06-23-2014, 05:27 PM
Continued from debate about centurion positioning in the topic: Sword Carrying and the Scutum Strap
Even with a slight gap between files, the scuta (2.5' x 4') corners would get in the way, further limiting the visibility, and there is no guarantee that the rank and files would be perfectly dressed to allow an open funnel to see what is happening in the front. With the centurion in the rear, with the optio in the rear, with the signifier in the rear, there is no one left leadership wise in the front leading. No standard for the men in the lead ranks to be guided by. No man rallying tired and scared soldiers, convincing them through personal example to launch another attack. Remember, there is no evidence that the Roman army had file leaders, so if all the leaders were in the rear, who was leading the unit in contact? We're discussing hand to hand combat with hand held weapons. Men needed encouragement and aggressive leadership in order to be effective at attacking. Its the reason so many ancient leaders (including kings and generals) led from the immediate front of the battlelines. Look at every competing city state/people that the Romans would have encountered during the time period in question and you'd see that they too had small unit leaders that led from the front, not counting the more senior officers. There wasn't much to control once a unit was committed to battle.
I have commanded units from the rear many times and although it gets harder the deeper the formation is you can still see enough to know what is going on (and I am a shorty!). Unlike standing in the front rank because during an actual fight as long as the men next to you are still there the rest of the unit could all be running for the hills and you would never even know.
I take it you are referring to a riot? If so, with all due respect, commanding a military police riot unit (platoon or at most company strength unless you're talking a massive action) from the rear and a century in battle (among dozens of others in a battle line, with multiple battle lines) are two different things. A modern riot force has to control a situation and worry about much more in depth issues that a centurion would. Weapons, tactics, communication procedures, and leadership methodology and mentality are completely and utterly different. Can you discuss the reasoning you had to command your unit from the rear? Who was leading from the front? How many ranks was your unit? Were you also using radio communication devices?
In reference to the problem of knowing what was happening in the rear of the unit while the leader is leading the unit in contact from the front, I believe three factors helped keep the men in the rear in line, preventing them from running off while the centurion is busy in the front:
1. The existence of the rank of Optio, which more than likely was positioned in the rear of the unit (per Polybius) to keep the men in line. Essentially a "file closer" for the whole century.
2. Multiple battle lines meant that if someone from the front line in contact decided to run, they would have to also pass through at least one, if not multiple other, battle lines.
3. Tribunes, Legates, and Imperators often rode/positioned themselves behind the front battle line, especially the former. Tribune casualty rates were as high as centurion casualties in many battles, according to many sources, meaning they were in or near the front lines as well. It was their job, according to many sources, to personally witness the heroics and cowardice of the men actually fighting and to respond appropriately. It was their job to control units in contact, cross coordinate, issue fragmentary orders, etc.
It takes a lot of courage to be a coward in the Roman army.
Quote:Which is true if he stands directly behind one individual or file and stays there. But half a pace right or left and he is looking between the heads of one file and the next. To get an idea of what is going on over the whole frontage of the unit he would actually need to be moving up and down the rear of the unit.
Even with a slight gap between files, the scuta (2.5' x 4') corners would get in the way, further limiting the visibility, and there is no guarantee that the rank and files would be perfectly dressed to allow an open funnel to see what is happening in the front. With the centurion in the rear, with the optio in the rear, with the signifier in the rear, there is no one left leadership wise in the front leading. No standard for the men in the lead ranks to be guided by. No man rallying tired and scared soldiers, convincing them through personal example to launch another attack. Remember, there is no evidence that the Roman army had file leaders, so if all the leaders were in the rear, who was leading the unit in contact? We're discussing hand to hand combat with hand held weapons. Men needed encouragement and aggressive leadership in order to be effective at attacking. Its the reason so many ancient leaders (including kings and generals) led from the immediate front of the battlelines. Look at every competing city state/people that the Romans would have encountered during the time period in question and you'd see that they too had small unit leaders that led from the front, not counting the more senior officers. There wasn't much to control once a unit was committed to battle.
I have commanded units from the rear many times and although it gets harder the deeper the formation is you can still see enough to know what is going on (and I am a shorty!). Unlike standing in the front rank because during an actual fight as long as the men next to you are still there the rest of the unit could all be running for the hills and you would never even know.
I take it you are referring to a riot? If so, with all due respect, commanding a military police riot unit (platoon or at most company strength unless you're talking a massive action) from the rear and a century in battle (among dozens of others in a battle line, with multiple battle lines) are two different things. A modern riot force has to control a situation and worry about much more in depth issues that a centurion would. Weapons, tactics, communication procedures, and leadership methodology and mentality are completely and utterly different. Can you discuss the reasoning you had to command your unit from the rear? Who was leading from the front? How many ranks was your unit? Were you also using radio communication devices?
In reference to the problem of knowing what was happening in the rear of the unit while the leader is leading the unit in contact from the front, I believe three factors helped keep the men in the rear in line, preventing them from running off while the centurion is busy in the front:
1. The existence of the rank of Optio, which more than likely was positioned in the rear of the unit (per Polybius) to keep the men in line. Essentially a "file closer" for the whole century.
2. Multiple battle lines meant that if someone from the front line in contact decided to run, they would have to also pass through at least one, if not multiple other, battle lines.
3. Tribunes, Legates, and Imperators often rode/positioned themselves behind the front battle line, especially the former. Tribune casualty rates were as high as centurion casualties in many battles, according to many sources, meaning they were in or near the front lines as well. It was their job, according to many sources, to personally witness the heroics and cowardice of the men actually fighting and to respond appropriately. It was their job to control units in contact, cross coordinate, issue fragmentary orders, etc.
It takes a lot of courage to be a coward in the Roman army.
