End of the triarii/hastati/principes/velites

[Eques]

In the "Rise of Rome" supplement it is stated that the the triarii/hastati/principes/velites system was brought to an abrupt end by the reforms of Marius. Is this the case? I always thought it died out gradually, and was extinct by the time of the 3rd Punic War.

Thanks

[Redpossum]

In the "Rise of Rome" supplement it is stated that the the triarii/hastati/principes/velites system was brought to an abrupt end by the reforms of Marius. Is this the case? I always thought it died out gradually, and was extinct by the time of the 3rd Punic War.

Thanks

Tough question. Like many aspects of history, it's not as neatly cut-and-dried as they taught it in school.

The Marian reforms (circa 107 BC) were wide-ranging, but I think the main aspects that concern us were-

1. The elimination of the baggage train, and making the legionaries carry the heavier 80 pound burden.

2. The end of the manipular legion, with its checkerboard formation designed to disrupt a phalanx by applying uneven pressure along its front.

3. The replacement of the maniple system with the cohort system and its solid front designed to deal with less-ordered opponents.

4. Also important, but of questionable military impact upon the battlefield, was the change in who was eligible to serve. Prior to the Marian Reforms, one had to be of the 5th census class or higher, own property worth 3000 sesterces or more, and supply one's own armaments. Marius (who needed an army to fight in Africa and, as junior consul, didn't have one!) brought into the ranks all the capite censi , and arranged for the state to supply their arms. This allowed training and standardization on a previously impossible scale, plus providing a year-round army for the first time. It was also the start of building a professional long-service army, as opposed to the hastily trained and organised volunteers who had made up the armies of Rome prior to this.

Note that the Roman armies that fought the 1st and 2nd Punic Wars were pre-Marian. Which didn't seem to help at the battle of Tunis (255 BC), where the Carthaginian spearmen trained by Xanthippus thrashed the Romans thoroughly and captured consul Marcus Atilius Regulus. This in spite of the fact that the Carthaginian spears were fighting in the very formation the manipular legion was designed to disrupt and defeat.

There are signs the manipular legion was changing even pre-Marius. For example, the word "Hastati" clearly means "those who bear the hasta", and the hasta was a medium spear. Yet the Hastati were clearly swordsmen by the time we get any detailed description of them.

So, the bottom line, after all of Possum's pompous pontification (help me, please, I'm talking and I can't shut up) is that we don't really know

[BrianC]

Oh no there is triple X now we have triple P . Still interesting discussion.

Brian

[ars_belli]

Most scholars tend to see the changes in the makeup of the legions as a gradual process taking place during the second half of the second century BC, with the reforms of Marius as a logical terminus post quem. Given that, the statement in RoR that "After the reforms of Marius, legionaries were no longer divided into hastati, principes and triarii, but were uniformly equipped with oval shield, mail, pilum and sword" seems pretty noncontroversial, especially for a set of wargaming rules. IMHO, the Mid-Republican list would work well for battles of the Second Punic War through the Fourth Macedonian War, while the Late Republican list is well suited to the battles of Marius, Sulla, Caesar and Pompey. Are there some historical battles with Roman forces that you feel wouldn't be well represented by either list?

Cheers,
Scott

[Eques]

No not really it is more a question of when to start using them!

Thanks for all your interesting replies.

[Jhykron]

In the "Rise of Rome" supplement it is stated that the the triarii/hastati/principes/velites system was brought to an abrupt end by the reforms of Marius. Is this the case? I always thought it died out gradually, and was extinct by the time of the 3rd Punic War.

I'm not sure we really have an exact timeline on it. Livy and Polybius give a couple of snapshots for the so-called "manipular" organization at different times, and we have a pretty definite idea how the Principate Legions were organized*. For the period in between, we've got something of a "most likely interpolation". How much Marius has to do with being the turning point between the "Manipular" method and the "cohortal" method is really uncertain. What we do have to work with is:

1. References to the use of cohorts as tactical units go all the way back to the 2nd century BC (at least), but we still see evidence of the familiar manipular lines on the battlefield (at least where we have good battle descriptions). Post Marius, the references are exclusively to cohorts.

2. Spear-armed Triarii, in any case, seem to be pretty much extinct by the time of Marius. I imagine re-training a bunch of Pila/sword veterans to use the hasta at the end of their careers eventually came to be seen as a waste of time.

3. There are some post-Marian references to Velites (which is why they still appear in lists).




* Well, apart from some fuzziness on integral light troops and proportions armed with lancea vs. Pilum, anyway...

[Jhykron]

2. The end of the manipular legion, with its checkerboard formation designed to disrupt a phalanx by applying uneven pressure along its front.

3. The replacement of the maniple system with the cohort system and its solid front designed to deal with less-ordered opponents.

Not sure about this. Romans faced enough non-phalanx opponents (successfully and otherwise) during and prior to the development of the "manipular" legion, that I'm doubtful that went much into their thinking.

I think what the development of the cohort gives the Romans is the ability to operate in terms of actual "units" capable of operating independently, being detached for garison duty, pulled out of the line to counteract the enemy's cavalry, etc. As opposed to the "manipular" system, which didn't really have independently capable battalions, but rather "lines" that were increasingly called upon for some non-standard re-deployments.

Note that the Roman armies that fought the 1st and 2nd Punic Wars were pre-Marian. Which didn't seem to help at the battle of Tunis (255 BC), where the Carthaginian spearmen trained by Xanthippus thrashed the Romans thoroughly and captured consul Marcus Atilius Regulus. This in spite of the fact that the Carthaginian spears were fighting in the very formation the manipular legion was designed to disrupt and defeat.

Well, aside from the question of "design" and intent with the manipular legion, the Carthaginian elephants probably deserve as much credit on winning the fight in the center as their phalanx.

Happy gaming.

[CrazyHarborc]

Why not discuss it with your opponent(s)? As mentioned, the evidence, the historical facts are not clear. Tournies might be a problem. I would contact the people who will be running the tournie for their ruling of what will be allowed to be used.