10-17-2011, 03:39 PM
Gaps have existed during battle. It does not make a difference if they are unquestionably attested in sources regarding other armies or periods. It is their actual use that is interesting that shows that under circumstances and by taking certain precautionary measures, they were indeed used. So, if Byzantines could fight with gaps (of a certain width, in specific parts of the front line, with men assigned to fill them up and maneuver/defend in a very specific way), it surely was possible for others to do so too.
Yes, sizable gaps would have been rare in pre-gunpowder battle formations, but still possible as a tactical choice.
As I perceived your model, and that of course is my personal opinion, the core of its mechanisms would be the continuous attacks and retreats by the "first" and "second" lines. This idea is very interesting but, I think, would need some further backing up with sources or parallel examples, even not about the Roman army itself. In order for such a mechanism of attack to be possible, gaps as wide as the units themselves are indeed necessary. Outside this model, these gaps need not be that wide, even exist. So, again in my opinion, you should try to find more arguments that could suggest that such a model of attack was indeed used sometime in antiquity.
If you really believe in your theory, do keep on researching it. Try to find information and quotes on infantry wedges, how they were formed and used. Certain comments aside, it was an interesting discussion and I truly hope I haven't heard the last of you Bryan! As I said, I love such "challenges", discussions on the application of tactics instead of just translations of sources.
As my ancient forefathers would say : "Hygienai!" (Be healthy!)
Yes, sizable gaps would have been rare in pre-gunpowder battle formations, but still possible as a tactical choice.
As I perceived your model, and that of course is my personal opinion, the core of its mechanisms would be the continuous attacks and retreats by the "first" and "second" lines. This idea is very interesting but, I think, would need some further backing up with sources or parallel examples, even not about the Roman army itself. In order for such a mechanism of attack to be possible, gaps as wide as the units themselves are indeed necessary. Outside this model, these gaps need not be that wide, even exist. So, again in my opinion, you should try to find more arguments that could suggest that such a model of attack was indeed used sometime in antiquity.
If you really believe in your theory, do keep on researching it. Try to find information and quotes on infantry wedges, how they were formed and used. Certain comments aside, it was an interesting discussion and I truly hope I haven't heard the last of you Bryan! As I said, I love such "challenges", discussions on the application of tactics instead of just translations of sources.
As my ancient forefathers would say : "Hygienai!" (Be healthy!)
