tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-649431201703508681.post845739209329549617..comments2023-11-02T10:22:20.717-04:00Comments on Mike Anderson's Ancient History Blog: Roman Combat MechanicsMike Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02072553719998549925noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-649431201703508681.post-37460233495200320042018-11-18T02:18:46.901-05:002018-11-18T02:18:46.901-05:00Well, I imagine that sources outside the Roman/Gre...Well, I imagine that sources outside the Roman/Greek Worlds would help: they might offer an insight into this. For example:<br /><br />In Arab accounts from the Early Islamic Period (much later than Classical Rome, but the basic mechanics of combat likely changed little), battle are explicitly described as having "karr wa farr" (lit. "repeat and retreat"). So they would attack, fight for a short time, then one side or another give ground. This then created a lull, after which the soldiers would resume combat once more (hence "karr"). Once one line completely broke for whatever reason (usually panic, which has spread from one or more points on the battlefield), the rout and pursuit would begin.Ibrahimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05209741194862486975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-649431201703508681.post-8859436847607952232011-12-14T17:13:30.057-05:002011-12-14T17:13:30.057-05:00I didn't understand how he leaves "terrai...I didn't understand how he leaves "terrain" off that list, but then I saw from the wikipedia link that his other speciality is air warfare!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-649431201703508681.post-32770992781613431352011-12-13T21:46:15.409-05:002011-12-13T21:46:15.409-05:00Be a bit careful citing the WWII SLA Marshall stud...Be a bit careful citing the WWII SLA Marshall studies on how many infantrymen fired (or aimed and fired) their rifles. There's been a fair amount of review calling Marshall's methodology into doubt.<br /><br />But that doesn't mean I disagree with your basic thesis, that battles had an ebb-and-flow. Although I've not personally been in real combat, I've observed this in firefights in training. Part of the Roman advantage was in training; troops were probably trained to stab not only as more effective, but also as it takes less effort. So it's likely that well-trained legions (or auxiliaries) had better stamina than many of their opponents.David Emeryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10345197518868472082noreply@blogger.com