Timeline for Why didn't Romans fight in a single line formation?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 12, 2017 at 4:33 | comment | added | tj1000 | The fatigue issue was far more prevalent with edged weapons than it is with firearms. Swinging a sword or thrusting a spear is hard work, and can't be maintained for any great length of time without the soldier becoming exhausted and easy to overwhelm. Having a rotating line to keep fresh soldiers at the front was a very effective tactic... if you have enough soldiers to do this. | |
| Sep 3, 2015 at 0:58 | comment | added | Pieter Geerkens | @Michael: Yes, the frontage per man was probably more like half that, 0.75 m, for the Romans in the Republican era. The main weapon for those Legionnaires was actually the shield, it's boss used as a ram and it's upper edge used as a club, with the gladius usually reserved for the final killing stab. | |
| Aug 7, 2015 at 16:34 | comment | added | Michael | A minor comment: 1.5 meters of "personal space" is an exaggeration: intervals were usually small enough to allow locking the shields together if necessary. | |
| Aug 7, 2015 at 12:19 | comment | added | David Herskovics | @ Ahh, so that was the problem. Thanks for the editing. | |
| Aug 7, 2015 at 12:13 | history | edited | David Herskovics | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
broking -> breaking
|
| Aug 7, 2015 at 12:12 | comment | added | David Herskovics | @Utku it works for me. Tried to click on the words "This video"? That is the link (it is written in blue). | |
| Aug 7, 2015 at 11:57 | history | edited | Semaphore | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 32 characters in body
|
| Aug 7, 2015 at 11:55 | comment | added | Utku | Thanks. But I think you forgot to include the link to the video. | |
| Aug 7, 2015 at 11:35 | history | answered | David Herskovics | CC BY-SA 3.0 |