The 1,000 man legion

[Robert Vermaat]

1000 men no matter how well they train alone are never going to be able to learn how to work as an integrated team. Sure you can "pretend" that the legion on your left is going this and the legion on your right is doing something else and do your part but it will never teach you how to communicate within larger formations. It will not teach you how to deal with the chaos that many men will create. Nor will it teach you how to deal with the number of opponents that a 6000 man legion will face.

Of course a 1000 men can learn how to work as an integrated team - why shouldn't they?? hock:

Timothy, you miss the point. A legion does not need to train with 6000 men to learn how to operate as a legion. They did not even have to train with a 1000 men to learn that. The big idea was that they all trained the same and all followed orders. That way it never mattered if they fought as a cohort of 500 or as a cohort 500 among many more cohorts of 500 in an army of 6000 or 20.000. Each unit knew what to do and could in case of a crisis be sent aas a cohort to another legion or a group of vexillated cohorts to form a large army in the field. This was done in the Principate as well as the Late Roman period. You claim it's not possible, but apparently the Romans disagreed with you.

Tactics are different for different sized units. A 6000 man legion can split off units to station at other locations for a time when wintering for example and they can learn to work alone. A 1000 man legion located alone or paired with a second legion cannot no matter how hard it tries train to operate as a 6000 man unit. Its just not possible. You cannot pretend yourself the extra 4000 men.

Yes, surely tactics vary for a 6000 men or for a 1000 men. that's mainly why the LR army changed unit size, because tactics changed. They no longer needed such large units to fight effectively.

The point made was that smaller legions made legions less effective in large scale battles such as Adrianople. In the Principate the Roman forces would have amounted to 2 legions plus some auxillarly forces. In the late period 14,000 men amounts to over a dozen independent legions not used to working together.

I totally disagree with that. The training they received made that they could work together just fine, which is proven by battle after battle after battle. Why are you denying that? Just because of one lost battle - Adrianople? the cause for that defeat was absolutely not explained by 'small units not being able to work together'.

Basically by becoming specialized in small unit combat you lose some effectiveness in very large number combat.

No you don't, as is proven throughout Roman military history.

Look at it this way. Spend all your time playing heads up poker. Then go sit at a table with 9 other players. Things are very different and it takes different skills for each one.

Look at it this way. You train with your comrades in a tight formation, and you are completely oblivious who is standing ten metres to your left or right. It's not your duty to know. Your commander barks his orders and you carry them out, not knowing if the left flank is victorious or the right flank is turned. You need not worry about that, just about your orders and the enemy in front of you. You may be fighting with 500 or 500 men, it matters not. Just carry out your duties.

The problem is that losing the large scale battle can hurt you a whole lot more than a small battle. The advantage is obviously that smaller units can travel easier, take less logistics, can catch fast moving raiders, and are less of a threat if they support a rival who wants to claim the throne.

Exactly! That's a few of the reeasons for the 'shrinking' legions. They never lost their effectiveness.[/quote]