umbri, first mention of Spoletium is the notice of the foundation of a Latin colony there in 241 BCE
    Ancona-Greek colony of Syracuse 387 (Tyrian purple production), surrounding area Etruscan/Celts (expelled). Frentani.
    Pisaurum-founded by the Romans in 184 BC as colony in the territory of the Picentes. Etruscan/Cetlic/Pictene mix.
    Benevetium-Renamed from Maleventum/Maloeis 268 w/Latin colony, Third Samnite War. Samnites-Pentri and Caudini
    Barium-Apulians, port/fishery, Socii troops during Second Punic War.
    Sipontum-Greek colony, conquered by Samnites before expelled by Alexander of Epirus. Brutti in surrounding regions.
    Buxentum-Lucanian w/Greek colonies in region. Lucanian alliance w/Rome 298. Re-subjugated in decade after Pyrrhus.
    Croton-Greek colony, under Syracusan tyrants, Pyrrhic wars devestated, submitted to Rome 277. Brutti in surrounding area
    Thurii-Brutti locals, Greek colonists. Roman garrison protected Thurii in 3rd century. Brutti territory-timber. Rebelled with Pyrrhus, but subjugated after he left.
    Tarentum-War w/Romans 282 after attack on Thurii. Surrenderd 272, Roman garrison and allies. Naval support. Apulli.

    Eventually I'll add general information on each of these tribes.

    If we can find a way to add completely new factions into the game, I'd love to eventually develop a scenario with the Hannibal at the Gates map that turns most of these into factions.
    Last edited by ABH2; October 31, 2014 at 12:48 AM.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •