Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
crowd behavior and ancient battles
#1
Recently, I saw a History/Military Channel show on Agincourt. An analysis of crowd behavior was shown in evaluating the battle. It should be of interest to students of Roman battles. One particular clip showed a crowd at a rock concert, packed tightly together. One person fell and it created a virtual "Tsunami" wave of people falling, like so many dominoes. Almost the entire crowd, maybe several hunder in the camera range fell over.

The impact on our analysis of Roman battles, such as Cannae, where a motley crew of Carthiginians slaughtered in detail a Roman army twice its size cannot be overestimated.

At Cannae, my logic is that because of the clever manuevering of Hannibal, and the forward impetus of the Roman Army into the Carthaginian center, the Romans became packed tigthly like the crowd at the Rock concert, all 50,000 of them. Just a couple of soldiers falling created a huge collapse of the Roman Army, from which it never recovered. It explains a lot.

This modern evidence of crowd behavior may also alter our vision of a Roman battle. The ancient texts speak of a distance of 3 meters per Roman soldier. Yet, many modern interpretations assume Roman armies were densley packed, shoulder to shoulder at the moment of combat.
"In war as in loving, you must always keep shoving." George S. Patton, Jr.
Reply
#2
I have learned to be careful in disregarding the ancient sources out of hand.
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Leg XX VV
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius
Reply
#3
Unless people are truly afraid of injury and death. I think it will be very difficult to model mass behavior of the type one would expect on an ancient battlefield.

Panic is a spark that becomes a prairie fire.
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Leg XX VV
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius
Reply
#4
The part that interested me was not a model. It was a video of an actual event. It has been pointed out to me that the people were not trained soldiers. However, viewing the video, I am of the opinion that it wouldn't make any difference. The active ingredients were people densely packed in a mass and a chain reaction of people falling. I believe if any engineer cared to work out the force involved, as the wave spread, the amount of force pushing the people over may well have soared into the hundreds if not thousands of pounds per individual. Even an army of terminators would have fallen over.
"In war as in loving, you must always keep shoving." George S. Patton, Jr.
Reply
#5
Is that 3 meters or 3 feet?
Measured on center or distance separating?
Just curious?

Yes the domino theory could have played a big role.
I was once caught in a large crowd at a university football game.
Completely helpless. And near Panic.
And that was without pointy things everywhere and people trying to kill me.
Panic is the mind killer.
>|P. Dominus Antonius|<
Leg XX VV
Tony Dah m

Oderint dum metuant - Cicero
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Vegetius
Reply
#6
A lot of ppl here will discount SCA experience in reenactment, but what you say is very accurate. Too many times I have seen an overly aggressive army 'bunch up' in the center, every soldier trying to get a 'kill', only to be flanked and butchered because they have no room to manuever and adjust.

Life and death experience, no. However, the adrenaline is very real and the desire to swing your weapon is very great, even in armies and groups that practice continually, I've seen the communication and discipline break down and create very tenuous circumstances.

I can believe this quite readily, especially if you consider that the Romans were aware that their flanks were breaking, they would have tried to push through the center just that much harder, hoping to break through before they were surrounded. This would have just made matters worse in the event they were unsuccessfull...which of course, they were.

Britannicus
Gaius Aquilius Britannicus
aka. Todd Searls
Reply
#7
The tendency to bunch up in combat is a feature of modern combat too, but is dangerous for different reasons.

In ancient battle, if you bunched up, massive collapse seems to have been a credible danger.

A well disciplined army may have been the ticket to avoiding this phenomna. Certainly, the Romans valued veteran troops all out of proportion to their numbers.

At Cannae, Hannibal's tactics allowed the Roman steamroller to charge into the weak Carthaginian center. The Roman battle plan apparently involved little else than to forge ahead with the massive weight of 8 legions into a very small front. Hannibal then had his African troops execute double flanking attacks. The question that arises in every effort to recreate this battle is: Why didn't the Romans just face outboard and repel the flanking attacks or stage a breakout through what must have been a very overextended Carthaginian line? The answer may well be that by the time of the flanking maneuver, the Roman army had compressed itself into a very dense mass of men trying to forge ahead into a small area to break the Carthaginian center. The outer layer of Roman troops probably did face outboard to repel the flanking attacks, but without manuever room, could do little but be compressed into the ever-shrinking Roman mass. Then, with just the right mechanics occurring, the collapse occurred. The rest can be seen in the descriptions of the battle field afterwards: Heaps of dead, men who buried their heads in the dirt (why would a well trained Roman do that?) and an inexplicable defeat of the mightiest Roman army to take the field up to that time.
"In war as in loving, you must always keep shoving." George S. Patton, Jr.
Reply
#8
Battlefields could indeed get pretty crowded sometimes, if we are to believe Ammianus Marcellinus' accouint of the battle of Adrianople. THe "downfall of a mighty rampart" metaphor made me think about that rock concert..

"And because the left wing, which had made its way as far as the very wagons, and would have gone farther if it had had any support, being deserted by the rest of the cavalry, was hard pressed by the enemy’s numbers, it was crushed, and overwhelmed, as if by the downfall of a mighty rampart. The foot-soldiers thus stood unprotected, and their companies were so crowded together that hardly anyone could pull out his sword or draw back his arm."
Pascal Sabas
Reply
#9
This is a good quote. It explains a lot.
"In war as in loving, you must always keep shoving." George S. Patton, Jr.
Reply


Forum Jump: