ROMAN LEGION - REPUBLIC PERIOD (298 - 105 BC). LESSON Nr. 2: THE CORNICEN

 With the term "cornicem" is it intended the men that used the "cornus", i.e. horn to give orders to the troops, under the command of a Centurio.

if we have some info about the Signiferi where they were positioned, as discussed in my previous lesson, (nr. 1), for the position of the cornicien we have even more difficulties to understand his correct position in the maniple and in the centuries.

1632 BATTLE OF LUTZEN YELLOW BRIGADE - PICTURES

 Time ago I was wondering about the Yellow Brigade at the Battle of Lutzen in 1632.

I prepared some templates, 

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/3755658264788069799/2327466852317935793

I printed them, trimmed, glued, put the magnet underneath.

Finally today I decided to post some pictures of them, just to give idea how from a pictures you can obtain a papersoldier.

ROMAN LEGION - REPUBLIC PERIOD (298 - 105 BC). LESSON Nr. 1: THE SIGNIFER

I always wanted to postpone this topic, in order to have 1 legion at 1:1 ratio to show. But I think this is a long time ahead and I cannot resist to share with you what I have learned from my researches. Above all, because Italian books on this topic are far better and better detailed - as you will see in the next lessons - than the English written books.

I am indeed preparing a "Polybian" Legion (Polybius was the Greek writer, contemporary to the Republican Legion that better described how a Legion worked) at 1:1 ratio, but my numbers are still very small (I am preparing at the same time the 3rd Battle of Ramla and the Battle of Turin 1706); so I need a lot of time to complete my purpose.

The first point to be pointed out immediatly is that no one ever described precisely how a Republican Legion actually worked. There are theories (mostly wrong) about the triple acies, but it is not clear how it actually worked, as said.

The Italian books that I will quote are the unique indeed that with a comparision of different passages (quoted in Latin or Ancient Greek) are able to give an idea of the way it worked. This will solve one an for ever the numbers of a Legion and a lot of other problems. The rest will be up to me and to my 1:1 ratio papersoldier Legion.

Let's start from the number and position of the "Signum" (insign), plural "Signa" inside the maniple. And let's start from the Osprey "Roman Republican Legionary - 298 - 105 BC"

As it happens sometimes with Osprey  the lack of space in details creates some problems in explaining well the topic. As usual pictures are superbe, but something with "Signa" is wrong.

At page 23 it is reported (please read underlined in red): "each century carried ist own standard (signum) ...omissis ... each centuroi was supported by four subordinates, a second in command (optio) a standard-beared (signifer) ....omissis Polybios says the Centurions choose from the ranks two of their bravest men to be the standard-beares for each maniple. AS THERE WAS ONLY ONE SIGNUM PER MANIPLE ....

 

So the text contradicts itself in few rows: at the top it say that every century had a standard. Though a maniple was formed by 2 centuries it means that every maniple (2 centuries) had 2 signa; but later, just few rows down it states (correctly) that there was only 1 signum per maniple, so 1 every 2 centuries. This points out very clearly the mistake the Author incurred in this case.

As it will better related later, it is correct that every maniple carried its own signum, also because the century (centuria in Latin) was just an administrative unit and not a fighiting unit. The 2 centuries (Centuriae plural in Latin) were differentiated as Centuria Anterior (front Century) and Centuria Posterior (Back Century); in between them there was the "Signifer" (from signum-ferre i.e. the transporter of the signum); in fact the legionaries in the front century were called "Antesignani" i.e. "those that are before the signum and the legionaries in the back century were called "Postsignani", i.e. those that are bihind the signum. 

It is correct that the Signifer had an auxiliary, had he some troubles or dies in battle.

It is true I don't have a complete Legion 1:1 but I do have a complete maniple pf Princepes to show the structure and where the signum was put.

 Every Centuria is 10 men wide per 5 rows deep (normal Legion); even though again reading from Osprey it seems that there were 2 tubincen (musician) it is clear there was just 1 that had to give orders to the troops according to the Centurio Prior's command.

My main sources for this "problems" are two books in Italian:

This one, written by Dario Battaglia and Luca Ventura through the analysis of ancient text and critics to old theories opens a new light on the real working of a Legion in the Republican period.

The second one "L'esercito Romano Armamento e Organizzazione" Author Giuseppe Cascarino:

Coming back to the topic of this post, i.e. the Signifer, it is interesting to compare this 2 execelent works (a must to be bought books I would say) on this.

So in the book "L'Esercito Romano" of Giovanni Brizzi, the Signifer is on the right (Nr. 3) just behind the Centurio Prior

The version of De Rebus Militum differs a lot: it moves the Optiones in the front, puts the Centuriones or the right (prior centurio) and on the left (posterior centurio) of the maniples, but in this in does not clarifies were exactly the Optiones should stay (in front behind the Centuriones, on the back?)

Moreover  in does not specify where the Signifer stays, but it expalins that there were antesignani and postsignani legioniers, supposing hence to have the "signa" in between the 2 centuriae.

The version of De Rebus Militum, that I will explain later in a next lesson is quite complicated even though very well conceived.

On this site, 

https://www.karwansaraypublishers.com/blogs/gary-brueggemans-the-roman-army-ancient-warfare/legion_formations_update?srsltid=AfmBOoqWlcXIjxzcRGKqBAGqyOll1Dq4vWRMslTpi5azYSpIlzP0mbuI

it is discussed - among other - the position of the signifer, with 2 different options:

1st Option:

As the Author says "The location of the signifer is a matter of discussion. Some put the signiferi behind the formations, others seem to think the standards were right up front, leading the way. There seems to be some indirect evidence for locating the standards in the front insofar as it is clear that they were rallying and assembly points. However, it seems unlikely that the most prized possession of the century would be put in the front. It seems almost incredible that the century would go into battle with a man in the foremost ranks who could not fight, could not even protect himself. Somehow it makes much more sense to locate the standard somewhere behind the century. If the standards were in this position it would make it easier for dispatch riders from the general or tribunes to find the appropriate units."

So the more probable position could be this

With the Centurion inside the century. This last position of the Signifer would match with the idea of De Rerum Militum, where it states of the Antesignani and Postsignani. Just in this last case it is not well expressed, when the 2 centuries are lined up, where the Signifer would stay. It is my personal opinion that it would stay behind the Maniple (formed by the Centuria Posterior + Centuria Prior) making of all the soldiers "Antesignani", that it would mean the front line of attack. 

So I intended to try to explain how it worked a maniple (on 2 centuries) when deploying for battle:

Still this position of the Signifer gives me some troubles:

a) it is written that the mayor close fighting were around the Signifer to defend and to conquer it. So I wonder if it was just put in the 3rd or 4th row, in order to be protected bt the "antisignani" but still visible from behind the unit to indentify the front of attack;

b) if the Signifer had to transfer the orders of the Centurio it should be in line with him or just some very few staps behind, as Caesar writes in his De Bello Civili.

This doubt is confirmed by a passage of Vegetius where he speaks of the past, and states that "cum centeni milites sequerentur non solum VEXILLUM sed etiam centurionem" i.e. "so that 100 soldiers follow non only the standard but also the centurion".  But his passage (Book II - chapter XIII) must be well read: it is said that during the fighting it was necessary for the men to recognize where his unit was. So it seem more reasonable to consider the "signa" in the middle or 2 centuries or behind. Nonetheless the same Vegetius in the Book II Chapter VII says that the Cohortal Legion was formed upon 10 cohortes: after the first five followed the sixth, seventh and so on and he adds "in ipsa quoque enucleati  adscribendi sunt juniores quia in secunda acie POST AQUILAM ET IMAGINES choors sexta consistit" that means "in the sixth must be inscribed the simple  younger (juniores) because in the second line (in srcunda acie) AFTER the eagle and the images there is the sixth coohrs.

So it is evident that inthe Legion of Marius and eventually before the "signa" were in between the formations and not in the front - during the battle - or in the middle of the unit.

1706 BATTLE OF TURIN - STANDARD NORMANDIE REGIMENT 2020 vs 2025

 In some previous posts I was commenting about the fact that I was preparing new poses for the Normandie Regiment that I would have not used. It was not true. In fact, I started to prepare new poses and here I would like to show the differences between a standard-bearer done in 2020 and that done now 2025

I went also to prepare a version with the powdered wig:

ROMAN LEGIONAR: PUNIC WARS vs MARIUS & CAESAR'S WARS

 It is interesting to investigate how the uniforms - i.e. the appearance of the Roman legionar changed fron the period of the Punic Wars (III Century b.C.) to the Caesar's period (I Century b.C.). It is also to be pointed out that uniforms were not so "uniform" and variations happened all the time in a slow evolution.

To recreate the evolution of the Roman Army I started from the series "My First Wargame" a real must for papersodiers. I did not know they also published the Roman Army during Punic wars. 

In any case, from an image of this, I increased (at east this is my opinion) the features of the template

From the Caesar's template I did the Punic Wars' template

1105 - THIRD BATTLE OF RAMLA - FATIMYD LIGHT CAVALRY 2nd PART

 As promised, here I ma with some picture of the 120 horses of Fatimyd light cavalry. I tried to pose them is a sort of attack to a Crusade town, just out of pleasure to set up a scenario. The ratio is 1:1.

The effect of the charges is well represented with banners and flags in the front. 

Some pictures with a total view on the facing: light Fatimid cavalry on the right and Crusaders on the left

Here bottom detaild of the Crusaders

PAPERSOLDIERS ON SELL

 After a while and some doubts, considering that some of you requested templates or papersoldiers to be sold, I am (re)considering to sell them.

The options are:

a) just the template

b) papersoldiers already trimmed:

c) papersoldiers trimmed, glued to a basis (adding or not a magnet) and reinforcement

The first option would have a very limited costs  (Euro 5 per template), while the others more expensive, considering the huge work necessary to be done:

- papersoldiers trimmed: nr. 10 papersoldiers Euro 3,75

- papersoldiers trimmed and glued to basis + reinfocement: nr. 10 papersoldiers Euro 4,30

For any request, write me on this blog. Thanks 

1105 - THIRD BATTLE OF RAMLA - FATIMYD LIGHT HORSE

I know I have to finish this project (in my next post I will publish the Crusaders' cavalry at 1:1 ratio already done all arrayed and ready for battle) and hence I lack some troops to finish it: specifically the Turks horse bowmen (still to be done) and the Fatimyd Light Cavalry.

I decided it was time to fill this gap and so I started to draw this light cavalry that will be just in 120 horse. There were no clear examples of this kind of troops and hence I had to find out how they would appear.

I had temptation to make them ride camels but for the moment I stick to horse. I decided to eliminate shields, bows under the saddle, and whatever hauberque they coud wear, leaving them as simple as possible.

Here some examples with colour variations:

Fatimyd Light Cavalry in white tunic

Fatimyd Light Cavalry in brownish tunic

From this template I changed the cover of the head:

and a further variation with weapon:

From this I passed to officer template:

and as a final some different kinds of banners:

Finally, I finished trimming the 120 Arab Light horses; I am glueing the basis and then I will take some pictures of them arrayed on the field

1744 BATTLE OF MADONNA DELL'OLMO - SPANISH REGIMENTS

I rewieved the uniforms of the Spanish Regiments present at the Battle of Madonna dell'Olmo of my previous post, where I found an error: I considered as present the Irish Regiment Hibernia; actually it was a sort of Iberia, i.e. Espana. 

I went to check on the Kronoskaf site for the Spanish troops in SYW and I found out that in the WAS the Irish Regiment Hibernia fought at the defense of Neapoles in 1744 and hence it is impossible its presence the same year at the Battle of Madonna dell'Olmo.

At the contrary, the same source states that the Espana Regiment passed the Alps in 1744. Also my misunderstanig was due to a bad reading of a map of the battle, where the name of the Regiment was faded.

So finally I could draw in their completeness the Spanish Regiments that fought at the Battle of Madonna dell'Olmo.

Note to distiguish the Regiments:

Aside the Swiss Jung Reding Regiment, that wore a blue uniform, all the other Spanish Regiment, since 1717 wore white uniforms. To distiguish between them there were different elements: the ribbon of the tricorne and buttons (always of the same colour) were silver of gold. Some units had the trousers of the lining colour, others in white. Other units had the vest in colour, other in white.

I am pretty sure there were difference in the position of the pockets (bewteen totally similar regiments) but at the state I was not able to find any detail (while for Piedmontese units I will have no problem for this).

Also important to point out that some regiment were regular and hence they had a collar of the same lining colours, while others were provincials ("Regimentos Proviciales") and they wore a black tie, with white unifors as per Regulation dating 1734.

In the figure above it is hence possible to distinguish as provincial the Cordoba and Grenada Regiments.

The Regimentos Provincilaes were 17: Jean, Badajoz, Sevilla, Burgos, Lugo, GRANADA, Leon, Oviedo, CORDOBA, Trujillo, Santander, Orense, Santiago, Pontevedra, Tuya and Betanzos.

Some doubts arose about the nuances of the blue for the Toledo Regiment. In fact, from the Spanish sources was "azul" i.e. blue. Then I found this pictures of this regiment

and I tried to reproduce the same "blue" as here:

but getting back to Kronoskaf it has the same picture but with a different (and normal) blue

So I kept the former blue colour.

Another doubt was the lining fo the Cordoba Regiment. The sources dating after the realm of Felipe V gives red lining while before green. So I kept the green lining. Moreover for the regiment Espana there were sources saying light green (around 1750) while before just bare green. So I did it in a sort of green not too dark, not too light.

There is finally a very interesting adding: while I was preparing my OOB I found that defending the Church of Madonna dell'Olmo there were 3 Battallones Provinciales. I thought they were simply grenadiers taken from regiments present at the battle, (even though the numbers of Provicial Regiments were too low to form 3 battalions) but then I found about this units: it was a special unit of 3 batallions of combined grenadiers taken from militia units; so not belonging to any specific regiment (line or provincial) and hence dressed all the same in a very characteristic purple faced colour. 

Grenadero Provincial 1744

This uniform was taken from this (please not the wrong colour for the Rgt Cordoba)

Nontheless for the Granaderos Provinciale it is plenty of info and well detailled. This trigged my curiosity also because it gives the correct number of the Battalions but what astonish me is that they were dressed all the same way.

I asked some help in The Miniatures Pages and mostly they said that during the Napoleonic period they exsisted, while doubts arose for this period.

Finally I find this in the Book Carlo Emanuele III di Savoia a difesa delle Alpi nella campagna del 1744, Studio storico militare written by Colonel Carlo Buffa di Perrero in the year 1887, where he pointed out the existence of 3 Battalions of Provincial Grenadiers, number that perfectly matches with all the numbers I saw, regarding these troops.

This info was taken from a note in the Turin Archive where it was pointed out all the French and Spanish troops that crossed the Alps at the beginning of the 1744 Campaign.