Login

Goffredo · 11-18-2004, 11:04 AM

Hi guys 
I saw a brief segment of Stone's Alexander and there is a scene that made me worry. It shows the "usual" charge of soldiers runnig top speed (couldn't tell whether greek or persian). The "usual" because in usually the movies show ancient and medieval battles starting with crowds of men running towards each other. 
 
The only movie battle scene I can think of that is really credible is in the second Zulu movie showing the battle of Isandhlwana wherein the Zulu line advances quickly but not at a foolish running pace. They needed to keep formation just like ancient armies did and the advancement ("charge") was effective if it was done systematically and not just a bunch of guys running top speed! 
 
My question is: how likely is it that ancient battles were fought like reckless charging of masses of men? I might imagine a charge occuring at a run, but certainly not over great distances, but instead over just a few tens of yards. Why? because people don't want to get into contact with the enemy already exhausted! and because formation was extremely important! A run might work up adrenaline but it is a delicate balance. Start too soon, too much running, and you get tired. Too much running over a great distance and your formation brakes up. Indeed a well trained army (like the romans) might not even need to run except those few yards to throw pila with greater velocity and to close distance with enemy line before it recomposes. But even then the final lunge best not be a reckess dash like in the movies. 
I don't even think Gauls and Germans ran top speed into Roman lines. I just doesn't make sense! A final dash, a final sprint, okay, but a running mass of men is just too stupid. Then only the frontlines would dash forward. Those behind them would not do so as they would simply run into the guys up front that would be presumably stopped. 
 
By the way Ceasar describes a battle in which the enemy sprint so quickly that the romans had no time to throw pila. That is consistent with my image because if the enemy had been running over a great distance for some time then the romans could have easily waited and tuned the time to throw the pila. Instead, evidently, the distance between the two armies was not great, just out of pila range, when suddenly the enemy decided to dash out. 
Edited by: <A HREF=http://p200.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=goffredo>goffredo</A> at: 11/18/04 12:10 pm

11-18-2004, 12:07 PM

I had been thinking about this recently as I believe that in one battle, between Roman armies during the civil wars, there was mention of a great clash of shields at the moment the armies met. 
 
I was going to post a question to ask of there was a tactic of slamming shields in an attack to try and break up the ranks to get in with the sword ? 
 
From what I believe, the Celtic rush was made with such speed as to break up a formation with sheer momentum. 
They threw their lives away by jumping over shields etc ( bloody nutters ). The fact that this worked early on makes me think that it was not the norm before the Celts came on the scene. 
 
Conal

**Robert Vermaat** · 11-18-2004, 02:35 PM

Quote:<hr>From what I believe, the Celtic rush was made with such speed as to break up a formation with sheer momentum. <hr> 
Is that based on an ancient account or or the Highland Charge? 
 
Valete, 
Valerius/Robert

Crispvs · 11-18-2004, 09:39 PM

"I had been thinking about this recently as I believe that in one battle, between Roman armies during the civil wars, there was mention of a great clash of shields at the moment the armies met." 
 
In my experience of combat re-enactment I have generally found that one of the dominant sounds of simulated combat is the sound of weapons being parried with shields, followed to a lesser extent by the sound of weapons connecting with shield bosses or other weapons. It strikes me that the sound of thousands of weapons suddenly being parried by shields and other weapons, as well as the sound of weapons striking armour would sound like a sudden crash, and with the sound of weapons on shields being one of the dominant parts of this noise I don't see it as inappropriate that it has been translated as "a great clash of shields". I do not necessarily think that the two armies simply ran forward and crashed into each other. 
 
Crispvs

John M McDermott · 11-19-2004, 12:35 AM

For what it's worth, at Quantico, Virginia, they taught us never to have your troops run a distance in combat greater than 100 meters. They simply get too tired to be effective if you make them do more. 
 
Of course, the big contradiction to this is the Battle of Marathon, where the Greeks were supposed to have run a great distance into the fight.

**Robert Vermaat** · 11-19-2004, 07:26 AM

C'mon guys - the Highland Charge! 
I'm sure they teach good stuff at Qauntico, but this is now! 
Remember the Scots during the Jacobite rebellions? Their charge was feared, even by troops who could lay down heavy suppressing fire from a much greater distance than we're talking about. 
 
So for an ancient army a charge could do it, but luck was involved. For armies like the Roman and the Greek ones I can imagine that such a charge could be dangerous. For a Greek vs. Greek battle it would be sucide (with the phalanx being able to deal with it), but in a Greek vs. Persian situation, why not? 
Roman armies had their pila just for that purpose-stopping a charge in its tracks. But against Celts I could see Romans charge, no problem. 
 
Valete, 
Valerius/Robert

11-19-2004, 01:23 PM

Robert, 
 
On accounts of ancient accounts 
 
The fact that it was still around in '45 shows it was in the blood eh !! 
 
Conal

Los456 · 11-19-2004, 03:02 PM

Didn't the Greeks at marathon break intoa dead run to get through the deadly hail of Persian arrow fire beffore clashing shieldwalls? 
 
herotodus sez.... 
"So when the battle was set in array, and the victims showed themselves favourable, instantly the Athenians, so soon as they were let go, charged the barbarians at a run. Now the distance between the two armies was little short of eight furlongs. The Persians, therefore, when they saw the Greeks coming on at speed, made ready to receive them, although it seemed to them that the Athenians were bereft of their senses, and bent upon their own destruction; for they saw a mere handful of men coming on at a run without either horsemen or archers. Such was the opinion of the barbarians, but the Athenians in close array fell upon them, and fought in a manner worthy of being recorded. They were the first of the Greeks, so far as I know, who introduced the custom of charging the enemy at a run, and they were likewise the first who dared to look upon the Median garb and to face men clad in that fashion. Until this time the very name of the Medes had been a terror to the Greeks to hear." 
 
When confronting a missile heavy army, it seems crossing that "last 100 yards" at speed can sometimes be of more importance than maintainig an orderly formation? 
 
But regardless, no doubt it looks cooler on film to have these two armies charging reclessly at each other. The Troy movie was like that too.

Dan Diffendale · 11-20-2004, 12:47 AM

Perhaps someone who has been in more dangerous situations than I can comment, but it seems that if you're marching into danger, it's easier (for most people) to do so at a run, at least from a psychological standpoint.

11-20-2004, 02:12 AM

I've always seen...er...imagined a charge as a last minute scare tactic to intimidate the enemy, to cause command/discipline chaos, and try to rout the enemy...But it's not going to work well if you start 100 yards away, and essepcially get tired by 50 yards out. 
 
from the ancient mentions, I think what's going on is that the 2 forces are slowly [marching] towards each other, and by the time they are , let's say, 50 yards or less to each other, one force will ultimately try to rush the enemy with a suddent, ferocious charge, yelling, screaming, banging shield, et cetera. Then, when they get to close-quarters, I'd think 1 of 2 things would happen: 
1. the charging force slows or stops just before making contact/crashing into the enemy, to use thier weapons (like spears) 
2. The front line keep charging right into the enemy lines to really try and scare the beegeezus out of the enemy and cause total chaos 
 
Now, for the Romans, I'd always think that they would want to throw Pila just as the enemy starts it's charge, so the Pila come down ontop/into the front lines just as they're starting to get up "to speed", and the short range of the Pila is going to make it tricky to "time" the throw just right. I think this is what happened in what Caesar was writing about. The enemy kept marching closer and closer to the Romans, edging just a little too close for Pila range, then suddently burst into a charge, catching the Romans off guard. 
 
If the Romans did get the Pila off into the charge and it slowed or stopped or went haywire, then the Romans rushed the people who managed to fanangle through the pila and bodies, trapping them between that mess and the Romans coming in, thus making the enemy force toast (or swiss cheese??)...That's at least how I've always understood the Pila and charging. 
 
On a side note, aren't Zouave units in the Amerc. Civil War known for making ridiculously long-distance charges? (and cause the opposing lines to flip out?) Titus Vulpius Dominicus ~ Your Friendly Neighborhood Roman Dude. 
 
Svaviter in Modo, Fortiter in Re (Soft in Manner, Strong in Deed) 
 
www.higgins.org 
www.higginssword.org

11-20-2004, 04:09 AM

I wish I was home surrounded by my resources, but nope, still at work. But I'd like to add before I forget that the Romans had a particular form of "jog" that I've come across in literature several times in the past. Then, leafing through a photo album of the Hitler's 1934 visit to Mussoulini, I was amazed to come across a photo of the dictator in full uniform... riding boots, breeches, tie, coat, and plumed Italian helmet... running in formation with his staff officers (also similarly attired). The caption read something like, "The Generalissimo and his staff, recalling the practices of Rome's glorious past, jog-marches his troops". It definitely wasn't a full-on run, but a high-step jog with the arms held higher than one would do normally. (Whether by design or accident, this jog-march can be seen in the movie Fall of the Roman Empire as well, where a large column of legionaries in full kit jog-march towards their enemy behind their officer... played by Christopher Plummer, I think... who is mounted on a horse.) 
 
When I was in the infantry, we commonly used the "Airborne shuffle" to move fully-equipped troops from one point to another (usually after the #>&!! trucks failed to show). In fact, we used to practice riot-control techniques where we'd double-time towards the agitators, banging our batons on our large, scuta-shaped riot shields to intimidate the rowdies. But again, it wasn't really a full double-time, but the Airborne shuffle... i.e., the jog march. We'd arrive with every man, and immediately form a skirmish line. 
 
I wonder if descriptions of Romans "running" into battle might not actually refer to this jog-march, which is (a) still much faster than walking, and (b) allows you to hit the enemy en masse, rather than having a third of your unit huffing and puffing in the distance. 
 
Darius

11-21-2004, 10:01 PM

I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this before...But after the last comment by Severus, I'm wondering now, isn't there a mention (Vegetius?) that the Romans were required to march at 2 speeds, the "Military Step" and a "Fast Step", essepcially while on Route March? I wonder then, if this Fast Step is what this possible charge might be about....I wonder if it's similar to the Double Quick step (do I have that right?) in the Amer. Civil War and whatnot? 
 
Hrrrmmmm....

Crispvs · 11-22-2004, 11:30 PM

Back to charging. During the battle of Crete in World War II, New Zealand Maori soldiers repeatedly forced the numerically stronger and better armed Germans back with bayonette charges. Seeing a group of men charging recklessly towards you, shouting at the tops of their voices and pointing bayonettes (or spears) at you can be an unnerving experience, even if you are better armed. Something similar happened during the battle of Arnham, when German infantry and tanks retreated in dissarray from a town just outside Arnham after a three hour confrontation with British paratroops who had had no food supplies for over a week, had been subjected to artillery fire for several days and were extremely short of ammunition. The psychological effect of angry reckless charges can be underestimated. I do not think that the distance has to be very far for it to be effective. Fit and well conditioned soldiers could however, jog (or lope, as the Zulus did to get quickly into position prior to engaging), as has been stated above, to get to a good position for a sudden and frightening charge, and by doing so get to the enemy faster to potentially catch him offguard. 
 
Crispvs

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me