Testudo

[staffordgames]

If forming and unforming a testudo is a simple maneuver can drilled Romans unform at the beginning of a move, march move and then reform a testudo at the end of the move?

[jim clarke]

If they can, then the rule needs to be re-written.

[stuartmcc]

If forming and unforming a testudo is a simple maneuver can drilled Romans unform at the beginning of a move, march move and then reform a testudo at the end of the move?

See Marching, page 13, 2nd column, "...a unit may not normally (drilled troops are an exception) make any manoeuvres when marching."

If the troops are drilled, refer to Drilled, page 102, bullet 2.
The short answer is that they cannot. Drilled troops may take a free simple manoeuvre then march, but may not make any further manoeuvres.

[staffordgames]

Thanks Stuart that is clear now.

[MarsUltor]

By the way, Stuart, the Mid Republicans were forming the testudo back in the 4th century BC in their wars in southern Italy. If you'd like to include that in the Maniple rules I can give you the source. (no partialiy there, of course...)

[stuartmcc]

Send it over!

I had actually considered not including it at all in the EIR but was convinced otherwise.

[MarsUltor]

Thanks for the consideration, Stuart. According to my book, the event took place in the Third Samnite War (so actually early 3rd Century, not 4th). The Romans were bent on avenging their humiliation at the Caudine Forks a generation earlier.

293 BC the Romans defeated a Samnite army outside the Samnite city of Aquilonia, the prepared for an assault on the gate and walls with ladders:

Livy (10.43)
"Orders were issued for scaling ladders to be reared against the walls in all directions and an approach made to the gates under a shield roof." (i.e., testudo, see below)

Here's the actual Latin text:

"ipse scalas ferri ad muros ab omni parte urbis iussit ac testudine ad portas successit."

I usually translate much more literally (can't stand it when authors take liberties with the text): "He himself [the consul] ordered ladders to be brought to the wall from every part of the city and he approached toward the gates by means of a testudo." The Latin word here, testudine, is the ablative case of testudo indicating use of something (Ablative of Means/Instrument).

Earlier on in 10.41, we also have the assault of L. Cornelius Scipio Scapula on the gate (I think from another side of the city?):

"secuti alii testudine facta in urbem perrumpunt deturbatisque Samnitibus quae circa portam erant muri occupauere." "Others following, with a testudo made, burst into the city and -with the Samnites confused (?) - occupied the walls which were around the gate." (the second part is much rougher than the first part mentioning the testudo, but you get the point....)

One could argue that Livy, writing hundreds of years later, doesn't know what he's talking about, or is inserting anachronisms. But the source says what it says. Anyway, I think it'd be kinda cool to have this continuity between the Mid Republican Maniple rule and the later Legion rule.

[stuartmcc]

Way back, I had thought that the testudo would be a tactic to use in sieges but was convinced otherwise. Might there be an argument that this would be appropriate for the Republican era with a transition from, perhaps, the Late Republican/Caesarian and Imperial periods?

[MarsUltor]

I think I understand your question: in other words, would it be used more in siege warfare in the Mid-Republican times? Perhaps. I'm quickly overstepping my area of expertise. The next notable/obvious use of the testudo I know of was Carrhae against the Parthians on the battlefield itself - and my understanding is that they were in desperate defensive mode against lots of horse archers. So I think the rules are right to include it as a battlefield option, especially if players play a lot of non-historical matches. Perhaps we don't hear much about it during the Mid-Republican era on the battlefield because there weren't a lot of very mobile missile troops like that being used in the western Mediterranean that were hard to close in with...??? Just a guess, but I'd think that Roman tactics depended on closing more quickly with the enemy than a testudo would allow...and probably not the way you want to get close to an enemy formation, all bunched up. But it would be an option that a commander would keep in his pocket if needed. Maybe some other opinions can help as well.

[argh]

I've 'seen' it used in open battle in the film the 'Eagle'

Does that count

Seriously though, good call Mr MarsUltor!

Just what the poor Romans needed, more power

[socalwarhammer]

There are many shield formations which were employed by Imperial Roman forces that are not included in game play. I wish some more were...such as the 'form-square' and 'wall or low-high' formations. I am glade the COE included the Testudo and I think it adds much to the tactics of game-play.

[argh]

Yep, I was only having a laugh you know!

I was using Romans and Testudo just yesterday, against filthy Indians.
Now that was a game of damage limitation

[MarsUltor]

I've 'seen' it used in open battle in the film the 'Eagle'

Does that count

Seriously though, good call Mr MarsUltor!

Just what the poor Romans needed, more power

Well, if I learn ancient Persian, Greek, or Cuneiform or Sanskrit and come across something that will help those armies then I'll certainly mention it! In the meantime I'm looking at my small Mid Republican units and wondering if they can really pull off a victory with almost all points spent on indepth-infantry and a shorter battle line than my opponent. I'll have to stick to the manipular tactics and might need that testudo...