The army of roman republic, by M.Dobson

[Mitra]

I previously (in the late 2006) signalled this book before his exit: now has been published.

I still reading him so I want wait to express my opinions, but, a part from the personel ideas about the theories present in the book, i think it is a good book for each people interested to II B.C. roman army.

Re-examing the Numantia excavations the author proposes an alternative view of the planning of roman camps here and the dating of Lager V respect Schulten ideas (in reality it is not the first as he reports). In short, he see in the camps the existence in the late II c. BC of first cohortal organisation, in parallel with the continous use the manipular organisation.

Many beautiful chapters and images over the Numantia's excavations and the examen of Lagers (only this is worth the book cost) and two chapter about theoretically description of II century roman army and camps organisation.

Here the link:
http://www.oxbowbooks.com/bookinfo.cfm/ID/47046

[Ross Cowan]

Hi Davide,

Does Dobson have much to say about the organisation of the Italic allies?

Cheers,

R

[Mitra]

Hi Ross

About the italic allies Dobson gives two points:

- internal organisation identical to that of legion (3 maniple + velites).

- he supposes the italics use the cohort formation much before the legion, probably he says from 2nd punic war. Without doubt the lager 3, the more like to polybian description of roman camp, where the socii are placed in the greek author text we find big barrack groups, bigger than that of possible legionary maniples. So he place the hastati, principes and triarii,velites of each socii cohort in a cohortal barrack group.

About these point my personal opinion is different:

- to assume that italics use maniples + velites before pass to cohort, is a modern obsession for symmetrical acies. From my point of view the socii always set themselves for community units (cohort).

- In the Dobson reconstruction of cohort barrack I found a absence: where are placed the cohort prefectus and quaestor? Both Livy and Polybius confirm these figures presence.

I have also a different opinion about the born of roman cohort in the legion as administrative unit, but this is too long discourse for mine poor english.

Anyway the book is fantastic, the camps descriptions, reconstructions and plants are very good and accurate. A great work.

[Ross Cowan]

Thank you, Davide. I have ordered a copy of the book.

Cheers,

Ross

[Mitra]

Your welcome, Ross. Tell me your opinion after the reading.

ciao
Davide

[Mitra]

Thank you, Davide. I have ordered a copy of the book.

Cheers,

Ross

Hi Ross

You read the book? I hope not have you "tirato un bidone".

ciao

[Ross Cowan]

It's gathering dust on my book shelf. I've only read chp. 2 on army organisation, which I didn't find very convincing, and I won't be looking at it again until I finish my current project. As far as I am concerned the legionary cohort was not a real tactical unit. With no commander or standard, how could it function as such? As I suggest in my Roman Battle Tactics, the cohortal legion was probably not very different to the manipular legion.

Cheers,

R

[Mitra]

>which I didn't find very convincing

I agree, this part is finalized only to book thesis. The strong part is the archeological.

>As far as I am concerned the legionary cohort was not a real tactical unit

I agree again. For the opposite motivation (they have cohort commader and vexillum) I think the socii cohorts fight as group in one line not in manipular organisation over three lines.

>my book shelf

Good new, I will buy for sure. I suppose the argument is over the middle republic army, correct?

[Ross Cowan]

Here's a review of the book in AJA:

[url:1mskpq6m]http://www.ajaonline.org/pdfs/book_reviews/113.3/13_Erskine.pdf[/url]

Cheers,

R

[Mitra]

Thanks for the link, Ross