ROMANS Command: Consul Claudius Nero CR: H @ 3; L @ 2 BP of 3 Initiative: 5 Unit(s) Scale Men FV *Hastati (2 - FT) V 1,600 7(2)2 +2 *Princeps (2 - FT) V 1,600 7(2)2 +2 *Triarii (2 - FT) V 1,200 7(2)2 +2 *Cavalry (2 - HC) V 1,000 4(0)0 +1 Velites (2 - SI) V 800 3(1)2 +2 "Lights" (2 - SI) 800 2(1)2 / 3(1)2 +2 Notes: 1. Key Units are indicated by the * prior to the unit description or type. 2. The "V" indicates Veteran status. Please see the corresponding sub-section in ADVANCED ARMATI. 3. In ARMATI, under 16.0 - Advanced Rules - there is discussion of the incident of "fatigue"in fighting units. (See page 39 of the original Rules Book.) Given the fact that Nero's force executed a forced-march for so many straight days; did not have a chance to rest before battle lines were drawn; and then, pursued the fleeing Carthaginians all night until, deserted by his guides, Hasdrubal was forced to stand and fight, it seems logical to reduce the fighting ability (effectiveness) of these Roman troops in particular. My suggestion is that ALL of the units in Nero's command begin the re-fight in a state of exhaustion. That is, they will fight with a negative modifier depending on unit type. Additionally, these units may gain more points / markers of fatigue by participating in a melee. If the unit "earns" enough fatigue points to match or exceed its original BP value, then the unit has the negative modifier doubled. Heavy Infantry then (the cohorts) would fight with a -4 modifier to any combat rolls. Points of fatigue from this "second" state of exhaustion may be removed, but all of Nero's force is considered exhausted at the start of the engagement. Command: Praetor Licinus CR: H @ 3; L @ 2 BPof 3 Initiative: 4 Unit(s) Scale Men FV *Hastati (4 - FT) 2,800 7(2)2 +2 *Princeps (4 - FT) 2,800 7(2)2 +2 *Triarii (2 - FT) 1,000 7(2)2 +2 Auxiliaries (2 - FT/LI) 1,600 4(1)2 +1 *Cavalry (2 - HC) 600 4(0)0 +1 Velites (4 - SI) 1,600 3(1)2 +2 "Lights" (2 - SI) 800 2(1)2 / 3(1)2 +2 Notes: 1. Key Units are indicated by the * prior to the unit description or type. 2. Fatigue rules apply here as well, but not on such a drastic level as they did for the command of Claudius Nero. All units under the Praetor will have one (1) fatigue point or marker to reflect the fact that they "stood to" on the first day, retreated to camp, and then made all haste to follow the retreating foe . The ARMATI exhaustion rule will apply only when any unit reaches or exceeds its BP value. 3. As Livy did comment that these legionnaries were (invalidus) weak, a low Army breakpoint of three (3) seems justified. Command: Consul Livius Salinator CR: H @ 5; L @ 5 BP of 8 Initiative: 4 Unit(s) Scale Men FV *Hastati (4 - FT) 3,200 7(2)2 +2 *Princeps (4 - FT) 3,200 7(2)2 +2 *Triarii (2 - FT) 1,200 7(2)2 +2 *Legion Cavalry (2 - HC) 600 4(0)0 +1 Velites (4 - SI) 1,600 3(1)2 +2 (Scipio's Contribution) *Hastati (1 - FT) V 800 7(2)2 +2 *Princeps (1 - FT) V 800 7(2)2 +2 *Triarii (1 - FT) V 400 7(2)2 +2 *Allied / Italians (10 - FT) 8,000 6(1)1 +1 Allied Velites (2 - SI) 800 2(1)2 +1 *Allied Cavalry (2 - HC) 1,200 4(0)0 +1 Auxiliary Cavalry (1 - LC) 600 2(0)0 +1 Auxiliary Cavalry (2 - HC) 1,200 4(0)0 +1 Auxiliaries (10 - FT/LI) 6,000 2(1)2 +1 "Lights" (2 - SI / Bowmen) 1,000 2(1)1 +2 Notes: 1. Key Units are indicated by the * prior to the unit description or type. 2. The "V" indicates Veteran status. Please see the corresponding sub-section in ADVANCED ARMATI. 3. The fatigue rules noted for the units of the Praetor, apply against units of the Consular Army. 4. The Army List for Republican Roman in ADVANCED ARMATI rates the Italian / Allies (FT) lower than the "true" Roman units or cohorts. Furthermore, their weaponry is simply stated as "swords." Of course, shields and armor are already factored in to the rating and combat ability. However, given that these Italian or Allied legions were modeled on the "true" Roman legions, it seems sensible to conclude that they were armed in a similar fashion. From the Internet posting of Creasy's narrative of the battle, we find: "The Italian allies, who were attached to the legion, seem to have been similarly armed and equipped, but their numerical proportion of cavalry was much larger." Force Totals: Infantry, Cavalry Nero 6,000, 1,000 Licinus 10,600, 600 Livius 27,000, 3600 Overall 42,600 , 5,200 Having established the Roman order of battle for the day, we need only do the same for the Carthaginians. [16] If a remark was made concerning "educated guesswork" with respect to the Roman forces on the field, the revised remark of "just plain guesswork" may well apply to determining the composition of Hasdrubal's army.  In their massive encyclopedia, Dupuy and Dupuy assert that Hasdrubal had about 50,000 men with him when he entered Italy. As I suggested in my initial research and will do so again here, I think that figure borders on the ridiculous. More reasonable, is the total proposed by Caven in his work. He estimates a figure in the neighborhood of 10,000, and most of these, foot soldiers. This small force was almost doubled with the addition of 8,000 Ligurians. [17] Bradford, writing in Hannibal, reports that Hasrubal was reinforced by only "several thousand Ligurians" as well as an unknown number of Cisalpine Gauls. (171) However, he gives no total figure for Hasdrubal's force until after the engagement has been fought and lost. Here, accepting the account by Polybius as "more accurate," Bradford notes that, "it is doubtful if Hasdrubal had more than 60,000 men in the first place, many of who had already deserted ..." (176) [18] Weighing in with his own analysis, Lazenby also works from the aftermath of the engagement to try and determine the number of Carthaginians (Ligurians and Gauls) present that day. He confirms his estimation at between 20 and 30,000 men in the ranks, by Hasdrubal's "willingness to accept battle with the forces of Salinator and Licinus (cf. Livy 27.47.1) ... (190) [19] This numeric range seems more reasonable and realistic to be certain. It also works out nicely in terms of the ARMATI representation, as one might simply declare / decide that there were eight to ten-thousand soldiers in each contingent: Carthaginians (Spanish, Africans, etc.), Ligurians and Gauls. And so, after much internal debate, I "arrived" at a figure of 26,000 men under the standards of Hasdrubal. This 26,000 is broken down into three "units:" 12,000 Carthaginians (Spanish, Africans, some cavalry and 10 elephants); 8,000 Ligurians (foot troops only); and, 6,000 Gauls (foot troops only). CARTHAGINIANS Command: Hasdrubal CR: H @ 3; L @ 3 BP of 5 Initiative: 4 Unit(s) Scale Men FV *Africans (3 - PH) V 1,800 8(1)1 +2 *Spanish (9 - FT) V 7,200 6(1)1 +1 *Spanish (2 - HC) V 600 4(0)0 +1 Elephants (2 stands) 10 beasts 4(3)1 +1 Celts (2 - SI) 800 3(1)2 +2 Spanish (2 - SI) 800 3(1)2 +2 Sardinians (2 - SI) 800 2(1)1 +1 Notes: 1. Key Units are indicated by the * prior to the unit description or type. 2. The "V" indicates Veteran status. Please see the corresponding sub-section in ADVANCED ARMATI. 3. As the Carthaginians had marched all night long looking for an escape from the pursuing Romans, each and every unit will start the scenario with a fatigue point or marker. 4. I readily admit that the above list is pure conjecture on my part. I gave Hasdrubal a "handful" of horse as I cannot believe he was completely without a mounted element. [20] Part of my thought process here too, goes to the notion of balance in the wargame. To be certain, I am not trying to change history. I am simply trying to make a guess as to what kind of and what numbers of cavalry were with Hasdrubal's force. Command: CENTER (unknown) CR: H @ 2; L @ 2 BP of 3 Initiative: 4 Unit(s) Scale Men FV *Ligurians (7 - WB) 5,600 5(1)3 +1 Ligurians (3 - LI) 1,200 4(1)2 +1 Ligurians (3 - SI) 1,200 3(1)2 +1 Notes: 1. Key Units are indicated by the * prior to the unit description or type. 2. As it was applicable to the Roman units, so will it be applied to the units under Hasdrubal: each and every unit will start the scenario with a fatigue point or marker. 3. There is no specific Army List for Ligurian tribesmen in either ARMATI or ADVANCED ARMATI. Therefore, this is another list based entirely on conjecture. However, I did review the Later Carthaginian 275 BC - 146 BC list in D.B.M. Army Lists, Book 2: 500 BC to 476 AD. In order to give the Ligurians some fighting ability against the legions posed against them, about 2/3 of the infantry were massed into Warbands. [21] Command: LEFT (unknown) CR: H @ 2; L @ 2 BP of 2 Initiative: 4 Unit(s) Scale Men FV *Gauls (6 - WB) 4,800 5(1)3 +1 Gauls (3 - SI) 1,200 3(1)2 +2  Notes: 1. Key Units are indicated by the * prior to the unit description or type. 2. Fatigue rules are in effect for the Gallic contingent as well. Force Totals: Infantry, Cavalry, Elephants Hasdrubal 11,400, 600, 10 Ligurians 8,000, 0 Gauls 6,000, 0 Overall 25,400, 600, 10 TERRAIN CONSIDERATIONS As was previously noted, the exact location of this battle has not been determined. As was previously admitted, I used the map provided in Dupuy and Dupuy for a visual aid in the independent paper. [22] With the exception of the "rough terrain" on the Roman right / Carthaginian left, one could suggest that the terrain for the rest of the field was fairly nondescript. Neither the ancient authorities nor modem scholars suggest that there was any "rough terrain" in the center or on the Roman left / Carthaginian right. Therefore, for the purposes of this reconstruction, I am going to re-use the map on page 70 of their ENCYCLOPEDIA. Footnotes [16] The detailed breakdowns of each force and total numbers available on the day are educated guesses based on my reading of the sources and scholarly work. I welcome any constructive criticism and clarification of this research. [17] I regret that I do not have the exact page reference from Dupuy and Dupuy. The Caven numbers appear on pages 209 and 210 of his text. [18] Polybius estimated 10,000 lost by Hasdrubal while Livy imagined no less than 56,000 enemy were slain on the field. [19] Lazenby continues: "Thus Hasdrubal would have thought he could fight a combined army of 30 - 40,000 men, but not when reinforced by Nero's 7000." I am left to puzzle on this point, too. If Hasdrubal had a force of only 20,000 men, then why would he consider fighting a force twice his number? If, on the other hand, Hasdrubal's force was on more of an equal footing with the Romans, say 30,000 versus 30,000, then why not fight an engagement with the Roman troops - even with the extra legion? Lazenby cites Appian (Hannibalic War 52) on this matter, reporting and dismissing Appian's figures of 48,000 foot and 8,000 horse for Hasdrubal when he crossed over into Italy. [20] The translation of Livy by Roberts offers this narrative the day before the battle was joined: "The enemy were already standing in front of their camp, in battle order. But there was a pause. Hasdrubal had ridden to the front with a handful of cavalry." (129) [21] Turning again to Syrett's article, one finds the following description of Ligurian Troops: "Not much is known about their appearance, but it is likely that they were armed and equipped in a similar manner to their Gallic neighbours (oval shields and long slashing swords). Hasdrubal evidently placed great reliance on them, as he deployed them in a critical part of his battle line at the battle of Metaurus." (29) This deduction may be open to discussion, as the Romans facing them were, the reader may recall, described by Livy as "invalidus." Perhaps then, Hasdrubal concentrated his best troops on the right of his line, hoping that the other portions of the line would hold while the fight was decided between him and Salinator? [22] Please see footnote 7. Modeling Metaurus Reconstructing Hasdrubal's Defeat in the Second Punic War Historical Background Orders of Battle Historical Commentary and Dispositions Detailed Orders of Battle Back to MWAN # 121 Table of Contents Back to MWAN List of Issues Back to MagWeb Magazine List © Copyright 2003 Hal Thinglum This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com