08-22-2019, 10:25 AM
For quite some time two specific references have been troubling me, these are:
Sallust Histories Book 2 (Harvard University Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England 2015 John T. Ramsey.)
80 93M, 76Mc, not included in D and K
A scarcity of supplies forced Pompey and Sertorius to withdraw eastward from the territory of the Vaccaei to the region occupied by the Vascones at the foot of the Pyrenees. (Italics in the translation signifies that the text or a supplement is uncertain.)
<The townsmen gave assurances by > pledging < the sanctity of an oath> that they would observe a faithful alliance, if they were released from the siege; for previously they had vacillated between Sertorius and Pompey with a wavering peace.
Then the Roman army was withdrawn into the territory of the Vascones for the sake of grain. And Sertorius likewise altered his position: it was greatly in his interest not to lose his hope of Asia. For a few days Pompey maintained a stationary camp thanks to a means of fetching water, being separated from the enemy by just a modest valley; and the nearby communities, the Mutudurei and the ***, did not aid Pompey or Sertorius with supplies. Hunger wore out both sides. Then, however, Pompey <advanced with his line of march> in a squared formation…
Dein ta/<me>n Pompeius quadrato |<agmine procedit>***
Panegyric of Messalla
Next, as soon as the struggle of venturous battle comes, and under confronting standards the lines prepare to close, then you will not fail in forming the order of the fight, whether it be needful for the troops to draw into a square, so that the dressed line runs with level front, or it be desired to sunder the battle into two several parts, so that the army's right may hold the left and its left the right and the twofold hazard yield a double victory.
http://www.attalus.org/poetry/messalla.html
Iam simul audacis uenient certamina Martis
aduersisque parent acies concurrere signis,
tum tibi non desit faciem componere pugnae,
seu sit opus quadratum acies consistat in agmen,
rectus ut aequatis decurrat frontibus ordo,
seu libeat duplicem seiunctim cernere martem,
dexter uti laeuum teneat dextrumque sinister
miles sitque duplex gemini uictoria casus.
http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/tibullus3.html
I never could understand this square formation until I read an article called:
“The square fighting march of the Crusaders at the battle of Ascalon (1099)," Journal of Medieval Military History 11 (2013) , pp. 57-71 Georgios Theotokis
https://www.academia.edu/3058471/_The_sq..._pp._57-71
Writing about the ideal formation of the infantry when deployed with units of cavalry in the field, Nicephoros Phocas writes in his Praecepta:
The formation of the infantrymen under discussion is to be a double-ribbed square, thus called “a four-sided formation” by the ancients, which has three units on each side so that all together there are twelve units on the four sides. In case the cavalry force is quite large and the enemy does not bring along a similar number of infantry, twelve intervals should be left open.
And the more important for our case is what immediately follows: “If, on the other hand, the cavalry force is not large and the enemy does bring infantry along, eight intervals should be left open.”32
32 “Praecepta Militaria”, I. 39–51, p. 14.
The phrase by the ancients in all probability means the ancient Romans. So we have just discovered a new kind of military formation for the Roman Army, perhaps even based upon the army camp. This formation seems to me different from that of Carrhae, since that was a hollow square compared to the solid square above.
Sallust Histories Book 2 (Harvard University Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England 2015 John T. Ramsey.)
80 93M, 76Mc, not included in D and K
A scarcity of supplies forced Pompey and Sertorius to withdraw eastward from the territory of the Vaccaei to the region occupied by the Vascones at the foot of the Pyrenees. (Italics in the translation signifies that the text or a supplement is uncertain.)
<The townsmen gave assurances by > pledging < the sanctity of an oath> that they would observe a faithful alliance, if they were released from the siege; for previously they had vacillated between Sertorius and Pompey with a wavering peace.
Then the Roman army was withdrawn into the territory of the Vascones for the sake of grain. And Sertorius likewise altered his position: it was greatly in his interest not to lose his hope of Asia. For a few days Pompey maintained a stationary camp thanks to a means of fetching water, being separated from the enemy by just a modest valley; and the nearby communities, the Mutudurei and the ***, did not aid Pompey or Sertorius with supplies. Hunger wore out both sides. Then, however, Pompey <advanced with his line of march> in a squared formation…
Dein ta/<me>n Pompeius quadrato |<agmine procedit>***
Panegyric of Messalla
Next, as soon as the struggle of venturous battle comes, and under confronting standards the lines prepare to close, then you will not fail in forming the order of the fight, whether it be needful for the troops to draw into a square, so that the dressed line runs with level front, or it be desired to sunder the battle into two several parts, so that the army's right may hold the left and its left the right and the twofold hazard yield a double victory.
http://www.attalus.org/poetry/messalla.html
Iam simul audacis uenient certamina Martis
aduersisque parent acies concurrere signis,
tum tibi non desit faciem componere pugnae,
seu sit opus quadratum acies consistat in agmen,
rectus ut aequatis decurrat frontibus ordo,
seu libeat duplicem seiunctim cernere martem,
dexter uti laeuum teneat dextrumque sinister
miles sitque duplex gemini uictoria casus.
http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/tibullus3.html
I never could understand this square formation until I read an article called:
“The square fighting march of the Crusaders at the battle of Ascalon (1099)," Journal of Medieval Military History 11 (2013) , pp. 57-71 Georgios Theotokis
https://www.academia.edu/3058471/_The_sq..._pp._57-71
Writing about the ideal formation of the infantry when deployed with units of cavalry in the field, Nicephoros Phocas writes in his Praecepta:
The formation of the infantrymen under discussion is to be a double-ribbed square, thus called “a four-sided formation” by the ancients, which has three units on each side so that all together there are twelve units on the four sides. In case the cavalry force is quite large and the enemy does not bring along a similar number of infantry, twelve intervals should be left open.
And the more important for our case is what immediately follows: “If, on the other hand, the cavalry force is not large and the enemy does bring infantry along, eight intervals should be left open.”32
32 “Praecepta Militaria”, I. 39–51, p. 14.
The phrase by the ancients in all probability means the ancient Romans. So we have just discovered a new kind of military formation for the Roman Army, perhaps even based upon the army camp. This formation seems to me different from that of Carrhae, since that was a hollow square compared to the solid square above.
