Here too, I figure the Romans discount the sheer breadth and depth of Massaliote possessions and people giving it allegiance, because they discount its leadership as decadent, pleasure seeking, and while they know the tagmas are forces to be reckoned with, they underestimate both the resolve of the League to use them if their own heartlands are threatened and the ability of the League to muster competent forces.
Yes the Romans underestimated the Massaliot league. After all we talk about antiquity here. Spy Intel is pretty much non existence( i mean about enemy stats, demographics,production etc). Romans new that the league had an army in Sicily and one against Hannibal so i think it was a valid plan from their perspective. One big problem for Scipio was that he didn't find support from Gaul tribes to boost his army(unlike Hannibal in OTL in Italy). The hellenisation of the Gauls, the open society/citizenship towards Gauls by Massaliot League and the spread of Epicurean Druidism made the Gauls in that area to feel more Massaliotes than anything else.
They appear to have underestimated not only the subtle factors but gross ones too, like how fast a tagma could be mustered and then marched across country.
Yes exactly! The reformations of Alaksagoras in 271 BC made Massalia and especially the heartlands able to produce good quality armour and weapons really fast. About march across the country, the major manpool cities of Massalia,Tolosa and Emporion are really close and have a very good road network( i mention the major road build in previous posts)
From 271 BC Alaksagoras reformations:
The Industry was developed also. New state factories builded. Artefacts,furnitures,pottery,textile manufacturing were produced in abundance, weapon and armour manufacturing(a blend of Gaul-Greek techniques) were Massalian specialties. The screw chain, the wheel chain, the cam chain, the ratchet chain, the pulley chain, and the screw press were all in use.
But I forget there are yet more lessons and more ways in which the situation differs from modern ones. In modern nations, there is no way that an amphibious descent on a port followed by direct advance on an enemy capital could work; it would be a salient quickly cut off, and there is no way such an expedition could have the punch necessary to take the capital. But in these ancient times, populations are lower, great empires are generally cobbled together with relatively small forces intimidating populations into client status, and such a move as Philopoemen's gamble can have dramatic effect, if it pays off. This is what the Romans figured they could do to Massalia after all, and that it would demoralize the League.
Well said.