(Late) (Roman) Formations

[sonic]

However, even here, it must be remembered that the chances are that the majority of individuals on both sides would not be interested in personally maiming or killing one of their opponents face-to-face.

But isn't that also how things can turn out in battle? I'm thinking of modern behavioural studies of men in combat, including Ardant du Picq's studies.

Come on, people, please have the decency to read the whole post! :roll: In the next sentence, I actually said roughly the same thing myself: “it must be remembered that the chances are that the majority of individuals on both sides would not be interested in personally maiming or killing one of their opponents face-to-face. Although the same may be said to a certain degree of the individuals in Roman armies, they at least have had the training to enable them to do just that when and if the need arose. The rioters usually haven't had such training."

I will always say that the majority of individuals were far more interested in their own safety, rather than in killing an enemy. The earlier Roman system of rewards and promotion encouraged individuals to go out and seek 'glory'. It is possible that the system later went into decline: so did Rome!
________________________________________

Ian (Sonic) Hughes