Military Technology: Using a Cloud of Dust in Ancient Warfare

 | MHQ  | 0 comments  |  Print This Post  |  Email This Post

In addition to indicating the presence of the enemy, dust was used, albeit imperfectly, to calculate the size, nature, and movement of opposing forces. There has been some speculation that high, thin clouds of dust correlated with the presence of cavalry, while dense, lower clouds could be associated with infantry.

Of course, the tendency to interpret clouds of dust in predictable ways could be used to advantage by an enterprising commander. Livy recounted a notable incident from Rome’s 293 b.c. campaign against the Samnites. The Romans had divided their forces, with Papirius outside Aquilonia and Carvilius twenty miles away outside Cominium, and planned to launch coordinated attacks against the Samnite towns. Before engaging the enemy forces at Aquilonia, Papirius had a legate and three auxiliary cohorts lead his army’s mules along a hidden route to a nearby hill. During the subsequent fierce battle, on the Samnites’ flank appeared a cloud of dust as though an enormous column of men were in motion to attack, Livy wrote. It was, however, the auxiliaries, who were riding the mules while dragging leafy boughs behind the beasts. Confusion swept through the Samnite ranks, as well as through the Romans’, as it appeared that a massive army had raised the cloud of dust. Papirius did his best to reinforce that impression by shouting loudly, Cominium has fallen, my victorious colleague is coming on the field, do your best to win the victory before the glory of doing so falls to the other army! He then ordered his troops to open ranks, and the Roman cavalry swept through and routed the enemy.

While dust clouds often betrayed enemy movements, they could also be important in finding a battle already underway. Thucydides, in his fifth century b.c. account of the Peloponnesian War, observed how the Corinthians stationed at Cenchreae correctly interpreted the dust clouds they saw as indicating the place of battle. As a result they hurried to the rescue of their comrades there.

Similarly, Caesar, during his first British expedition, was alerted to his troops’ peril by a cloud of dust. After he had sent a legion out from his camp to forage for corn, guards reported to him the presence of a large cloud of dust in the direction that the legion had headed. According to the great commander’s own account: Caesar guessed the truth — that the natives had hatched a new scheme. He set out with troops toward the dust cloud and found the legion hard-pressed by Britons, who broke off their attacks upon his arrival.

Once battle was joined, the resulting dust could prove a serious obstacle to both armies. Livy recounted the 426 b.c. Battle of Fidenae between the Romans and the Etruscans during which dust and smoke caused widespread confusion. The Romans had been enjoying the better of the fight at Fidenae when suddenly Etruscan reinforcements armed with firebrands, and all waving blazing torches sallied forth. Soon both sides were so armed. In the swirl and clash of men and horses a great cloud of dust and smoke nearly blinded both sides.

In the arid Middle East, swirling dust and sand complicated matters for both sides during the Jewish Revolt of a.d. 66-73. The Galilean general-turned-historian Flavius Josephus recorded how thick dust complicated Roman operations in the siege and conquest of Gamala. Later, during the battles at Jerusalem, Josephus described how the armies also were now mixed one among another, and the dust that was raised so far hindered them from seeing one another, and the noise that was made so far hindered them from hearing one another, that neither side could discern an enemy from a friend.

For the side losing an engagement, dust could still save the day. Diodorus Siculus, writing his universal history in the late first century b.c., attributed to the Persian general Darius the strategic use of dust to rescue his army. During his war against Alexander the Great in 331-330 b.c., Darius’ force was routed. As the Persian cavalry retreated in panic, with Alexander’s soldiers in close pursuit, the dust clouds became so thick that the victors found it impossible to tell in which direction their foes were fleeing. Diodorus thought that Darius had cleverly used the cover of the dust not to retreat, but rather to swing around and bring his troops to the safety of towns behind the Macedonian lines. Though the historian was probably factually wrong in his account, there is no doubt that on occasion troops fled to safety under the cover of a battle-driven dusty haze.

At the 48 b.c. Battle of Pharsalus, dust revealed to Pompey the Great that his cause was lost. Although outnumbered, Caesar thoroughly outgeneraled his rival. Encamped in a favorable position with a force much larger than Caesar’s, Pompey had elected to offer battle. Caesar naturally accepted. Pompey relied on his superiority in number of cavalry to prevail against Caesar’s right wing. Initially, Pompey’s seven thousand cavalrymen were successful, routing Caesar’s one thousand horsemen. But then the six cohorts that Caesar had placed in reserve on his flank swung into action, surprising Pompey’s cavalry. Thanks to that timely maneuver, the fortunes of battle were stunningly reversed.

The second-century Greek biographer Plutarch tried to imagine Pompey’s reaction as his cavalry’s early-battle flank attack failed. In his Life of Pompey, he recounted that when Pompey, by the dust flying in the air, conjectured the fate of his horse, it was very hard to say what his thoughts or intentions were, but looking like one distracted and beside himself, and without any recollection or reflection that he was Pompey the Great, he retired slowly towards his camp, without speaking a word to any man…. Caesar’s rival escaped to Egypt where he was murdered. His fate, like that of many a leader before him, had been written in the dust.

This article was written by Gregory G. Bolich and originally published in the Autumn 2004 edition of MHQ. For more great articles, subscribe to MHQ: The Quarterly Journal of Military History today!

Help HistoryNet by bookmarking to

Tags: Ancient-Medieval, Historical Conflicts, Military Technology

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site.