Battle Strategy Meetings/Staff Meetings

[alekaras5811]

Actually, there is evidence for written orders... But rather orders about daily business

Actually I wonder how much tactical, or even strategic, instruction would have been needed. In most cases, Roman-era battles appear to have been tactically pretty simple affairs, and once deployed the majority of small-unit commanders and their men would only have had to follow the procedures they had practiced on the drill field. In an age before firearms and motorised transport, most battles would have happened in quite a small area, and everyone involved would have had a good idea of the lie of the land and relative dispositions of forces.

So detailed tactical instructions may only have been necessary if the commander was using some strategem or other - concealing flanking troops, or exercising a fake withdrawal, perhaps. In these cases, verbal instructions could be given to the few senior officers in charge of the units concerned, or even to the unit as a whole, on the field of battle (as I think Caesar did, or claimed to have done,

I have been reading this thread with great interest and I have to say that the above statement brought out a very strong emotional response for me. I would have to respectfully dissagree that anything involving a full legion or more can possibly be described as simple affairs. No matter how proffessional, technically and tactically proficient the officers troops, allies and supporting arms(Calvary, artillery) there must be coordination. No matter how professional no one has a cristal ball, everyone down to the century level must at minimum know at least the commanders intent, unit disposition in relation to terain as well as artillery coordination. Not to mention reserves and Calvary employment. Perhaps there were no written orders but concidering Romans kept records on everything else to me seems unlikely. As a rich Patrishian how are you going to impress your peers at the senete without records of your tactical achivment? How are you going to blame others if things do not go well? So I submit that at minimum there must have been pre-battle coordination meetings of all key subordinate leaders. At least if it involved anything more than everyone get on line and wait to receive a charge. I would also point out that moving a small number of troops might be easy. Moving several hundred is hard and takes planing and coordination, moving several thousand, to do even something as simple as going to the messhal is impossible. Honestly I am speaking from personal experience, I have held every leadership position for non commissioned officers up to Battalion operations chief (700 men) and I have participated in a six battalion, plus supporting arms attack of a city. I can not site an ancient primary source as proof of my opinion but I would bet parts of my anatomy on the opinion that only the most incompetent leader would go to battle without a coordinated plan in writing. If for no other reason than to cover his behind. It also just occurded to me that even if the legatus and his tribunes were morans the prefectus legionis, primus pillus and the other senior centurion were proffessionals and would step in and do what must be done. If for no other reason for self preservation. I hope my comments contribute to the subject in a positive way.