"National Roman Legion"

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Where do these ideas come from? Not the historical writings, which show individual combats, room to fight, and duels, but movies and drawings from the 20th century? You might take a moment to read "Soldiers and Ghosts" by Lendon?

I would love to. These ideas all come from what I have read and learned here on RAT alone. I just find it hard to understand how when one praises the initial scenes of gladiator (sure the missing flying pilla did suck) one is told they are innacurate due to close quarters combat, and that the evidence is on monumental collumns. The next momment this evidence is being decried as artistic license, and we are having a debate that they indeed did fight in looser formations.

Im sorry, I don't seem to sound crass or rude (I know it may sound like it at times), but I am just confused. I am using the Gladiator analogy not because I base any historical fact on the film, but because it is a common point of the film many of us refute as unauthentic.

Just seems to me like a slap in the face of those who were told the scene was not how the roman army fought, while what is being discussed here in this discussion (which is way off topic btw) could well have allowed that particular scenario to happen. Especially, as how has already been mentioned, the barbarians which fought rome regularly would be aware of their tactics and exploit any particular weaknesses.

I don't have a problem accepting they could use a looser formation, but that it would have been a lesser used tactic and only used rarely. Anyway, once again, sorry if I have come across as rude or anything, it is not my intention.

Yuri