With thanks to Michael (Theuns) and Miles (Dillon)
This document describes standardised ranks, methods for recognising officers on the field and a (default) method for assigning command. Adoption of some or all this convention would be a purely voluntary measure on the part of the units involved. This document doesn't deal with tactics.
As well as the general benefits of a command structure, it is my hope that this convention will make organised co-operation between units on the field easy, and provide a simple method for the spontanious creation of units on the day. This should allow diverse and dispersed "cells" to join and fight together. Suggestions and recomendations are not compulsary.
The rank of a unit commander should depend on the number of fighters commanded. Subordinate officers are recommended, especially for commanders above the rank of ancient (at least 2 corporals per ancient, 2 ancients per lieutenant etc). For every two or more officers of the same rank there should be a superior officer. It is not anticipated that units of less than four fighters require an officer.
Units using this convention should at least understand these titles, even if they are not used internally. Officers may opt to wear markings in the colours suggested (e.g on a sash, baldrick or crest), in order to be recognised on the field.
A unit or officer may wish to make particlar people responsible for some activity (e.g quartermasters, banner-bearers). Such responsibilities and titles do not denote battlefield rank.
The default method suggested for selecting or replacing officers is by vote of all the fighters in a unit. Units may choose to use other methods according to custom or preference (e.g an elected commander might pick trusted subordinates, or a unit might form around an obvious leader). However, voting is an obvious choice in the absence of other custom, especially when forming a unit "on the day" (subordinate officers are again recommended, especially with green fighters).
Cooperation between units on the field is desirable. It is anticipated that this will be achieved by one person assuming overall command of the allied units, leaving the existing command structure of these units largely intact (if an officer from one of the allied units is thus promoted, then a (temporary) replacement should be selected according to the customs of the unit).
There are a number of suggested ways in which such a commander may be appointed (in no particular order):
Common tactics (e.g "The Black Company Commands of Doom") are desirable but fall outside the scope of this document.
A very small allied unit (i.e those too small to require a corporal) might attatch themselves to an allied officer (if they are not adverse to this). If there are more than one of these units, it is suggested that they band together and create officers of their own.
Fighters (and officers) should follow the instructions of their (superior) officers on the field to the best of their ability. Officers are responsible for making fighters aware of who should be following whom.
Officers should not be replaced during battle unless they are unable to issue instructions to their fighters and no other officers are available; such replacement is temporary. Fighters seperated from their units should attatch themselves to another allied officer if possible.
The authority and duties of an officer off the field is the choice of the unit and will likely depend on the scope of the units activities.
While common practice is desirable between allied units, this document has been deliberately reduced in scope to just the most basic of points, so that (hopefully) it is agreeable to the maximum number. This should not of course, rule out additional agreements on common practice.
Alexander (Simeon)