Chuck and Charge

[Dave Gee]

(from Mark: this was moved from the Forums Discussion forum back here. Have changed topic subject also)

I was only discussing how the EiR would have used their pilums in combat as it is not easy to fling a spear when in a 'combat' formation. I would value input from anyone who knows (or even wants to speculate) about different weapons and tactics.

[mikefanta]

I was only discussing how the EiR would have used their pilums in combat as it is not easy to fling a spear when in a 'combat' formation. I would value input from anyone who knows (or even wants to speculate) about different weapons and tactics.

They didn't use them in close combat as such, except in certain circumstances.  They were generally thrown just before combat, (whether charging or receiveing a charge), and then followed up with the sword.  Many sets of rules count them as a close combat weapon, because they are only used just before close combat, and not as a general missile weapon.  On occasions they would not throw them in the case of sieges such as at Alesia, and when  the front ranks when receiving a cavalry charge.   

I am guessing somewhat but I assume that when recieving cavarly charges the front rank would kneel/brace their pila and the rank behind would hold their pila over a shoulder a bit like the British did in the Napoleonic era in square against cavalry, (but without the firepower of course).!!!!  The rear ranks would still throw their pila to break up the cavalry formation, cause confusion etc.

I always liked the idea in many sets of rules,  that once thrown, and the unit  charges  later in a  game again, they suddenly have their pila back.

[Erpingham]

I always liked the idea in many sets of rules,  that once thrown, and the unit  charges  later in a  game again, they suddenly have their pila back.

If we assume the "chuck & charge" model, the unit will not have thrown all its pila in one go.  The rearmost ranks will still have them.  So, in a second charge, we can assume either some exchange of personnel or some replenishing the front ranks ammunition by the men behind.

[Patrick Waterson]

Perhaps we should look at the legion drawn up for combat: the classical Polybian legion (c.300?-c.100 BC) has three lines: hastati (pilum-armed), principes (pilum-armed) and triarii (spear-armed).  Preliminary action is undertaken by the velites, who deliver their gaesa or similar light javelins (description at Livy XXVI.4.4), and who are recalled once skirmishing is over, taking their places as rear ranks of hastati, principes and triarii maniples.

Now, with the serious action about to commence, the hastati move forward as a body, eight deep (six ranks of hastati and two of velites), the principes and triarii advancing behind them until the signal to attack is sounded.  The principes and triarii halt to await their turn, the principes standing and the triarii kneeling on one knee, while the hastati increase their pace and simultaneously (all eight ranks together) loose javelins at the foe, twice in succession.  The front six ranks then simultaneously draw swords and, at a steady trot, slam into the foe, who has hopefully been disordered by the volleys of pila flavoured with velite javelins.  Closure upon contact telescopes the ranks from 6' deep to 3' deep, with the possible exception of velites who still have javelins; these might still follow up loosely and discharge what remains of their inventory indirectly over the hastati and into the foe.

For this approach to work, the entire line of hastati has to shoot simultaneously and get rid of its two volleys in quick succession.  Then, in unison, it must draw swords and close depth for melee (this closure handles itself once the front rank contacts the enemy).  Shooting by ranks would disrupt the order and spacing of the unit, because shooting imposes a temporary delay on progress and unless the entire unit is delayed at the same time there will be collisions (and quite possibly a certain amount of 'friendly eye poke' with pila-butts).

Hence, once the line of hastati has charged, its pila are gone.  It is in melee, and stays there until relieved.  Once relieved, it reforms behind the triarii and may or may not be re-issued with pila (I have seen no accounts of any such reissue except below).  The principes then do their thing and. if necessary, also drop back behind the triarii.  Like the hastati, they would never get to make a second attack: their pila would all have gone in the first one.

However, we do have at least one authenticated instance of battlefield recovery: Sentinum, 295 BC.  The Romans were fighting a Gallic-Samnite army, had beaten the Samnites and fought the Gauls to a standstill: the Gallic infantry, in extremis, had retired and formed a shieldwall.  The surviving Roman consul (it was one of those battles) noticed that the pila which had been thrown in earlier stages of the battle had been exposed by the Gallic withdrawal and were lying on the ground between the lines (a testimony to how few actually found targets) - he ordered them collected and issued to the legionaries.  This worked only because the Gauls were too exhausted to charge the collectors.  The pila were then duly discharged as part of the last Roman attack and the Gallic shieldwall broken.  This procedure, however, seems to have been very much the exception.

Patrick

[Duncan Head]

Of course Patrick's reconstruction assumes the "chuck and charge" model which gives its name to this thread, which by no means everyone supports these days. The best summary of (and perhaps the best case for) alternative models is probably Sam Koon's book Infantry Combat in Livy's Battle Narratives, for which I've submitted a review to Slingshot.

However most of the new work, with the exception of some of Adrian Goldsworthy's observations, has like Patrick's post concentrated on the Republican period. The original question, though, was about the early Empire. One significant difference is that Republican legionaries had two pila each but Imperial legionaries seem to have carried only one. Does this indicate that the later legionaries were much more committed to shock action rather than retaining the option of prolonged missile barrages against an enemy who holds firm? 

And what accounts do we have of EIR legionaries throwing and charging? I don't know the sources as well as I do those for the Republic, but my general impression is that they more or less take for granted that the reader knows how legions fight, so don't go into much detail.

Mikefanta should look at Arrian's account of how the legion resists cavalry - http://s_van_dorst.tripod.com/Ancient_Warfare/Rome/Sources/ektaxis.html. There is some uncertainty about whether the weapon held by the first few ranks is in fact a pilum or a thrusting-spear, but otherwise it has some similarities to Mike's suggestions.

[Patrick Waterson]

Indeed ... though as Arrian publishes this as a tactical system for use against the Alans, the question arises whether was it in use before, or developed during, his time.

Tacitus is our main Early Imperial Legion source, and his most revealing accounts of legions in combat are in the engagements of AD 69, the flavour of which suggests 'chuck-and-charge' by whole battlelines:

"Then the Othonianist infantry charged. The enemy's line was completely crushed..." (Tacitus, History II.26)

"Then the enemy's line charged with its ranks unbroken, in strength and in numbers superior; the Othonianists, scattered and weary as they were, met the attack with spirit. The ground was so entangled with trees and vineyards that the battle assumed many forms. They met in close [comminus] and in distant [eminus = spear's throw] conflict, in line [catervis = bands] and in column [cuneis = wedge(?)]. On the raised road they stood foot to foot, they pushed with their bodies and their shields, and ceasing to throw their javelins, they struck through helmets and breastplates with swords and battle-axes [securibus]." (ibid. II.42)

Patrick