“Acies quadratum” On the square formation of the Roman army

[Hanny]

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Then the Roman army was withdrawn into the territory of the Vascones for the sake of grain.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>***
I
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.

Roman used two marching methods, the first is when not in the presence of the enemy and is of a different configuation, 6 man man wide column, so each legio is 2100 feet long and 18 feet wide for the inf, if however the enemy is encountered it moves to the attack in an oblong box called the square attack posture.Rome was only able to fight to the immediate front or rear in this configuration by having the extraordinaries at the front or rear, this changed c 211 using T Wise account, in reforms to Velite equipments and usage on the March in an attempt to counter HB shaping of the battlefield and trapping marching Roman columns into battles at a disadvantage due to Roman in experience and lack of proper troop types to do it, at recon.


The second marching method is when combat is expected and is the more standard battle formation of the triple axis by marching to conform to the threat from any direction.If the threat comes from the expected flank, then the triple axis is already orientated towards it, if otoh it comes from the unexpected flank the column has to counter March for 9 min to re orient itself to face the threat and conform to a triple axis orientated to the threat, and deploy to a depth of 900 feet the standard depth of the triple axis for combat.

The time required to move from marching column to battle line of 4 legions abreast involves marching 8800 paces, and therefore means it takes 25 mins of the Roman double pace March speed of 120 paces a min, which is the fastest it can occur.The time required to move a battle line in column to deploy into line requires the column to March 3 miles to presentitself in triple axis, and would be more likely done at standard 100 paces a min.