Login

Q Rutilius · 02-26-2005, 08:41 PM

As I recall, Vegetius makes a reference to the Romans using a wedge formation. I think some attribute the Roman use of this formation to their contact with barbarians, whom supposedly used it as means of penetrating enemy lines. No doubt the Romans used it for the same purpose. Does anyone know how this worked? 
 
I find it hard to believe that the point of the wedge would be one man. So, I assume that the point would be one century (or maniple). Behind the point would be two centuries, etc. so that viewed from above the whole formation would look something like how bowling pins are set up. 
 
Did the point century hack its way through the enemy line and then the two following centuries widen the breach by attacking beside it? 
 
Or was it a case of pushing on the point unit until the enemy line gave way, and then the following units exploiting the break in the enemy line, (a phalanx-like shoving match)? 
 
Or was it a far less precise process with the all the units hitting the enemy line in sequence; those in front hitting the enemy line first, (a sort of variation of echelon)? 
 
Your thoughts , please.

02-27-2005, 03:38 PM

Salve Rutilius, 
 
I'm not sure why you are so reticent to accept that the point of the Cuneum should not be one or possibly two men. 
 
From a practical point of view, if the 'point' were a susbstantial number of troops it would in effect be a line. against a tight packed enemy, the advance of a line tends to slow or even stall. On the other hand, a wedge or series of wedges (like a saw blade) tends to be able to keep momentum going. The scutum works well at protecting the man at the point of the wedge, providing a tight shield wall is maintained in the overall formation. Taken a stage further, If each century strong cuneum left a gap between it and the next adjacent, the surviving enemy would be funelled onto further formations in the second rank. 
 
Although this is somewhat speculative, it is based on practiacl findings from application of historical data. We have carried out several practical experiments of formations in combat situations, albeit not at full legion or even century strength, but nevertheless we have been able to identify some strengths and weaknesses of some of the battle formations. The main point we found was that the army needs room to move and operate otherwise things seem to grind to a halt. I really don't buy the phalanx idea. 
 
Vale 
 
Mummius

Q Rutilius · 02-27-2005, 08:01 PM

Thanks mummius. The sawtooth idea makes a lot sense. Mostly, it was just not clear to me if the wedge refered to individial soldiers or formations.

Jeroen Pelgrom · 02-28-2005, 09:35 AM

in the final battle against Boudicca the romans fought in a "sawtooth" formations. In a show on discovery (i think that the guys of II augusta were in that) the reconstructed this formation - really impressive to see. 
 
The idea that they had was that a sawtooth-formation pushes he enemy soldiers aside into the gaps between the tooth, so-called killing zones. In these zones the enemy soldier would have romans on 2 sides and/ or would be crushed to death by his fellow troopers behind him who canÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â´t see what is front of them - the idea of a funnel. The romans at this battle were charging down-hill with trees on their flanks. They speculated that most casulties on Boudicca side would have been the result on brittains who were crushed to death. ------------------------------------------------------- 
A great flame follows a little spark. 
Dante Alighieri,The Divine Comedy

Thiudareiks Flavius · 03-01-2005, 10:58 PM

Medieval re-enactors have been using wedge formations for years, with great success. And yes, you can make a highly effective wedge with one man at the 'point', so long as (i) he has a large shield and the wedge is closely packed and well-co-ordinated with overlapping shields. 
 
I've mentioned this many times to 'armchair tacticians' who proceed to scoff about how ineffective such a formation would be. Apologies to any armchair experts who may not believe me, but I've seen and experienced how effective this formation is when it is done properly. When you are flying through the air after a wedge hits your line then the way things look from the comfort of the armchair suddenly vanish in a flash of insight into how things were. 
Tim O'Neill / Thiudareiks Flavius / Thiudareiks Gunthigg

<a href="http://p066.ezboard.com/bthedavincicodefactandfiction"><img src="http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-1/935133/DVCBanner.jpg" width=588 height=135>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p200.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=thiudareiksflavius>Thiudareiks Flavius</A> at: 3/1/05 11:59 pm

Felix · 03-10-2005, 12:57 AM

In the 10th century C.E. the later Roman emperor Nikephoras Phocas's text explicitly describes a cavalry version of a wedge. It has one man at the point, and progressively widens 2 men (one on either flank) per line. The wedge formation is expected to have some 540 odd men.

Vincula · 03-10-2005, 09:59 PM

Forgive me pointing out that a wedge of thundering horses is quite a different prospect than a wedge of jogging infantry.

03-10-2005, 10:57 PM

In rugby, the wedge attack (known as the flying wedge) was once a major attacking weapon. It is now illegal given how dangerous it is to the defending side! 
Now, if you then add swords, shield, and spears to the wedge and try and defend against it.......!!

Tarbicus · 03-10-2005, 11:35 PM

And in school, the 'wedgie' was a formidable attacking weapon, bringing most opponents to their knees in seconds 
 
I liken the wedge formation to a knife edge at the molecular level. Tightly packed and penetrating, it pushes aside more loosely formed molecules spread more thinly.. Or am I talking nonsense again? Funnily, that is how a steel blade would work against lead I think. Applying the same principle, would a 'kevlar' formation stop and absorb it?

03-11-2005, 10:52 AM

I am one of those armchair tacticians sceptical about the wedge formation, I wonder, what happened if the front man, and even second and third row were killed? with such a limited frontage the formation would be very much slowed down. 
As for the cavalry wedge, given the fact that horses, unlike men, canÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â´t efectively add their weight to the front ranks, I donÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â´t see how could be any useful.

Goffredo · 03-11-2005, 11:46 AM

Hi 
my two cents worth. 
I think a true wedge would work but it was risky and dangerous. Aryaman askes: what happens if the very front guy or guys get killed? I ask what happens if the guys behind the front one chicken-out? What I am driving at is that a wedge required a very tightly-knit group of men and well disciplined and worked if the enemy was not very aggressive and maybe was huddling defensively just ready to break. 
 
Regards proof by practice I do think re-enacting suffers from serious bias: there really is no risk of getting killed.

03-11-2005, 09:31 PM

Hi Goffredo 
I was thinking about the wedge "formation" from that same psichological perspective but on the opposite direction, I mean I recall Marshal De Saxe describing how a 3 ranks deep line usually when advancing towards the enemy become a sort of "wedge" several ranks deep by soldiers hiding behind comrades and falling behind in the advance. Barve soldiers advancing towards the enemy would then form the front of the "wedge".

Tarbicus · 03-11-2005, 11:43 PM

Quote:<hr>what happened if the front man, and even second and third row were killed?<hr> 
 
Battle over? 
 
Quote:<hr>I ask what happens if the guys behind the front one chicken-out?<hr> 
 
They die later when their comrades and/or centurions ceremonially or instinctively beat them to death. But Aryaman points out the braver ones would go through with it anyway. That said, I think discipline was pretty strong most times. If the centurions called for the wedge, it must have been for a reason, and the fact it had been called for must have given hope to the men, so it would have been an enthusiastic attack? Fluidity was a successful Roman trait.

Crispvs · 03-12-2005, 04:21 PM

Having participated in 11th century battle re-enactment for a number of years and having both stood against and been part of wedge formations I can confirm the effectiveness of the technique at penetrating an enemy line. I have never found that I could do anything other than be thrown backwards through the air when hit by the point of the wedge. Even if the men hit by the wedge did manage to get in a swing at the point man they would certainly not get another one as they would be flung aside by the wedge. 
It is true that being on the point of a wedge would be hazardous in the extreme, but we are not talking here about individuals but about trained and disciplined units. Even if the men on the point were killed the onward force of the packed formation behind them would carry their bodies forward some way into the enemy formation. However mauled the point became in the operational four or five seconds of the wedge, I am certain that the line receiving it would suffer greater trauma. The Napoleonic 'column' formation was certainly recognised as a very powerful and destructive formation, even in an age when muskets made killing the men at the front even easier. 
In several years of using tight wedge formations we only found one way of defeating a wedge. This was to cause the leading two or three men on the point to trip, causing a frontal collapse of the formation, which then nosedived into the ground before it hit the other line. About the only way to trip the point was to physically throw yourself at the lower legs of the point men. The timing had to be perfect and I only saw it work twice in seven years. 
 
Incidentally, wasn't there some talk the last time we discussed wedges about 'column' style wedges and killing pockets? 
 
Crispvs

Thiudareiks Flavius · 03-13-2005, 11:40 PM

Crispvs, 
 
Thank God I've finally come across someone else who has seen a wedge in action. This is a classic case where the armchair generals REALLY don't have much of a clue. 
 
What if the front guys get killed? I've never seen it happen, for precisely the reason Crispvs points out: the defenders barely get time to get a blow in before the wedge hits them. Hard. 
 
What if the other guys wimp out? Er ... yes, that would make the wedge ineffective. Just as it would make any attack, any defence or anything at all on the battlefield ineffective. This is not a reason to doubt wedges were used any more than it would be a reason to doubt any formation was used. It would be a reason, however, to try to avoid going into any formation with nervous cowards. 
 
Re-enactment doesn't have the danger of actually being killed and therefore isn't a valid measure? Okay - by this logic pretty much any attacking formation is invalid and everyone in battles hung back whining 'Oh no - I might get KILLED out there!'. 
 
Re-enactors are assuming (reasonably) that the people on an ancient or medieval battlefield generally had some degree of training, discipline, warrior ethos and esprit de corps. And that they were prepared to put their lives on the line for their kingdom, unit, country etc. So the (fake) bravado engendered by the fact that the worst things you're facing is (i) a bit of pain, (ii)wounded ego (iii) some bad bruises and (iv) being off the field for the rest of the fight or the rest of the day similates the real bravado of professional warriors and soldiers in real life and death struggles with real things (freedom, loot, glory, families and land) at stake. 
 
Assuming, therefore, that the warriors or soldiers involved had the courage to attack in formation, the question then becomes: does the formation in question actually work? And the answer, according to anyone who has been involved in practical experiments with it, is 'YES'. 
Tim O'Neill / Thiudareiks Flavius / Thiudareiks Gunthigg

<a href="http://p066.ezboard.com/bthedavincicodefactandfiction"><img src="http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-1/935133/DVCBanner.jpg" width=588 height=135>

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me