Post by zedeyejoe on Apr 13, 2012 16:36:52 GMT
Yep thats what he would have liked to have happen.
I will give you a few more;
So this guy says that Republican Romans included archers in the legions?
So you can now see the time-period that he is talking about (what we would call the Late Roman) and that he would rather like to get them back to wearing armour and helmets.
A copy of this was included in the subscription to all Society of Ancients members some years back. But nice to have the link, so it was easy to find the appropriate quotations. Thank you.
The absence of helmet, armour or shields at that fort makes me think that it was for a later period, I think they thought it would be 300AD.
I will give you a few more;
It is a paradox that DE RE MILITARI, which was to become a military bible for innumerable generations of European soldiers, was little used by the Romans for whom it was written. The decay of the Roman armies had progressed too far to be arrested by Vegetius' pleas for a return to the virtues of discipline and courage of the ancients.
A third or fourth of the youngest and fittest soldiers should also be exercised at the post with bows and arrows made for that purpose only. The masters for this branch must be chosen with care and must apply themselves diligently to teach the men to hold the bow in a proper position, to bend it with strength, to keep the left hand steady. to draw the right with skill, to direct both the attention and the eye to the object, and to take their aim
with equal certainty either on foot or on horseback. But this is not to be acquired without great application, nor to be retained without daily exercise and practice.
The utility of good archers in action is evidently demonstrated by Cato in his treatise on military discipline. To the institution of a body of troops of this sort Claudius owed his victory over an enemy who, till that time, had constantly been superior to him. Scipio Africanus, before his battle with the Numantines, who had made a Roman army ignominiously pass under the yoke, thought he could have no likelihood of success except by mingling a number of select archers with every century.
with equal certainty either on foot or on horseback. But this is not to be acquired without great application, nor to be retained without daily exercise and practice.
The utility of good archers in action is evidently demonstrated by Cato in his treatise on military discipline. To the institution of a body of troops of this sort Claudius owed his victory over an enemy who, till that time, had constantly been superior to him. Scipio Africanus, before his battle with the Numantines, who had made a Roman army ignominiously pass under the yoke, thought he could have no likelihood of success except by mingling a number of select archers with every century.
So this guy says that Republican Romans included archers in the legions?
The manner of arming the troops comes next under consideration. But the method of the ancients no longer is followed. For though after the example of the Goths, the Alans and the Huns, we have made some improvements in the arms of the cavalry, yet it is plain the infantry are entirely defenseless. From the foundation of the city till the reign of the Emperor Gratian, the foot wore cuirasses and helmets. But negligence and sloth
having by degrees introduced a total relaxation of discipline, the soldiers began to think their armor too heavy, as they seldom put it on. They first requested leave from the Emperor to lay aside the cuirass and afterwards the helmet. In consequence of this, our troops in their engagements with the Goths were often overwhelmed with their showers of arrows. Nor was the necessity of obliging the infantry to resume their cuirasses and
helmets discovered, notwithstanding such repeated defeats, which brought on the destruction of so many great cities.
having by degrees introduced a total relaxation of discipline, the soldiers began to think their armor too heavy, as they seldom put it on. They first requested leave from the Emperor to lay aside the cuirass and afterwards the helmet. In consequence of this, our troops in their engagements with the Goths were often overwhelmed with their showers of arrows. Nor was the necessity of obliging the infantry to resume their cuirasses and
helmets discovered, notwithstanding such repeated defeats, which brought on the destruction of so many great cities.
So you can now see the time-period that he is talking about (what we would call the Late Roman) and that he would rather like to get them back to wearing armour and helmets.
A copy of this was included in the subscription to all Society of Ancients members some years back. But nice to have the link, so it was easy to find the appropriate quotations. Thank you.
The absence of helmet, armour or shields at that fort makes me think that it was for a later period, I think they thought it would be 300AD.