+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space (/showthread.php?tid=7188)
Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Mitra - 10-22-2006
We know the triarii have only the half number of men in comparison with the hastati and the principes. How possible cover the same battle surface without be reduced to few ranks? Livy for triarii is explicit, no gaps between maniples after the passage of the first lines (VIII.8 ); a continue triarii line must to be on three ranks for cover the same surface of chess formation hastati-principes with 12x10 maniples. Unreal, too few ranks.
Personally i'm thought a idea different from the orthodox view on the triarii battle line (eventually i talk of this after), but i want open a discussion. Your ideas?
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Matthew - 10-22-2006
I see no problem with the Triarii being composed of ten companies, each twenty files wide by three ranks deep. What exactly strikes you as being unlikely about it?
Matthew James Stanham
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Mitra - 10-22-2006
three rank deep is a line too fragile for a last resource, also for a phalanx like the triarii, and 10 deep for the other maniples is largely hypothetical; much probable 6 or 8 deep equivalent to a contubernium , so we have less than 3 for the triarii.
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Matthew - 10-22-2006
Well, I think one has to keep in mind that the rest of the army may not have actually dissolved. I always envisioned the Triarii as forming a point behind which the other ranks would reform.
A lot depends on how you envision the Republican Army operating and what roles one has in mind for the various groups.
Principes and Hastati always struck me as operating in files of twenty men, four to six ranks deep, depending on whether they have been reinforced or not.
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - L C Cinna - 10-23-2006
hmm my opinion always was that the maniples of the hastati and principes form the checkerboard formation. the centuries of each maniple behind each other, each century 8 to 10 ranks deep, so each maniple 16 to 20 ranks. when closing in on the enemy the 2nd century moves forward to fill the gap and make a closed battleline.
if the centuries stay 8 to 10 deep we'll get a closed line of hastati and a 2nd closed line of principes each 8 to 10 deep, so the triarii should in the end still be able to cover the rear in a line at least 4 to 5 ranks deep.
i don't think they kept the gaps and used to fill them with units from the 2nd line. then it just wouldn't make sense to have the 2 lines equipped differently.the change of worn out hastati centuries with fresh principes centuries would take place one by one during the breaks which occur in the battle. i really don't think the gaps were kept during the actual engagement. if you do it like i described above you can still have a 3rd line consisting of triarii which covers the same space as the units in the first 2 lines and they still have enough depht to form a strong defensive line if needed.
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Mitra - 10-23-2006
>Well, I think one has to keep in mind that the rest of the army may not have actually >dissolved. I always envisioned the Triarii as forming a point behind which the other ranks >would reform.
True but Livy is clear in his battle and triplex acies descriptions, the triarii is a last attack force not a cover line. On Veseri and Vadimone descriptions on view than after the triarii we don't have a new change with hastati e principes.
>hmm my opinion always was that the maniples of the hastati and first 2
>..............
>lines and >they still have enough depht to form a strong defensive line if >needed
8 ranks with 120 men maniple isn't possibile (centuries with a front of 7,5 men?), only with 144 maniples 8 ranks is plausibile (contuberni from 6 to 8 men) but in this case the triarii must have 3 ranks. With 10 ranks and a century behind the other, the space's count is correct but with this measures the space occupied by a consular army is only of 800-900 meters at maximum with the cavalry, 500 +- with only the infantry. Very little if on view a hellenistic army with the same number of men.
We can make a little hypotesis on the Polybius's fictional fight between legion and phalanx and the occupied space by a legionary for the greek author.
if we assume:
1 - The phalanx and the legion of Polybius in this fictional battle have the same frontal space
2 - Polybius know that the manipular line have gaps and the mechanisms of the gaps
Polybius can have made this consideration: each man in the phalanx continue line have 3 foots space, in the no-continue legion line we have half of men in first rank, so each man have the double of space of phalanx soldier (6 foots).
From this we have two possibilities:
1- The Polybius legionary's space count are only theoretical, in reality the gaps isn't closed, the presence of principes a little distance blocked the "viae".
2- This is a real observation: the legionaries pass from 3 foots to 6, before the contact with the enemy (move with 3, combat with 6; rational or natural movement?). The gaps are closed from this change of space.
But for triarii cannot been valid the same rule.
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Matthew - 10-23-2006
Theoretical spacing can be quite the problem. If the Hastati, for instance, are deployed in ten Maniples of 120 Men, they might be initially deployed in 10 Files of 12 Ranks or 20 Files of 6 Ranks. Other configurations are possible, but, if we assume the former, and take Polybius' spacing into account we may conclude that each Maniple has a frontage of 60 Feet with gaps between of equivalent space. This, though, is by no means certain.
Such deep formations make little sense to me nor do gaps after the Velites have retired, so I follow the school of thought that has Maniples fill in the gaps before closing with the enemy, which could mean that each Maniple would have a frontage of 120 Feet, with a continuous line of ten Maniples having a frontage of 1,200 Feet. This seems to me a reasonable hypothosis for the Hastati and Principes battle order. If the Hastati line were to crumble they could retire through the gaps in the Principes line before that was also filled.
The Triarii pose a problem in this context, but the simplest solution would be for them to operate in the same way, first in 10 Files and 6 Ranks and afterwards (once the rest of the army has fallen back behind them) in 20 Files and 3 Ranks.
There are, of course, a number of questions around the Triarii which need to be answered:
1) Did they have an individual frontage of 6 Feet, like their fellows, or did their more Hellenic style equipment cause them to have an individual spacing of 3 Feet?
2) What was the purpose of arming them differently from the other two lines? The Spear would certainly be an advantage against Horsemen, which strikes me as a useful kind of troop to be able to deploy as a reserve to the flanks or rear of a battle line.
3) What was the purpose of the Triarii? To my mind they would not be likely to recklessly attack an enemy. I suppose that their role was to stop routs by halting the advance of the enemy until the other lines rally and reform.
4) Looking at the battles described by Polybius there appears to be no clear delinated role for the Triarii. Indeed, in Scipio's final battle with Hannibal all three lines are eventually deployed as one to envelop the enemy in the final stages of the battle.
Needless to say none of this likely occured regularly in real combat. Exceptions appear to have been the rule...
Matthew James Stanham
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Tarbicus - 10-23-2006
Machiavelli certainly had a theory on how it all worked.
[url:3ce886dc]http://www.constitution.org/mac/artofwar_.htm[/url]
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Matthew - 10-23-2006
Arrghh. Which book do you mean, Jim? Or was that a general comment?
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Tarbicus - 10-23-2006
I think it's Book Three.
[url:3s4uvevc]http://www.constitution.org/mac/artofwar3.htm[/url]
It's worth reading the whole lot though, simply because there are few in history who were as besotted with the Roman military as he was, and uses the book as an opportunity to espouse his theories on what they did, why, and how it related to warfare of his time when men were still fighting steel-on-steel. Check out his opinion that there was troop rotation at the very front lines as well :wink:
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Mitra - 10-23-2006
Yes, the idea is a misunderstanding of Machiavelli; he uses the word "ordini" in the sense of rank, but in in Livius 8.8 ordo is used in the sense of maniple.
In XVII century we have another image of triplex acies with the principes behind and to right of hastati and the triarii behind and right of principes. So the gaps between the maniples are equivalent to 1,5 maniples.
Matt, the polybian battle descriptions is very late compared to the original use of triplex acies (Polybius dont describe the changing of line); Scipio tactics in particular, are "heretical"; between Ibera and Magnesia we dont have a true old style legionary tactic in authors descriptions. The only usable source for the original mechanism is Livy's VIII.8.
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Matthew - 10-23-2006
Thanks Jim. An interesting read so far; I always meant to get round to reading this... if only I had more time...
I thought that sounded suspicious; thanks for clearing that up, Davide.
I thought Livy was writing much later than Polybius. Do you mean because of the sources he uses. Scipio certainly seems to divert from the established dogma, but then so do pretty much all the other generals of the same period.
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - L C Cinna - 10-23-2006
Quote:
>hmm my opinion always was that the maniples of the hastati and first 2
>..............
>lines and >they still have enough depht to form a strong defensive line if >needed
8 ranks with 120 men maniple isn't possibile (centuries with a front of 7,5 men?), only with 144 maniples 8 ranks is plausibile (contuberni from 6 to 8 men) but in this case the triarii must have 3 ranks.
what about 160 for a maniple?
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Tarbicus - 10-23-2006
Quote:he uses the word "ordini" in the sense of rank, but in in Livius 8.8 ordo is used in the sense of maniple.That may not be the case as some here believe he means line of maniples. My own opinion is mixed and may well be with you on this, especially if you, being Italian, can say specifically that 'ordini' means a single line of soldiers and would definitely not mean a line of maniples. I would be very grateful if so, as it would be a very specific description of his theory of possible troop rotation during combat. He does mention individual rank rotation in a separate part of The Art of War.
Re: Middle republican triplex acies: a problem of space - Mitra - 10-23-2006
The force of maniple is variable with the legion strength but for semplicity is best using a normal force legion.