Use of whistles to relay commands in battle

[Robert Vermaat]

At the risk of having to split this thread and create a new one myself... :wink:

Centuries eight men deep as fighting units wouldn't work. Formation lacks depth, maneuverability and hitting power.

Why? there's plenty of documentation (which I am going to try and dig up, honest!) of formations being 4 (half-file), 8 (file) or 16 (double file) deep. Perhaps not 4 when confronted by 100.000 screaming Germans (which is a LOT of Germans, although they weren't exactly all trained for war, as previously suggested by someone), but depending on the opposing force.

Lets look at a typical file of the 1st line:
1st soldier - Veteran killing machine
2nd soldier - Same
3rd soldier - Motivated soldier with decent fighting abilities
4th soldier - Somewhat motivated soldier with OK abilities
5th soldier - Doesn't want to fight any longer, only joined cause he was levied
6th soldier - Terrified of fighting/dying. (even in ancient Rome not everyone was tough)
7th soldier - Slot open, soldier wounded severely in sword sharpening accident
8th soldier - Slot open, soldier dead from fever

The Strategicon describes such a file, and recommends that, in order to ensure that the formation can make a turn in place when attacked by an enemy from behind, or split down the middle, the file closers should also be motivated soldiers. They could also serve in a capacity to 'motivate' the soldiers in the rear of the file.
Anyway, the point i want to make is that the formation is always 4, 8 or 16 deep, so when there's a manpower shortage, the front become smaller - the depth always remains the same.

So now we have an entire front line of this. And they are fighting against a phalanx 16 deep, or Germans in shield wall 50 deep.

A phalanx of 16 I can imagine, but whereever did you find a description of a germanic shield wall with a formation depth of 50 ?!?? hock: Unimaginable. My guess would be that this never exceeded more than 4 to 8, the rest swarmed around - Germanic tribes never had the Roman's training nor discipline.

For sake of argument the length of lines of both forces are equal. And for the record I am pretty sure the enemy wasn't standing still when the enemy hit them, they went forward to. Both sides would charge and both sides threw missiles. Greek phalanx had slingers, archers. The germans/celts are generally given extra lighter spears to throw.

Ah, but here we have a big difference. Greek hopltes never threw missiles, only their light support troops did. Germans never had anything but javelins, which soon ran out (next to some archers perhaps. The Romans on the other hand not only had heavy missiles in every front rank (pilum, or later plumbata), but were know to sustain a constant rate of missile fire with javelins, slingers, archers throughout the battle.

Exactly how do the Roman's win?
Easy, they don't. Not if they fight in one line. When the two sides collide the men in the first couple ranks will fight like demons while the men in the rear panic when they see the insurmountable odds they face. Remember, war is psychological. Men see for their 6 man deep file they face 16-50 men. Not going through them so the only way is backwards.

If you present it like that, they will of course fail do to the odds being heavily against them. But Romans often fought in line; before, during and after the development of the manipular system. Roman infantry from the Tetrarchy and after was known for an immense steadfastness, even when outnumbered. So to the contrary, they could (and did) win.

(but I thought Romans were unstoppable...)

A well-groomed Roman myth, but unsupported by historical records. :wink:

So now you take 100,000 Germanic warriors, all who spend their entire lives training for battle, and you put them against your entire line of centuries 8 deep (but they wouldn't be because of casualties/sickness/desertions). So actually 6 deep. Or 8 deep with replacements from those of the second or third line who are now running at 40% manpower instead of 80% and who would probably not send their best men anyway because what commander/centurion sends his best men away right before a battle? I don't need to be a Roman general to figure out how this situation will turn out.

Ah, it was you with that quote about Germanics and training. they didn't. They wer raiders, not training full time for pitched battle. they screamed and ran at the enemy, and when scared they could loose. Big time. As the Cimbri and Teutones eventually did.

Back to your general: he would never have deployed his men like that. If he did, it would be suicide. So he would choose for 16 deep, preferably in three lines.
Like I said above, a formation would not vary in depth due to men being sick or wounded.
I'm afraid your view on how this works is too simplistic, no offense meant.