Fortified villages, Classical era.

[Bill Lee]

Hello all

I've recently got back into active wargaming after a layoff of nearly 20 years (usual story) playing regular friendly games against an old mate, all Second Punic War. We've dusted off old figures and been painting new stuff and are now concentrating on making decent terrain, taking the place of the tatty polystyrene hills nothing could stand up on etc. I'm currently making olive and fig trees plus some vineyards,

My question is, how prevalent were permanent walled defences around villages and small towns, as opposed to cities, in the theatres of war fought across in the Punic Wars? I've found it a harder subject to research than I expected. From what I've found so far it seems that Gauls, Iberians, Celtiberians and Numidians habitually fortified hilltop settlements but I've found nothing on what any non-Celtic Italian peoples did, or Libyan villages in Carthaginian territory. Can any members help out, both as to whether or not you could expect to find a walled village in, say, Etruria, c218BCE or whether I'm right that such would be the norm in Spain?

Thanks.

[Patrick Waterson]

Slightly outside Second Punic War territory is Xenophon's experiences in Thrace.  Villages there had a surrounding palisade of stakes - and on one occasion these caught some raiders who were retiring over the palisade, leaving them dangling by their shield straps.

If villages elsewhere had defences, a palisade seems the likely choice, particularly in wooded areas.  The problem is that our main sources for the Second Punic War tend to conentrate on the larger actions and leave out how the other side lived.  I cannot recall a single Punic War battle which saw a village act as part of the battlefield terrain, and in any event anything less than a city stood zero chance of resisting an army of the period - even Cannae, a small town, was abandoned on Hannibal's approach.  This suggests that for vilages and small towns, defences, if any, were rudimentary and defenders non-existent.

Carthaginian territories may or may not have been different, depending upon how endemic trouble with the tribes may have been.  Unfortunately I have no information on those, but someone else might have.  Whatever defences Carthaginian non-city settlements may have had did not appear to discommode the likes of Regulus, Scipio or Masinissa in any way.

[Jim Webster]

Greece appears to have had a history of small towers for villagers to run to, which may also have been lookout posts rather than fortifying villages
Villages in Thrace and other places could well have had fences to corral livestock, to keep them in when you wanted them in and out when you wanted them out. Such a palisade wouldn't have a wall walk but wouldn't be the easiest thing to cross

[Duncan Head]

One interesting thing is that you hardly ever read of villages on a battlefield; perhaps generals choose battle-sites without such obstructions. Obviously if you are trying to reduce a tribal people like the upland Spanish or Thracians you have a lot of little hill-forts to storm, but I'm thinking of big field-battles.

[Erpingham]

One interesting thing is that you hardly ever read of villages on a battlefield; perhaps generals choose battle-sites without such obstructions.

Or perhaps any buildings on the field were insignificant in how the battle panned out, so didn't make the history.  Wargamers perhaps make more of settlements on battlefields than armies in pre-horse and musket times.

[RichT]

Yes, that (what Duncan said), surely, for Classical and Hellenistic battles at any rate. Good example being before Cynoscephalae, where neither Macedonians nor Romans wanted to fight near Phthiotic Thebes as it was full of clutter (agricultural not defensive, but same principle) and both moved off to find suitable ground (and supplies). Battlefield selection specifically avoided 'built up areas'.

[manomano]

It's extremely difficult to find  archaeological evidences of  secondary "strongholds"
( I think that this is the correct tradution in english of the words  "oppidum" or  "castrum")
in Italy during first and second punic wars and also in wars against
the Ligurian, Celts and others in the same historical period.
This it is so because of the substantial reason that strategic point in military history do not change
if not for natural disasters or if alternatives ways were discovered and as a consequence of this "old"
fortifications are under later buildings.
(Italy it's a very mountainous country and so alternative ways very unlikely)

Perhaps something is left.

http://archeonervia.blogspot.com/2009/11/scoperto-un-oppidum-fortezza-dei-liguri.html
( it's a work by dilettantes)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/it/thumb/2/27/Milano_Celtica.svg/900px-Milano_Celtica.svg.png
( it's correct, several celtic coins with etruscan inscriptions have been founded)

https://www.archeologiaviva.it/8712/heuneburg-dei-celti-e-lantica-pyrene-sul-danubio/
( the place is on a hill near the Danube but is very  interesting as a comparison)

But returning to the punic wars I observe that in carthaginian Afrika only Utica and perhaps Hippo Regio
fortifications were allowed. ( mercenary revolt).
It's so because semitic spoken ethnic   people never understand the importance of integration,
indoeuropean spoken people  instead yes.
In my opinion Hannibal campaign in Italy was hopeless, it was based on a wrong preconception.
I quote Maarbale.
Desertions about italics people were sporadic because people dont'  like go from the frying pan into the fire.

It's not correct  that fortification were not  ininfluent in battles in Punic wars, Panormus and Capua docet,

I insist about campaign game instead of a tabletop battle,  for example tring to conserve some  comunications
with the motherland forced Hannibal to lost several men and all his Numidian Cavalry to hold some stongholds ,
so the campaign betwen Marcellus and Hannibal is similar to Lee/ Grant ACW.
Hera lacinia and Appomatox the same thing ( G.B.Vico docet)

I remember a basic book.

[Bill Lee]

Those are all really helpful comments, thanks everyone. I admit I was thinking more the 'look of the thing' when it came to tabletop villages rather than objectives that could be a significant tactical factor, but Manomano and Duncan Head have given me food for thought regarding the potential for assaults on strongpoints as small actions in their own right. Otherwise, at most some small houses on the edge of the field to look good but otherwise nothing!
Thanks again.