|
|
|
|
|
|
|
army.
38 Any march in excess of 32 kilometers (20 miles) per 24-hour period is considered a forced march, and the U. S. Army's maximum recommended distances are 56 kilometers (35 miles) in 24 hours, 96 kilometers (60 miles) in 48 hours, and 128 kilometers (80 miles) in 72. hours.39 Based on these examples, and considering the rudimentary nature of most Mesoamerican roads, the Aztec rate of march was probably closer to the modern cross-country rate of 2.4 kilometers per hour than to the faster rate for roads. In subsequent calculations, however, I will present a range, using 9.4 kilometers per hour as the low and 4 kilometers per hour as the high, yielding a day's march of 19 to 32 kilometers (1220 miles). The effect of these rates of march is to produce a long column. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premodern armies usually did not formally march, but some discipline had to be observed to keep the army from fragmenting. The U.S. Army normally calculates a distance of 2 meters (6.6 feet) between men,40 the same distance recorded for the Roman imperial army.41 Furthermore, each soldier is calculated to occupy a square meter.42 Thus, a single-file column for an army as small as 8,000 men (a xiquipilli) would stretch 24,000 meters (15 miles), calculated without considering the accordion effect that normally occurs on a march. This means that the end of the column would not begin the march until 6 to 10 hours after the head had begun, depending on the march rate. This difficulty with stretching out the columns can be reduced by increasing the number of files in the column. In the Aztec case there is no good evidence for the width of the column, though some light may be shed on the question by examining road widths. Armies can march where there are no roads, including on the sides of existing roads, terrain permitting, but doing so drastically reduces their speed, lengthens the campaign, and significantly increases the logistical costs. Staying on roads is much preferred, being faster, safer, and less costly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mesoamerican roads were locally maintained and were swept and cleared of debris for the advancing army by inhabitants of the towns en route, but they were simply dirt routes, not paved highways. There are few indications of deliberate road construction for military purposes and none outside the basin of Mexico. Rather, roads were built primarily for local trade purposes, to connect a maximum number of towns,43 so they were only wide enough to allow single-file or, possibly, double-file two-way traffic. Anything larger was an extraneous expense. Thus, while local topography may have dictated |
|
|
|
|
|