![]() "The article about the battle mentioned, however, that there was not one, but two consular armies involved in the battle. That seems to be contrary to what I've read. I've read that there was "only" one consular army but that it was significantly reinforced by both Italian and Gallic Allies. Your typical consular army would have around 40,000 men whereas this one had perhaps as many as 65,000 troops. Given Roman commitments in Spain and also in the war against Jugurtha, plus the process of reforms, it seems highly unlikely that they would have been able to instantaneously raise two consular armies on the spur of the moment, especially if you consider that the number of men lost at the Battle of Noreia and preceeding skirmishes amounted to almost half a consular army. "Supposedly one of the reasons for how poorly the Romans fared in the battle was abysmal coordination between the two consular armies commanded by men who hated each other." #Battle of arausio historium plus ![]() I'd be rather careful with that statement. It sounds suspiciously like the words of Titus Livius, who had the rather annoying tendency of blaming poor Roman martial prowess on ineffectual leadership rather than recognizing enemy fighting abilities for their true worth. Livius is a great writer but a mediocre military historian. While poor leadership is quite possible, I think it far more likely that the Roman commander simply under estimated enemy capabilites and got violated in the most disturbing manner as a result.īoris the Romanian, I am attaching an article I found on the web about the Battle of Arausio. Indeed, I am a little sceptical of internet sources, though this one looks reasonably trustworthy. Nonetheless, you may be interested in the article so here it is: Nevertheless, I posted on this board to get a 'reality check' on the info - so I want to thank you for your help with this. The Battle of Arausio took place on October 6, 105 BC, between the town of Arausio and the Rhone River. Ranged against the migratory tribes of the Cimbri under Boiorix and the Teutoni were two Roman armies, commanded by the proconsul Quintus Servilius Caepio and consul Gnaeus Mallius Maximus. However, bitter differences between the commanders prevented the Roman armies from cooperating with devastating results. Roman losses are quoted at up to 80,000 troops, and many more servants and camp followers (total loss estimated at about 112,000 men). The terrible defeat gave Gaius Marius the opportunity to come to the fore and radically reform the organisation and recruitment of Roman legions. The migrations of the Cimbri tribe through Gaul and adjacent territories had disturbed the balance of power and incited or provoked other tribes, such as the Helvetii into conlict with the Romans. An ambush of Roman troops and the temporary rebellion of the town of Tolosa caused Roman troops to mobilise in the area, with three strong forces. Having regained Tolosa, the proconsul Quintus Servilius Caepio adopted a defensive strategy, waiting to see if the Cimbri would move toward Roman territories again. In October of 105 BC, they did.Įven before battle was joined, the Romans were in trouble. Two of the major Roman forces available were camped out on the Rhone River, near Arausio. However, the proconsul Caepio didn't have much time for the consul commanding the other force. Gnaeus Mallius Maximus was a new man - not part of the established elite of Roman political life. Saving Earth Britannica Presents Earth’s To-Do List for the 21st Century.As the current consul, he was also the superior of the two.100 Women Britannica celebrates the centennial of the Nineteenth Amendment, highlighting suffragists and history-making politicians.COVID-19 Portal While this global health crisis continues to evolve, it can be useful to look to past pandemics to better understand how to respond today.Julius Caesar allows the relatively hospitable Boii to settle a buffer. ![]() Having been greatly reduced, the Helvetii will be unable to fight off Germanic incursions that could also threaten Gaul. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |