06-23-2014, 09:54 PM
Sempronius,
I agree, the front rank riot police officers in that video probably have terrible situational awareness, at least once the fight begins. But the same can be said for someone in the rear ranks, who obviously can't see over the heads of the many disordered ranks in front of them. But at least a leader in the front ranks would be contributing to the overall fight. How can they be influencing what the unit does? By leading by example and demanding that others follow them, which is helped if you give that person life and death control over their men and make that person readily easy to visibly follow, by giving them a large colored transverse crest of horsehair or feathers that everyone in the ranks can see, as well as stationing the unit's standards right next to that person. Standard bearers throughout history were often the bravest person in the unit for a reason, they were used to guide the force from the front and were always in danger. And its clear from several sources, including Caesar and Livy, that one of the centurions jobs was to protect the standards (see the early career path of the centurion Dentatus and the recovering of his legion's standards in battle, as well as Caesar's constant reference to the position of standards during a faltering attack).
Also, based off the way the South Korean riot police in the video are being driven back, how the front ranks are wavering and retreating in the face of a concerted attack by the rioters, I'd say that they probably aren't being led from the front, at least not well. And that the commanders (not leaders) in the rear have zero idea what is happening and why their men are retreating. I can see a police officer acting as commander of that situation getting rather nervous and desperate, especially when they find out 20 minutes later that one of their men was almost beaten to death and kidnapped by the mob.
I am not saying that Centurions definitely commanded from the rear, I just don't know. But what I do know, and have said before, is that based on my experience as both a shield man in the front rank and as a commander in real fights if the leaders were in the front rank then a century was a one shot weapon. You told it to engage and it just fought until they won, lost or both sides disengaged due to exhaustion.
If a century was a one shot weapon, which I tend to agree with as well, then there is nothing that is needed to commanded or coordinated once the fight started. Fire and forget. Within the unit, the best soldiers would be in the front ranks, fighting alongside the centurion and standard bearer. The more timid would be in the rear, along for the ride, kept in the ranks by the fear of being exposed as a coward by the century's optio, the men of following battle lines watching and encouraging them, as well as the ever vigilant tribunes, legates, and imperators riding and watching behind the battle line. The tribunes ordered the unit to attack and then would order it being relieved, both orders conducted with musical communication devices.
For those interested in the subject, before making a decision, I highly recommend reading the two Osprey books on centurions, as well as L.E. Lendon's Soldiers and Ghosts, as well as Ross Cowan's For the Glory of Rome, which is was specifically written to promote the warlike and aggressive nature of the Romans, counter to the constant comparison of the Roman's organization to modern units.
Nathan,
*EDIT - Just another quick point on this issue. It occurs to me that, in an era of close and often confused hand-to-hand fighting, the legates and tribunes stationed behind the ranks would often have had little idea of what was happening at the front line, where the fighting was going on.
In this case, the centurions would have played a vital role as the eyes of command at the front - they alone could see openings in the enemy line and attack towards them; they alone could see if their own front line was hard pressed or wavering, and needed withdrawing, reinforcing or regrouping. Caesar's commentaries are full of centurions taking this sort of immediate executive action in battle - albeit usually highly aggressive and often unwise!
Agree 100%. But I think the tribunes and legates would definitely have an easier time seeing what was happening if they were on horseback. However, being mounted immediately behind the front battle line (maybe a 20-40 feet away from enemy) is as dangerous as being in the front line I think, maybe more so, considering the added height makes for a most spectacular target for missile attacks, which could explain the large casualty rates among tribunes. I think they always had the option to dismount and fight on foot, and in those cases, their visibility as well of the overall situation awareness would be limited and maybe in that case a centurion in the front might have a better view of the tactical situation. But exploiting any situation would require either other centurions taking initiative or the coordination of higher officers (such as Publius Licinius Crassus' flanking attack at the Battle of Vosges).
I agree, the front rank riot police officers in that video probably have terrible situational awareness, at least once the fight begins. But the same can be said for someone in the rear ranks, who obviously can't see over the heads of the many disordered ranks in front of them. But at least a leader in the front ranks would be contributing to the overall fight. How can they be influencing what the unit does? By leading by example and demanding that others follow them, which is helped if you give that person life and death control over their men and make that person readily easy to visibly follow, by giving them a large colored transverse crest of horsehair or feathers that everyone in the ranks can see, as well as stationing the unit's standards right next to that person. Standard bearers throughout history were often the bravest person in the unit for a reason, they were used to guide the force from the front and were always in danger. And its clear from several sources, including Caesar and Livy, that one of the centurions jobs was to protect the standards (see the early career path of the centurion Dentatus and the recovering of his legion's standards in battle, as well as Caesar's constant reference to the position of standards during a faltering attack).
Also, based off the way the South Korean riot police in the video are being driven back, how the front ranks are wavering and retreating in the face of a concerted attack by the rioters, I'd say that they probably aren't being led from the front, at least not well. And that the commanders (not leaders) in the rear have zero idea what is happening and why their men are retreating. I can see a police officer acting as commander of that situation getting rather nervous and desperate, especially when they find out 20 minutes later that one of their men was almost beaten to death and kidnapped by the mob.
I am not saying that Centurions definitely commanded from the rear, I just don't know. But what I do know, and have said before, is that based on my experience as both a shield man in the front rank and as a commander in real fights if the leaders were in the front rank then a century was a one shot weapon. You told it to engage and it just fought until they won, lost or both sides disengaged due to exhaustion.
If a century was a one shot weapon, which I tend to agree with as well, then there is nothing that is needed to commanded or coordinated once the fight started. Fire and forget. Within the unit, the best soldiers would be in the front ranks, fighting alongside the centurion and standard bearer. The more timid would be in the rear, along for the ride, kept in the ranks by the fear of being exposed as a coward by the century's optio, the men of following battle lines watching and encouraging them, as well as the ever vigilant tribunes, legates, and imperators riding and watching behind the battle line. The tribunes ordered the unit to attack and then would order it being relieved, both orders conducted with musical communication devices.
For those interested in the subject, before making a decision, I highly recommend reading the two Osprey books on centurions, as well as L.E. Lendon's Soldiers and Ghosts, as well as Ross Cowan's For the Glory of Rome, which is was specifically written to promote the warlike and aggressive nature of the Romans, counter to the constant comparison of the Roman's organization to modern units.
Nathan,
*EDIT - Just another quick point on this issue. It occurs to me that, in an era of close and often confused hand-to-hand fighting, the legates and tribunes stationed behind the ranks would often have had little idea of what was happening at the front line, where the fighting was going on.
In this case, the centurions would have played a vital role as the eyes of command at the front - they alone could see openings in the enemy line and attack towards them; they alone could see if their own front line was hard pressed or wavering, and needed withdrawing, reinforcing or regrouping. Caesar's commentaries are full of centurions taking this sort of immediate executive action in battle - albeit usually highly aggressive and often unwise!
Agree 100%. But I think the tribunes and legates would definitely have an easier time seeing what was happening if they were on horseback. However, being mounted immediately behind the front battle line (maybe a 20-40 feet away from enemy) is as dangerous as being in the front line I think, maybe more so, considering the added height makes for a most spectacular target for missile attacks, which could explain the large casualty rates among tribunes. I think they always had the option to dismount and fight on foot, and in those cases, their visibility as well of the overall situation awareness would be limited and maybe in that case a centurion in the front might have a better view of the tactical situation. But exploiting any situation would require either other centurions taking initiative or the coordination of higher officers (such as Publius Licinius Crassus' flanking attack at the Battle of Vosges).
