Medical Corps

[Pertinax]

Some years ago I read a book which was on the subject of important ancient battlefield innovations, (eg:assyrian jackboot for all season campaigning, Hyksos chariot for shock and mobility etc etc). I failed to note its title and also to take any decent notes .

The one section which stood out was related to battlefield retrival of Legion casualties , the basis of the article was that the flexible spacing required for handling the pilum then acquiring "targets of opportunity" with the gladius within a "personal" space also allowed easier extraction of the injured by dedicated medics. The gist of the argument being that if (as we know) you retrieve fast and treat fast you can save lives, your opponents perishing from the efficiency of the "usual weapons" and lying injured with only camp followers or their own legs to save them. The point of this as a crucial innovation being that you dont waste trained ,experienced men you get them back into fighting condition and dont need to train more people up,secondly morale is bolsterd by knowing you are going to get pulled out by your shirt if you are hit.The point was made that Legionnary life expectancy was actually higher than civillian life expectancy even amongst front line combat troops.So the Legion was no bad option for men in a subsistence economy

Can anyone point me to this source ? would anyone wish to comment on the notion of combat medics in relation to what is known of the attached Immunes in any camp?

I think the book was of American origin, possibly from a Military college or training establishment .

[Jimbow]

Is it amongst this list?:

RMA IN HISTORY: ANCIENT TO ATOMIC ERAS IN TWO PARTS:

 

This one perhaps stands out:

Holmes, Richard, ed. The World Atlas of Warfare: Military Innovations that Changed the Course of History. London: Mitchell Beazley, 1988.

 

Cheers,

Jim.

[Pertinax]

Yes it does-though the book I had in mind wasnt in atlas form-nevertheless I think youve given me a point to start searching from .

[FLavius Valerius Constantinus]

My Latin Teacher gave me book called Roman Medicine by John Scarborough

and has a big chapter on medicine in the Roman Army.I could scan it for you I think.I talks alot about the medical corps ranging from Caesars army to different other generals.Well the book only talks about how they served their purpose came to be one. It applies to only strictly medicine topic.

[Pertinax]

I dont think ive seen that one at ll -ill check on amazon ,thanks for the info.

[PerfectimusPrime]

Acording to my history book Roman army had the best medical care to that of any army untill 20th century.

 

The Arabs later on copied the Graeco-Roman medicine, advanced it very much, and made a basis for the modern medicine.

[Pertinax]

In fact the Romans appear to be unsurpassed in

killing power till the machine gun:

medevac and combat survivabilitytill the end of WW2:

staff organisation till WW2 and still superior to many present day armies :

tactical flexibility till recent times (vietnam)

and longevity as an effective combat force.

 

which is an awesome list,hand it to the assyrians though they were pretty good logistically as well

[Jimbow]

hand it to the assyrians though they were pretty good logistically as well

Not only at logistics, but it looks like they were better than the Greeks at medical science as well:

Greek Medicine v Assyrian

 

Cheers,

Jim.

[Pertinax]

and I forgot-seigecraft!

 

Actually the medical care is not just combat medicine ,as has been said before ancient armies were travelling reserves of disease and ill health bringing illness to enemies and re-importing it to home terrotories.The Assyrians took great care to make sure troops were fit and healthy at all times,likewise Roman troops so far as was possible, received a more stable diet than the civilian poulation. (The major secondary assyrian innovations were breeding of cavalry mounts and horse archers-after the jackboot for all weather campaigning).

An ancient army kept in the field for any length of time was ground away by actual combat, lack of rations and inherent morbidity from insanitary conditions and the close press of numbers.

[Onasander]

I just read an article recently in the Army Times (USA) that their building video stimulated rifle ranges within the Walter Reeds Medical Clinic (I think that's what it's called) for amputees to see if they can someday return back to work. Given that the casuality rate for a couple years of war in Iraq is barely over two thousand and I'm seemingly at more risk of dying in garrision than in the combat theater (honestly, every friday before we get off, we're given a safety meeting for the weekend.... I hear of more people dying from drunk driving or drowning in the Army than I read about combat deaths in the whole of the armed forces), I'm a bit more willing to stick my neck out on the line figuring so long as a got good cover and backup, even if I get hit, I'll still get the chance to recover, even if I lose a limb, and return to duty. If Luke Skywalker can do it, why can't I?

[Pertinax]

Good stuff Onasnader-if I remember rightly during the Vietnam conflict the USA lost more people in car accidents than combat fatalities? I also seem to remember a considerable proportion of US casualties were "accidents" relating to air and road traffic and regrettably friendly fire casualties. Again I wish id kept better notes of the paper I read but the essence was,the most dangerous age/sex cohort to be around is young males 18-25 ish: so if you then put this group near big pieces of machinery and weapons you are going to get "attrition" as a matter of course. This isnt to denigrate the level of training recieved but to point out that a lot of troops are tactical or specialists not neccesarily combat dedicated and may just as well drive a truck offf a road as inadvertently loose a clip off into someones leg.