Interpreting Polybius' description on a formation

[Draugr the Greedy]

So I believe you're all familiar with this snippet from the Histories XVIII

A Roman soldier in full armour also requires a space of three square feet. But as their method of fighting admits of individual motion for each man—because he defends his body with a shield, which he moves about to any point from which a blow is coming, and because he uses his sword both for cutting and stabbing,—it is evident that each man must have a clear space, and an interval of at least three feet both on flank and rear, if he is to do his duty with any effect.

The thing is that I had always interpreted this as the legionary having three feet at each side, with the other legionary besides him also having three feet to each side, making the formation a total of six feet wide. However many others interpret this to mean three feet between each soldier.

What do you say is more likely?

[Crispianus]

When he talks of an "interval" this means bettween each man, so three feet, otherwise he would say six feet.... To my mind a normal spacing.

[Michael Collins]

This is the gap bewteen a legionary`s right elbow and the next man`s shield?

TBH, I don`t know, wasn`t this interval equal to another file, which could fill the interval and close up the century?

[CaesarAugustus]

He is talking of interval between men, so we don't have any real reason to think in a different way. Anyway, we have also another translation:

Now in the case of the Romans also each soldier with his arms occupies a space of •three feet in breadth, 7 but as in their mode of fighting each man must move separately, as he has to cover his person with his long shield, turning to meet each expected blow, and as he uses his sword both for cutting and thrusting it is obvious that a looser order is required, 8 and each man must be at a distance of at least three feet from the man next him in the same rank and those in front of and behind him,  p153 if they are to be of proper use.


http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Ro...s/18*.html

In this case, the translation is even more explicit.

[Michael J. Taylor]

Polybius in fact refers to two different three feet spaces: 1) the space occupied by the soldiers themselves and their equipment and 2) the intervals between soldiers. While this has often been read as producing a file width of 6 feet, these two spaces likely overlap. That is, the interval between soldiers of three feet is likely calculated from the center of the soldier, who occupies part of it with his person and weapons. The actually file-width would only be 4.5 feet (or so--no need to be dogmatic about what foot Polybius is using, although its probably Attic).

This might explain how the Romans actually "found" their space when the created formations. The Roman shield is somewhat under 2.5 feet in width (once you factor the curve), and its may be that the Romans created their "open order" formations simply by starting off with locked shields, and then having every other man step forward, which would create shield sized intervals between the men of the front rank.

I discuss this more here (available in full on line): https://www.academia.edu/3394799/Visual_...ry_Tactics and here (PM me for a full PDF) https://www.academia.edu/1602947/Roman_I...assessment

[Michael Collins]

He is talking of interval between men, so we don't have any real reason to think in a different way. Anyway, we have also another translation:

Now in the case of the Romans also each soldier with his arms occupies a space of •three feet in breadth, 7 but as in their mode of fighting each man must move separately, as he has to cover his person with his long shield, turning to meet each expected blow, and as he uses his sword both for cutting and thrusting it is obvious that a looser order is required, 8 and each man must be at a distance of at least three feet from the man next him in the same rank and those in front of and behind him,  p153 if they are to be of proper use.


http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Ro...s/18*.html

In this case, the translation is even more explicit.

I have read this too, but my question is whether a Roman soldier really needed three feet between himself and the next man to cut and thrust with his sword? I wouldn`t have thought so. Is Polybius suggesting here that the legionary extends his arm and swings his sword laterally, much in the manner of an incredibly poor boxer, who announces his punch in advance to his opponent? This doesn`t sound to me like a good practical description of tactical sword-play, but maybe I`m missing something.
There were, I believe, tactical reasons why open and close orders would be adopted by Romans and by Greek hoplites.
Generally close order may have been preferrable to receive, or deter a charge or an attack, but it could be a disadvantage if pressed heavily by a determined enemy (take the XII legion at battle of the Sabis River as an example). Michael has it I think, in that the inteval is equal to the frontage of a single man and so there were options for files to step back to create open order, or as I have mused upon, the idea that files of more than one century (the prior and posterior) could interdigitate - which I think is the only practical way I can see a cohort`s  maniples opening when it is pressed in from its front and its flanks.
Interesting subject, one day that lost regulation drill tablet will turn up at Vindolanda?

[CaesarAugustus]

I have read this too, but my question is whether a Roman soldier really needed three feet between himself and the next man to cut and thrust with his sword?

If I have understood correctly, that is the distance between roman lines, not the distance with the enemy.

[Michael Collins]

I have read this too, but my question is whether a Roman soldier really needed three feet between himself and the next man to cut and thrust with his sword?

If I have understood correctly, that is the distance between roman lines, not the distance with the enemy.

I`m not referring to the proximity of Roman troops to their enemy. Cutting and thrusting would not require a lateral movement, so my question is why would  Roman troops actually need three feet between their files ?

[CaesarAugustus]

I would say that this is the distance for which two soldiers protected by a tower shield can fight without interfer. But nothing say that they could not close further the ranks if needed, for example to create "the wall".

[Michael Collins]

Sorry for not replying earlier - I`ve not been around much lately...
Yes indeed, in my investigations re. legionary sizes I found this little snippet about Roman infantry closing the intervals between files in Livy:
“To prevent his line from being quickly broken he [Gaius Flamininus] halved the front and gave twice the depth to the files, so that the depth might be greater than the width. He also ordered the ranks to close up so that man might be in touch with man and arms with arms.” (Livy 33.8)
From the battle of Cynocephalae, Livy describes an "elbow-to-elbow" close order.
Best Regards,
Mike.

[Shield And Spear Art]

For my money, I look at it more from a physiological point of view.  I for one don't have any problems with some gap in the line in many, if not most cases.  Think of it this way: You are charging at a Roman line and upon reaching it, you see the gap. Do you really want to go through it?  REALLY?? 

Let's say you decide to. First thing to do is get past that first rank. The man on the right has his sword free to kill you if you make the attempt.  But let's say your buddy closed in to fight and distract him, or you slip through with your shield.  Then what?

Now, you are surrounded on all sides by the enemy and cut off from support.  Do you turn and try to kill someone from the first rank?  You have Legionaries to your rear with nothing better to do with their time than kill you!  Do you fight the second rank? Alone?  This is a confined space, and most likely you have a spear or long sword which isn't as well suited to it, whereas the Roman army was built to fight in this manner.

Considering that one of the least deadly places on a battlefield, generally, at this time is the main clash of lines I can't see units risking this unless there was a considerable chance of success.

I know this is a more 'artsy' point of view, but I try to visualize myself in a given context to gain some perspective. Take that as you will.

[Michael J. Taylor]

N.B. Livy is discussing Philip's phalangites, not Flamininus legionaries. The "he" is Philip V.  Cf. Polyb. 18.24.8.

[Fregoe]

Is N.B.Livy an authority on the subject?

[Michael Collins]

N.B. Livy is discussing Philip's phalangites, not Flamininus legionaries. The "he" is Philip V.  Cf. Polyb. 18.24.8.

Well, paint me stupid! Thanks for pointing that out Michael.

---

I know this is a more 'artsy' point of view, but I try to visualize myself in a given context to gain some perspective. Take that as you will.

Pretty sure I didn`t post this. I`m off to change my password. Or does RAT have a bug or two?

I have deleted the post and changed my password.

[Bryan]

Polybius in fact refers to two different three feet spaces: 1) the space occupied by the soldiers themselves and their equipment and 2) the intervals between soldiers. While this has often been read as producing a file width of 6 feet, these two spaces likely overlap. That is, the interval between soldiers of three feet is likely calculated from the center of the soldier, who occupies part of it with his person and weapons. The actually file-width would only be 4.5 feet (or so--no need to be dogmatic about what foot Polybius is using, although its probably Attic).

This might explain how the Romans actually "found" their space when the created formations. The Roman shield is somewhat under 2.5 feet in width (once you factor the curve), and its may be that the Romans created their "open order" formations simply by starting off with locked shields, and then having every other man step forward, which would create shield sized intervals between the men of the front rank.

I discuss this more here (available in full on line): https://www.academia.edu/3394799/Visual_...ry_Tactics and here (PM me for a full PDF) https://www.academia.edu/1602947/Roman_I...assessment

You've emphasized the importance of the simplicity of drill movements in terms of forming a battleline from marching column in your previous writing, whether coming from camp or after a period of travel. To expand on that, I'm trying to wrap my head around how a Roman century or maniple comes to form line from column. 

If someone is marching in formation, front to back, each man needs about an arms length reach of space between them or else they step on each other's heels. Since there is no proof of Romans calling any cadence to march in lockstep, it means the distance between each man in column would need to greater than arms length to prevent even the possibility of the trailing left foot from the man in front connecting with the advancing left foot of the man in rear, causing a "flat tire" incident, resulting in a very pissed off individual missing some skin on the back of his foot. And the faster they walk, the more they stretch out their step, the farther they need to be. So a minimum of arm's reach between them. 

I just grabbed up my wife for an experiment. I had in her front of me, we both faced to the forward, me at her and her at the wall, we did the "cover" portion of the D&C drill maneuver to Dress and Cover. I pushed her forward as I extended my arm until she no longer touched my arm. That simulated us being in a marching column mimicking it already having hit the pivot point at the far left of the designated battlefield, performing a column right, marching until the position the tribune's pick for them at which point the century/maniple is halted (roughly a maniple gap in between), being faced left toward the enemy, and being ready for battle. Doing that we ended up in line, and by spacing we were roughly an arm's length away. Roughly 2.5 feet. Or the width of a scutum. 

So take a century in marching column and halt them, have them face left, and they're in Polybius' open ranks. 

To go from that position to close interval/to remove the gaps between members of a rank, the second rank can do what you state, to take a step forward to fill in the gap, which results in a thin formation of only 2-3 ranks but one that maintains the same frontage. The other possibility is they keep the same frontage width by going from open interval to close similar to how the US military drill and ceremony does it, everyone on one wing of the rank (the left in US mil) moves toward the other side to fill in gaps, by using elbows or some other means of gauging how close they are from one another. While this would result in the frontage of the formation shrinking, it maintains the depth of the formation.