Chucking the Pilum 2: The Pilum Returns!

[Justin Swanton]

I don't see the Gauls as "more conventional", but as the exception; not only Carthaginian but Italian, Hellenistic and Spanish armies would surely have substantial numbers of skirmishers.

It's possible that the skirmish phase at Cannae lasted longer than usual, in that P implies that it went on until the cavalry fight was over (was that Hannibal's intention?), but I doubt that it was in itself unusual.

Sure. I just find it curious that if that was the only way velites were used with HI why don't they form separate units but instead are co-pted to the maniples of the heavies - whose commanders keep an eye on how they are fighting? Also, why are the hastati armed the same way they are, implying the hastati do their own volleying of the enemy when the moment is right? I'm thinking there was a good deal of flexibility in how velites were used - they could have been initially all deployed in the front, especially to screen against a considerable number of enemy lights, but they could also have supplied overhead missile support from within the legion. We know they did act as hamappoi.

Subsequent legionaries of the Marian legion were all armed with pila even though most of them were not in a position to ever use them in the front ranks, implying they used them as rear-rank missile support. The late legion clearly used rear-rank missile support, possibly a carry-over from earlier legions. Speculation hat still firmly on.

[Erpingham]

Sure. I just find it curious that if that was the only way velites were used with HI why don't they form separate units but instead are co-pted to the maniples of the heavies - whose commanders keep an eye on how they are fighting?

Why would each line retain its own skirmishers, rather than deploying all skirmishers to the fore before the main battlelines clash?  Did they have organic light infantry for when operating alone but brigade them into a skirmish line when fighting with the rest of the legion?

[Ian61]

Onasander covers this:

There should be intervals [διαστήματα - diastemata, which means 'gaps' in this context] within the ranks [κατὰ τὰς τάξεις - kata tas taxeis; in this context kata means 'throughout'; taxeis in the plural applied to a single phalanx line means 'ranks'], so that, when the lightarmed troops have discharged their weapons while the enemy is still advancing, before the two armies come to close quarters, they may about-face, pass in good order through the centre of the phalanx, and come without confusion to the rear. For it is not safe for them to go around the whole army, encircling the flanks—since the enemy would quickly anticipate them in this manoeuvre, coming to close quarters and intercepting them on the way—nor is it safe for them to force their way through the closed ranks, where they would fall over the weapons and cause confusion in the lines, one man stumbling against another. - Strategikos: 19.1

Now that is interesting it does imply that skirmishes were 'supposed' to be able to retreat without hindrance or hindering the HI behind them through the gaps between the files. It is also annoyingly vague. Is this a general gap between each and every file or only a smaller number of channels to alow the HI to maintain a closer order?

[Justin Swanton]

Now that is interesting it does imply that skirmishes were 'supposed' to be able to retreat without hindrance or hindering the HI behind them through the gaps between the files. It is also annoyingly vague. Is this a general gap between each and every file or only a smaller number of channels to alow the HI to maintain a closer order?

The tacticians describe the different ways light troops could be deployed with heavies:

The light infantry and targeteers will be stationed by the general as the situation demands, sometimes before the line of battle, sometimes behind it, and on other occasions now on the right flank and again on the left; the first is called van position (protaxis), the second rear-position (hypotaxis), and the third flank-position (prosentaxis). Sometimes they are incorporated in the phalanx and stationed one beside each man; and this is called insert-position (parentaxis), because there is an insertion of different branches of the service, e.g., light infantry with hoplites - Asklepiodotus, 6:1

Parembolē [παρεμβολή] is the term employed when the men from the rearward ranks are inserted into the intervals between the men occupying the front ranks.
Protaxis [πρόταξις] describes the positioning of the light-armed troops in front of the armed infantry who make up the phalanx. The repositioned light troops then assume the role of file-leaders, or protostatae.
Epitaxis [ἐπίταξις] is the reverse of the protaxis and means the positioning behind of those who would normally be at the front.
Prostaxis [πρόσταξις] is the word used to describe the positioning of troops to either wing or to both of them, with the original line of the front being preserved. The other name for the prostaxis deployment of the phalanx is proentaxis [πρόενταξις].
Entaxis [ἔνταξις] occurs when it is considered appropriate to insert the light armed infantry into the intervals between each man of the phalanx. - Aelian, 30

[They call it] and adjoinment whenever a [light] troop from both parts or one of the formation is attached to the phalanx along the length of the formation's "forehead." They name it a [light] insertion when they place lightly armed men into the intervals [between] hoplites, one man standing along [another] man. [They name it] a [subordinate] deployment whenever someone arrays the lightly armed under the phalanx's edges as into a bent [formation]. - Arrian, 26

What is clear is that when deployed within a formation of heavies, the light troops occupied the space between each file of heavies. The heavy troops are hence in open order, each file occupying a frontage of about 2 yards, with about 4 feet between the shoulders of men in adjacent files. This is how the heavy infantry would be deployed when Onasander's LI fell back through them (since the tacticians describe no other way HI would create spaces for LI to fall back through).

[Justin Swanton]

I don't see the Gauls as "more conventional", but as the exception; not only Carthaginian but Italian, Hellenistic and Spanish armies would surely have substantial numbers of skirmishers.

The Livian legion (which certainly had to deal with Italian opponents) had only 300 leves. That would form a thin line 1-2 ranks deep if deployed in intermediate order. But that, apparently, was enough for a skirmish screen. If the velites are split proportionately between the hastati, principes and triarii, then the hastati get 400, enough to form a skirmish screen 2 ranks deep - pretty much the equivalent of the former leves. Would the Romans have felt the need to put all the velites in front of the legion, at least in a standard situation?

One could argue that Cannae wasn't standard in that the Roman infantry were deployed in unusual depth, too deep for velites further back to be able to reach with their javelins the enemy engaged in front of the legion. Rather than leave them deployed uselessly within the legion, it makes more sense to deploy them all in front and use them to damage the enemy's lights as much as possible, and maybe even the heavies if the lights can be driven off.

[Duncan Head]

The Livian legion (which certainly had to deal with Italian opponents) had only 300 leves.

There were also (if we believe Livy's account of the 4th-century legion, which many do not) the rorarii; who seem to have been administratively attached to the rear lines, yet, we are told, opened the battle as skirmishers:

"Rorarios milites vocabant, qui leui armature primi praelium committebant..." (Festus)
"Rorarii, dicti ab rore qui bellum committebant, ideo quod ante rorat quam pluit." (Varro)

Perhaps little had changed except names?

[Justin Swanton]

The Livian legion (which certainly had to deal with Italian opponents) had only 300 leves.

There were also (if we believe Livy's account of the 4th-century legion, which many do not) the rorarii; who seem to have been administratively attached to the rear lines, yet, we are told, opened the battle as skirmishers:

"Rorarios milites vocabant, qui leui armature primi praelium committebant..." (Festus)
"Rorarii, dicti ab rore qui bellum committebant, ideo quod ante rorat quam pluit." (Varro)

Perhaps little had changed except names?

Very good point.