Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Marching drill?

Expand Messages
  • Deb Fuller
    From the wiki: HOWEVER, if anyone begins to call out SIN DEX SIN , all troops will halt immediately, assume a tilted, broken, or otherwise malfunctioning
    Message 1 of 27 , Jun 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      From the wiki:  HOWEVER, if anyone begins to call out "SIN DEX SIN", all troops will halt immediately, assume a tilted, broken, or otherwise malfunctioning pose, and do their best imitations of a car alarm.

      Did you see the new drill manual that just came out? It doesn't look much different from the one that you use.

      Deb
    • holeva6433@comcast.net
      Seriously, what is wrong with SIN DEX SIN? We ve been using it. Lee ... From: Deb Fuller To: romandays@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday,
      Message 2 of 27 , Jun 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Seriously, what is wrong with SIN DEX SIN?  We've been using it.

        Lee

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Deb Fuller" <debfuller@...>
        To: romandays@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 9:07:04 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
        Subject: [romandays] Marching drill?



        From the wiki:  HOWEVER, if anyone begins to call out "SIN DEX SIN", all troops will halt immediately, assume a tilted, broken, or otherwise malfunctioning pose, and do their best imitations of a car alarm.

        Did you see the new drill manual that just came out? It doesn't look much different from the one that you use.

        Deb

      • Matthew Amt
            Great, so document it!  It s a modernism, and to me it just sounds ridiculous.     Matthew ...   Seriously, what is wrong with SIN DEX SIN?  We ve
        Message 3 of 27 , Jun 1, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
              Great, so document it!  It's a modernism, and to me it just sounds ridiculous. 

             Matthew


          --- On Tue, 6/1/10, holeva6433@... <holeva6433@...> wrote:
           

          Seriously, what is wrong with SIN DEX SIN?  We've been using it.

          Lee

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Deb Fuller" <debfuller@comcast. net>
          To: romandays@yahoogrou ps.com
          Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 9:07:04 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
          Subject: [romandays] Marching drill?



          From the wiki:  HOWEVER, if anyone begins to call out "SIN DEX SIN", all troops will halt immediately, assume a tilted, broken, or otherwise malfunctioning pose, and do their best imitations of a car alarm.

          Did you see the new drill manual that just came out? It doesn't look much different from the one that you use.

          Deb


        • dsmith7070@comcast.net
          Matthew, Lee,  et al, I m sorry that I won t be there at Roman Days. Dad s Parkinson s, etc., have me local most weekends. I do hope there can be future
          Message 4 of 27 , Jun 1, 2010
          • 0 Attachment

            Matthew, Lee,  et al,

             

            I'm sorry that I won't be there at Roman Days. Dad's Parkinson's, etc., have me local most weekends.

             

            I do hope there can be future discussions about drill.

             

            Some of the reenactors who have military service have convinced themselves that the ancient Romans MUST have sounded like "this," or "that."  Or that modern drill manuals can "simply" be translated by going word for word in the dictionary.

             

            Those of us who "do" Latin for a living have been working on oral language skills for many years now. We can use a functional Latin vocabulary from the 1st  century. You're right  Matthew, "Sin-Dex" has no ancient precedent. I have even tried to explain the rudiments of Latin metrical language that might be of some  help in working on the issue--but to no avail. I was even told by one commander, "I'm not going to learn Latin."  I tried to explain that an inflectional language like Latin does not "work" the way English does. Strange, that so many reenactors will spend thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours trying to look the part of a Roman--and then completely ignore the possibility of "acting" or "sounding" like a Roman.

             

             I was fascinated by what Dr. Junkelmann and his group used for their "drill manual" as found in the back of his The Legions of Augustus.

             

            Our goal in Legion XXIV was--and is---to use words that would have been understood by average Romans of the 1st century. If an "average" Roman commander of the 1st century were to use phrases used in Maurice, his troops would possibly fall on the ground and laugh, the language having changed that much by the 6th century. We have documented this in our drill manual, i.e., the one prepared by Dr. Max Nelson (University of Windsor) and I (Wayne State University). There are some funny poems of Catullus and Martial that point out examples of how the Romans really did care about how they "sounded."

             

            IAM SATIS...

             

            We will continue to hope there are "ears to hear" out there,

             

            Quintus Fabricius Varus

            (David Brian Smith)

            Legion XXIV

            Midwest Vexillation

             


            ----- Original Message -----
            From: holeva6433@...
            To: romandays@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 10:17:27 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
            Subject: Re: [romandays] Marching drill?

             

            Seriously, what is wrong with SIN DEX SIN?  We've been using it.

            Lee

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Deb Fuller" <debfuller@...>
            To: romandays@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 9:07:04 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
            Subject: [romandays] Marching drill?



            From the wiki:  HOWEVER, if anyone begins to call out "SIN DEX SIN", all troops will halt immediately, assume a tilted, broken, or otherwise malfunctioning pose, and do their best imitations of a car alarm.

            Did you see the new drill manual that just came out? It doesn't look much different from the one that you use.

            Deb

          • Deb Fuller
            ... Sorry to hear about your father. We ll miss you this RD. ... That s a good point. I ve seen many a decent living history persona ruined by a bad, farby
            Message 5 of 27 , Jun 1, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              At 12:53 PM 6/1/2010, you wrote:

              >I'm sorry that I won't be there at Roman Days. Dad's Parkinson's,
              >etc., have me local most weekends.

              Sorry to hear about your father. We'll miss you this RD.

              >Those of us who "do" Latin for a living have been working on oral
              >language skills for many years now. We can use a functional Latin
              >vocabulary from the 1st century. You're right Matthew, "Sin-Dex"
              >has no ancient precedent. I have even tried to explain the rudiments
              >of Latin metrical language that might be of some help in working on
              >the issue--but to no avail. I was even told by one commander, "I'm
              >not going to learn Latin." I tried to explain that an inflectional
              >language like Latin does not "work" the way English does. Strange,
              >that so many reenactors will spend thousands of dollars and hundreds
              >of hours trying to look the part of a Roman--and then completely
              >ignore the possibility of "acting" or "sounding" like a Roman.

              That's a good point. I've seen many a decent living history "persona"
              ruined by a bad, farby accent. Language is very much a part of
              culture just as much as clothing, food and art. In the more "modern"
              units, members work hard at learning the language and sounding
              correct, why not us Romans?

              Hopefully we can have you back next year and do some more spoken Latin!

              Deb
            • Andy
              David - Yikes, do what you need to do for your dad. You ll be missed but my thoughts are with you. As for drill and marching, I tend to agree that counting
              Message 6 of 27 , Jun 1, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                David - Yikes, do what you need to do for your dad. You'll be missed but my thoughts are with you.

                As for drill and marching, I tend to agree that counting cadence is a new thing, a modernism. I do not recall ever 'hearing' about any historical reference noting the soldiers counting step, and therefore I do not think it is needed in Roman reenacting today.

                We "know" they had a fairly standard marching step - but AFAIK, Vegetius does not mention -how- they kept step/time -if- they ever did. We have to try and un-ratchet ourselves with the notion of trying to superimpose our modern ways with ancient ways either to fill in gaps or dare I say - in the same flavor of Victorian "Romanesque" - this idea of "this is how the Romans -should- have done this!

                Medieval armies (Burgundian troop illustrations from Master ES) do not show them marching in perfect step, nor do I know of any medieval reference of soldiers marching to a cadence either, and they seemed to have been able to march a good distance without much trouble.

                I say blame the Prussians of the 18th century for this rigid marching-step thing :D

                I find myself leaning more towards writings like Aelian's Tactics in how possibly 1st Century Roman soldiers may have operated. Much like it's revival in 17th century Pike&Shot, this concept of a "Casual Precision" -as I call it- seems to me, closer to what Romans may have acted like.

                I don't -think- the Romans were super-precise either. But that is of course my own opinion.

                We know fairly sure the individual soldier was trained to not only act and fight in a cohesive unit, but also to be able to 'think on his own feet' if he was on his own, or, somehow got separated on the field ~ was there not some instance where a few soldiers found themselves surrounded but were able to re-organize and attack for while?
              • Matt Lanteigne
                David Smith said: Strange, that so many reenactors will spend thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours trying to look the part of a Roman--and then
                Message 7 of 27 , Jun 1, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  David Smith said:
                   
                  "Strange, that so many reenactors will spend thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours trying to look the part of a Roman--and then completely ignore the possibility of "acting" or "sounding" like a Roman."
                   
                  That should be the bloody quote of the year for Roman Reenacting. I concur...too much modern military stuff seeps into roman reenacting. It's funny, but I just started reading Simon Scarrow's books, and while amazingly great, I think Scarrow has seen "Full Metal Jacket" one too many times.
                   
                  The roman marching pace/step that is alluded to in Vegetius I always thought wasn't clear as to whether it was measuring the actual lenght of the pace, or cadenced step...I thought that was still up for debate? I mean, if we're agreeing that the Romans weren't as complex in terms of drill as we moderns tend to be, that raises the question of a measured step at all.
                   
                  Myself and the II AVG guys up here in Canada tried doing drill without having it called on the left foot (again, another horrible modern drill-ism), and without a precautionary and executive word of command. So instead of saying "staaaa....teeeyy" (state), we just said the word in one phrase, without dividing it. This worked beautifully. I think if people can let go of how they think drill should look (in the modern sense), I think we could do something that looks more appropriate.
                   
                  My two cents.
                   
                  All the best with your dad Dave, that cannot be easy.
                   
                  Magnus/Matt
                   
                   
                   
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: Andy
                  Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 5:49 PM
                  Subject: [romandays] Re: Marching drill?

                   



                  David - Yikes, do what you need to do for your dad. You'll be missed but my thoughts are with you.

                  As for drill and marching, I tend to agree that counting cadence is a new thing, a modernism. I do not recall ever 'hearing' about any historical reference noting the soldiers counting step, and therefore I do not think it is needed in Roman reenacting today.

                  We "know" they had a fairly standard marching step - but AFAIK, Vegetius does not mention -how- they kept step/time -if- they ever did. We have to try and un-ratchet ourselves with the notion of trying to superimpose our modern ways with ancient ways either to fill in gaps or dare I say - in the same flavor of Victorian "Romanesque" - this idea of "this is how the Romans -should- have done this!

                  Medieval armies (Burgundian troop illustrations from Master ES) do not show them marching in perfect step, nor do I know of any medieval reference of soldiers marching to a cadence either, and they seemed to have been able to march a good distance without much trouble.

                  I say blame the Prussians of the 18th century for this rigid marching-step thing :D

                  I find myself leaning more towards writings like Aelian's Tactics in how possibly 1st Century Roman soldiers may have operated. Much like it's revival in 17th century Pike&Shot, this concept of a "Casual Precision" -as I call it- seems to me, closer to what Romans may have acted like.

                  I don't -think- the Romans were super-precise either. But that is of course my own opinion.

                  We know fairly sure the individual soldier was trained to not only act and fight in a cohesive unit, but also to be able to 'think on his own feet' if he was on his own, or, somehow got separated on the field ~ was there not some instance where a few soldiers found themselves surrounded but were able to re-organize and attack for while?

                • Mark Graef
                  ... You are right Deb. The drill in the newly released manual Tactica is essentially the same drill that has been used at Roman Days since it started. The
                  Message 8 of 27 , Jun 1, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment


                    From the wiki:  HOWEVER, if anyone begins to call out "SIN DEX SIN", all troops will halt immediately, assume a tilted, broken, or otherwise malfunctioning pose, and do their best imitations of a car alarm.

                    Did you see the new drill manual that just came out? It doesn't look much different from the one that you use.

                    Deb._,_.___


                    You are right Deb. The drill in the newly released manual "Tactica" is essentially the same drill that has been used at Roman Days since it started. The basic movements are executed the same and the Latin commands are drawn mostly from the Strategikon. 

                    The Tactica was not purposely written to refurbish any one particular existing reenacting drill; if our research had taken us in a different direction, the drill that is described would have been much different than what we've been used to. 

                    Even though the manual has ample descriptions, illustrations, and documentation, the drill itself is still fairly simple.

                    And there is no "sin dex sin" used in the Tactica;  nor any cadence at all, or even the requirement to march in step. Experience using the Tactica at Castra Romana in November and AD43 Lafe in March shows that lockstep is not needed when the intervals and formations described in the ancient sources are used.

                    -- MARCVS EQVITIVS LENTVLVS



                  • Mark Graef
                    Military thinkers and scholars have been trying for at least 400 years to find some literary evidence of Romans marching in step to drums, music, or a cadence,
                    Message 9 of 27 , Jun 1, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Military thinkers and scholars have been trying for at least 400 years to find some literary evidence of Romans marching in step to drums, music, or a cadence, to no avail.

                      Of course the old adage about the absence of evidence not being evidence of absence applies. Finding positive proof of a negative, some ancient literary source stating the Romans never marched to a cadence, will be equally impossible.

                      The bottom line is that practical experience shows that ancient drill can be done without a cadence call, as long as the proper intervals are more or less maintained. Also, in most cases a formation will tend to unconsciously march in step after a while if the ground is even, making a cadence superfluous.

                      If you don't need something and can't document it, it's best not to use it.

                      --Mark



                          Great, so document it!  It's a modernism, and to me it just sounds ridiculous.  

                         Matthew


                      --- On Tue, 6/1/10, holeva6433@comcast. net <holeva6433@comcast. net> wrote:
                       

                      Seriously, what is wrong with SIN DEX SIN?  We've been using it.

                      Lee

                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "Deb Fuller" <debfuller@comcast. net>
                      To: romandays@yahoogrou ps.com
                      Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 9:07:04 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
                      Subject: [romandays] Marching drill?



                      From the wiki:  HOWEVER, if anyone begins to call out "SIN DEX SIN", all troops will halt immediately, assume a tilted, broken, or otherwise malfunctioning pose, and do their best imitations of a car alarm.

                      Did you see the new drill manual that just came out? It doesn't look much different from the one that you use.

                      Deb 




                    • rotmistrzb
                      There is one observation that makes me think large formations were always taught to march in cadence, 1000 BC to today. If you take a bunch of guys and put
                      Message 10 of 27 , Jun 2, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        There is one observation that makes me think large formations were always taught to march in cadence, 1000 BC to today. If you take a bunch of guys and put them into a formation, everyone in good open-order distance, and say , ready , march... this is what will happen:

                        The guys in front will start moving, then the guys behind them, then the middle one, the the ones near the end, and finially, some seconds later, the ones in the back.

                        I would argue that if formations matter this is simply not acceptable, and its unacceptability is obvious. when the guy in front takes a step the guy at the very back should also take a step in confidence he won't crash into the guy in front of him, so that the whole formation moves as one group.

                        Only maching in cadence training allows that to happen.

                        Worse, the same thing happens to whole units if they are not trained to march to the drum. The last batalion might start moving several minutes after the first, unnecessarily and dangerously stretching out the column. Watch the natural dynamics unfold in a modern parade next 4th of July, if you care to.

                        Having said that, I don't necessarily think the footwork left-right etc need be as structured as Prussian drill. I was unfavorabally struck by a New Variangian Guards video, marching exactly like the british & australian army does it, heel stomps and all. If everyone moves on time, which foot is where may not matter so much, unless you are in very close order (like in a testudo)

                        --- In romandays@yahoogroups.com, "Andy" <PalusButeo@...> wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > David - Yikes, do what you need to do for your dad. You'll be missed but my thoughts are with you.
                        >
                        > As for drill and marching, I tend to agree that counting cadence is a new thing, a modernism. I do not recall ever 'hearing' about any historical reference noting the soldiers counting step, and therefore I do not think it is needed in Roman reenacting today.
                        >
                        > We "know" they had a fairly standard marching step - but AFAIK, Vegetius does not mention -how- they kept step/time -if- they ever did. We have to try and un-ratchet ourselves with the notion of trying to superimpose our modern ways with ancient ways either to fill in gaps or dare I say - in the same flavor of Victorian "Romanesque" - this idea of "this is how the Romans -should- have done this!
                        >
                        > Medieval armies (Burgundian troop illustrations from Master ES) do not show them marching in perfect step, nor do I know of any medieval reference of soldiers marching to a cadence either, and they seemed to have been able to march a good distance without much trouble.
                        >
                        > I say blame the Prussians of the 18th century for this rigid marching-step thing :D
                        >
                        > I find myself leaning more towards writings like Aelian's Tactics in how possibly 1st Century Roman soldiers may have operated. Much like it's revival in 17th century Pike&Shot, this concept of a "Casual Precision" -as I call it- seems to me, closer to what Romans may have acted like.
                        >
                        > I don't -think- the Romans were super-precise either. But that is of course my own opinion.
                        >
                        > We know fairly sure the individual soldier was trained to not only act and fight in a cohesive unit, but also to be able to 'think on his own feet' if he was on his own, or, somehow got separated on the field ~ was there not some instance where a few soldiers found themselves surrounded but were able to re-organize and attack for while?
                        >
                      • Matt Lanteigne
                        This is an incorrect idea. You don t need a cadence to maintain a formation. If every other person in the front rank starts off on their right foot, and the
                        Message 11 of 27 , Jun 2, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          This is an incorrect idea. You don't need a cadence to maintain a formation. If every other person in the front rank starts off on their right foot, and the others on their left, and so on through each rank, people are still going to move at the exact same time, and keep the same distance apart, thus maintaining the formation.
                           
                          A cadence is simply a modern method to ensure a body of troups is marching at the speed on the same foot. However as we have demonstrated, this isn't a necessity.
                           
                          The only times a large difference in the pace lenght will occur between people is if there is a massive height difference, and even then it becomes negligable as the person visually ensures that they maintain their spacing.
                           
                          So while you may think your argument valid, there is no practical application of it.
                           
                          Magnus/Matt
                           
                           
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 12:15 PM
                          Subject: [romandays] Re: Marching drill?

                           

                          There is one observation that makes me think large formations were always taught to march in cadence, 1000 BC to today. If you take a bunch of guys and put them into a formation, everyone in good open-order distance, and say , ready , march... this is what will happen:

                          The guys in front will start moving, then the guys behind them, then the middle one, the the ones near the end, and finially, some seconds later, the ones in the back.

                          I would argue that if formations matter this is simply not acceptable, and its unacceptability is obvious. when the guy in front takes a step the guy at the very back should also take a step in confidence he won't crash into the guy in front of him, so that the whole formation moves as one group.

                          Only maching in cadence training allows that to happen.

                          Worse, the same thing happens to whole units if they are not trained to march to the drum. The last batalion might start moving several minutes after the first, unnecessarily and dangerously stretching out the column. Watch the natural dynamics unfold in a modern parade next 4th of July, if you care to.

                          Having said that, I don't necessarily think the footwork left-right etc need be as structured as Prussian drill. I was unfavorabally struck by a New Variangian Guards video, marching exactly like the british & australian army does it, heel stomps and all. If everyone moves on time, which foot is where may not matter so much, unless you are in very close order (like in a testudo)

                          --- In romandays@yahoogroups.com, "Andy" <PalusButeo@...> wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > David - Yikes, do what you need to do for your dad. You'll be missed but my thoughts are with you.
                          >
                          > As for drill and marching, I tend to agree that counting cadence is a new thing, a modernism. I do not recall ever 'hearing' about any historical reference noting the soldiers counting step, and therefore I do not think it is needed in Roman reenacting today.
                          >
                          > We "know" they had a fairly standard marching step - but AFAIK, Vegetius does not mention -how- they kept step/time -if- they ever did. We have to try and un-ratchet ourselves with the notion of trying to superimpose our modern ways with ancient ways either to fill in gaps or dare I say - in the same flavor of Victorian "Romanesque" - this idea of "this is how the Romans -should- have done this!
                          >
                          > Medieval armies (Burgundian troop illustrations from Master ES) do not show them marching in perfect step, nor do I know of any medieval reference of soldiers marching to a cadence either, and they seemed to have been able to march a good distance without much trouble.
                          >
                          > I say blame the Prussians of the 18th century for this rigid marching-step thing :D
                          >
                          > I find myself leaning more towards writings like Aelian's Tactics in how possibly 1st Century Roman soldiers may have operated. Much like it's revival in 17th century Pike&Shot, this concept of a "Casual Precision" -as I call it- seems to me, closer to what Romans may have acted like.
                          >
                          > I don't -think- the Romans were super-precise either. But that is of course my own opinion.
                          >
                          > We know fairly sure the individual soldier was trained to not only act and fight in a cohesive unit, but also to be able to 'think on his own feet' if he was on his own, or, somehow got separated on the field ~ was there not some instance where a few soldiers found themselves surrounded but were able to re-organize and attack for while?
                          >

                        • rotmistrzb
                          Cadence is not about right or left foot, it is about timing. As you point out, timing to achieve synchronious movement is necessary in formations. -Rick
                          Message 12 of 27 , Jun 2, 2010
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Cadence is not about right or left foot, it is about timing. As you point out, timing to achieve synchronious movement is necessary in formations.
                            -Rick
                            --- In romandays@yahoogroups.com, "Matt Lanteigne" <matt_lanteigne@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > This is an incorrect idea. You don't need a cadence to maintain a formation. If every other person in the front rank starts off on their right foot, and the others on their left, and so on through each rank, people are still going to move at the exact same time, and keep the same distance apart, thus maintaining the formation.
                            >
                            > A cadence is simply a modern method to ensure a body of troups is marching at the speed on the same foot. However as we have demonstrated, this isn't a necessity.
                            >
                            > The only times a large difference in the pace lenght will occur between people is if there is a massive height difference, and even then it becomes negligable as the person visually ensures that they maintain their spacing.
                            >
                            > So while you may think your argument valid, there is no practical application of it.
                            >
                            > Magnus/Matt
                            >
                            >
                            > ----- Original Message -----
                            > From: rotmistrzb
                            > To: romandays@yahoogroups.com
                            > Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 12:15 PM
                            > Subject: [romandays] Re: Marching drill?
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > There is one observation that makes me think large formations were always taught to march in cadence, 1000 BC to today. If you take a bunch of guys and put them into a formation, everyone in good open-order distance, and say , ready , march... this is what will happen:
                            >
                            > The guys in front will start moving, then the guys behind them, then the middle one, the the ones near the end, and finially, some seconds later, the ones in the back.
                            >
                            > I would argue that if formations matter this is simply not acceptable, and its unacceptability is obvious. when the guy in front takes a step the guy at the very back should also take a step in confidence he won't crash into the guy in front of him, so that the whole formation moves as one group.
                            >
                            > Only maching in cadence training allows that to happen.
                            >
                            > Worse, the same thing happens to whole units if they are not trained to march to the drum. The last batalion might start moving several minutes after the first, unnecessarily and dangerously stretching out the column. Watch the natural dynamics unfold in a modern parade next 4th of July, if you care to.
                            >
                            > Having said that, I don't necessarily think the footwork left-right etc need be as structured as Prussian drill. I was unfavorabally struck by a New Variangian Guards video, marching exactly like the british & australian army does it, heel stomps and all. If everyone moves on time, which foot is where may not matter so much, unless you are in very close order (like in a testudo)
                            >
                            > --- In romandays@yahoogroups.com, "Andy" <PalusButeo@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > David - Yikes, do what you need to do for your dad. You'll be missed but my thoughts are with you.
                            > >
                            > > As for drill and marching, I tend to agree that counting cadence is a new thing, a modernism. I do not recall ever 'hearing' about any historical reference noting the soldiers counting step, and therefore I do not think it is needed in Roman reenacting today.
                            > >
                            > > We "know" they had a fairly standard marching step - but AFAIK, Vegetius does not mention -how- they kept step/time -if- they ever did. We have to try and un-ratchet ourselves with the notion of trying to superimpose our modern ways with ancient ways either to fill in gaps or dare I say - in the same flavor of Victorian "Romanesque" - this idea of "this is how the Romans -should- have done this!
                            > >
                            > > Medieval armies (Burgundian troop illustrations from Master ES) do not show them marching in perfect step, nor do I know of any medieval reference of soldiers marching to a cadence either, and they seemed to have been able to march a good distance without much trouble.
                            > >
                            > > I say blame the Prussians of the 18th century for this rigid marching-step thing :D
                            > >
                            > > I find myself leaning more towards writings like Aelian's Tactics in how possibly 1st Century Roman soldiers may have operated. Much like it's revival in 17th century Pike&Shot, this concept of a "Casual Precision" -as I call it- seems to me, closer to what Romans may have acted like.
                            > >
                            > > I don't -think- the Romans were super-precise either. But that is of course my own opinion.
                            > >
                            > > We know fairly sure the individual soldier was trained to not only act and fight in a cohesive unit, but also to be able to 'think on his own feet' if he was on his own, or, somehow got separated on the field ~ was there not some instance where a few soldiers found themselves surrounded but were able to re-organize and attack for while?
                            > >
                            >
                          • Randi Richert
                            the same thing happens to whole units if they are not trained to march to the drum ??? Oh good, someone has finally found real evidence of what Hollywood has
                            Message 13 of 27 , Jun 2, 2010
                            • 0 Attachment
                              "the same thing happens to whole units if they are not trained to march to the drum"??? Oh good, someone has finally found real evidence of what Hollywood has been saying all along, Romans marched to the steady beat of drums.  As a fan of Civil War fife & drum music and a collector of instruments I have been looking for an excuse to build a "Roman Army" drum.  All sarcasm and irony aside, as someone who's spent lots of time on the drill field (CivWar RevWar and a whole lot of modern) I naturally want to impose cadence to tighten things up.  That doesn't mean it's right though. When it comes to maintaining formation and cohesion, the most important thing is that the troops all step off together at the same time and maintain their intervals.  That's more a function of discipline than of cadence.  You can have all the percussion and fancy commands in the world, but if your troops aren't paying attention they will still move like rag-bag accordion players.  That's nothing few good stripes from the vitis couldn't fix. Try watching the Old Guard in action at Arlington Cemetary.  They are them most precise human machines I know of and they don't need a Gunny growling gutturally to control them.  
                              To: romandays@yahoogroups.com
                              From: orlirva@...
                              Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 16:15:33 +0000
                              Subject: [romandays] Re: Marching drill?

                               
                              There is one observation that makes me think large formations were always taught to march in cadence, 1000 BC to today. If you take a bunch of guys and put them into a formation, everyone in good open-order distance, and say , ready , march... this is what will happen:

                              The guys in front will start moving, then the guys behind them, then the middle one, the the ones near the end, and finially, some seconds later, the ones in the back.

                              I would argue that if formations matter this is simply not acceptable, and its unacceptability is obvious. when the guy in front takes a step the guy at the very back should also take a step in confidence he won't crash into the guy in front of him, so that the whole formation moves as one group.

                              Only maching in cadence training allows that to happen.

                              Worse, the same thing happens to whole units if they are not trained to march to the drum. The last batalion might start moving several minutes after the first, unnecessarily and dangerously stretching out the column. Watch the natural dynamics unfold in a modern parade next 4th of July, if you care to.

                              Having said that, I don't necessarily think the footwork left-right etc need be as structured as Prussian drill. I was unfavorabally struck by a New Variangian Guards video, marching exactly like the british & australian army does it, heel stomps and all. If everyone moves on time, which foot is where may not matter so much, unless you are in very close order (like in a testudo)

                              --- In romandays@yahoogroups.com, "Andy" <PalusButeo@...> wrote:
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > David - Yikes, do what you need to do for your dad. You'll be missed but my thoughts are with you.
                              >
                              > As for drill and marching, I tend to agree that counting cadence is a new thing, a modernism. I do not recall ever 'hearing' about any historical reference noting the soldiers counting step, and therefore I do not think it is needed in Roman reenacting today.
                              >
                              > We "know" they had a fairly standard marching step - but AFAIK, Vegetius does not mention -how- they kept step/time -if- they ever did. We have to try and un-ratchet ourselves with the notion of trying to superimpose our modern ways with ancient ways either to fill in gaps or dare I say - in the same flavor of Victorian "Romanesque" - this idea of "this is how the Romans -should- have done this!
                              >
                              > Medieval armies (Burgundian troop illustrations from Master ES) do not show them marching in perfect step, nor do I know of any medieval reference of soldiers marching to a cadence either, and they seemed to have been able to march a good distance without much trouble.
                              >
                              > I say blame the Prussians of the 18th century for this rigid marching-step thing :D
                              >
                              > I find myself leaning more towards writings like Aelian's Tactics in how possibly 1st Century Roman soldiers may have operated. Much like it's revival in 17th century Pike&Shot, this concept of a "Casual Precision" -as I call it- seems to me, closer to what Romans may have acted like.
                              >
                              > I don't -think- the Romans were super-precise either. But that is of course my own opinion.
                              >
                              > We know fairly sure the individual soldier was trained to not only act and fight in a cohesive unit, but also to be able to 'think on his own feet' if he was on his own, or, somehow got separated on the field ~ was there not some instance where a few soldiers found themselves surrounded but were able to re-organize and attack for while?
                              >




                              Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Learn more.
                            • Matt Lanteigne
                              Exactly. Officers set the pace and the troops maintain it. Formations do not exist solely on cadence, in fact very little. That s modern thinking again
                              Message 14 of 27 , Jun 2, 2010
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Exactly. Officers set the pace and the troops maintain it. Formations do not exist solely on cadence, in fact very little. That's modern thinking again clouding judgement.
                                 
                                Magnus/Matt
                                 
                                ----- Original Message -----
                                Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 3:38 PM
                                Subject: RE: [romandays] Re: Marching drill?

                                 

                                "the same thing happens to whole units if they are not trained to march to the drum"??? Oh good, someone has finally found real evidence of what Hollywood has been saying all along, Romans marched to the steady beat of drums.  As a fan of Civil War fife & drum music and a collector of instruments I have been looking for an excuse to build a "Roman Army" drum.  All sarcasm and irony aside, as someone who's spent lots of time on the drill field (CivWar RevWar and a whole lot of mo dern) I naturally want to impose cadence to tighten things up.  That doesn't mean it's right though. When it comes to maintaining formation and cohesion, the most important thing is that the troops all step off together at the same time and maintain their intervals.  That's more a function of discipline than of cadence.  You can have all the percussion and fancy commands in the world, but if your troops aren't paying attention they will still move like rag-bag accordion players.&nbs p; That's nothing few good stripes from the vitis couldn't fix. Try watching the Old Guard in action at Arlington Cemetary.  They are them most precise human machines I know of and they don't need a Gunny growling gutturally to control them.  


                                To: romandays@yahoogrou ps.com
                                From: orlirva@yahoo. com
                                Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 16:15:33 +0000
                                Subject: [romandays] Re: Marching drill?

                                 
                                There is one observation that makes me think large formations were always taught to march in cadence, 1000 BC to today. If you take a bunch of guys and put them into a formation, everyone in good open-order distance, and say , ready , march... this is what will happen:

                                The guys in front will start moving, then the guys behind them, then the middle one, the the ones near the end, and finially, some seconds later, the ones in the back.

                                I would argue that if formations matter this is simply not acceptable, and its unacceptability is obvious. when the guy in front takes a step the guy at the very back should also take a step in confidence he won't crash into the guy in front of him, so that the whole formation moves as one group.

                                Only maching in cadence training allows that to happen.

                                Worse, the same thing happens to whole units if they are not trained to march to the drum. The last batalion might start moving several minutes after the first, unnecessarily and dangerously stretching out the column. Watch the natural dynamics unfold in a modern parade next 4th of July, if you care to.

                                Having said that, I don't necessarily think the footwork left-right etc need be as structured as Prussian drill. I was unfavorabally struck by a New Variangian Guards video, marching exactly like the british & australian army does it, heel stomps and all. If everyone moves on time, which foot is where may not matter so much, unless you are in very close order (like in a testudo)

                                --- In < A href="mailto:romandays@yahoogroups.com">romandays@yahoogrou ps.com, "Andy" <PalusButeo@. ..> wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > David - Yikes, do what you need to do for your dad. You'll be missed but my thoughts are with you.
                                >
                                > As for drill and marching, I tend to agree that counting cadence is a new thing, a modernism. I do not recall ever 'hearing' about any historical reference noting the soldiers counting step, and therefore I do not think it is needed in Roman reenacting today.
                                >
                                > We "know" they had a fairly standard marching step - but AFAIK, Vegetius does not mention -how- they kept step/time -if- they ever did. We have to try and un-ratchet ourselves with the notion of trying to superimpose our modern ways with ancient ways either to fill in gaps or dare I say - in the same flavor of Victorian "Romanesque" - this idea of "this is how the Romans -should- have done this!
                                >
                                > Medieval armies (Burgundian troop illustrations from Master E S) do not show them marching in perfect step, nor do I know of any medieval reference of soldiers marching to a cadence either, and they seemed to have been able to march a good distance without much trouble.
                                >
                                > I say blame the Prussians of the 18th century for this rigid marching-step thing :D
                                >
                                > I find myself leaning more towards writings like Aelian's Tactics in how possibly 1st Century Roman soldiers may have operated. Much like it's revival in 17th century Pike&Shot, th is concept of a "Casual Precision" -as I call it- seems to me, closer to what Romans may have acted like.
                                >
                                > I don't -think- the Romans were super-precise either. But that is of course my own opinion.
                                >
                                > We know fairly sure the individual soldier was trained to not only act and fight in a cohesive unit, but also to be able to 'think on his own feet' if he was on his own, or, somehow got separated on the field ~ was there not some instance where a few soldiers found themselves su rrounded but were able to re-organize and attack for while?
                                >




                                Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Learn more.

                              • Andy
                                In a similar vein to what Randi says about ACW marching and drill the ACW group I m with, we do a pair of parades on Memorial Day, and we do a couple of
                                Message 15 of 27 , Jun 3, 2010
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  In a similar vein to what Randi says about ACW marching and drill

                                  the ACW group I'm with, we do a pair of parades on Memorial Day, and we do a couple of practice sessions on marching in formation and marching in step.

                                  The only time our 'commander' belts out a cadence is every once in a while. For the most part we're using visual cues in our distance from forming up, and marching distance. Once you do this a couple of times, you sort of get into the rhythm or 'groove' about it, and you hardly need any drums or audible cadence to keep in step. Does a [drum] help? Well, sure, but, you can do it without a drum, too. With practice :D

                                  You also learn quickly if you're in more than one rank, to not crash into the guys ahead of you if you halt suddenly, or mark time, whatever. So if you have a group of people who have never or rarely done candence marching before, they will step on heels and be all jumbled - at first - but eventually it all melds together. We've essentially done this at past Roman Days, even when we had two "centuries" marching around the field separately. But that was less to do with keeping a cadence and more to do with visual keeping distance, and keeping a reasonably/consistent pace. it wasn't "perfect", but I seriously doubt the Romans tried to be that kind of perfect. Once you get into the mix, keeping a perfect cadence and tight formation is pretty much out the window.


                                  I agree with Magnus/Matt L about the idea of using the "State" as an unbroken word, but I also tend to like a 'preparatory command' (like in ACW - Squad...Halt!) Matt Amt has used "Con-Sis-Te" for the longest time, once you get used to hearing "Con-Sis" you pretty much get the hang of stopping on the "Te". But then to me it brings up the argument - do we need to be so precise because it looks good for the audience? And how 'practical' would that be in a tactical situation?

                                  I think both "State" and "Con-Sis-Te" are both equally valid and within the realm of possibility. I do also tend to think that with Legions so spread out around the Empire, there had to have evolved some regional variation in drill and commands. Who's to say the troops in Egypt were not incorporating Greek commands, since Greek is so predominant in that region? And, what about the Auxiliaries? How much native language was incorporated? Any evidence of it? (I don't know)

                                  I know it's more apples-oranges, but you have similar problems in the 15th - 17th centuries - Charles the Bold had to issue commands in 3-4 languages with his cosmopolitan army (nevermind the italian Condotteri he hired) - De Gehyen was translated into what, 6 languages only a year or two after it was first published?

                                  But now I'm heading off topic here :D
                                • Arthur
                                  I have five hard copies of the Public release Tactica, as well as CD s with it in the SOTW tent... we are selling them at cost for RD. I also have soem of the
                                  Message 16 of 27 , Jun 3, 2010
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    I have five hard copies of the Public release Tactica, as well as CD's with it in the SOTW tent... we are selling them at cost for RD. I also have soem of the faux "wax tablet" cheat sheeets we used at Lafe that look good for the field. There is also audio of the Tactica on the www.ad43.org website if you want to her how it sounds and works together... and no, there is no cadence!!!

                                    --- In romandays@yahoogroups.com, "Andy" <PalusButeo@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > In a similar vein to what Randi says about ACW marching and drill
                                    >
                                    > the ACW group I'm with, we do a pair of parades on Memorial Day, and we do a couple of practice sessions on marching in formation and marching in step.
                                    >
                                    > The only time our 'commander' belts out a cadence is every once in a while. For the most part we're using visual cues in our distance from forming up, and marching distance. Once you do this a couple of times, you sort of get into the rhythm or 'groove' about it, and you hardly need any drums or audible cadence to keep in step. Does a [drum] help? Well, sure, but, you can do it without a drum, too. With practice :D
                                    >
                                    > You also learn quickly if you're in more than one rank, to not crash into the guys ahead of you if you halt suddenly, or mark time, whatever. So if you have a group of people who have never or rarely done candence marching before, they will step on heels and be all jumbled - at first - but eventually it all melds together. We've essentially done this at past Roman Days, even when we had two "centuries" marching around the field separately. But that was less to do with keeping a cadence and more to do with visual keeping distance, and keeping a reasonably/consistent pace. it wasn't "perfect", but I seriously doubt the Romans tried to be that kind of perfect. Once you get into the mix, keeping a perfect cadence and tight formation is pretty much out the window.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > I agree with Magnus/Matt L about the idea of using the "State" as an unbroken word, but I also tend to like a 'preparatory command' (like in ACW - Squad...Halt!) Matt Amt has used "Con-Sis-Te" for the longest time, once you get used to hearing "Con-Sis" you pretty much get the hang of stopping on the "Te". But then to me it brings up the argument - do we need to be so precise because it looks good for the audience? And how 'practical' would that be in a tactical situation?
                                    >
                                    > I think both "State" and "Con-Sis-Te" are both equally valid and within the realm of possibility. I do also tend to think that with Legions so spread out around the Empire, there had to have evolved some regional variation in drill and commands. Who's to say the troops in Egypt were not incorporating Greek commands, since Greek is so predominant in that region? And, what about the Auxiliaries? How much native language was incorporated? Any evidence of it? (I don't know)
                                    >
                                    > I know it's more apples-oranges, but you have similar problems in the 15th - 17th centuries - Charles the Bold had to issue commands in 3-4 languages with his cosmopolitan army (nevermind the italian Condotteri he hired) - De Gehyen was translated into what, 6 languages only a year or two after it was first published?
                                    >
                                    > But now I'm heading off topic here :D
                                    >
                                  • rotmistrzb
                                    an article in the Hoplites book quoted Roman Aristiles Quintilicnus about use of the Saltpinx (sp?) /trumpet in the military, and its multiple distinct
                                    Message 17 of 27 , Jun 4, 2010
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      an article in the "Hoplites" book quoted Roman Aristiles Quintilicnus about use of the Saltpinx (sp?) /trumpet in the military, and its multiple distinct meles/calls for every manouver. This section can be read online in Google Books.
                                      -Rick
                                      --- In romandays@yahoogroups.com, "Andy" <PalusButeo@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > In a similar vein to what Randi says about ACW marching and drill
                                      >
                                      > the ACW group I'm with, we do a pair of parades on Memorial Day, and we do a couple of practice sessions on marching in formation and marching in step.
                                      >
                                      > The only time our 'commander' belts out a cadence is every once in a while. For the most part we're using visual cues in our distance from forming up, and marching distance. Once you do this a couple of times, you sort of get into the rhythm or 'groove' about it, and you hardly need any drums or audible cadence to keep in step. Does a [drum] help? Well, sure, but, you can do it without a drum, too. With practice :D
                                      >
                                      > You also learn quickly if you're in more than one rank, to not crash into the guys ahead of you if you halt suddenly, or mark time, whatever. So if you have a group of people who have never or rarely done candence marching before, they will step on heels and be all jumbled - at first - but eventually it all melds together. We've essentially done this at past Roman Days, even when we had two "centuries" marching around the field separately. But that was less to do with keeping a cadence and more to do with visual keeping distance, and keeping a reasonably/consistent pace. it wasn't "perfect", but I seriously doubt the Romans tried to be that kind of perfect. Once you get into the mix, keeping a perfect cadence and tight formation is pretty much out the window.
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > I agree with Magnus/Matt L about the idea of using the "State" as an unbroken word, but I also tend to like a 'preparatory command' (like in ACW - Squad...Halt!) Matt Amt has used "Con-Sis-Te" for the longest time, once you get used to hearing "Con-Sis" you pretty much get the hang of stopping on the "Te". But then to me it brings up the argument - do we need to be so precise because it looks good for the audience? And how 'practical' would that be in a tactical situation?
                                      >
                                      > I think both "State" and "Con-Sis-Te" are both equally valid and within the realm of possibility. I do also tend to think that with Legions so spread out around the Empire, there had to have evolved some regional variation in drill and commands. Who's to say the troops in Egypt were not incorporating Greek commands, since Greek is so predominant in that region? And, what about the Auxiliaries? How much native language was incorporated? Any evidence of it? (I don't know)
                                      >
                                      > I know it's more apples-oranges, but you have similar problems in the 15th - 17th centuries - Charles the Bold had to issue commands in 3-4 languages with his cosmopolitan army (nevermind the italian Condotteri he hired) - De Gehyen was translated into what, 6 languages only a year or two after it was first published?
                                      >
                                      > But now I'm heading off topic here :D
                                      >
                                    • Randi Richert
                                      According to Vegetius.... The music of the legion consists of the tuba, cornu and buccina The tuba sounds the charge and the retreat. The cornus are used only
                                      Message 18 of 27 , Jun 6, 2010
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        According to Vegetius....
                                         The music of the legion consists of the tuba, cornu and buccina The tuba sounds the charge and the retreat. The cornus are used only to regulate the motions of the colors; the tubas serve when the soldiers are ordered out to any work without the colors; but in time of action, the tubas and cornus sound together. The classicum, which is a particular sound of the buccina or horn, is appropriated to the commander-in-chief and is used in the presence of the general, or at the execution of a soldier, as a mark of its being done by his authority. The ordinary guards and outposts are always mounted and relieved by the sound of tuba, which also directs the motions of the soldiers on working parties and on field days. The cornus sound whenever the colors are to be struck or planted. These rules must be punctually observed in all exercises and reviews so that the soldiers may be ready to obey them in action without hesitation according to the general's orders either to charge or halt, to pursue the enemy or to retire . For reason will convince us that what is necessary to be performed in the heat of action should constantly be practiced in the leisure of peace.
                                         
                                         
                                        an article in the "Hoplites" book quoted Roman Aristiles Quintilicnus about use of the Saltpinx (sp?) /trumpet in the military, and its multiple distinct meles/calls for every manouver. This section can be read online in Google Books.
                                        -Rick
                                        --- In romandays@yahoogroups.com, "Andy" <PalusButeo@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > In a similar vein to what Randi says about ACW marching and drill
                                        >
                                        > the ACW group I'm with, we do a pair of parades on Memorial Day, and we do a couple of practice sessions on marching in formation and marching in step.
                                        >
                                        > The only time our 'commander' belts out a cadence is every once in a while. For the most part we're using visual cues in our distance from forming up, and marching distance. Once you do this a couple of times, you sort of get into the rhythm or 'groove' about it, and you hardly need any drums or audible cadence to keep in step. Does a [drum] help? Well, sure, but, you can do it without a drum, too. With practice :D
                                        >
                                        > You also learn quickly if you're in more than one rank, to not crash into the guys ahead of you if you halt suddenly, or mark time, whatever. So if you have a group of people who have never or rarely done candence marching before, they will step on heels and be all jumbled - at first - but eventually it all melds together. We've essentially done this at past Roman Days, even when we had two "centuries" marching around the field separately. But that was less to do with keeping a cadence and more to do with visual keeping distance, and keeping a reasonably/consistent pace. it wasn't "perfect", but I seriously doubt the Romans tried to be that kind of perfect. Once you get into the mix, keeping a perfect cadence and tight formation is pretty much out the window.
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > I agree with Magnus/Matt L about the idea of using the "State" as an unbroken word, but I also tend to like a 'preparatory command' (like in ACW - Squad...Halt!) Matt Amt has used "Con-Sis-Te" for the longest time, once you get used to hearing "Con-Sis" you pretty much get the hang of stopping on the "Te". But then to me it brings up the argument - do we need to be so precise because it looks good for the audience? And how 'practical' would that be in a tactical situation?
                                        >
                                        > I think both "State" and "Con-Sis-Te" are both equally valid and within the realm of possibility. I do also tend to think that with Legions so spread out around the Empire, there had to have evolved some regional variation in drill and commands. Who's to say the troops in Egypt were not incorporating Greek commands, since Greek is so predominant in that region? And, what about the Auxiliaries? How much native language was incorporated? Any evidence of it? (I don't know)
                                        >
                                        > I know it's more apples-oranges, but you have similar problems in the 15th - 17th centuries - Charles the Bold had to issue commands in 3-4 languages with his cosmopolitan army (nevermind the italian Condotteri he hired) - De Gehyen was translated into what, 6 languages only a year or two after it was first published?
                                        >
                                        > But now I'm heading off topic here :D
                                        >




                                        The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail. Get busy.
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.