08-25-2016, 07:12 PM
amount of men fighting depends also on enemy you are facing.. that's why usually Romans adjusted the depth of formation to the enemy line, instead of spreading out and outflanking them.
Anyway, my point was mostly to the unit control portion.Its easier to control a square, than a line at movement. Of course Romans didnt kept perfect line like Napoleonic infantry, but its worth mentioning that 3 rank formation typical for 18-19.century was practically unable to move farther than 100m without need to redress the ranks. So even if you are not keeping the perfect lines, and you allow men marching on their own terms, you still want to get into contact at the same time as other units, so some sort of line had to be kept anyway (not questioning the gaps)
Also, with the whole century in reserve, you have option to replace the tired century for a fresh one during a lul, and continue the fight with the fresh men. For Pila sake, i think its not that big deal that not all of them could use it at charge, as if they really had 2x larger spacing than Phalangites, it means they would have enough of space using Pila thorough the whole engagement, not necessarily as entire unit, but more like individual men supporting those fighting with occasional throw (or legionaries in second rank could use the heavy pila Thrand style against enemy fighting with the front rank) while even men in second rank maniple, positioned against the gap of units in front row, could eventually throw their pila at enemy entering the gap, making it a place where you can outflank the enemy from three sides practically..
Anyway, i recall Gary Bruggeman mentioning the Illerda ridge, where Caesar fitted three cohorts, and he suggested it would be only possible to fit three cohorts there, if they were in 6 ranks.
one thing unrelated - just reading the "Etruscan Identity and Service in the Roman Army" paper from Michael J Taylor, and he mentioned interesting thing - per him Etruscans called their Class 1 ditissimi, dunatÅtatoi, principes...
Anyway, my point was mostly to the unit control portion.Its easier to control a square, than a line at movement. Of course Romans didnt kept perfect line like Napoleonic infantry, but its worth mentioning that 3 rank formation typical for 18-19.century was practically unable to move farther than 100m without need to redress the ranks. So even if you are not keeping the perfect lines, and you allow men marching on their own terms, you still want to get into contact at the same time as other units, so some sort of line had to be kept anyway (not questioning the gaps)
Also, with the whole century in reserve, you have option to replace the tired century for a fresh one during a lul, and continue the fight with the fresh men. For Pila sake, i think its not that big deal that not all of them could use it at charge, as if they really had 2x larger spacing than Phalangites, it means they would have enough of space using Pila thorough the whole engagement, not necessarily as entire unit, but more like individual men supporting those fighting with occasional throw (or legionaries in second rank could use the heavy pila Thrand style against enemy fighting with the front rank) while even men in second rank maniple, positioned against the gap of units in front row, could eventually throw their pila at enemy entering the gap, making it a place where you can outflank the enemy from three sides practically..
Anyway, i recall Gary Bruggeman mentioning the Illerda ridge, where Caesar fitted three cohorts, and he suggested it would be only possible to fit three cohorts there, if they were in 6 ranks.
one thing unrelated - just reading the "Etruscan Identity and Service in the Roman Army" paper from Michael J Taylor, and he mentioned interesting thing - per him Etruscans called their Class 1 ditissimi, dunatÅtatoi, principes...
Jaroslav Jakubov
