Battlefield signalling

[Erpingham]

While details are skimpy, various trumpets and visual signals were used to effect command and control of Israelite armies.

It is interesting that many of the examples are actually to do with camp life, or assemblies, not battlefield signalling, much like the Medieval stuff.  Interesting to see different trumpets and horns being used for different purposes, as with the Romans.

So far, I think Patrick's initial observation is reasonably correct.  Camp and march signals seem common.  Most armies have "big picture" signals.  Only so far have the regulars of the Roman, Byzantine and Hellenistic periods shown a hint of unit signals to change battlefield orders.

On the visual signalling front, do we know what signals were made by the standards? Medieval standards were primarily markers for where commanders were and troops under command positioned or moved themselves according to what their standard did.  I get the impression from the regular examples that they had more to it than that.

[Duncan Head]

Only so far have the regulars of the Roman, Byzantine and Hellenistic periods shown a hint of unit signals to change battlefield orders.

There's a fairly sophisticated Chinese tradition of flag signals for unit manoeuvre using signal-flags in the colours of the Five Directions, but I haven't dug out any quotes for it. They also have the "big picture" signals - beat the drums for the advance, sound the gong for the retreat - from an early date.

[Justin Swanton]

Is there anything that indicates signals giving the timing of the execution of prearranged orders?

[Duncan Head]

There's the Sellasia flag-signals - "named unit will attack as arranged on signal A" - and one of those appears to be triggering an ambush by concealed troops:

It was arranged that the Illyrians, who had bivouacked in full order during the previous night along the river Gorgylus, close to the foot of Euas, were to begin their assault on the hill when they saw a flag of linen raised from the direction of Olympus; and that the Megalopolitans and cavalry should do the same when the king raised a scarlet flag.

The moment for beginning the battle had come: the signal was given to the Illyrians, and the word passed by the officers to their men to do their duty, and in a moment they started into view of the enemy and began assaulting the hill.

[Mark G]

I suppose Mel Gibson in brave heart doesn't count.
But it was one of the few bits that felt right.

[Justin Swanton]

There's the Sellasia flag-signals - "named unit will attack as arranged on signal A" - and one of those appears to be triggering an ambush by concealed troops:

It was arranged that the Illyrians, who had bivouacked in full order during the previous night along the river Gorgylus, close to the foot of Euas, were to begin their assault on the hill when they saw a flag of linen raised from the direction of Olympus; and that the Megalopolitans and cavalry should do the same when the king raised a scarlet flag.

The moment for beginning the battle had come: the signal was given to the Illyrians, and the word passed by the officers to their men to do their duty, and in a moment they started into view of the enemy and began assaulting the hill.

Ta Duncan. I imagine I can invoke this to justify a general rule.

[Dangun]

Normally pips are spent in a wargame to move troops.
But if signaling was limited to such big picture objectives, it seems more appropriate to spend pips to stop troops moving in accordance with the pre-battle plan.

[Dangun]

Polybius has an extensive section on fire-signaling 10.43 to 10.47.

I struggle to believe that his coding of the alphabet into torch signals was practical (10.45.6) despite him telling us - modestly, that it was, "perfected by myself."

[RichT]

For Classical Greeks a useful article is:
J. K. Anderson, "Cleon's Orders at Amphipolis"
The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 85 (1965), pp. 1-4

I'll summarize his main findings below:

Signals are divided by Arrian (Arrian Tactica 27) into three groups. Verbal orders, being most readily intelligible, are preferable when they can be heard above the din of battle. Visual signals may be obscured in the dust and confusion. Finally, the trumpet is useful in overcoming 'atmospheric disturbances'

Visual signals are found in Greek warfare from at least the fifth century B.C. onwards, but they are generally prearranged, either to convey the news that some foreseeable event has actually occurred (e.g. Thucydides viii 95-4; Xenophon, Hellenica i 1.2, ii 1.27.) or to coordinate the operations of two bodies of troops who are widely separated but in sight of each other (Thucydides i 63.2.). But the signals used ... are all obviously arranged for the occasion. There does not seem to have been any code by which the commander of a Greek army, at any rate in the classical period, could convey orders to his men on the spur of the moment by visual signals.

Trumpet signals, on the other hand, seem to have been codified at an early date. Distinct calls for the 'charge' and 'retire' are implied by passages in Thucydides, Xenophon and later writers.
Thucydides vi 69.2
Xenophon, Anabasis iv 4.22

Better evidence is provided by stories of generals who ordered their men to attack when the recall was sounded, and retire on the sounding of the advance
Polyaenus v 16.4
Diodorus xiv 52.1-5
Xenophon, Anabasis iv 3.29-32 [and here they are barbarians who wouldn't know the actual calls]

It is possible that there were other distinct trumpet calls for other contingencies, such as a sudden attack by the enemy.
Polyaenus i 41.3; Xenophon, Anabasis vii 4.16.

We do find, however, in Xenophon special signals for pitching or moving camp, sounded not upon the trumpet but upon the horn
Xenophon, Anabasis ii 2.4; Cyropaedia v 3-44

But though the trumpet might convey an 'executive' order with the definite meaning 'Charge' or 'Retire', it could not explain how the operation was to be carried out. Therefore, whenever possible the good officer would issue a 'cautionary' command beforehand, giving full details of the procedure to be adopted. Once more, examples are found in Xenophon's Anabasis.
Xenophon, Anabasis iii 4.3-4; v 2.12-14; vi 5.25.

The verbal cautionary order might be given by a single loud-voiced herald, like Tolmides of Elis (Xenophon, Anabasis ii 2.20; iii 1.46; iii 4.36; v 2.I18.), or it might be passed from man to man down the ranks, as was the watchword before Cunaxa.... It was better for the general to issue his orders to a 'command group' of senior officers, and send them or other 'appropriate persons' (Xenophon, Anabasis v 2.12) to pass on his orders to the different units. [Or for Spartans, proper command structure (Thucydides v 66.3)] In any case, he could not count on the verbal orders reaching everyone simultaneously. The cautionary order had therefore to be followed by the executive order, given by trumpet, which coordinated the operations of the different units and made certain that they all acted at once.

Cleon at Amphipolis (Thuc v 10 3-4) ordered the signal to be given as he began to issue his verbal orders [resulting in confusion and defeat].

[Jim Webster]

Normally pips are spent in a wargame to move troops.
But if signaling was limited to such big picture objectives, it seems more appropriate to spend pips to stop troops moving in accordance with the pre-battle plan.

We actually played some games of DBA with 'negative pips'
Basically you played pips to get a base to 'change it's state'.
So if it was stationary it too a pip to get it to move in a certain direction. If it was moving it took a pip to stop it or get it to turn.

We discovered that the big disadvantage was that you had to remember what the base had been doing last move. It did mean that retreats were good and could escalate if you didn't get in there and sort things 

Jim

[Dangun]

We actually played some games of DBA with 'negative pips'
Basically you played pips to get a base to 'change it's state'.
So if it was stationary it too a pip to get it to move in a certain direction. If it was moving it took a pip to stop it or get it to turn.

That is interesting.
So you have a basic state - advancing, halted or withdrawing, and then you pay with pips for any variance with the basic state.

[Erpingham]

That is interesting.
So you have a basic state - advancing, halted or withdrawing, and then you pay with pips for any variance with the basic state.

You might add facing to the basic state list.

I recall a set of rules I think by Simon Macdowell which used a "steady state" system but his was slightly more complex, some troop types being more difficult to start and others more difficult to stop.

It does overcome some problems with "stop/go" using pips but overall, does it lead to any less artificial battlefield behaviour?

[Jim Webster]

We actually played some games of DBA with 'negative pips'
Basically you played pips to get a base to 'change it's state'.
So if it was stationary it too a pip to get it to move in a certain direction. If it was moving it took a pip to stop it or get it to turn.

That is interesting.
So you have a basic state - advancing, halted or withdrawing, and then you pay with pips for any variance with the basic state.

Yes, so if a unit is pushed back and not followed up, it keeps going back unless you throw pips at it. But if your battle line is advancing towards the enemy battle line, once you've got it going, it keeps going.

Also it seems that you need about the same number of points as you do with the normal system 

Jim

[Jim Webster]

That is interesting.
So you have a basic state - advancing, halted or withdrawing, and then you pay with pips for any variance with the basic state.

You might add facing to the basic state list.

I recall a set of rules I think by Simon Macdowell which used a "steady state" system but his was slightly more complex, some troop types being more difficult to start and others more difficult to stop.

It does overcome some problems with "stop/go" using pips but overall, does it lead to any less artificial battlefield behaviour?

probably leads to differently artificial behaviour 

Jim

[RichT]

We actually played some games of DBA with 'negative pips'

As recounted in a Slingshot article an issue or two back IIRC (and as proposed in my series an issue or two before that). As I recall you found that behaviour under 'negative pips' was pretty similar to 'positive pips' - but to me it still feels better.

We discovered that the big disadvantage was that you had to remember what the base had been doing last move.

Use dust markers - coloured cotton wool. Behind the unit = advancing, in front of it = retreating, and no dust = standing still. No feats of memory required.