12-03-2010, 09:44 AM
There is a passage which I have often wondered about in Vegetius but my previous
translation, the 1944 The Military Service Publication Company, was an
incomplete one and its not until I acquired a copy of Milner's later
translation, and a full copy in Latin, that I was able to fully compare them.
This is the passage in question-
'Two soldiers armed from head to foot in a chariot drawn by two horses, also
covered with armor, attacked these beasts(elephants) with lances of great
length. They were secured by their armor from the archers on the elephants and
avoided the fury of the animals by the swiftness of their horses' (TMSPC 1944)
This is the newer, Milner translation of the same passage-
'Pairs of cataphract horses were harnessed each to a chariot; mounted on (the
horses) were cataphract cavalrymen who aimed sarisae, that is, very long pikes,
at the elephants. Being covered in iron they were not harmed by the archers
riding on the beasts, and avoided their charges thanks to the speed of their
horses' (Milner 2001)
Now, I don't know about you, but is this not the near mythical 'Currus Drepanus'
proposed by the anonymous author of 'De Rebus Bellicis'? Not only does the above
passage indicate such a device was used, but the passage below from Thompsons
translation of the 'De Rebus Bellicis' gives an indication that this was not the
invention of the author of 'De Rebus Bellicis' as he implies it was already in action
when he wrote his little book-
'This type of combat vehicle, armed as you see in an unusual manner, owes its
invention to the exigencies of battle with the Parthians(Sasanids?) (there is a
picture of the chariot in the book that this part means you should study, it
shows both riders and horses in armor and the riders each have a long spear).
This car, then, is swept into battle at full speed by a crew of two men,
carefully protected by mail clothing and weapons, and each mounted on a
well-caparisoned horse. Its rear part above the chassis is defended by knives
projecting in a row, so that no one can easily mount it from behind. Further,
very sharp scythes are attached to the axles of the afore-mentoned chassis, with
rings upon their sides to which ropes are tied: these ropes are slackened to let
down the scythes and tightened to raise them, at the two riders will. Those who
know warfare from personal experience will describe better than I can what
losses machines of this kind inflict upon the enemy and what slaughter they
cause among broken ranks(my italics) (Thompson 1996)
The part I italicised should read '...what losses machines of this kind
could inflict upon the enemy and what slaughter they could cause among broken
ranks...' if the machine was a theoretical model not actually tested in the
field of combat
translation, the 1944 The Military Service Publication Company, was an
incomplete one and its not until I acquired a copy of Milner's later
translation, and a full copy in Latin, that I was able to fully compare them.
This is the passage in question-
'Two soldiers armed from head to foot in a chariot drawn by two horses, also
covered with armor, attacked these beasts(elephants) with lances of great
length. They were secured by their armor from the archers on the elephants and
avoided the fury of the animals by the swiftness of their horses' (TMSPC 1944)
This is the newer, Milner translation of the same passage-
'Pairs of cataphract horses were harnessed each to a chariot; mounted on (the
horses) were cataphract cavalrymen who aimed sarisae, that is, very long pikes,
at the elephants. Being covered in iron they were not harmed by the archers
riding on the beasts, and avoided their charges thanks to the speed of their
horses' (Milner 2001)
Now, I don't know about you, but is this not the near mythical 'Currus Drepanus'
proposed by the anonymous author of 'De Rebus Bellicis'? Not only does the above
passage indicate such a device was used, but the passage below from Thompsons
translation of the 'De Rebus Bellicis' gives an indication that this was not the
invention of the author of 'De Rebus Bellicis' as he implies it was already in action
when he wrote his little book-
'This type of combat vehicle, armed as you see in an unusual manner, owes its
invention to the exigencies of battle with the Parthians(Sasanids?) (there is a
picture of the chariot in the book that this part means you should study, it
shows both riders and horses in armor and the riders each have a long spear).
This car, then, is swept into battle at full speed by a crew of two men,
carefully protected by mail clothing and weapons, and each mounted on a
well-caparisoned horse. Its rear part above the chassis is defended by knives
projecting in a row, so that no one can easily mount it from behind. Further,
very sharp scythes are attached to the axles of the afore-mentoned chassis, with
rings upon their sides to which ropes are tied: these ropes are slackened to let
down the scythes and tightened to raise them, at the two riders will. Those who
know warfare from personal experience will describe better than I can what
losses machines of this kind inflict upon the enemy and what slaughter they
cause among broken ranks(my italics) (Thompson 1996)
The part I italicised should read '...what losses machines of this kind
could inflict upon the enemy and what slaughter they could cause among broken
ranks...' if the machine was a theoretical model not actually tested in the
field of combat
Adrian Coombs-Hoar
