• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Caesar's Rhine bridges

Captain_Swoop said:
Piercebridge was washed away a number of times and replaced with a stone pier bridge with wooden decking a few hundred yards downstream. Since then the river has changed course at that point and the bases of the stonework are now south of the river in a field.
Click to expand...

Quite true.

And these facts serve quite well to support my point.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Well, we know that the Legions built bridges elsewhere quickly when they were on campaign, they practiced it and had standard designs and carried tools and materials for doing it.
Click to expand...

And that would make them a direct pre-cursor to Engineers Corps in most Armies around the world (UK: "Corps of Royal Engineers", USA: "US Army Corps of Engineers"
 
The Commentary mentions other bridges in other places being built and torn down on the campaign. I suppose there are probably other texts describing similar feats the legions carried out. It strikes me that for the Rhine bridge to have become contentious as to whether it was really built or not, historians must have considered it in context with other bridges for which there's more evidence (like a battle fought after crossing it).

So, is the grounds for suspicion really that the feat was very difficult (if so, *how* difficult, comparatively?) or is it that so little was claimed to be achieved after crossing that there's no corroborating evidence the crossing was made?
 
smartcooky said:
And that would make them a direct pre-cursor to Engineers Corps in most Armies around the world (UK: "Corps of Royal Engineers", USA: "US Army Corps of Engineers"
Click to expand...

Exactly that.

A Legion was accompanied by surveyors that were part of the advance scouts ahead of the main army.
They would be looking for the best place to put the marching camp that night, they marked it out on the ground ready for the main column to build.
They also selected the best route and river crossings.

On the march the head of the legion would be arriving at the surveyed location and starting to build the ramparts for the camp while the tail end was still leaving the previous nights camp.

The surveyors were part of a group known as 'Immunes'. These were specialists and men excused from fighting because they were important to the legion in other ways. This included scribes, medics, carpenters, veterinarians, armorers, priests, soothsaysers and hunters.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Exactly that.

A Legion was accompanied by surveyors that were part of the advance scouts ahead of the main army.
They would be looking for the best place to put the marching camp that night, they marked it out on the ground ready for the main column to build.
They also selected the best route and river crossings.

On the march the head of the legion would be arriving at the surveyed location and starting to build the ramparts for the camp while the tail end was still leaving the previous nights camp.

The surveyors were part of a group known as 'Immunes'. These were specialists and men excused from fighting because they were important to the legion in other ways. This included scribes, medics, carpenters, veterinarians, armorers, priests, soothsaysers and hunters.
Click to expand...

Thanks much.

I was thinking about the same thing myself.

While I think that such a bridge could be built in ten days by 40,000 men.

However, I expect that several days before the construction actually began, the Romans surveyed the area in order to find the best place for a bridge, and once they decided on a location, then they obtained much of the building materials.

Then, once the Romans decided on a location and obtained the needed building materials, then they did the actual building work.

Therefore, when Julius said that his troops built the needed bridge in ten days, then what he really meant was that the actual construction phase of said bridge took ten days. But the entire construction process of this bridge from inception to completion probably took a good bit longer than ten days.
 
Crossbow said:
Thanks much.

I was thinking about the same thing myself.

While I think that such a bridge could be built in ten days by 40,000 men.

However, I expect that several days before the construction actually began, the Romans surveyed the area in order to find the best place for a bridge, and once they decided on a location, then they obtained much of the building materials.

Then, once the Romans decided on a location and obtained the needed building materials, then they did the actual building work.

Therefore, when Julius said that his troops built the needed bridge in ten days, then what he really meant was that the actual construction phase of said bridge took ten days. But the entire construction process of this bridge from inception to completion probably took a good bit longer than ten days.
Click to expand...

I figure a lot of the construction process was built into the DNA of a Roman legion on the march, by that point in history. The legion that arrives at the river arrives already equipped and supplied and trained to get right to work on the bridge.

Kind of like how, "ackshully!" the process of constructing a temporary bridge in modern warfare could be said to begin years earlier, with the design and manufacture of a bridgelaying vehicle in a factory thousands of miles from what will become the front. The army arrives at the river with the bridgelayer already in train. All that's left is to drive it up to the head of the column and lay out the bridge according to well-established procedures.
 
Last edited:
Crossbow said:
Thanks much.

I was thinking about the same thing myself.

While I think that such a bridge could be built in ten days by 40,000 men.

However, I expect that several days before the construction actually began, the Romans surveyed the area in order to find the best place for a bridge, and once they decided on a location, then they obtained much of the building materials.

Then, once the Romans decided on a location and obtained the needed building materials, then they did the actual building work.

Therefore, when Julius said that his troops built the needed bridge in ten days, then what he really meant was that the actual construction phase of said bridge took ten days. But the entire construction process of this bridge from inception to completion probably took a good bit longer than ten days.
Click to expand...

Yes, the crossing point would have been decided by the advance guard and engineers before the legion arrived. Not all the legions would have been dedicated to building and the entire manpower of any one legion wouldn't be dedicated to the task.
Before the bridge went in Auxiliary cavalry scouts would have crossed and probably a couple of cohorts of men to build a defensive position on the far bank.

Just to bring the entire army to the area of the bridge will have taken a few days and some of the legions would have built their camps up and downstream and back from the bridge site to form a defence in depth.

If a legion is camped for more than just a few days a 'strengthened' marching camp would have been built. They had a second outer ditch and rampart with the inner rampart and ditch being substantial than usual. Also the corners and entrances had wooden towers built and the land around out past a bowshot was cleared of trees and undergrowth.
Cutting down trees was everyday work.

They would cut the trees as they built, there would be no need to stockpile all the timber before they started.
 
theprestige said:
I figure a lot of the construction process was built into the DNA of a Roman legion on the march, by that point in history. The legion that arrives at the river arrives already equipped and supplied and trained to get right to work on the bridge.

Kind of like how, "ackshully!" the process of constructing a temporary bridge in modern warfare could be said to begin years earlier, with the design and manufacture of a bridgelaying vehicle in a factory thousands of miles from what will become the front. The army arrives at the river with the bridgelayer already in train. All that's left is to drive it up to the head of the column and lay out the bridge according to well-established procedures.
Click to expand...

M3 Amphibious Bridge.




US Ribbon Bridge

 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
And that would make them a direct pre-cursor to Engineers Corps in most Armies around the world (UK: "Corps of Royal Engineers", USA: "US Army Corps of Engineers"
Click to expand...

Many military historians have described the classic Roman Legions as being fully trained both as infanty and what we would call combat engineers.
 
It was the legions that built Hadrian's Wall, 20th Legion Valeria Victrix built a lot of it and the various forts along it.
They quarried and transported the stone blocks and some of them have inscriptions such as "The Sixth Cohort, the Century of Lousius Suavis built this"
Not just the wall, they built the road that runs the length of the wall behind it and the series of ditches and ramparts that protect the rear of the wall the 'Vellum' as it is called plus all the forts and 'mile castles' and the roads that lead to the wall. Also the bridges across all the rivers and all the other forts.
Busy buggers the Romans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom