Login

Hibernicus · 02-09-2004, 06:13 PM

Avete 
 
We prefer to use plural imperative whenever possible based on the information we received many years ago from a Latin scholar 
 
We also like to use them because they can impart a certain rhythm 
 
Example: STATE 
 
We usually speak the words in two parts.. STA (pause) TE! 
 
or.. ORDATE.. as: ORDA (pause) TE! 
 
This gives the troop a moment to prepare to initiate the action. 
 
Same with MOVE.. as: MO (pause) VE! 
 
When I used the commands in SCA warfare the value of using them as per above was immense. Trying to cause a line of troops to uniformly refuse a side while engaged with a determined opponent without a clear sharp signal is extremely difficult. In order for the refuse to work effectively everyone has to move at the same time. The sequence might be: "Parate recedite ex scuta! Parate recedite ex scuta! Orda.. TE!!" The pause also allowed me a moment to insure that everything was in order before the final execution of the action. 
 
 
Hibernicus

Matthew Amt · 02-09-2004, 08:44 PM

Avete! 
Okay, here it is (kissing my lunchtime goodbye!). The book is "Maurice's Strategikon: Handbook of Byzantine Military Strategy", George T. Dennis, translator, 1984 (Univ. Pennsylvania Press), ISBN 0-8122-7899-2. For some reason we have two copies of it here, but NO, I will NOT steal one for you! 
 
This is from Book 12, Mixed Formations, Infantry, Camps, and Hunting, Part B, Infantry Formations, section 14, Infantry Drill Movements. (No idea if these are original headings or not, might say in the translator's intro.) I'll give the translation first, then the Latin, which is included as footnotes in this book. 
 
"The herald commands: 'Silence. Observe orders. Do not worry. Keep your position. Follow the standard. Do not leave the standard and pursue the enemy.' The troops then advance at a steady pace and in silence, without anyone even whispering. They should become accustomed to these movements, so that at a spoken command, a nod, or some other signal, they march or halt, reduce or divide the depth of the files, march steadily in close order for a good distance over various kinds of terrain, close or tighten their ranks in depth and width, march in a foulkon, engage in a mock battle, sometimes using staffs and sometimes naked swords." 
 
Footnote: "Silentium. mandata captate. non vos turbatis. ordinem servate. bando sequute. nemo demittat bandum et inimicos seque." 
 
Section 15. A Second Drill. 
"They should divide into a double phalanx and then resume normal formation, face to the right and the left, march to the flank and then back to their original position, change their front to the right and to the left, broaden and thin their formation, deepen or double the depth of the files, change their front to the rear and then back again." 
 
Section 16. How to Begin the Above Movements. 
"These maneuvers are begun as follows. The troops march or halt at a spoken command, a nod, or some other signal. When he wants them to march, the drill master signals by trumpet, horn, or voice, and they march. To halt, the signal is given by trumpet, voice, or movement of the hand, and they halt. It is essential that the troops become accustomed to these commands by voice or signal, so that they will not be confused by the clash of arms, dust, or fog. 
"The files, which are ordinarily sixteen men deep, may be thinned or divided, for example, when the commander wants to extend the width of the battle line, either to make it look more impressive or to have it the same width as that of the enemy. He gives the command: 'By eights,' or: 'March out.' (footnote They then divide with every other man stepping out of line, and the depth of the files is reduced. The width of the battle line is extended, and the depth becomes eight men. If he wants to make it four deep, he again orders: 'March out.' (9) As above, they all step to one side, either right or left. Make sure that all step in or out to one side. 
"The should march evenly in close order. So, when some men in the line step out in front and the whole line becomes uneven, the command is given: 'Straighten out the front.' (10) And the front is made even. 
"They tighten up or close ranks when the line gets to about two or three bowshots from the enemy's line and they are getting set to charge. The command is 'Close ranks.' (11) Joining together, they close in toward the center, both to each side and to front and back, until the shields of the men in the front rank are touching each other and those lined up behind them are almost glued to one another. This maneuver may be executed either while the army is marching or while it is standing still. The file closers should order those in the rear to close in forcefully on those to the front and to keep the line straight, if necessary, to prevent some from hesitating and even holding back. 
"They move in a foulkon when the two lines, ours and the enemy's, are getting close, and the archers are about to open fire, and the front-rank men are not wearing coats of mail or knee guards. The command is, 'Form foulkon.' (12) The men in the front ranks close in until their shields are touching, completely covering their midsections almost to their ankles. The men standing behind them hold their shields above their heads, interlocking them with those of the men in front of them, covering their breasts and faces, and in this way move to attack. 
"When ranks have been properly closed, and the line is about one bowshot from the enemy, and the fighting is just about to begin, the command is given: 'Ready.' (13) Right after this another officer shouts: 'Help us.' In unison everyone reponds loudly and clearly: 'O God.' (14) The light-armed troops start shooting their arrows overhead. The heavy infantry, who are drawn up in the front line, advance still closer to the enemy. If the men have darts or missile weapons, they throw them, resting their lances on the ground. If without such weapons, they advance more closely, they hurl their lances like javelins, take out their swords and fight, each man remaining in his proper position and not pursuing the enemy if they turn to retreat. The men to the reat keep their heads covered with their shields and with their lances support those in front. Obviously, it is essential for the soldiers in the first line to keep themselves protected until they come to blows with the enemy. Otherwise, they might be hit by enemy arrows, especially if they do not have coats of mail or greaves. 
 
"The are divided into a double phalanx when the line is advancing straight ahead and hostile forces appear both in front and to their rear. Assuming that the files are sixteen men deep, if the enemy approaching the front is getting very close and about to begin fighting, give the command: 'Divide in the middle. Form double phalanx.' (15) The first eight men halt. The other eight face about and move back, thus forming a double phalanx. If the files are eight or even four, then the command is: 'Primi halt, secundi march out. Form double phalanx.' (16) The secundi, those under the dekarch, face about and march out a distance of three hundred paces or feet, far enough so the enemy's arrows will not cause harm to the rear of either phalanx but will fall in the clear space between them. 'Return.' (17) They again turn around, if the need arises, and return to their previous formation. If, as may occur, the larger hostile force approaches the rear of our line and the wagons are not following behind, then the secundi halt and the primi march out. The double-phalanx formation is appropriate when the wagons are not following or have been seized by the enemy. 
 
"Facing to the right or left is called for when the commander wants to move the line by the flank to one side either, as would be likely, to extend the line and outflank the enemy, to avoid being outflanked by them, to obtain more favorable ground, or to pass a defile. If he wants to march it to the right, he orders: 'To the lance, face.' (1 Each soldier, then, remaining in place, turns. 'March.' (19) And they move to the designated place. 'Return.' (20) And they resume their original front. If he wants them to go to the left, he orders: 'To the shield, face. March.' (21) And the rest is observed as above. The two-faced line is called for in the event that the enemy circles around both front and rear before our battle line has time to divide into the double phalanx. Give the command: 'Face in all directions.' (22) Half the troops stand fast to meet the enemy attacking from the front. The other half turns about to the rear. The middle ranks remain n place with their heads covered by their shields. 
 
"They change fronts to the right or the left when the commander wants to bring our battle line to the right or left to meet some emergency which might arise. The command for this is: 'Change to the right, or to the left.' (23) By one tagma at a time changing front, the whole line is quickly brought over to the designated front. 
 
"The depth of the files may be increase or doubled. Assume that the troops are standing four deep and the commander wants to double that to correspond to the depth of the enemy's line and to make his own stronger in preparation for the charge. The command for this is: 'Enter.' (25) And the files become eight deep. If he wants to make them sixteen deep, he gives the same command: 'Enter.' One by one they return to their original depth as one unit of sixteen men. Although this is generally not advisable, still, in case the commander wants to make the files thirty-two deep, he orders: 'File in file.' (26) They are doubled in the manner described above, and the battle line is deepened while its width is reduced. 
 
"When the line is marching on straight ahead, and the enemy, instead of coming to them from the front, approach from the rear, the line may be turned around. If the commander wants to bring the front, that is, the file leaders, around to the rear, the files still being sixteen deep, he orders: 'Change place.' (27) The line stands still while the file leaders pass through the files to the rear; the rest of the men follow behind them, and they form a new front facing the enemy. It is best to do this before they close ranks. But if they are already closed, and there is no time to open them, the comman is given: 'About face.' (2 Remaining in position, each man turns around to the rear, and the sixteenth man, the file closer, is now in front instead of the file leader. 
 
 
Footnotes for this section: 
8. Ad octo, exi. 
9. Exi. 
10. Dirige frontem. 
11. Junge. 
12. Ad fulcon. 
13. Parati. 
14. AdiutaÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚Â¦Deus. 
15. Medii paritis ad difallangiam. 
16. Primi state, secundi ad diffalangiam exite. 
17. Reverte. 
18. Ad conto, clina. 
19. Move. 
20. Redi. 
21. Ad scuto, clina, move. 
22. Undique servate. 
23. Depone au dextra au senestra. 
24. Largia ad ambas partes. 
25. Intra. 
26. Acia in acia. 
27. Muta locum. 
28. Transforma. 
 
Whew! Four and a half pages of Maurice, hope that does it. Seems to be all the "meat" of the matter. And I hope there aren't too many typos. The "au...au" in note 23 is presumably "either...or", not a typo for "ad". 
 
As someone else suggested, I took the use of singular imperatives to be correct for addressing the unit as a whole. He does occasionally use plurals, for instance in note 16 when addressing the primi. 
 
Also, we use the "depone" commands for a unit wheel (basically swinging the line like a door), simply because we need to be able to do that on the field. But the description is a little hard to follow and might not mean a regular wheel at all. "Fulcon" is just a later form of testudo. 
 
It should be noted that this does not really seem to be presented as a "standardized" drill. He notes repeatedly that the men should be used to responding to visual and musical signals as well as spoken commands. However, there are some fascinating parallels between these commands and the obsolete Greek ones given by Arrian (2nd cent. AD)--the latter uses "klinon" where Maurice says "clina", for one. So it does give the impression of a system (or the basics of one) which has been around for a long time. 
 
Carry on! Valete, 
 
Matthew/Quintus

02-09-2004, 11:06 PM

Hibernicus, 
 
As a professional Latinist myself I agree that a plural imperative seems more logical for addressing a group of people- but Latin "as it was spoke" differed a great deal from the ideal Latin of Cicero and Livy, so I'm prepared to be a bit flexible even though it sticks in the gullet a bit. When I made my last post I was thinking of my experience as a drill instructor, and I do think that in this instance simplicity may well have won out over grammatical correctness. How else do we explain the "Strategikon" evidence for singular forms? 
 
Having said that, and I guess I'm getting a bit off topic here so tell me to shut up if you want, I often find the Latin on re-enactor websites (and often, dare I say it, on RAT) a bit suspect. I don't know what sort of hinges a lorica segmentata should have, though, so maybe I shouldn't complain. 
 
If you want to use plural imperatives in Latin commands you need to be consistent in doing so. The examples in your post contained a mixture of singular and plural; STATE is plural, as is ORDATE. (Actually, there isn't as far as I can discover a Latin verb ORDO, ORDARE, but never mind. I think it should probably be ORDINO, ORDINARE, in which case it should be ORDINATE.) 
 
But MO-VE is singular... For consistency with the above, you'd need MOVETE. 
 
As for "parate recedite ex scuta", this should read "parate recedERE ex scutIS". An infinitive is probably required here after the verb paro, not another imperative. And the preposition "ex" takes the ablative, so it should be "scutis". 
 
I'm not saying all this to score points, just trying to point out that there's a lot of suspect "Latin" flying around which has become fossilized through modern use. I do think that some attempt to standardize commands, using ancient sources wherever possible for guidance, would be worth while. If reenactors want to claim authenticity, then Latin seems a good place to start. 
 
If this sounds too critical or "precious", please accept my apologies. I'm very happy to help anyone who wants any Latin checking over (or ancient Greek, for that matter). Just e-mail it to [email protected] and I'll do my best to assist. 
 
Shaun Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=shaunhullis>ShaunHullis</A> at: 2/10/04 8:59 am

Hibernicus · 02-10-2004, 01:01 AM

Shaun you are very likely correct in what you post. ( I do not feel my leg being pulled...) 
 
Unfortunately, (reluctantly?) so many of the commands we use are ingrained, oh so very traditional... bad habits, (his hers and ours)... ... provincial as we often say... and please, no apologies needed.. and none given either.. going on 12 years at this... 
 
We're the guys that official from Rome complained about when he said he cou;d hardly understand what we were speaking or if it even was Latin... 
 
Sorta like avete all y'all 
 
Hibernicus 
(....often pronounced hyperknickers)

02-10-2004, 08:18 AM

Thanks for that, Hibernicus. And actually, on reflection you're probably right to stick to what you do anyway. We probably can't know how standardized commands were from unit to unit, and I bet that legions made up of recruits from the Greek-speaking east, not to mention the auxilia, mangled Latin commands enough to make a Roman from Rome wince. 
 
At the risk of getting even more of a reputation for pedantry... I've now had time to digest Mr Amt's fascinating post of the Maurice. The list of commands is interesting not only because it contains singular imperatives where we'd expect plural ones, but because some of the case uses are dodgy, e.g ad conto, ad scuto. Also the pronunciation seems to have moved away from the Classical. e.g. "senestra" for "sinistra"; "depone au dextra au senestra" must be "aut... aut" but the final t has dropped out. 
 
This all strongly suggests to me that these commands are genuine spoken ones, not invented academic ones. Romans, just like us, were more careless in speech than in writing, and by the Medieval period Latin was much simpler and would have made a C1st/C2nd AD Roman author turn in his urn. Maurice's C6th Latin commands seem well on their way to the Medieval. 
 
Which then raises the question as to what one should do for C2 AD re-enactment. Use Maurice's commands verbatim, or rein back a bit and tighten up the grammar to "correct" four centuries of back-sliding? 
 
Shaun

02-10-2004, 01:46 PM

In LEG II AVG (UK) commands are all in the plural. This is so even in the very rare event that a single person is being given an order. This means that recruits have only one set of orders to learn and aviods confusion. 
 
Plural imperatives end with a -te that is stressed emphatically and may even have a short pause before it so that the -te almost sounds like a separate word. I am pretty sure that this is not good Latin - one would never normally stress the last sylable - parade ground speach is a special case, however. 
 
In fact the -te is useful is very useful in getting the timing right. All commands are executed on a one-two one-two count (never verbalised) where the timing of the count is the same as the marching pace. If marching, the -te will (or should) come on the left footfall. All this gives the execution of commands a natural rythm which is easy to learn and helps everybody act in unison.

Hibernicus · 02-10-2004, 02:29 PM

Ah, but Gaius Cornelius you assume the recruit knows left from right and for those who don't we sometimes say "alius senestrum" 
 
Hibernicus

aitor iriarte · 02-10-2004, 06:17 PM

Shaun, then the two separate commands would be 'Depone dextra' and 'Depone senestra', wouldn't they? 
 
Aitor

02-10-2004, 06:53 PM

Aitor 
 
Yes, Maurice's text gives you the choice; "depone" either (au) right ("dextra") or (au) left ("senestra"). So "depone dextra" or "depone senestra". 
 
Shaun

Crispvs · 02-11-2004, 12:44 AM

Gaius Cornelius, 
 
I agree that the emphasis on the executive -te sharpens up the drill and helps everyone move in unison. We use it for exactly the same reason. However the R.M.R.S, like most other Roman groups, starts on the left foot rather than the right and therefore we give the executive suffix on the right footfall, to ensure that the next step with the left foot lands where it is supposed to. 
 
Crispvs

TITVS SABATINVS AQVILIVS · 02-11-2004, 09:19 AM

Saluete, 
 
Not to be pedantic but in latin I have "sinistra" not "senestra". 
 
Valete, 
Titus Sabatinus Aquilius

aitor iriarte · 02-11-2004, 09:34 AM

It's late Latin, Titus! 
 
Aitor

TITVS SABATINVS AQVILIVS · 02-11-2004, 11:32 AM

So, it has to be used only by late roman groups... 
 
Do you know when for the first time the term "senestra" appeared in the sources, instead of "sinistra"? 
 
Vale, 
Titus Sabatinus Aquilius

02-11-2004, 05:44 PM

Don't know exactly when "senes-" replaced "sinis-" in "sinister". It would be caused by the process of "assimilation" whereby vowel sounds in adjacent syllables became the same. "sinister" becomes "sinester" becomes "senester." Heaven knows why. 
 
"Vulgar" Latin (that of everyday speech, as opposed to the formal sort) really kicked in for texts after the fall of Rome itself in the C5th AD (which fits the Maurice date quite well, I suppose). More than that I don't know. 
 
The only change I do know the date of is that of "v". Current thinking is that it started being pronounced "v" and not "w" at around the end of the C1st AD. Perhaps other changes were coming in then? 
 
Shaun

TITVS SABATINVS AQVILIVS · 02-12-2004, 01:55 PM

Salue Shaun, 
 
the "w" / "v" (and th "k" / "c" too) changing is a really interesting matter: in Italy it seems that changing happened just in the cities of the Empire, while in the country land communities, more isolated, it lasted, first in the latin, then in the italian language till about 1800... BUT, in Rome exist yet some 1700/1800 marble tabs in Italian that show the use in the writing (and so also in the speaking) of the "u" (the italian equivalent of the english "w") instead of the "v". The most famous one is the marble tab at the corner between via Frattina and via del Gambero. 
Moreover, some rustic idioms in the Lazio region, used especially in some Rome neighboroughs yet, show the same ancient use of the "u" ("w") instead of the "v". That language "purity" is dued probably to the "isolation" of the country towns in the centuries till nowadays. 
 
Vale, 
Titus Sabatinus Aquilius

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	Latin Drill Commands	QF VARUS	35	11,228	05-22-2007, 10:14 PM Last Post: Magnus