08-25-2019, 06:35 PM
(08-23-2019, 10:33 AM)Steven James Wrote: The criteria is from all directions, and it should be mandatory for all modern historians describing this event to show all four.
In most cases it would quite obvious to any commander which direction the enemy was attacking from, taking into consideration possibilities of outflanking. No need, surely, to assume a formation facing in all four directions - that way, three quarters of your fighting strength would be rendered useless against the main attack?
I`ve been reflecting a bit on how the sub-units marched in such a square; would it make sense if the right-hand column of an Agmen Quadratum marched with its left leading and left-hand column led with its right? - These would be the army centre sub-units.
A deployment to the front then would take place on the heads of the columns with the right wing deploying to the right and the left wing to the left.
Deploying to either flank would require the one of the columns to halt and turn to the threat, but the other column would need to advance further (if an inversion of units was to be avoided) and its rearmost sub-unit would need to march the furthest to come into line.
Forming to the rear, would be possible too, but perhaps a little tricksy, with each column turning about and marching in procession until the sub-units arrived to their positions on the new front. A problem may be that the wings would be the new leading elements - and the commading officers would need to get to these positions before any movement could be ordered.
[/quote]
