(Late) (Roman) Formations

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi John, I felt this was going away from plumbatae, so I split the post.

Sorry Robert I disagree with you.

Nothing to be sorry about! In fact we are agreeing about a lot of things, if not most, but here we can agree to disagree like gentlemen.

I wouldn't let Vegetius lead me to the corner shop, let a lone conclusions on the nature of combat.

Well, are you entirely sure that you do not use his writings in some way? Anyhow, I'm not a great fighter for the authenticity of vegetius, but I would not want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. :wink:

I have more respect for Maurice, but he doesn't tackle the mechanics of infantry combat either.

My thoughts exactly.

He is of course writing of a different army, 200 years after our period, using formations of illiterate peasants.

WHAT! hock: Illiterate peasants?? What on earth gave you that idea? Why would the Early Byzantine army differ that much from the late Roman army of our period? Peasants?

But he still mentions forming a battle line, and doubling files which may have resulted in close order files.

Oh, but I'm by no means against the notion of close order fighting - in fact that's what Vegetius is telling us, isn't he? A foot of space per soldier - synaspismos is the correct term, right?. Ask Damianus of the Herculiani, who are (probably rightly) of the opinion that spatha can't be used in such close order. But then I'm a hasta fan, and against troop rotation... :wink:

Let's stick to Ammianus marcellinus, a contempory writer with real experiance of infantry combat. A real witness to stand in the dock.
In his decription of the Battle of Strasbourg (Book 16?) he gives a good sense of a pushing match. shield on shield. He even seems to suggest the Germans use an old trick of pushing with their knees. This is a great way of increasing pressure on your opponants sheild.

Ammianus is surely a good witness! Having said that, he uses often archaizing words and never mentions plumbatae.... But for the 4th c. he's the best we've got!
But does he actually give a good description of a 'pushing match' at Strassbourg? Close order fighting, absolutely. Knee pushing, possibly, but even if correct no proof for a pushing match.

Here's the description:

12.20: When our leading officers espied them, now near at hand, taking their places in close wedge-formation, they halted and stood fast, making a solid line, like an impregnable wall, of the vanguard, the standard bearers, and the staff-officers; and with like wariness the enemy held their ground in wedge-formation.

Well, close formation it is! Wedge formations would suggest pushing from behind, I give you that, but see below, I think these wedges were not continued?

12.37: And when in the very crisis of the battle the cavalry formed massed squadrons valiantly and the infantry stoutly protected their flanks by making a front of their bucklers joined fast together, clouds of thick dust arose. Then there were various manoeuvres, as our men now stood fast and now gave ground, and some of the most skilful warriors among the savages by the pressure of their knees tried to force their enemy back; but with extreme determination they came to hand-to‑hand fighting, shield-boss pushed against shield, and the sky re-echoed with the loud cries of the victors or of the falling. And although our left wing, marching in close formation had driven back by main force the onrushing hordes of Germans and was advancing with shouts into the midst of the savages, our cavalry, which held the right wing, unexpectedly broke ranks and fled

Is this really still a pushing match? I can interpret this as a testudo, a closed front, shield wall, close contact on the front lines, no problem. But I read this as a battle going to and fro, not necessarily as a pushing match where each formation pushes with their shields in the back of their comrades before them. Various manoeuvres, giving and gaining ground at any rate does not suggest that the wedge formations were continued after battle commenced. The left flank driving back the enemy also need not be a description of a pushing match instead of just hard fighting.

12.38: the cavalry would have caused complete confusion by trampling the infantry underfoot, had not the latter, who were packed close together and intertwined one with the other, held their ground without stirring.

Again, evidence of massed infantry in close order, but no evidence of a pushing contest.

12.42-43: Then the Alamanni, having beaten and scattered our cavalry, charged upon the front line of the infantry, supposing that their courage to resist was now lost and that they would therefore drive them back. 43 But as soon as they came to close quarters, the contest continued a long time on equal terms. For the Cornuti and the Bracchiati, toughened by long experience in fighting, at once intimidated them by their gestures, and raised their mighty battle-cry. This shout in the very heat of combat rises from a low murmur and gradually grows louder, like waves dashing against the cliffs. Then a cloud of hissing javelins flew hither and thither, the dust arose with steady motion on both sides and hid the view, so that weapon struck blindly on weapon and body against body.

Hard fighting, close order, but still I read nothing that says that two armies are literally pushing against each other.

12.44: But the savages, thrown into disorder by their violence and anger, flamed up like fire, and hacked with repeated strokes of their swords at the close-jointed array of shields, which protected our men like a tortoise-formation.

Absolutely no pushing contest – a disorganised enemy that attacks a shield wall with swords – no pushing here, at least.

12.45-46: On learning this, the Batavians, with the Regii (a formidable band) came at the double quick to aid their comrades and (if fate would assist) to rescue them, girt about as they were, from the instant of dire need; and as their trumpets pealed savagely, they fought with all their powers. But the Alamanni, who enter eagerly into wars, made all the greater effort, as if to destroy utterly everything in their way by a kind of fit of rage. Yet darts and javelins did not cease to fly, with showers of iron-tipped arrows, although at close quarters also blade clashed on blade and breastplates were cleft with the sword; the wounded too, before all their blood was shed, rose up to some more conspicuous deed of daring.

This is no pushing match. The reserves come to the aid of the main force and attack the enemy, instead of pushing from the back as they would if it were a pushing match. Also, the sword fight shows that there is at least room to wield swords. And if a the wounded can still fight that means they have room to do so.
Btw, I see here, too, that missiles continue to be loosed over the heads of the fighting ranks.

12.47-48: For in a way the combatants were evenly matched; the Alamanni were stronger and taller, our soldiers disciplined by long practice; they were savage and uncontrollable, our men quiet and wary, these relying on their courage, while the Germans presumed upon their huge size.
48 Yet frequently the Roman, driven from his post by the weight of armed men, rose up again; and the savage, with his legs giving way from fatigue, would drop on his bended left knee and even thus attack his foe, a proof of extreme resolution.

Now I can understand why this part would be interpreted as a pushing match. Indeed, if your read this by itself it really sounds like one. Yet, with the text before and after, my own interpretation is that this describes hard fighting, not a pushing match. See below.

12.49-50: And so there suddenly leaped forth a fiery band of nobles, among whom even the kings fought, and with the common soldiers following they burst in upon our lines before the rest; and opening up a path for themselves they got as far as the legion of the Primani, which was stationed in the centre — a strong feature called praetorian camp; there our soldiers, closely packed and in fully-manned lines, stood their ground fast and firm, like towers, and renewed the battle with greater vigor; and being intent upon avoiding wounds, they protected themselves like murmillos, and with drawn swords pierced the enemy's sides, left bare by their frenzied rage.
50 But the enemy strove to lavish their lives for victory and kept trying to break the fabric of our line. But as they fell in uninterrupted succession, and the Romans now laid them low with greater confidence, fresh savages took the places of the slain; but when they heard the frequent groans of the dying, they were overcome with panic and lost their courage.

The Alamanni then almost break the Roman front line, but they do not push it back. The Romans then hold that break, and the subsequent heavy losses cause the Alamanni to falter, they then begin to waver. Nowhere do the Romans push the enemy back, it is the enemy that loses heart and literally begins to crumble. The battle is won, the rest is flight and carnage.

Summing up, although several elements in the text seem to suggest that both parties may be pushing shield on shield, when you see that there is room to use swords, that manoeuvres are carried out, that lines are broken into instead of pushed back by weight of numbers, my conclusion is that this battle is not a pushing match, but hard fighting in close order.