There was some discussion in another thread about whether the Romans were pre-ordained to lose at Cannae by their military doctrine, and also discussion of how much flexibility gamers should get to depart from such a military doctrine.
But if Scipio Africanus had been born 20 years earlier, and had taken command at Cannae, he probably wouldn't have stuck to Roman military doctrine either. So what would he have done?
Hi Mike,
Counterfactuals or "What ifs" can be interesting, but some historical gamers have very strong positions about their use, at least in my experience.
If I may turn the question back to you, what do you think Scipio would have done if he had been at Cannae?
Cheers,
Chris
I'm not sufficiently confident we know what Varro and Paullus did to guess what someone else might have done (most boring answer). Perhaps given the overall situation and Carthaginian cavalry superiority, Scipio wouldn't have fought at Cannae at all (boring answer). Or perhaps he would have spread out his front to prevent Carthaginian encirclement, or done something fancy with the three lines, using the triarii to hold off the Carthaginian cavalry while the principes manoeuvred against the Carthaginian veterans and the hastati held the front more passively (vague answer). Perhaps his combat bonuses would have meant the Romans would have won doing exactly what they did do (flippant answer).
QuoteIf I may turn the question back to you, what do you think Scipio would have done if he had been at Cannae?
Scipio was actually a Cannae survivor. One the awkward "wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey" problems of this case is how much was Scipio the general shaped by his earlier military experiences? Was surviving the disaster of Cannae important in convincing him to do things differently?
Quote from: Erpingham on September 02, 2021, 12:04:15 PM
One of the awkward "wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey" problems of this case is how much was Scipio the general shaped by his earlier military experiences?
thank you Dr
Quote from: Holly on September 02, 2021, 12:09:57 PM
Quote from: Erpingham on September 02, 2021, 12:04:15 PM
One of the awkward "wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey" problems of this case is how much was Scipio the general shaped by his earlier military experiences?
thank you Dr
Also you get the issue that even if he had been 20 years older and had commanded at Cannae, he would still have commanded the same army which was probably remarkably Green and probably not all that well trained compared to its predecessors
Quote from: Cantabrigian on September 02, 2021, 11:13:41 AM
There was some discussion in another thread about whether the Romans were pre-ordained to lose at Cannae by their military doctrine, and also discussion of how much flexibility gamers should get to depart from such a military doctrine.
But if Scipio Africanus had been born 20 years earlier, and had taken command at Cannae, he probably wouldn't have stuck to Roman military doctrine either. So what would he have done?
The thing is he didn't need to stick to Roman military doctrine since he had experienced veterans at his back and could execute manoeuvres the raw recruits at Cannae were incapable of. Presuming the Roman infantry under Varrus had about as much training as and less experience than citizen hoplites what
could Scipio have done other than form a line (not too long so as to become unwieldy) and advance? If his line was several km long to fill up the space between the hills and the river could he have advanced? Did very long lines ever managed co-ordinated advances? And he had to advance - his troops, goaded by Hannibal, were itching for a fight and couldn't be kept back any longer.
Quote from: Justin Swanton on September 02, 2021, 12:38:07 PM
... the raw recruits at Cannae ...
Really? Polybius says of the Roman army at Cannae:
Up to that time both Consuls had never been engaged together, or employed thoroughly trained soldiers: the combatants on the contrary had been raw levies, entirely unexperienced in danger;and
While the men had not only seen the arms, order, and numbers of the enemy, but had been engaged in almost daily fights with them for the last two years.Clearly there must have been a lot of new recruits to make up the increased numbers, but there were also a lot of Roman veterans present as well.
Quote from: Chris on September 02, 2021, 11:22:24 AM
If I may turn the question back to you, what do you think Scipio would have done if he had been at Cannae?
One of the things I've learnt about this forum is that I don't need to bother writing down my own views, because if I wait a while someone else will come along and express them much more fluently than I could ever manage.
In this case, RichT.
Quote from: Cantabrigian on September 02, 2021, 07:54:47 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on September 02, 2021, 12:38:07 PM
... the raw recruits at Cannae ...
Really? Polybius says of the Roman army at Cannae:
Up to that time both Consuls had never been engaged together, or employed thoroughly trained soldiers: the combatants on the contrary had been raw levies, entirely unexperienced in danger;
and
While the men had not only seen the arms, order, and numbers of the enemy, but had been engaged in almost daily fights with them for the last two years.
Clearly there must have been a lot of new recruits to make up the increased numbers, but there were also a lot of Roman veterans present as well.
Sure, the army was a mixed force of new recruits and experienced soldiers, but it seems the new recruits outnumbered the old hands and in any case to execute fancy manoeuvres you need formations comprised entirely of well-drilled troops. A mixed force means the veterans will stiffen the raw recruits' will to fight, but manoeuvres have to be elementary.
You could say that we know what Scipio would do at Cannae because he did it at Zama ;)
Quote from: Jim Webster on September 03, 2021, 06:54:02 AM
You could say that we know what Scipio would do at Cannae because he did it at Zama ;)
Become Massinisa's best friend?
Quote from: Justin Swanton on September 03, 2021, 07:08:11 AM
Quote from: Jim Webster on September 03, 2021, 06:54:02 AM
You could say that we know what Scipio would do at Cannae because he did it at Zama ;)
Become Massinisa's best friend?
A better plan than that put forward by anybody else.
But yes, if somebody wants to know what Scipio would do if he was in charge, you have to look at what he did when he was in charge. So not only do you have to look at Spain, but also how he handled Sicily and Africa. With him in charge before Cannae the attitude to Italian allies could have been different, and his battle of Cannae could have been very different. He might have fought it on a different battlefield and in a different way.
But would the Scipio with experience of Cannae and the Spanish campaign, have done the same thing as one without that experience?
Wouldn't it be more accurate to suggest that what he intrinsically brought with him was a belief in examining the past behaviour of the enemy for clues to his next move.
And Rome's experience of Hannibal at that point was of someone who favoured ambushes and had excellent scouting and evading cavalry.
So when presented with a straight head on fight with no risk of an ambush, wouldn't he have seen that as the best chance Rome had?
I suggest it was impossible for anyone to anticipate the use of the African veterans and the slow pull in of the centre line, and equally it was impossible to anticipate that the cavalry failure would be so catastrophic (was there ever a cavalry double envelopment in recorded history before then?
So the question then would become, what better situation would Scipio have been waiting for than the one he had?
He would have been wary of an encounter battle, and if letting H get out of sight for fear of a repeat ambush, which he would know his scouts were unlikely to detect.
The terrain was ideal for securing his flanks, then enemy was in sight.
Seems to be his only viable other option was to try stalling for time until H ran out of food - and that is distinctly un-Roman .
Subsequent performances were based on prior experiences, not on natural ability
Scipio's technique seems to have consisted of wrong-footing his opponents, i.e. he was a master of disinformation: so switching Spanish and Roman infantry at Ilipa and IMHO getting Massinisa to make a surprise appearance at Zama.
How does he hoodwink Hannibal at Cannae? Hannibal knows how the legions traditionally fight and draws up his plan based on that knowledge. He relies on his cavalry superiority to take out the Roman flanks and a surprise envelopment by his Libyan veterans to complete the encirclement. Scipio would have known from the Trebia about the Carthaginian cavalry superiority and how it can be used to flank the Roman infantry, but can he use this knowledge at Cannae? He can't try Caesar's trick at Pharsalus as Hannibal has a good vantage point in the hills to view the battlefield, making it impossible for Scipio to hide a separate force of anti-cavalry troops behind the lines.
Unless...
Scipio knows Hannibal must drive off his cavalry and envelope his infantry if the Carthaginians are to have any hope of winning the battle. He has a mixed force of raw and experienced troops. He puts all his experienced infantry into the wings of the triarii line. As the battle commences, he orders the wing triarii to form column and then march to a new position 90 degrees to the orientation of the rest of the infantry and turn back into line, facing outwards. He orders his Roman and Allied cavalry to fall back from the Carthaginian cavalry. As the Carthaginian cavalry advance against the Romans he hits their flank and rear with his veteran triarii and routs them. The Libyan infantry can no longer outflank the Roman foot, the Carthaginian centre is driven back and routed, and Rome is triumphant.
(https://i.imgur.com/OhOJ8RH.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/xncNh06.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/Z6l85GT.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/NzbvovM.png)
Quote from: Mark G on September 03, 2021, 08:10:26 AM
Wouldn't it be more accurate to suggest that what he intrinsically brought with him was a belief in examining the past behaviour of the enemy for clues to his next move.
You may well be right, but I think you could generalise it to say that what all the great leaders (Alexander, Hannibal, Scipio, Caesar) did that made them different from everyone else was that they actually thought about stuff, and reacted to stuff.
The accounts of their battles tend to have a lot more stuff coming on. It could be said that this is merely due to more attention being payed to their battles (and that hence the description of other battles being simple "line them up and let them go" affairs is completely unrealistic). But I tend to believe that "great" leaders did bring an element of flexibility and reactiveness to their commands.
Quote from: Mark G on September 03, 2021, 08:10:26 AM
I suggest it was impossible for anyone to anticipate the use of the African veterans and the slow pull in of the centre line, and equally it was impossible to anticipate that the cavalry failure would be so catastrophic
I don't think it was impossible to anticipate that Hannibal would try something. Given his record it seems unlikely that he would just settle for a straight head-on fight. So a wise commander would expect the unexpected, and have some resources to deal with it.
Of course, if Hannibal had known he was facing someone of Scipio's capabilities (i.e. not a complete numpty), he probably wouldn't have agreed to battle either.
Interesting question. As my long suffering wife will tell you I've spent the better part of a week tramping over Cannae trying to square the historical accounts with the actual battlefield and as near as I can figure the fundamental problem is the Romans allowed themselves to be drawn into situation that resulted in 'canalization' - they were funneled into an area where the crush from behind forced those in front to become so tightly constrained as to be unable to effectively fight. So to perhaps answer the original question, 1. As point out Scipio was there (but as a very young cavalryman apparently) but 2. Scipio would never have accepted battle on that terrain. He would have lured Hannibal onto grounds of his own choosing and destroyed him there (to paraphrase Rommel)... IMHO