Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why didn\'t Romans fought in single line?
#37
Quote:And there in lies why having riot police in continuous lines is necessary. Because in the way you used them and were trained on them, it appears that they weren't used for the type of violent assaults that Romans were famous for, at least according to Caesar. Not slighting your service or the tactics at all, its better than they didn't wade into mobs of civilians with swords killing everyone.

I disagree, here is a completely different example. Every year at Wolin the large scale battles end the same way; one side will create a breach in the other shield wall, more and more people will force their way into that gap and the now split shield wall gets surrounded and wiped out. If the gaps were there to begin with then it would all just happen that much quicker.

Wolin battle
Adam

No man resisted or offered to stand up in his defence, save one only, a centurion, Sempronius Densus, the single man among so many thousands that the sun beheld that day act worthily of the Roman empire.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Why didn\'t Romans fought in single line? - by Sempronius Densus - 08-09-2015, 10:09 PM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Which Roman fought the most number of battles ? Theodosius the Great 8 2,064 10-20-2013, 01:07 PM
Last Post: AMELIANVS
  Why didn\'t the Romans conquer Scotland? AureliusFalco 18 9,852 05-08-2010, 03:59 PM
Last Post: PhilusEstilius
  Galearii - military slaves who fought Tarbicus 5 2,475 04-21-2007, 02:37 PM
Last Post: drsrob

Forum Jump: