03-20-2005, 09:36 AM
Tarbicus<br>
I think most armies went for an intermediate solution, it was important to have a veteran front line, because many battles were decided early in the fight, as a front line routing could escalate in the whole army routing, but it was normal to have a small reserve of veterans in the rear, like the triarii of the early Republic. However there is graphic evidence in the draws of battles in the XVI and XVII centuris, they usually depict soldiers running away in the rear ranks as a normal feature, because as Crispus pointed out, they have open space behind them. Those desertions would be part of every battle casualties even for the victorious side, as we know when we have detailed relations of casualties in the XIX century. For instance, in the battle of Antietam, the Confederate army, despite not routing but retiring in relatively good order, had 2700 killed and 2000 missing, while the Union army had 2000 kill and 1000 missing. <p></p><i></i>
I think most armies went for an intermediate solution, it was important to have a veteran front line, because many battles were decided early in the fight, as a front line routing could escalate in the whole army routing, but it was normal to have a small reserve of veterans in the rear, like the triarii of the early Republic. However there is graphic evidence in the draws of battles in the XVI and XVII centuris, they usually depict soldiers running away in the rear ranks as a normal feature, because as Crispus pointed out, they have open space behind them. Those desertions would be part of every battle casualties even for the victorious side, as we know when we have detailed relations of casualties in the XIX century. For instance, in the battle of Antietam, the Confederate army, despite not routing but retiring in relatively good order, had 2700 killed and 2000 missing, while the Union army had 2000 kill and 1000 missing. <p></p><i></i>
