SoA Forums

History => Ancient and Medieval History => Weapons and Tactics => Topic started by: Justin Swanton on March 08, 2019, 01:50:43 AM

Title: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 08, 2019, 01:50:43 AM
The primary source evidence seems pretty overwhelming that it did - far more than for the hoplite phalanx doing othismos with its shields - but I've never seen the idea mooted anywhere.
      

Just as a sword presents the effect of its edge, increased by the stroke and the weight of the iron towards its back, so the rank of file leaders may be considered the edge of the phalanx, receiving its power, impetus and momentum from the mass of men that presses forward from the rear.
- Aelian, Tactics: 13

Compactly [literally 'in a circle'] they stand back successively so that each hoplite [phalangite in this context] in the front is covered by six sarissas and presses on with six forces whenever they bear down. Those standing in the sixth row press on with the weight of their bodies, if not with their sarissas, so that the phalanx's push against the foes does not become endurable and flight [becomes] difficult for the front row men. - Arrian, Tactics: 12

And the Macedonians, men say, with this line of spears do not merely terrify the enemy by their appearance, but also embolden every file-leader, protected as he is by the strength of five; while the men in the line behind the fifth, though they cannot extend their spears beyond the front of the phalanx, nevertheless bear forward with their bodies at all events and deprive their comrades in the front ranks of any hope of flight. But some, who wish to bring all the projecting spear-points to the same distance in front of the line, increase the length of the spears of the rear ranks. - Asklepiodotus, Tactics: 5

Of these sixteen ranks, all above the fifth are unable to reach with their sarissae far enough to take actual part in the fighting. They, therefore, do not lower them, but hold them with the points inclined upwards over the shoulders of the ranks in front of them, to shield the heads of the whole phalanx; for the sarissae are so closely serried, that they repel missiles which have carried over the front ranks and might fall upon the heads of those in the rear. These rear ranks, however, during an advance, press forward those in front by the weight of their bodies; and thus make the charge very forcible, and at the same time render it impossible for the front ranks to face about.
- Polybios, Histories: 18.30[/i]

And here is at least one example of this kind of othismos in action at Sellasia:

      
But when Cleomenes saw that his brother's division was retreating, and that the cavalry in the low ground were on the point of doing the same, alarmed at the prospect of an attack at all points at once, he was compelled to demolish the palisade in his front, and to lead out his whole force in line by one side of his position. A recall was sounded on the bugle for the light-armed troops of both sides, who were on the ground between the two armies: and the phalanxes shouting their war cries and with sarissas lowered [note that both phalanxes used sarissas], charged each other. Then a fierce struggle arose: the Macedonians sometimes slowly giving ground and yielding to the superior courage of the soldiers of Sparta, and at another time the Lacedaemonians being forced to give way before the overpowering weight of the Macedonian phalanx. Finally, the troops around Antigonus, packing their sarissas closely together and making use of the phalanx's unique close-order disposition, attacked the Lacedaimonians with force, driving them back from their field-defences. - Polybios, Histories: 2.69[/i]

A similar thing seems to happen at Cynoscephalae:

      
But one of the tribunes, with about twenty maniples, having made up his mind on his own account what ought to be done next, contributed by his action very greatly to the general victory. He saw that the division which was personally commanded by Philip was much farther forward than the rest of the enemy, and was pressing hard upon the Roman left by its superior weight - Polybios, Histories: 18.26[/i]

and Pydna:

      
For the Romans tried to thrust aside the long spears of their enemies with their swords, or to crowd them back with their shields, or to seize and put them by with their very hands; while the Macedonians, holding them firmly advanced with both hands, and piercing those who fell upon them, armour and all, since neither shield nor breastplate could resist the force of the Macedonian long spear, hurled headlong back the Pelignians and Marrucinians, who, with no consideration but with animal fury rushed upon the strokes that met them, and a certain death. When the first line had thus been cut to pieces, those arrayed behind them were beaten back; and though there was no flight, still they retired towards the mountain called Olocrus, so that even Aemilius, as Poseidonius tells us, when he saw it, rent his garments. - Plutarch, Life of Aemilius: 20[/i]

Putting everything together, it seems that a phalanx would jam its sarissas into the shields of its opponents then push. The phalangite shield, concave like the hoplite aspis, made this a workable tactic (the phalangite, like the hoplite, would still be able to breathe in the crush). The sarissas would not shatter as several were stuck in each enemy shield, each taking only a part of the strain of the push. The use of several sarissas for this purpose by each file would explain Asklepiodotus' remark about variable sarissa lengths: "But some, who wish to bring all the projecting spear-points to the same distance in front of the line, increase the length of the spears of the rear ranks."

Does one see this kind of othismos anywhere else in the sources? It is possible to explain it all away as a metaphor? (the phalangites drive back their enemies by the simple terror of their appearance or something like that)

And to the floor.

Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Prufrock on March 08, 2019, 03:39:25 AM
Polybius uses 'weight' to describe the force of the Roman formation at Cannae (3.115) in the Penelope.uchicago translation.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Mark G on March 08, 2019, 07:31:40 AM
Which of those sources actually use the term?

Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Andreas Johansson on March 08, 2019, 08:25:03 AM
Quote from: Mark G on March 08, 2019, 07:31:40 AM
Which of those sources actually use the term?

None of the tacticians (too lazy to check Polybius or Plutarch) use the word othismos, nor any recognizable form of otheo.

Note, BTW, that they all share the concern with making flight difficult for the front row men and the lack of any explicit claim that the enemy is to be pushed on: it's the rear ranks who are enjoined to push on the front ones, not the latter on the enemy.

I'm sure Justin, Patrick, and Hanson will disagree, but to me it reads a lot more like Maurice's othismos than that of the "orthodox" interpretation of hoplite combat.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 08, 2019, 08:51:02 AM
Curiously enough, the only thing that went through the mind of the bowl of petunias as it fell was Oh no, not again.

Firstly, we must remind ourselves the issue here is generated by accepting a hypothesis about othismos being about co-ordinated physical shoving.  If we move back from that to a model where the closing up of the ranks and an emphasis on stepping forward rather than back, enforced by the officers in the formation who are stationed at intervals through the file, we get something that would work for a pike phalanx. 

On the use of the word othismos itself, I wouldn't be surprised to see it in its general sense of "press of combat" .  Whether it ever meant more than that is something we've already spent many thousands of words disagreeing about, so perhaps we shouldn't go there again?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: RichT on March 08, 2019, 08:52:33 AM
An othismos argument! What a splendid idea!

Justin - I'm surprised you've never seen the idea mooted - I wrote a Slingshot article on this subject a few years back and we had a long long forum discussion on the subject too - 2016 maybe? I was sure you took part.

If anyone has any new evidence to offer, wake me up and I'll take an interest :)
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 08, 2019, 08:58:42 AM
Quote from: RichT on March 08, 2019, 08:52:33 AM
Justin - I'm surprised you've never seen the idea mooted - I wrote a Slingshot article on this subject a few years back and we had a long long forum discussion on the subject too - 2016 maybe? I was sure you took part.

Really? Point me to them.  :)
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Dangun on March 08, 2019, 09:03:16 AM
Quote from: RichT on March 08, 2019, 08:52:33 AM
An othismos argument! What a splendid idea!

Richard, I was giggling as I opening the thread, wondering whether you had responded yet.

I always get the whale and petunias confused.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Andreas Johansson on March 08, 2019, 09:10:45 AM
Quote from: Prufrock on March 08, 2019, 03:39:25 AM
Polybius uses 'weight' to describe the force of the Roman formation at Cannae (3.115) in the Penelope.uchicago translation.
FWIW, the original has baros, which has a range of literal and metaphorical meanings not too different from English "weight".
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Andreas Johansson on March 08, 2019, 09:17:19 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 08, 2019, 08:58:42 AM
Really? Point me to them.  :)

Here (http://soa.org.uk/sm/index.php?topic=2222.15)'s the thread about the Ss issue, with a fair bit of discussion of Richard's article.

A forum search for "othismos" will bring up sundry other threads largely rehashing the same arguments.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: RichT on March 08, 2019, 09:20:00 AM
:) Friday morning, tired, with a headache, end of a long week. What's happening on the SoA forum, for a bit of light relief? More argy bargy with Patrick Waterson (we're like an old married couple), and Justin starting another othismos thread. Can I cancel today and just go back to bed?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 08, 2019, 09:52:13 AM
Quote from: RichT on March 08, 2019, 09:20:00 AM
:) Friday morning, tired, with a headache, end of a long week. What's happening on the SoA forum, for a bit of light relief? More argy bargy with Patrick Waterson (we're like an old married couple), and Justin starting another othismos thread. Can I cancel today and just go back to bed?

That's all right (I feel like bed too).

Earmmm...do we have any evidence that Macedonian officers slept on beds during a campaign? Or was it just the general? Or did he sleep on the ground like everybody else? (couldn't resist  ;D )
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 08, 2019, 11:16:51 AM
Quote from: RichT on March 08, 2019, 08:52:33 AM
An othismos argument! What a splendid idea!

Justin - I'm surprised you've never seen the idea mooted - I wrote a Slingshot article on this subject a few years back and we had a long long forum discussion on the subject too - 2016 maybe? I was sure you took part.

If anyone has any new evidence to offer, wake me up and I'll take an interest :)

OK, I read (actually reread) the thread and remember the article.

I think we may be talking at cross purposes. Let's pretend (or hypothesize or agree, take your pick) that Greek hoplites never practised othismos, and the bit about 'press of shields' just means that opposing phalanxes got really close and personal. It remains that the manuals when speaking of the pike phalanx describe something that only be called othismos, or words have no meaning. The problem is that this 'othismos' or whatever you want to call it goes hand-in-hand with the use of sarissas. It's not about shield in contact with enemy shield. But it most certainly is about rear ranks pushing against ranks in front and the combined pressure driving the enemy back, using sarissas as a kind of ram. Is there any literature out there on this aspect of the pike phalanx?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: RichT on March 08, 2019, 12:20:33 PM
Did you read the right article? I wrote two - one more specifically on hoplites ('When push comes to shove: the meaning of othismos') and one more on sarissa-phalanxes (and Byzantines) - ('Bear forward with the weight of their bodies: pushing in Greek infantry formations'). Not the last word on the subject (to say the least) but covers the passages you quoted.

Quote
But it most certainly is about rear ranks pushing against ranks in front and the combined pressure driving the enemy back, using sarissas as a kind of ram.

Well as usual that is begging the question.

I can't point you to any particular literature on it - there's Matthew's An Invincible Beast who covers it to some extent. And Richard Taylor (forthcoming) but you'll have to wait a while for that. :)
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 08, 2019, 12:23:40 PM
Quote from: RichT on March 08, 2019, 12:20:33 PM
Did you read the right article? I wrote two - one more specifically on hoplites ('When push comes to shove: the meaning of othismos') and one more on sarissa-phalanxes (and Byzantines) - ('Bear forward with the weight of their bodies: pushing in Greek infantry formations'). Not the last word on the subject (to say the least) but covers the passages you quoted.

Quote
But it most certainly is about rear ranks pushing against ranks in front and the combined pressure driving the enemy back, using sarissas as a kind of ram.

Well as usual that is begging the question.

I can't point you to any particular literature on it - there's Matthew's An Invincible Beast who covers it to some extent. And Richard Taylor (forthcoming) but you'll have to wait a while for that. :)

Which Slingshot was the sarissa-phalanxes article in?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: RichT on March 08, 2019, 01:38:01 PM
How the f**k should I know?

Or less wearily - I'm afraid I don't recall - a couple of years ago I think. If you can't find it I can dig it out at some point in the nearish future.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Imperial Dave on March 08, 2019, 03:51:45 PM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 08, 2019, 08:51:02 AM
Curiously enough, the only thing that went through the mind of the bowl of petunias as it fell was Oh no, not again.


42
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 08, 2019, 04:39:17 PM
Quote from: Holly on March 08, 2019, 03:51:45 PM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 08, 2019, 08:51:02 AM
Curiously enough, the only thing that went through the mind of the bowl of petunias as it fell was Oh no, not again.


42

Don't panic.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on March 08, 2019, 07:39:14 PM
QuotePutting everything together, it seems that a phalanx would jam its sarissas into the shields of its opponents then push. The phalangite shield, concave like the hoplite aspis, made this a workable tactic (the phalangite, like the hoplite, would still be able to breathe in the crush). The sarissas would not shatter as several were stuck in each enemy shield, each taking only a part of the strain of the push. The use of several sarissas for this purpose by each file would explain Asklepiodotus' remark about variable sarissa lengths: "But some, who wish to bring all the projecting spear-points to the same distance in front of the line, increase the length of the spears of the rear ranks."

One detail I noticed about combat between two sarissa-armed phalanxes is the amount of back-and-forth which results (e.g. at Sellasia), as if one side establishes superiority of pressure early and the other gives back rather than stand and get skewered.  The second thing I noticed was that very few people appear to get skewered unless they try to press back (the Paelignian cohort at Pydna being a case in point).

When a phalanx encounters a legion, the pressure is generally all one way: the legion goes backwards in short order.  The exception, the Paelignian cohort at Pydna, ended up as kebabs.

This suggests to me that the pike phalanx developed considerable forward pressure, and opponents who wanted to live went with the flow, backwards.  Interestingly the exceptions seem to have been Greek hoplite phalanxes.  This could be understood as the hoplites, being both configured for and accustomed to a mode of fighting based upon pressure, had both equipment and training (or habit) capable of withstanding the pressure exerted by the pike phalanx.  Or that, being accustomed to an othismotic form of fighting, their natural reaction was to press back, which might not have been quite so good for their health, given the greater length of the sarissa.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Jim Webster on March 08, 2019, 09:32:51 PM
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on March 08, 2019, 07:39:14 PM

Interestingly the exceptions seem to have been Greek hoplite phalanxes.  This could be understood as the hoplites, being both configured for and accustomed to a mode of fighting based upon pressure, had both equipment and training (or habit) capable of withstanding the pressure exerted by the pike phalanx.  Or that, being accustomed to an othismotic form of fighting, their natural reaction was to press back, which might not have been quite so good for their health, given the greater length of the sarissa.

Yet it's interesting that in Diodorus Siculus, (sorry, no reference) when Alexander attacked Thebes, the Thebans brought their infantry out to fight in the open field but with secure flanks and seem to have held the phalanx, indeed the phalanx had to be withdrawn and replaced with a fresh phalanx
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: aligern on March 08, 2019, 11:10:56 PM
I too find it unresolved as to whetherPhalanxes  comebtogether shield against shield or pike against shield. Both would involve pressure upon the enemy and would enable one phallanx to push back another. If they contacted shield to shield then the pikes of the ohalanxes woukd have to penetrate the formation of the opposing phalanx.
A question I may well have pised before is why opposing phalanxes do not just spit one another. Clearly there is movement of the whole formation back and forth  and  clearly there are not enormous casualties on both sides. Also the projecting pikes of ranks two to five play some part. Renaissance and later pike may have some lessons in that they do mnot have shields and do not run upon each other so hard that the front ranks drop mutually. If tge phalanxes are fencing then overarm might be the best pisture, but if the pije heads are stuck into shields then it looks more sensible to have an underarm stance with pelta to the front.
Roy
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 09, 2019, 05:47:44 AM
Quote from: Jim Webster on March 08, 2019, 09:32:51 PM
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on March 08, 2019, 07:39:14 PM

Interestingly the exceptions seem to have been Greek hoplite phalanxes.  This could be understood as the hoplites, being both configured for and accustomed to a mode of fighting based upon pressure, had both equipment and training (or habit) capable of withstanding the pressure exerted by the pike phalanx.  Or that, being accustomed to an othismotic form of fighting, their natural reaction was to press back, which might not have been quite so good for their health, given the greater length of the sarissa.

Yet it's interesting that in Diodorus Siculus, (sorry, no reference) when Alexander attacked Thebes, the Thebans brought their infantry out to fight in the open field but with secure flanks and seem to have held the phalanx, indeed the phalanx had to be withdrawn and replaced with a fresh phalanx

Which makes sense. A pike phalanx in close order has one cubit or 48cm per file. Hoplites at the moment of contact with enemy have overlapping shields and 60 cm per file (about as close as they can go without the edge of one aspis hitting against the elbow of the adjacent aspis). Which makes it 2 hoplites per 3 phalangites. Assuming that Alex's phalanx was 16 deep to begin with, and doubled to a close order depth of 8 men, the Thebans would need only 12 ranks in their phalanx to be even-stevens as regards the number of men pushing against each other.

There is however a caveat: the further back a rank is, the less force it applies to the whole phalanx. Paul Bardunias tested othismos with re-enactors and came up with this table (the relevant line is crowd pushing, men facing forwards when pushing each other):

(https://i.imgur.com/PC8BC1n.png)

Which means a pike phalanx is more efficient at pushing that a hoplite phalanx. If Alex added men to the phalanx fighting the Thebans that would do the trick. Does Siculus say he did?*

*Addendum: here is the relevant passage from Diodorus (17.2.1-4):

      
At length Alexander saw that the Thebans were still fighting unflinchingly for their freedom, but that his Macedonians were wearying in the battle, and ordered his reserve division to enter the struggle. As this suddenly struck the tired Thebans, it bore heavily against them and killed many. Still the Thebans did not concede the victory, but on the contrary, inspired by the will to win, despised all dangers. They had the courage to shout that the Macedonians now openly confessed to being their inferiors. Under normal circumstances, when an enemy attacks in relays, it is usual for soldiers to fear the fresh strength of the reinforcements, but the Thebans alone then faced their dangers ever more boldly, as the enemy sent against them new troops for those whose strength flagged with weariness. So the Theban spirit proved unshakable here, but the king took note of a postern gate that had been deserted by its guards and hurried Perdiccas with a large detachment of troops to seize it and penetrate into the city.note He quickly carried out the order and the Macedonians slipped through the gate into the city, while the Thebans, having worn down the first assault wave of the Macedonians, stoutly faced the second and still had high hopes of victory. When they knew that a section of the city had been taken, however, they began immediately to withdraw within the walls,

So the Thebans are presumably deep enough to resist the pressure of the Macedonian phalangites even after fresh troops have replaced those already tired. Siculus though says in 17.11.4 that both sides used swords. Not quite sure what to make of that unless it refers to the fighting on the palisades and not at the main lines.

Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 09, 2019, 06:09:24 AM
Quote from: aligern on March 08, 2019, 11:10:56 PM
I too find it unresolved as to whetherPhalanxes  comebtogether shield against shield or pike against shield. Both would involve pressure upon the enemy and would enable one phallanx to push back another. If they contacted shield to shield then the pikes of the ohalanxes woukd have to penetrate the formation of the opposing phalanx.
A question I may well have pised before is why opposing phalanxes do not just spit one another. Clearly there is movement of the whole formation back and forth  and  clearly there are not enormous casualties on both sides. Also the projecting pikes of ranks two to five play some part. Renaissance and later pike may have some lessons in that they do mnot have shields and do not run upon each other so hard that the front ranks drop mutually. If tge phalanxes are fencing then overarm might be the best pisture, but if the pije heads are stuck into shields then it looks more sensible to have an underarm stance with pelta to the front.
Roy

Hoplite and phalangite shields were designed to not let a spearpoint pass through them and by and large were effective in that role. A phalangite trying to skewer an opposing phalangite/hoplite would have only two targets: the head or the thighs. A strike at the head could be blocked by raising the shield, and a strike at the thighs by angling the bottom edge of the shield up (as shown in the pergamon plaque). The strike would end with the spearpoint deflected or embedded in the shield, and since one or both phalanxes are advancing towards each other the wielder of the sarissa would not have the chance for a second strike. I'm guessing phalangites were trained to aim their sarissas at the shield.

The tacticians and Polybios give the distances pikes will project past the front rank when the ranks are in intermediate order, but in the case of pike othismos the ranks are obviously jammed one against the other. An average man's chest is about 10 inches deep. Add 4 or 8 inches for the shield, depending on which shield, and the total depth is 18 inches max, which enables pikes of the rear ranks to actually reach the shields of the enemy and add to othismos (the phalangites have six feet of pikeshaft behind their left arm - plenty to push forward).  I don't think it matters much if you hold the pike overarm or underarm. What matters is that forearm be across the stomach or chest and the left hand hold the pikeshaft very close to the body. It is the body then that pushes the pike forwards, not the arm muscles. All the phalangite has to do is keep his grip on the pikeshaft.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Mark G on March 09, 2019, 07:13:34 AM
Andreas seemed to understand my question, Justin seems not to.

I shall spell it out.

You have taken one definition of othismos, it is disputed and there are many others or equal validity,
You have then searched for translated uses of key words from the definition, concluded they must also be translations of the actual word othismos, and are describing the exact same thing, and then formed your question.

If your question is to have any merit, you must forget whichever definition of othismos you happen to prefer, go and find actual uses in the original sources of the word itself; and then confirm that those passages apply to something comparable to the hoplite situation, and then you can propose your question in relation to that passage.

At that point, we can debate the meaning of othismos in relation to phalangites

Or we can recall the many interminable threads on the most tedious subject line in ancient military history, and just ignore it, as we ignore new biblical dating theories.

Subjects which not coincidentally seem to attract the same minds..,
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 09, 2019, 07:33:15 AM
Quote from: Mark G on March 09, 2019, 07:13:34 AM
Andreas seemed to understand my question, Justin seems not to.

I shall spell it out.

You have taken one definition of othismos, it is disputed and there are many others or equal validity,
You have then searched for translated uses of key words from the definition, concluded they must also be translations of the actual word othismos, and are describing the exact same thing, and then formed your question.

If your question is to have any merit, you must forget whichever definition of othismos you happen to prefer, go and find actual uses in the original sources of the word itself; and then confirm that those passages apply to something comparable to the hoplite situation, and then you can propose your question in relation to that passage.

At that point, we can debate the meaning of othismos in relation to phalangites

Or we can recall the many interminable threads on the most tedious subject line in ancient military history, and just ignore it, as we ignore new biblical dating theories.

Subjects which not coincidentally seem to attract the same minds..,

Forget about the word 'othismos'. I just use it for convenience.

Take the manuals' very clear and detailed description of a pike phalanx's pushing process (cf. first post) and go with that. Give it another name if you prefer - 'sarissmos'?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on March 09, 2019, 08:56:47 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 09, 2019, 05:47:44 AM
So the Thebans are presumably deep enough to resist the pressure of the Macedonian phalangites even after fresh troops have replaced those already tired. Siculus though says in 17.11.4 that both sides used swords. Not quite sure what to make of that unless it refers to the fighting on the palisades and not at the main lines.

He says that both sides started by flinging missiles and then reverted to swords.  This is typical Roman behaviour, and I wonder if Diodorus was having a slightly careless day and this simply equates to 'they closed and fought'.  The idea of imitation legions in Greece in Alexander's time is a bit odd, to say the least.

Or Diodorus may have been genuinely ignorant of the Macedonian army's weaponry.  The word 'pike' does not appear in the English, nor 'sarissa', when attempting a word search of the entire text of Diodorus at Perseus, with the exception of a single scholar-added footnote.

Although Diodorus does not explicitly state this, the Thebans may well have formed up in their characteristic deep formation: 25 deep was the norm; they might even have used Epaminondas' 50 deep if there were enough of them on a narrow frontage.  Such a formation could absorb a lot of shoving and thrusting and negate a lot of pressure.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 10, 2019, 06:28:26 AM
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on March 08, 2019, 07:39:14 PM
One detail I noticed about combat between two sarissa-armed phalanxes is the amount of back-and-forth which results (e.g. at Sellasia), as if one side establishes superiority of pressure early and the other gives back rather than stand and get skewered.  The second thing I noticed was that very few people appear to get skewered unless they try to press back (the Paelignian cohort at Pydna being a case in point).

Could the Paelignian cohort's shields not have been designed to withstand the pressure of a sarissa head? Do we know how those shields were constructed?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 10, 2019, 06:36:11 AM
Working on the hypothesis that sarissmos (I'm avoid the O-word from now on) was an important component of pike warfare, that would explain the 16-deep files that the manuals state were standard for a pike phalanx. Bardunias demonstrated that after the 8th rank there is little additional pressure supplied to a file pushing forwards. Which means that in close order (used by the phalanx when dealing with difficult opponents like hoplites or legionaries) 8 ranks was the optimum depth for sarissmos, and thus 16 ranks would be the depth of the intermediate order arrangement that was used for grand tactical manoeuvring on the battlefield and fighting easier opponents. It also explains why the 16 rank file of Alexander was composed of two half-files, i.e. the half file was used as a separate entity in close order only for exceptional circumstances and was usually just part of a complete 16-man file. All speculative but it fits.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on March 10, 2019, 08:35:44 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 10, 2019, 06:28:26 AM
Could the Paelignian cohort's shields not have been designed to withstand the pressure of a sarissa head? Do we know how those shields were constructed?

Someone like Duncan will know all that is known about construction about Roman shields in any given period.

My own input is that all shields were resistant up to a point (no pun intended); as a rule, that point was only reached when someone decided to stand or push back against the sarissa points.  Again, the Paelignian cohort at Cynoscephalae is my guideline here: the cohort standard bearer threw the unit standard into the Macedonian ranks, the soldiers pushed forward to retrieve it and many of them were thrust through; they were the only Roman unit recorded as taking substantial casualties.

Hence my conclusion would be that the shields were designed to withstand pressure - or to be more accurate, penetration - to an extent whioch served for normal use, but that extent could easily be surpassed if one added counter-pressure of one's own.  In the Paelignians' case, they managed to surpass it with sufficient margin for the Macedonian weapons to also penetrate their armour.

It would of course be possible to have designed a totally sarissa-proof shield, but this would have been too heavy to use, reminiscent of the naval designers' axiom that a totally protected battleship cannot float.  All shields are a compromise between weight and effective functioning, often with cost and convenience of manufacture being added in.  They tend to be good enough for their usual operating environment.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 10, 2019, 09:38:30 AM
Can I just say thanks to Justin for moving this on from another stale othismos debate?  Talking about how phalanxes fought their own kind and other troop types seems a more fruitful area of enquiry.

One question based on Renaissance pike fighting.  There were two basic methods - either you indulged in pike fencing (in which you avoided too much pressure on the front rank so they could do their stuff) or you went for "push of pike", where the ranks closed up more tightly and you sought to use momentum to drive your opponent back or down (Monluc talks of front ranks being knocked off their feet).  Push of pike rapidly tangled up if the target didn't give ground and front rankers ditched pikes and went for swords.  Do we see similar variations in tactics within Hellenistic phalanxes?  We know that hoplites when they got to "shield to shield" would ditch spears and go for swords - did phalangites do this or did they keep a rigid formation to keep themselves several metres from the enemy?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 10, 2019, 11:09:41 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 10, 2019, 09:38:30 AM
One question based on Renaissance pike fighting.  There were two basic methods - either you indulged in pike fencing (in which you avoided too much pressure on the front rank so they could do their stuff) or you went for "push of pike", where the ranks closed up more tightly and you sought to use momentum to drive your opponent back or down (Monluc talks of front ranks being knocked off their feet).  Push of pike rapidly tangled up if the target didn't give ground and front rankers ditched pikes and went for swords.  Do we see similar variations in tactics within Hellenistic phalanxes?  We know that hoplites when they got to "shield to shield" would ditch spears and go for swords - did phalangites do this or did they keep a rigid formation to keep themselves several metres from the enemy?

There's no mention anywhere that I know of a pike phalanx that maintained its order getting to shield-to-shield contact with its opponent, and the fight at Sellasia, with a prolonged push and counter push between the Macedonians and Spartans during which everyone kept - and used - their sarissas would suggest that a phalangite was not meant to let go of his sarissa for any reason. The manuals also seem clear that the pushing process went with the use of sarissas and never without them.

On the other hand phalangites always carried a sword or at least a long knife as an auxiliary weapon which suggests that getting to shield-to-shield contact was a possibility they had to be prepared for.

Doesn't Monluc say that a charge of pike against pike resulted in the front rank of both sides going down? (presumably killed) I would imagine that Macedonian/Successor pikers in the front rank stood a good chance of getting killed, shields or no shields. What are the casualty rates for winners of a sarissa vs sarissa battle? Usual 5%?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 10, 2019, 11:34:25 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 10, 2019, 11:09:41 AM

Doesn't Monluc say that a charge of pike against pike resulted in the front rank of both sides going down? (presumably killed)

all on a suddain rush'd in among them, a good many of us at least, for as well on their side as ours all the first Ranks, either with push of Pikes or the Shock at the encounter, were overturn'd; neither is it possible amongst Foot to see a greater fury: the second Rank and the third were the cause of our victory; for the last so pushed them on that they fell in upon the heels of one another, and as ours press'd in, the Enemy was still driven back:

Monluc, who is leading from the front, pike in hand, is knocked down three times.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 10, 2019, 11:38:24 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 10, 2019, 11:34:25 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 10, 2019, 11:09:41 AM

Doesn't Monluc say that a charge of pike against pike resulted in the front rank of both sides going down? (presumably killed)

all on a suddain rush'd in among them, a good many of us at least, for as well on their side as ours all the first Ranks, either with push of Pikes or the Shock at the encounter, were overturn'd; neither is it possible amongst Foot to see a greater fury: the second Rank and the third were the cause of our victory; for the last so pushed them on that they fell in upon the heels of one another, and as ours press'd in, the Enemy was still driven back:

Monluc, who is leading from the front, pike in hand, is knocked down three times.

So they live (or many of them do). Which suggests that it's not so easy to just kill an opposing pikeman by pushing your pikehead through his face. I notice that neither Renaissance pikers nor phalangites had headgear that protected their face in the way Corinthian helmets protected the faces of hoplites - I'm guessing that when in shield-to-shield contact with an enemy hoplite, sticking a knife in his eye was a viable proposition.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: aligern on March 10, 2019, 03:06:28 PM
If we think about it the lijelihood of an entire front rank going down has to be small, because no one would sign up for that duty, especially as with a levelled row of sarissa points the destruction of the front rankers would be mutual. If we can assume that mutual death is avoided by catching the points on the shields then the explanation of the retrograde motion is that a phalanx is physically pushed back by its opponents. That won't be a matter of shield on shield, but it does seem very likely that the men in the ranks after the first are pushing on the back of their front ranker and those being pushed are trying the same and failing.
Is there an alternative model as to how poking and jousting would cause a similar fall back?
Roy
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Jim Webster on March 10, 2019, 03:34:48 PM
Quote from: aligern on March 10, 2019, 03:06:28 PM
If we think about it the lijelihood of an entire front rank going down has to be small, because no one would sign up for that duty, especially as with a levelled row of sarissa points the destruction of the front rankers would be mutual. If we can assume that mutual death is avoided by catching the points on the shields then the explanation of the retrograde motion is that a phalanx is physically pushed back by its opponents. That won't be a matter of shield on shield, but it does seem very likely that the men in the ranks after the first are pushing on the back of their front ranker and those being pushed are trying the same and failing.
Is there an alternative model as to how poking and jousting would cause a similar fall back?
Roy

not disagreeing Roy,but I think there's more than just catching the point on the shield. There must be other techniques, perhaps 'fencing with pikes' that push the other side's pikes away, or shieldless pikemen would die in heaps.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Dangun on March 10, 2019, 11:33:39 PM
Quote from: aligern on March 10, 2019, 03:06:28 PM
If we think about it the lijelihood of an entire front rank going down has to be small, because no one would sign up for that duty, especially as with a levelled row of sarissa points the destruction of the front rankers would be mutual.

Especially if 7-49 people were also pushing you from behind!  :)
It certainly doesn't fit with low casualty rates. Low casualty rates are an issue for scrum-O.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 06:27:13 AM
Quote from: Dangun on March 10, 2019, 11:33:39 PM
Quote from: aligern on March 10, 2019, 03:06:28 PM
If we think about it the lijelihood of an entire front rank going down has to be small, because no one would sign up for that duty, especially as with a levelled row of sarissa points the destruction of the front rankers would be mutual.

Especially if 7-49 people were also pushing you from behind!  :)
It certainly doesn't fit with low casualty rates. Low casualty rates are an issue for scrum-O.

The working hypothesis is that sarissa points do not generally penetrate enemy shields as the pressure from the rear ranks is distributed among several sarissas that contact the enemy. Some shields though are penetrated as Plutarch describing Pydna makes clear.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on March 11, 2019, 08:22:48 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 06:27:13 AM
The working hypothesis is that sarissa points do not generally penetrate enemy shields as the pressures from the rear ranks is distributed among several sarissas that contact the enemy. Some shields though are penetrated as Plutarch describing Pydna makes clear.

And, if the counterpressure is sufficient, armour, too.

My best guess is that phalangites tried hard to get initial 'shove superiority' at contact; the side achieving this would bowl or stagger the other back, maybe not knocking down the front rank (their advance would be impressive but not necessarily up to furor helveticus standards) but 'getting their act together' so that the opposition are dropping back.

Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 10, 2019, 11:09:41 AM
Doesn't Monluc say that a charge of pike against pike resulted in the front rank of both sides going down? (presumably killed) I would imagine that Macedonian/Successor pikers in the front rank stood a good chance of getting killed, shields or no shields. What are the casualty rates for winners of a sarissa vs sarissa battle? Usual 5%?

There is one phalanx vs phalanx battle (Raphia, 217 BC) for which we have reasonable casualty information, but as the loser's (significant) losses include the effects of pursuit and disintegration/desertion, I suggest we concentrate on the winner's loses.

Ptolemy at Raphia lost 1,500 infantry (he also lost 700 cavalry and 16 elephants). As most of his infantry were phalangites, it would be reasonable to conclude that most if not all the losses were phalangites.  It seems likely from the course of the battle that most of these losses were incurred in combat against the Seleucid phalanx (as opposed to being crushed by elephants, ridden down by cavalry, etc.).  So of 70,000 infantry, Ptolemy lost 1,500 or about 2%.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 10:09:33 AM
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on March 11, 2019, 08:22:48 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 06:27:13 AM
The working hypothesis is that sarissa points do not generally penetrate enemy shields as the pressures from the rear ranks is distributed among several sarissas that contact the enemy. Some shields though are penetrated as Plutarch describing Pydna makes clear.

And, if the counterpressure is sufficient, armour, too.

My best guess is that phalangites tried hard to get initial 'shove superiority' at contact; the side achieving this would bowl or stagger the other back, maybe not knocking down the front rank (their advance would be impressive but not necessarily up to furor helveticus standards) but 'getting their act together' so that the opposition are dropping back.

Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 10, 2019, 11:09:41 AM
Doesn't Monluc say that a charge of pike against pike resulted in the front rank of both sides going down? (presumably killed) I would imagine that Macedonian/Successor pikers in the front rank stood a good chance of getting killed, shields or no shields. What are the casualty rates for winners of a sarissa vs sarissa battle? Usual 5%?

There is one phalanx vs phalanx battle (Raphia, 217 BC) for which we have reasonable casualty information, but as the loser's (significant) losses include the effects of pursuit and disintegration/desertion, I suggest we concentrate on the winner's loses.

Ptolemy at Raphia lost 1,500 infantry (he also lost 700 cavalry and 16 elephants). As most of his infantry were phalangites, it would be reasonable to conclude that most if not all the losses were phalangites.  It seems likely from the course of the battle that most of these losses were incurred in combat against the Seleucid phalanx (as opposed to being crushed by elephants, ridden down by cavalry, etc.).  So of 70,000 infantry, Ptolemy lost 1,500 or about 2%.

Which translates to one man in six in the front rank killed if the phalanx deployed in close order and was 8 ranks deep. Not so bad (for the other five).
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 01:34:43 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 10:09:33 AM

Which translates to one man in six in the front rank killed if the phalanx deployed in close order and was 8 ranks deep. Not so bad (for the other five).

I think we should be cautious on the casualty rate argument.  If we go again to medieval and renaissance examples, we can see considerable variations in casualty levels in similar fights.   For example, the French Landsknechts fighting the Swiss at Novara in 1513 lost virtual all their front rank (attempts to convert this in percentages sometimes published tend to over-literalise however).  We should note that they weren't properly formed up and they only broke when the Swiss hit them in the flank as well as the front.  Whereas, if we take another example sometimes chosen to show the lack of lethality of pike fighting, the Battle of Langside 1568, the losers suffered about 5% casualties overall, the winners 1% or less.  There was no pursuit and nearly all the losers losses came from shooting.  Tactically, it was similar to Novara in that the pike fight was settled by a flank attack, so that can't be used to distinguish the results.  Pike fight lethality seems to have varied a lot on who was fighting who and what the tactical circumstances were and Hellenistic fights may have been similar.

In our examples so far, it seems to me that we are drawing the conclusion that the two sides stayed at pike-push distance and exerted pressure, unlike hoplites or Romans who closed to sword and dagger distance (which also happened in renaissance pike fights).  Everybody except the file leader just contributed pressure (we can ignore the mechanics for now).  Why then did the first five ranks level their pikes?  Two I understand - the file leader may break a pike or get in jammed in a shield or a body and have to drop it, so a back up row would be essential - but five rows?  I'm still not sure we have cracked how the macedonian system actually fought yet.

Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 02:30:25 PM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 01:34:43 PM
I think we should be cautious on the casualty rate argument.  If we go again to medieval and renaissance examples, we can see considerable variations in casualty levels in similar fights.   For example, the French Landsknechts fighting the Swiss at Novara in 1513 lost virtual all their front rank (attempts to convert this in percentages sometimes published tend to over-literalise however).  We should note that they weren't properly formed up and they only broke when the Swiss hit them in the flank as well as the front.  Whereas, if we take another example sometimes chosen to show the lack of lethality of pike fighting, the Battle of Langside 1568, the losers suffered about 5% casualties overall, the winners 1% or less.  There was no pursuit and nearly all the losers losses came from shooting.  Tactically, it was similar to Novara in that the pike fight was settled by a flank attack, so that can't be used to distinguish the results.  Pike fight lethality seems to have varied a lot on who was fighting who and what the tactical circumstances were and Hellenistic fights may have been similar.

These examples do show that Renaissance and Mediaeval pikemen weren't afraid to close to pike-on-human contact, and that - sometimes at least - casualties could be surprisingly low. Which would argue in favour of sarissmos.

Quote from: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 01:34:43 PMIn our examples so far, it seems to me that we are drawing the conclusion that the two sides stayed at pike-push distance and exerted pressure, unlike hoplites or Romans who closed to sword and dagger distance (which also happened in renaissance pike fights).  Everybody except the file leader just contributed pressure (we can ignore the mechanics for now).  Why then did the first five ranks level their pikes?  Two I understand - the file leader may break a pike or get in jammed in a shield or a body and have to drop it, so a back up row would be essential - but five rows?  I'm still not sure we have cracked how the macedonian system actually fought yet.

Arrian affirms that the six front rows of a pike file pushed with their pikes:

      
Compactly they stand back successively so that each hoplite [phalangite] in the front is covered by six sarissas and presses on with six forces whenever they bear down. Those standing in the sixth row press on with the weight of their bodies, if not with their sarissas, so that the phalanx's push against the foes does not become endurable and flight [becomes] difficult for the front row men. - Arrian, Tactics: 12

This is possible since the ranks in close order occupy a depth of only 18" at the most. A sarissa's centre of balance - held by the left hand according to Polybios - is 6 feet from the back of the weapon, meaning that the back rows have plenty of pikeshaft to push forward to reach the enemy. If the first couple of rows hold their pikes somewhat forward of their centre of balance (3 feet for front rank, 18 inches for second rank) then six rows are quite capable of shoving their pikes against the shield of an opponent.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 02:50:23 PM
QuoteIf the first couple of rows hold their pikes somewhat forward of their centre of balance (3 feet for front rank, 18 inches for second rank) then six rows are quite capable of shoving their pikes against the shield of an opponent.

Except this isn't what Polybios says.  His pikemen hold the pike the same and there is a two cubit distance between the heads of successive rows.  So only the file leader will reach the shield of the opposing file leader. 
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: RichT on March 11, 2019, 03:08:20 PM
AFAIK nobody fully understands how Med/Ren/Mod pikes fought and there is relatively speaking a mass of information on them, so it's going to be hard to understand Hellenistic pikes. Comparison with Smythe, Monluc etc (as we've discussed here many times) suggests two models (as we've discussed here many times) - 'fencing and foyning' or 'pushing and pressing' although the precise details even of these are lacking. My impression is that Hell pikes used 'pushing and pressing' though that doesn't mean they necessarily all did this all the time. The problem with eg Smythe's account is he is very clear that a pushing pike block will scatter a fencing and foyning pike block ('like a flock of geese') but not what happens when two pushing pike blocks meet each other (or why, given that, anyone ever fenced and foyned). Monluc's account suggests something hot, close, chaotic and disorganised, with lots of knocking over but not necessarily much fatality.

Judging by Polybius et al, as many sarissas extend beyond the front rank as are able to do so given their length and the rank spacing. Those that are only two cubits in front might not have any immediate practical purpose but presumably it was felt useful to have the maximum possible number of pikes out front - makes it harder to cut or push through them all if nothing else (remember the whole point is to place a fence or palisade in front of the phalanx) and it makes the front ranks feel safer. Plus if back ranks do have to step up to replace casualties, better if their sarissas are already levelled.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 03:45:56 PM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 02:50:23 PM
QuoteIf the first couple of rows hold their pikes somewhat forward of their centre of balance (3 feet for front rank, 18 inches for second rank) then six rows are quite capable of shoving their pikes against the shield of an opponent.

Except this isn't what Polybios says.  His pikemen hold the pike the same and there is a two cubit distance between the heads of successive rows.  So only the file leader will reach the shield of the opposing file leader.

Sure, but Polybios implies that when engaged in a pike push, the ranks were actually much closer together, since the only way rear rankers could "press forward those in front by the weight of their bodies" was if the ranks were compacted together, shield against back, with each rank occupying a depth of a foot and a half at the most.

He supports the notion of all 5 spears of each rank reaching the enemy soldier a bit later on:

The Roman soldier will face two of the front rank of a phalanx, so that he has to encounter and fight against ten spears, which one man cannot find time even to cut away, when once the two lines are engaged, nor force his way through easily—seeing that the Roman front ranks are not supported by the rear ranks, either by way of adding weight to their charge, or vigour to the use of their swords. - Histories, 18.30.10

Notice also that he also confirms sarissmos here: "the Roman front ranks are not supported by the rear ranks".

What is interesting is that Polybios describes a phalanx in close order (2 phalangites to 1 legionary) but with 16 ranks as opposed to the 8 one would expect following the manuals. He may have confused close order with intermediate order here or be describing a phalanx compacting to close order, not by advancing rear half-files to the front alongside the front half-files, but by simply bunching the files together:

If the centre must assume the compact position, we shall command the right wing to left face and the left wing to right face, then to advance to the navel of the phalanx, to face to the front, and to advance the rear ranks, and we shall have the desired formation. - Asklepiodotus 12.9
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 04:44:44 PM
I think you are missing the fact that the ten spears bit refers to fighting Romans.  Romans don't have pikes - they throw things and close with swords.  To do this they must fight their way through layers of pikes.

On pushing on the backs of the person in front with shields, it would be easier with a ported pike.  And before you ask, pretty impossible with a high charge position.  So, low charge might work but would be inefficient.  No, those pikes are held like that because the protruding pike points are more important than shoving people in the back.

Going back (forward?) to the renaissance for a moment to pick up Richard's point, pike "foyning and fencing" is associated by Monluc with better training.  He goes for the unsophisticated pike charge of the Swiss because his men are good enough to challenge in a fancy pike fight.  So training may be one angle that is important in hellenistic terms.

Smythe's rejection of fancy pike work is because it is indecisive - his men close up tight, lean into the man in front and actually try to stab the enemy to death.  If they don't break though, everything gets tangled up and the front men drop pikes and draw swords (he is rude about people who take rapiers into a pike fight because there is no room to use them so this fight is close up and personal).  Does this happen in Hellenistic clashes or are they "fencing and foyning" types?   Or are they something else?

Final thought.  Were Macedonian pike phalanxes designed to fight other pike phalanxes?  If they were for fighting hoplites or Persians, that row of pike heads would stop the enemy closing with their big shields and shorter weapons and give them the choice of being skewered or giving ground.  This sort of works too against Romans but they have a couple of tricks of their own - they throw things, they are more flexible in difficult terrain and they have fancy ways of using reserves.

Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 06:22:45 PM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 04:44:44 PM
I think you are missing the fact that the ten spears bit refers to fighting Romans.  Romans don't have pikes - they throw things and close with swords.  To do this they must fight their way through layers of pikes.

OK. We are looking at two interpretations of the passage: the Romans have fight through 5 (or 6) rows of pikes successively or they have to fight through the whole lot at once. I opt for the latter as that makes better sense of Arrian: "Compactly they stand back successively so that each hoplite [phalangite in this context] in the front is covered by six sarissas and presses on with six forces whenever they bear down." Notice the "compactly" BTW - it implies less than 2 cubits per rank.

Quote from: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 04:44:44 PMOn pushing on the backs of the person in front with shields, it would be easier with a ported pike.  And before you ask, pretty impossible with a high charge position.  So, low charge might work but would be inefficient.  No, those pikes are held like that because the protruding pike points are more important than shoving people in the back.

Can you clarify for me? What is a ported pike and a high and low charge position?

Quote from: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 04:44:44 PMFinal thought.  Were Macedonian pike phalanxes designed to fight other pike phalanxes?  If they were for fighting hoplites or Persians, that row of pike heads would stop the enemy closing with their big shields and shorter weapons and give them the choice of being skewered or giving ground.  This sort of works too against Romans but they have a couple of tricks of their own - they throw things, they are more flexible in difficult terrain and they have fancy ways of using reserves.

They were designed for hoplites and Persians, their only serious enemies at that time (besides Thracians). They were probably designed more for hoplites as the default Macedonian hoplite would have been good enough for Persians. So they had to beat the hoplite phalanx at its own game. And we argue about what the hoplite phalanx's game was (no, I won't say the O-word). Just to say that the hoplite was well protected against spear thrusts.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 06:58:26 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 06:22:45 PM


Can you clarify for me? What is a ported pike and a high and low charge position?
How quickly the overarm sarissa thread fades into the past :)

Porte = holding at 45 degrees, front hand high, back hand low.  Not to be confused with high porte across the body, which is good for pushing but does not point pike points forward, which we know they did.

Low charge (Swiss style) = pike down at thigh level, arms straight or bent at elbow (there seem to be variations - I think the bent elbows one is more apt for comparison because of the need to hold shield). Front hand slightly ahead of body.

High charge - the classic "charge your pike" known to all re-enactor pikemen, with pike at neck level, front hand level with chest , back hand stretched backwards along shaft.  You advocated this as a possible sarissa hold.


[
Quote
They were designed for hoplites and Persians, their only serious enemies at that time (besides Thracians). They were probably designed more for hoplites as the default Macedonian hoplite would have been good enough for Persians. So they had to beat the hoplite phalanx at its own game. And we argue about what the hoplite phalanx's game was (no, I won't say the O-word). Just to say that the hoplite was well protected against spear thrusts.
Yes, but the hoplites game, as Paul B reminds us, is to close to spear fighting distance and ultimately to shield to shield.  He has to navigate his aspis between ranks of spears to do this, which may be possible individually but perhaps not as a body.  He can break formation and fight (abandoning his big advantage of a seried phalanx) or he can keep it and fall back (abandoning the forward momentum of his supporting ranks, however we envisage that).  This is a good balanced fight against good professional hoplites but will chew up ordinary city state militia types.  Persian Cardaces will find it very tough, provincial levies it doesn't look good at all.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on March 11, 2019, 07:23:43 PM
Arrian may actually be a better guide in this instance than Polybius, who was an Achaean cavalry officer and displays occasional misunderstandings of how a phalanx worked (e.g. in his critique of Callisthenes in Book XII).  Polybius has two cubits per man as file spacing but this is obviously incompatible with the rear ranks being able to add their weight.  Justin's one cubit or so per man for file spacing at contact (or just pursuant to contact, which may be the key here) makes eminent sense, because it brings the pike points forward and makes multiple application of points against an individual easier to achieve.  And it allows the rear ranks to 'add their weight' by actual contact with those in front.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 07:36:48 PM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 06:58:26 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 06:22:45 PM


Can you clarify for me? What is a ported pike and a high and low charge position?
How quickly the overarm sarissa thread fades into the past :)

Porte = holding at 45 degrees, front hand high, back hand low.  Not to be confused with high porte across the body, which is good for pushing but does not point pike points forward, which we know they did.

Low charge (Swiss style) = pike down at thigh level, arms straight or bent at elbow (there seem to be variations - I think the bent elbows one is more apt for comparison because of the need to hold shield). Front hand slightly ahead of body.

High charge - the classic "charge your pike" known to all re-enactor pikemen, with pike at neck level, front hand level with chest , back hand stretched backwards along shaft.  You advocated this as a possible sarissa hold.

I suspected that's what you meant (except for the porte - I'd completely forgotten that).

Y'know, there is actually an issue trying to wield a pike two-handed if you face directly forwards, and are in close order with a shield across your front. Here's a diagram with phalangites carrying the two standard shield sizes (64-66cm diameter for the smaller shield, 73-76cm diameter for the larger shield). Each phalangite occupies a close order interval of 48cm.

(https://i.imgur.com/c7eHsyL.png)

It's very difficult, especially for the larger shield, to get your left arm all the way across to the low position far enough so it can reach the pikeshaft where it would need to be to pass under the shields. OK with the high position though. In the low position your right hand can grip the pikeshaft well back from the left hand but in the high position it can't - I tried. To grip the pikeshaft comfortably with a decent gap between hands (Polybios' 2 cubits) you need to adopt a 3/4 stance, more so for the high position. For the porte the high position works fine even facing forwards.

In a serious pike-push crush your body is naturally forced to face ahead as the shield behind you pressing into your back flattens your torso into a forward position. In a high position your left hand can retain its grip on the pikeshaft but I've no idea how it would manage that in the low position whilst keeping the pike below the shields. The right hand in the high grip would have to move forwards, to just behind the left hand, though I suppose that if the pikehead is jammed in the shield of your opponent that isn't a problem - it would explain though Polybios' preoccupation with holding the pike at its point of balance, unlike the Renaissance pike that would just drop forwards in this position.

Quote from: Erpingham on March 11, 2019, 06:58:26 PM
Quote
They were designed for hoplites and Persians, their only serious enemies at that time (besides Thracians). They were probably designed more for hoplites as the default Macedonian hoplite would have been good enough for Persians. So they had to beat the hoplite phalanx at its own game. And we argue about what the hoplite phalanx's game was (no, I won't say the O-word). Just to say that the hoplite was well protected against spear thrusts.

Yes, but the hoplites game, as Paul B reminds us, is to close to spear fighting distance and ultimately to shield to shield.  He has to navigate his aspis between ranks of spears to do this, which may be possible individually but perhaps not as a body.  He can break formation and fight (abandoning his big advantage of a seried phalanx) or he can keep it and fall back (abandoning the forward momentum of his supporting ranks, however we envisage that).  This is a good balanced fight against good professional hoplites but will chew up ordinary city state militia types.  Persian Cardaces will find it very tough, provincial levies it doesn't look good at all.

Here the phalangite wins. The hoplite can't fight him spear to spear, and he can't close to shield against shield. He has to let the phalangites stick their sarissas in his shield and then try to win the shoving contest, with the risk - not shared by the phalangites - of sarissa points pushing through his shield and armour and killing him. I know who I'd bet on.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: RichT on March 11, 2019, 08:51:51 PM
(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png)
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Dangun on March 11, 2019, 11:09:49 PM
Nice graphic by the way...

Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 11, 2019, 07:36:48 PM
In a serious pike-push crush your body is naturally forced to face ahead as the shield behind you pressing into your back flattens your torso into a forward position.

So is this an argument against scrum-O?

One for the proponents of scrum-O... how do we rationalise low casualties and scrum-O?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PM
My 2 drachmas:

A sarissaphoroi cannot push with a sarissa in the manner that hoplites pushed.  The reason has nothing to do with spacing, etc.  It is because the linkage between man and sarissa is no strong enough to support the force levels we see with hoplites.  You cannot grip a spear shaft strong enough to support a half ton of mass. 

But did sarissaphoroi engage in "othismos"?  Surely they did, the author's are quite clear.  But othismos just refers to a very crowded condition. This can exist with great force propagation forward, or with limited force propagation in an uncoordinated manner.  I have been in both kinds of crowds, and probably many of you have. Xenophon tells us of such pushing crowds trying to flee through a gate, ships at sea can crowd each other, even opposing arguments can jam to a stand-still. Roman's did it a bit at Zama, so the definition has to be quantitative, not qualitative.

Smythe is clear I think on what happens when two pike formations plow into each other: "after they have given their first thrust with their pikes and being come to join with their enemies front to front and face to face, and therefore the use and execution of the pikes of the foremost ranks being past, they must presently betake themselves to use of their swords and daggers"

He also tells us that the front ranks cannot foyne with their pikes unless they open their formation due to the closeness of the men behind them (and here I am reminded of Arrian's use of othismos in describing the crowding of the second rankers upon the first): "to the intent that they may have elbow roome enough without and impediment by the nearness of the ranks behind them, to pul backe their armes, and to thrust at their enemies approaching them at all the length they can of their armes and piques, and again with dexteritie to pull backe, and retire them to give new thrusts"

So, there would have been crowding within the sarissa phalanx pushing men forward, but not the kind of sustained pressure you can achieve with hoplites.  That said, Smythe also advocates the front ranks moving forward with swords, and if sarissaphoroi ever found themselves in dissarray and fighting shield on shield like hoplites, then it could occur.  But this is unlikely, because like the later pike men, it seem that the rear ranks would retain their pikes and still try to foyne around the front-like fighters rather than drop them and move up.

Now a caution.  It is not clear that a sarissa phalanx, formed closer can put out more force per square meter than a hoplite phalanx.  The problem is that the hoplite shields overlap much more solidly, which helps to synchronize the movement of men.  Also, I believe that the sarissa close order of 45cm per man required a sideways stance which allows no othismos of any kind.  In fact it probably arose specifically to counter any attempt at othismos by hoplites because you cannot push against a bunch of spear points and expect to live a long happy life.

Dangun mentioned the old argument that othismos would be too deadly to engage in.  This is not true, othismos is not comfortable, but unless your shield is crushed, as seems to have happened to some at Coronea, it is impossible to die. The pushing part of Othismos is actually too safe to account for battle casualties.  It is the vicious, short range sword or knife-fight, so close that you can smell the cheese and onions on your foe's breath, that kills you.

As of yet no one has seriously challenged the arguments I have put forward for othismos on grounds other than we cannot prove Greeks did it.  Fair enough, we were not there. But the possibility of elements of othismos as I present have not been refuted. Many of the old-school arguements against it can be shown to be frivolous. I think Mathew is the only author to try, but he clearly had no idea of the mechanics involved and spouted the old "men will be crushed", "12 ranks can't stand up to 50", "files can't generate such forces" (comical when the other argument is men will be crushed), and "no one would let you propel them into a hedge of spears".


Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PM
My 2 drachmas:

A sarissaphoroi cannot push with a sarissa in the manner that hoplites pushed.  The reason has nothing to do with spacing, etc.  It is because the linkage between man and sarissa is no strong enough to support the force levels we see with hoplites.  You cannot grip a spear shaft strong enough to support a half ton of mass.

But it doesn't support half a ton. If five or six pikes are simultaneously involved in the sarissmos then each pike has to bear a maximum of 500kg/5 = 100kg or 500kg/6 = 83kg. A pole vaulter lifts his own weight with ease and the average weight of a polevaulter (http://www.polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7544) is 79kg.

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMBut did sarissaphoroi engage in "othismos"?  Surely they did, the author's are quite clear.  But othismos just refers to a very crowded condition. This can exist with great force propagation forward, or with limited force propagation in an uncoordinated manner.  I have been in both kinds of crowds, and probably many of you have. Xenophon tells us of such pushing crowds trying to flee through a gate, ships at sea can crowd each other, even opposing arguments can jam to a stand-still. Roman's did it a bit at Zama, so the definition has to be quantitative, not qualitative.

I'm not quite clear on this. If you have force propagation forwards, and your men are in a straight file pushing shield against back, surely that is a pike version of othismos?

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMSmythe is clear I think on what happens when two pike formations plow into each other: "after they have given their first thrust with their pikes and being come to join with their enemies front to front and face to face, and therefore the use and execution of the pikes of the foremost ranks being past, they must presently betake themselves to use of their swords and daggers"

He also tells us that the front ranks cannot foyne with their pikes unless they open their formation due to the closeness of the men behind them (and here I am reminded of Arrian's use of othismos in describing the crowding of the second rankers upon the first): "to the intent that they may have elbow roome enough without and impediment by the nearness of the ranks behind them, to pul backe their armes, and to thrust at their enemies approaching them at all the length they can of their armes and piques, and again with dexteritie to pull backe, and retire them to give new thrusts"

So, there would have been crowding within the sarissa phalanx pushing men forward, but not the kind of sustained pressure you can achieve with hoplites.  That said, Smythe also advocates the front ranks moving forward with swords, and if sarissaphoroi ever found themselves in dissarray and fighting shield on shield like hoplites, then it could occur.  But this is unlikely, because like the later pike men, it seem that the rear ranks would retain their pikes and still try to foyne around the front-like fighters rather than drop them and move up.

This describes Renaissance pike formations for which I've seen no evidence of any kind of othismos. Lacking concave shields they couldn't have done it anyway.

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMNow a caution.  It is not clear that a sarissa phalanx, formed closer can put out more force per square meter than a hoplite phalanx.  The problem is that the hoplite shields overlap much more solidly, which helps to synchronize the movement of men.

Phalangite shields overlap just as solidly. They are smaller but the men are closer together so there is the same degree of overlap.


Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMAlso, I believe that the sarissa close order of 45cm per man required a sideways stance which allows no othismos of any kind.

Evidence for this?

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMIn fact it probably arose specifically to counter any attempt at othismos by hoplites because you cannot push against a bunch of spear points and expect to live a long happy life.

And yet that seems to be exactly what happened at Sellasia.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Dangun on March 12, 2019, 07:18:07 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMAs of yet no one has seriously challenged the arguments I have put forward for othismos on grounds other than we cannot prove Greeks did it. 

Historicity, is a fairly significant exception.

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMBut did sarissaphoroi engage in "othismos"?  Surely they did, the author's are quite clear...  As of yet no one has seriously challenged the arguments I have put forward...

To confidence with which a statement is made does not necessarily enhance its credibility.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on March 12, 2019, 08:55:01 AM
Quote from: Dangun on March 12, 2019, 07:18:07 AM
To confidence with which a statement is made does not necessarily enhance its credibility.

Although lack of refutability, or at least of refutation, does. :)

About the shields ...

If we visualise a phalanx from above, at one-cubit spacing each man probably has an angled body and definitely has an angled left arm and hence an angled shield.  I am assuming the centre of the shield more or less coincides with the elbow in order to let the left hand protrude sufficiently beyond the edge to grasp the sarissa shaft.

This gives us an angled shield, although one which would appear to be angled in the opposite direction to the body of the man in front.  Does this prevent the application of a push by the man behind?  I think it would still be possible, as the push would presumably be transmitted through chest, forearm and the part of the shield between elbow and hand as opposed to the whole shield.  And since the push would be delivered against what is essentially a cylinder (the torso of a man in a thorax) I do not think the angle would be an insuperable problem.

Exactly how much force a sarissa holder can bear and still hang onto his shaft is a matter beyond my physics, but to my mind the key point is that sarissa points would be going through targets and out the other side long before the limit was reached.  To get another phalanx moving back Sellasia-style would presumably require only as much pressure as makes the opposing front rank start to stagger back - and the side which reaches this threshold first will drive the other backwards until something else intervenes.

My current thinking is thus that an important part of phalanx fighting (as opposed to pike fighting, which I see as a rather broader spectrum) is the ability to close up the file spacing swiftly and with style, adding more - shall we call it 'thrust'? - more rapidly than the opponent can, and doing so without (this is important) any of one's own side cannoning into people ahead and knocking them off balance.  This kind of coordinated cohesive closure and concomitant thrust build-up would be what veterans such as the original Argyraspides could perform in the twinkle of an eye, with speeds and distances perfectly synchronised, while less expert opponents were still closing up and trying not to push each other over.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 12, 2019, 10:26:15 AM
QuoteThis describes Renaissance pike formations for which I've seen no evidence of any kind of othismos.

I will say again that renaissance pike fighting gives us an idea of what fighting in close formation with long pointy sticks might be like but we can't be sure the solutions they came up with are the same as those from a separate tradition nearly 2000 years before.

However, Smythe's description of pike fighting is about the most detailed we have from its period.  Obviously not everyone has picked up on the key points (though Paul clearly has).

Smythe derides pike foyning - it opens the formation to give people room to move weapons and reduces the supporting ranks to spectators.

What he prefers is to close up the formation from the sides and rear.  The first four ranks present their pikes at high charge, the remainder pikes upright.  The pike heads are in four even rows, 1 yd behind the previous rank (sound familiar?).  The ranks pack tight "as close as they can possiblie march pace with pace and step with step, as if they were one entire body" (this for some reason makes me think of a Genesis video  :) ).  On impact, the body all give a strong thrust at the faces of their enemy, which hopefully causes them to break.  If not, there is no room behind for the now extended pikes to be withdrawn for another thrust and the front men are best advised to draw sword and danger and stab their (still pike encumbered) foes.

So, by closing everyone up to virtually touching, the full weight of the formation is brought to bear.  Just like hoplites in a crowd-fight phase, the front men are using shorter weapons and actively trying to do the other guy harm, not just jostling and shoving.

What of this can apply a sarissa phalanx.  The closing tight on the back of the man in front can, and may be what the tacticians are talking about.  But did ranks of pikes slip past each other in a phalanx on phalanx encounter, to leave the file leaders using swords?  Or does that need a high hold on the pike , so that they slide over the opposition?  If we assume, as almost everyone does, that Hellenistic pikemen held pikes low, this couldn't happen.  So what did happen when five rows of points met five rows of points?

We have, I think plausibly explained the value of five rows of points against men with shields and spears.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 12:45:18 PM
Quote from: Dangun on March 12, 2019, 07:18:07 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMAs of yet no one has seriously challenged the arguments I have put forward for othismos on grounds other than we cannot prove Greeks did it. 

Historicity, is a fairly significant exception.

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMBut did sarissaphoroi engage in "othismos"?  Surely they did, the author's are quite clear...  As of yet no one has seriously challenged the arguments I have put forward...

To confidence with which a statement is made does not necessarily enhance its credibility.

It is not a matter of historicity. Half of those who read the relevant passages believe they are describing physical pushing, half don't. It is about differential interpretation and a lack of historical analogy. Without a time machine it cannot be resolved.

That is a neat trick on your second comment. You linked two comments which were unrelated in my original comments.  If you understood my position on what othismos was, then my surety in its existence in a Macedonian context is all but banal.  A state that the Greeks were describing as othismos is a feature of any close-in fighting in ranks. The difference is a matter of how much force the ranks generated.  In hoplites it could be huge and wholly survivable, in sarissaphoroi is was enough to keep their own front ranks moving forward and no allow backward movement, at Zama it was enough to at least herd the enemy ranks back if not push them in a coordinated manner.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 01:17:42 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PM
My 2 drachmas:

A sarissaphoroi cannot push with a sarissa in the manner that hoplites pushed.  The reason has nothing to do with spacing, etc.  It is because the linkage between man and sarissa is no strong enough to support the force levels we see with hoplites.  You cannot grip a spear shaft strong enough to support a half ton of mass.

But it doesn't support half a ton. If five or six pikes are simultaneously involved in the sarissmos then each pike has to bear a maximum of 500kg/5 = 100kg or 500kg/6 = 83kg. A pole vaulter lifts his own weight with ease and the average weight of a polevaulter (http://www.polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7544) is 79kg.

Sorry Rich, that is not how it works.  Each file is putting out force. if the force were being transferred from a spear 5 ranks back, unlikely because all of the spears would need to be getting shorter as they go forward in rank, then the force from the 6-8th rank would not be passed to the 4th rank in front. You have to choose one or the other.  But the whole unit is free to push with less force, which is a low energy type of othismos as I stated. The limit is really on how much force a shield can take from the point of a sarissa before being penetrated. Othismos requires that both sides resist, and I would not resist enough to get impaled.


Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMNow a caution.  It is not clear that a sarissa phalanx, formed closer can put out more force per square meter than a hoplite phalanx.  The problem is that the hoplite shields overlap much more solidly, which helps to synchronize the movement of men.

Phalangite shields overlap just as solidly. They are smaller but the men are closer together so there is the same degree of overlap.

It is unlikely that sarissaphoroi stood any closer than hoplites with their peltae forward. It is not a matter of shield size, but human proportion. The average man's shoulders are 45 cm wide.  You cannot stand and fight in a 45cm space, you need room to be able to move your arms at least minimally- something closer to 60cm. This is also why I am sure they stood sideways at 45cm. I have yet to see anyone actually stand front on at 45cm and fight.  Mathew's measurements are bogus, the men are closer to 60cm than 45cm. The closest you will get is the shoulder to shoulder 18th-19th C marching formations.



Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMIn fact it probably arose specifically to counter any attempt at othismos by hoplites because you cannot push against a bunch of spear points and expect to live a long happy life.

And yet that seems to be exactly what happened at Sellasia.

It is not clear what happened at Sellasia.  One problem with the othismos debate is that people seem to want a level of consistency rarely met by ancient authors in their descriptions.  We have two things that occuss between masses of men: pushing and herding.  From the inside of a formation they feel the same.  Those men a few ranks back at Cannae or in the battle Procopius describes where the dead could not fall, felt all the sardine packing of othismos, yet it is unlikley that the enemy unit was physically pushing them in a consistent manner.  Instead they were herding the men into a tight space and the men's own outer ranks were pushing in- I just coined the term auto-othismos for this.  Cavalry could do this to infantry for example. Other times the opposing units are more likely physically pushing each other and transferring force from rear rank to rear rank, as in hoplite othismos.  Then we have what I think is going on in sarissa, where the rear ranks are pushing on their own front ranks, but the force is not being transferred above a minimal level through the pike shafts.

The difference between these is based on a) resistance. If the enemy, or your own men give more than a step, you are out of the packed condition. 2) The ability to transfer force forward. Here the sarissa fails. c) the ability to survive being crushed. Without an aspis or some other equivalent (I would love to see how renaissance breast and back plates held up to crushing) you have to either give ground, or push back on your own rear ranks, signalling them to let up. Unfortunately for the men at Cannae, stabby things were more inspiring that the pleas of their friends to spread out.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: RichT on March 12, 2019, 01:48:19 PM
Just want to point out, if the 'Rich' was me, it wasn't me you are responding to but Justin. I'm with you on this one Paul, mostly!

As well as the difficulty of transmitting much push force through a held sarissa, there's the question of the sarissa itself. Modern reconstructions all have a certain degree of bend and if I understand anything at all about the mechanics of long slightly bendy poles, if you apply a very high degree of force to one end, they break. Matthew did force tests on his sarissa but just a two handed thrust test, not a sixteen man push.

Smythe and Montluc (or Monluc? Opinions seem to vary) seem to me to describe push of pike just as clearly, and in much the same words, as Polybius and the tacticians - they all talk about closing right up and pushing the man ahead while retaining one yard (two cubit) rank spacing. If that sounds strange then it is more likely to be due to us misunderstanding the realities of pike fighting than Polybius or Smythe or Montluc.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 03:14:36 PM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 12, 2019, 10:26:15 AM
QuoteThis describes Renaissance pike formations for which I've seen no evidence of any kind of othismos.

I will say again that renaissance pike fighting gives us an idea of what fighting in close formation with long pointy sticks might be like but we can't be sure the solutions they came up with are the same as those from a separate tradition nearly 2000 years before.

However, Smythe's description of pike fighting is about the most detailed we have from its period.  Obviously not everyone has picked up on the key points (though Paul clearly has).

Smythe derides pike foyning - it opens the formation to give people room to move weapons and reduces the supporting ranks to spectators.

What he prefers is to close up the formation from the sides and rear.  The first four ranks present their pikes at high charge, the remainder pikes upright.  The pike heads are in four even rows, 1 yd behind the previous rank (sound familiar?).  The ranks pack tight "as close as they can possiblie march pace with pace and step with step, as if they were one entire body" (this for some reason makes me think of a Genesis video  :) ).  On impact, the body all give a strong thrust at the faces of their enemy, which hopefully causes them to break.  If not, there is no room behind for the now extended pikes to be withdrawn for another thrust and the front men are best advised to draw sword and danger and stab their (still pike encumbered) foes.

So, by closing everyone up to virtually touching, the full weight of the formation is brought to bear.  Just like hoplites in a crowd-fight phase, the front men are using shorter weapons and actively trying to do the other guy harm, not just jostling and shoving.

What of this can apply a sarissa phalanx.  The closing tight on the back of the man in front can, and may be what the tacticians are talking about.  But did ranks of pikes slip past each other in a phalanx on phalanx encounter, to leave the file leaders using swords?  Or does that need a high hold on the pike , so that they slide over the opposition?  If we assume, as almost everyone does, that Hellenistic pikemen held pikes low, this couldn't happen.  So what did happen when five rows of points met five rows of points?

We have, I think plausibly explained the value of five rows of points against men with shields and spears.

OK, I think I get it. Using Renaissance pikefighting as a benchmark, we are to understand the 'weight' of a jhellenistic pike phalanx in a metaphorical sense, in that the men behind, by crowding forward, oblige the men in front to fight, even when they can no longer use their pikes, being obliged to resort to their secondary weapon. There is no serious physical pressure as such, just some persuasive nudging. Is that about it?

This however strains the text of Polybios and the tacticians, who speak of physical pressure of the bodies of the rear rankers making "charge very forcible": the men "press on with the weight of their bodies." It's a real physical pressure, not just a closing of the back door to prevent front rankers from taking early military retirement.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 03:42:37 PM
Quote from: RichT on March 12, 2019, 01:48:19 PM
Just want to point out, if the 'Rich' was me, it wasn't me you are responding to but Justin. I'm with you on this one Paul, mostly!

Oops!  I blame the fog of written war.  I have a feeling though that we will all be on the same page in the end on this discussion where sarissa pushing is concerned.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 03:50:02 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 01:17:42 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PM
My 2 drachmas:

A sarissaphoroi cannot push with a sarissa in the manner that hoplites pushed.  The reason has nothing to do with spacing, etc.  It is because the linkage between man and sarissa is no strong enough to support the force levels we see with hoplites.  You cannot grip a spear shaft strong enough to support a half ton of mass.

But it doesn't support half a ton. If five or six pikes are simultaneously involved in the sarissmos then each pike has to bear a maximum of 500kg/5 = 100kg or 500kg/6 = 83kg. A pole vaulter lifts his own weight with ease and the average weight of a polevaulter (http://www.polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7544) is 79kg.

Sorry Rich, that is not how it works.  Each file is putting out force. if the force were being transferred from a spear 5 ranks back, unlikely because all of the spears would need to be getting shorter as they go forward in rank, then the force from the 6-8th rank would not be passed to the 4th rank in front. You have to choose one or the other.  But the whole unit is free to push with less force, which is a low energy type of othismos as I stated. The limit is really on how much force a shield can take from the point of a sarissa before being penetrated. Othismos requires that both sides resist, and I would not resist enough to get impaled.

Rich would be nice.  :) To take Polybios' extreme case scenario of a pike phalanx in close order with 16 ranks. Visualise the five first men of a pile projecting their pikes all the way to the enemy shield. This they can do because they hold their pikes at the centre of balance (according to Polybios) which means they have six feet of pike projecting back behind their left hand (or possibly even their right hand.). That means that if the front two ranks - each with a depth of 18 inches maximum - hold their pikes forward of the CoB, the 3 ranks behind them will be able to hold their pikes behind the CoB and reach the enemy. Asklepiodotus' remark that "some, who wish to bring all the projecting spear-points to the same distance in front of the line, increase the length of the spears of the rear ranks" may represent a desire to facilitate this arrangement.

Now, with 5 sarissas stuck in the enemy shield, the 16 men of the file close up to shield against back and push. The 5th man has 11 men behind him pushing, with the pressure on his back reaching the vicinity of half a ton - say 500kg at the most. However he does not transmit all this pressure to his pike; most of it is transmitted by his shield to the 4th rank man, and 100kg or so to his pike. The 4th rank man has 400kg pushing his back, and he transmits most of that via his shield to the 3rd rank man with 100kg transmitted to his pike. The 3rd rank man has 300kg pushing his back: he sends 100 kg along his pike and 200kg to the 2nd rank man. The 2nd rank man sends 100kg to his pike and 100kg to the front rank man, and the front rank man sends that remaining 100kg via his pike to the enemy shield. It works.

I suspect pikes can easily handle this pressure since vaulting poles, originally made of wood, can handle the far greater lateral forces of polevaulting.

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 01:17:42 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMNow a caution.  It is not clear that a sarissa phalanx, formed closer can put out more force per square meter than a hoplite phalanx.  The problem is that the hoplite shields overlap much more solidly, which helps to synchronize the movement of men.

Phalangite shields overlap just as solidly. They are smaller but the men are closer together so there is the same degree of overlap.

It is unlikely that sarissaphoroi stood any closer than hoplites with their peltae forward. It is not a matter of shield size, but human proportion. The average man's shoulders are 45 cm wide.  You cannot stand and fight in a 45cm space, you need room to be able to move your arms at least minimally- something closer to 60cm. This is also why I am sure they stood sideways at 45cm. I have yet to see anyone actually stand front on at 45cm and fight.  Mathew's measurements are bogus, the men are closer to 60cm than 45cm. The closest you will get is the shoulder to shoulder 18th-19th C marching formations.

The manuals are abundantly clear that phalangites stood in files about one cubit or 48cm wide. A phalangite just needs to hold his pike close to his body which doesn't require any additional lateral space. 'One cubit' of course is flexible, but it isn't 60cm. The problem is that no reenactors to my knowledge have actually tried this - shoulder to shoulder, facing forwards with shields in front and overlapping, pikes presented over the shields. It really needs to be tried to resolve once and for all if it is possible or not.

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 01:17:42 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 11, 2019, 11:58:31 PMIn fact it probably arose specifically to counter any attempt at othismos by hoplites because you cannot push against a bunch of spear points and expect to live a long happy life.

And yet that seems to be exactly what happened at Sellasia.

It is not clear what happened at Sellasia.

It seems clear enough.

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 01:17:42 PMOne problem with the othismos debate is that people seem to want a level of consistency rarely met by ancient authors in their descriptions.  We have two things that occuss between masses of men: pushing and herding.  From the inside of a formation they feel the same.  Those men a few ranks back at Cannae or in the battle Procopius describes where the dead could not fall, felt all the sardine packing of othismos, yet it is unlikley that the enemy unit was physically pushing them in a consistent manner.  Instead they were herding the men into a tight space and the men's own outer ranks were pushing in- I just coined the term auto-othismos for this.  Cavalry could do this to infantry for example.

Sure. This is surrounded infantry trying to fall back from their enemies and crushing against the men behind them. But this is a different kettle of fish.

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 01:17:42 PMOther times the opposing units are more likely physically pushing each other and transferring force from rear rank to rear rank, as in hoplite othismos.  Then we have what I think is going on in sarissa, where the rear ranks are pushing on their own front ranks, but the force is not being transferred above a minimal level through the pike shafts.

And yet it is precise the pressure from the men behind that ensures that the "phalanx's push against the foes does not become endurable."

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 01:17:42 PMThe difference between these is based on a) resistance. If the enemy, or your own men give more than a step, you are out of the packed condition. 2) The ability to transfer force forward. Here the sarissa fails. c) the ability to survive being crushed. Without an aspis or some other equivalent (I would love to see how renaissance breast and back plates held up to crushing) you have to either give ground, or push back on your own rear ranks, signalling them to let up. Unfortunately for the men at Cannae, stabby things were more inspiring that the pleas of their friends to spread out.

I can think of two ways of refuting the sarissmos hypothesis: a) proving the phalangite pelta could not endure the strain of 400-odd kg of pressure, and b) proving that an aspis or phalangite pelta would generally be pierced by a sarissa pikehead applied to it with 100kg pressure. Does anyone have numbers?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 03:57:33 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 03:14:36 PM

OK, I think I get it. Using Renaissance pikefighting as a benchmark, we are to understand the 'weight' of a jhellenistic pike phalanx in a metaphorical sense, in that the men behind, by crowding forward, oblige the men in front to fight, even when they can no longer use their pikes, being obliged to resort to their secondary weapon. There is no serious physical pressure as such, just some persuasive nudging. Is that about it?

This however strains the text of Polybios and the tacticians, who speak of physical pressure of the bodies of the rear rankers making "charge very forcible": the men "press on with the weight of their bodies." It's a real physical pressure, not just a closing of the back door to prevent front rankers from taking early military retirement.

Initially there is actual pressure. But the pressure is your own rear ranks pushing forward for the initial clash. On the collision, some pikes kill foes, more are probably driven to the ground (which is what I would do to get it out of harms way if it missed me). After that, the front ranks of pike are out of action, either in a body or shield, on the ground, maybe stepped on or broken, or unable to be drawn back far enough to strike again.  Some men surely just held their useless pikes, maybe they could still be of use in blocking incoming strikes.  But if Smythe applies to sarissa, then some men who were effectively the equivalent of renaissance rodeleros, moved forward to fight with sword and pelta. Or the pike formation loosened and foyning began.  Even if the rear ranks did not follow, the pikes on both sides helped to shield you from enemy pikes. I remember the first time I was in a phalanx and the spears came down, a pair to my right and left. They provide quite a bit of defense against strikes from the sides.

Or they just charged up to foyning range and spear fenced.  I believe both of these were options that occurred.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 04:05:45 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 03:57:33 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 03:14:36 PM

OK, I think I get it. Using Renaissance pikefighting as a benchmark, we are to understand the 'weight' of a jhellenistic pike phalanx in a metaphorical sense, in that the men behind, by crowding forward, oblige the men in front to fight, even when they can no longer use their pikes, being obliged to resort to their secondary weapon. There is no serious physical pressure as such, just some persuasive nudging. Is that about it?

This however strains the text of Polybios and the tacticians, who speak of physical pressure of the bodies of the rear rankers making "charge very forcible": the men "press on with the weight of their bodies." It's a real physical pressure, not just a closing of the back door to prevent front rankers from taking early military retirement.

Initially there is actual pressure. But the pressure is your own rear ranks pushing forward for the initial clash.

I would imagine that if a phalanx is moving forwards, there is no pushing of rank against rank at all - you can't walk properly when someone is pushing you in the back, and the fellow behind you would more likely than not trip over your feet if he got that close to you. Smythe has 'marching step with step' but that's not pushing.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 04:24:22 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 03:50:02 PM

Asklepiodotus' remark that "some, who wish to bring all the projecting spear-points to the same distance in front of the line, increase the length of the spears of the rear ranks" may represent a desire to facilitate this arrangement.
As I wrote, it is possible to reach the enemy with all pikes simultaneously if this is done. But I do not believe it is thought to be, and this passage suggests is was not the common practice.

Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 03:50:02 PM
Now, with 5 sarissas stuck in the enemy shield, the 16 men of the file close up to shield against back and push. The 5th man has 11 men behind him pushing, with the pressure on his back reaching the vicinity of half a ton - say 500kg at the most. However he does not transmit all this pressure to his pike; most of it is transmitted by his shield to the 4th rank man, and 100kg or so to his pike. The 4th rank man has 400kg pushing his back, and he transmits most of that via his shield to the 3rd rank man with 100kg transmitted to his pike. The 3rd rank man has 300kg pushing his back: he sends 100 kg along his pike and 200kg to the 2nd rank man. The 2nd rank man sends 100kg to his pike and 100kg to the front rank man, and the front rank man sends that remaining 100kg via his pike to the enemy shield. It works.

I suspect pikes can easily handle this pressure since vaulting poles, originally made of wood, can handle the far greater lateral forces of polevaulting.
Eh, not so much.  Apportioning force between spear and shield in this manner is not realistic.  What is more likely is putting force through the shaft until failure and your hand slips, then the force defaults to the shield.  Remember, it is the lateral force that allows a pole vaulter to hold onto his pole.  I am a big dude, and I could not hold a 100kg pole with just grip strength for long. I have actually done this when using boat hooks- they slip through your grip.

Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
The manuals are abundantly clear that phalangites stood in files about one cubit or 48cm wide. A phalangite just needs to hold his pike close to his body which doesn't require any additional lateral space. 'One cubit' of course is flexible, but it isn't 60cm. The problem is that no reenactors to my knowledge have actually tried this - shoulder to shoulder, facing forwards with shields in front and overlapping, pikes presented over the shields. It really needs to be tried to resolve once and for all if it is possible or not.
Of course we have done this.  Which is why I know it does not work. You cannot get to 45cm with an aspis because the width of your bicep is in the way, but even as close as you can get with an aspis is too close to use a spear effectively, and that is in one hand. At this density all you can use is a sword in overhand strikes.



Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
Sure. This is surrounded infantry trying to fall back from their enemies and crushing against the men behind them. But this is a different kettle of fish.
This is my point.  It is, in fact, the same kettle.


Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
I can think of two ways of refuting the sarissmos hypothesis: a) proving the phalangite pelta could not endure the strain of 400-odd kg of pressure, and b) proving that an aspis or phalangite pelta would generally be pierced by a sarissa pikehead applied to it with 100kg pressure. Does anyone have numbers?
As I said, the real problem is grip strength.  But here is the only data I have on aspis piercing, from De Groote.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 04:29:28 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 04:05:45 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 03:57:33 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 03:14:36 PM

OK, I think I get it. Using Renaissance pikefighting as a benchmark, we are to understand the 'weight' of a jhellenistic pike phalanx in a metaphorical sense, in that the men behind, by crowding forward, oblige the men in front to fight, even when they can no longer use their pikes, being obliged to resort to their secondary weapon. There is no serious physical pressure as such, just some persuasive nudging. Is that about it?

This however strains the text of Polybios and the tacticians, who speak of physical pressure of the bodies of the rear rankers making "charge very forcible": the men "press on with the weight of their bodies." It's a real physical pressure, not just a closing of the back door to prevent front rankers from taking early military retirement.

Initially there is actual pressure. But the pressure is your own rear ranks pushing forward for the initial clash.

I would imagine that if a phalanx is moving forwards, there is no pushing of rank against rank at all - you can't walk properly when someone is pushing you in the back, and the fellow behind you would more likely than not trip over your feet if he got that close to you. Smythe has 'marching step with step' but that's not pushing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRRhC-h4ON8
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 04:31:52 PM
If I can focus on just a couple of things:

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 04:24:22 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
The manuals are abundantly clear that phalangites stood in files about one cubit or 48cm wide. A phalangite just needs to hold his pike close to his body which doesn't require any additional lateral space. 'One cubit' of course is flexible, but it isn't 60cm. The problem is that no reenactors to my knowledge have actually tried this - shoulder to shoulder, facing forwards with shields in front and overlapping, pikes presented over the shields. It really needs to be tried to resolve once and for all if it is possible or not.
Of course we have done this.  Which is why I know it does not work. You cannot get to 45cm with an aspis because the width of your bicep is in the way, but even as close as you can get with an aspis is too close to use a spear effectively, and that is in one hand. At this density all you can use is a sword in overhand strikes.

This is for a 90cm wide hoplite aspis, with the hand within the bowl. Has it been tried with a 63cm or 73cm wide pelta with hand projecting beyond the edge (and angled up to your shoulder level)?

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 04:24:22 PM
As I said, the real problem is grip strength.  But here is the only data I have on aspis piercing, from De Groote.

What units is the impact energy measured in?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 04:34:32 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 04:29:28 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 04:05:45 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 03:57:33 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 03:14:36 PM

OK, I think I get it. Using Renaissance pikefighting as a benchmark, we are to understand the 'weight' of a jhellenistic pike phalanx in a metaphorical sense, in that the men behind, by crowding forward, oblige the men in front to fight, even when they can no longer use their pikes, being obliged to resort to their secondary weapon. There is no serious physical pressure as such, just some persuasive nudging. Is that about it?

This however strains the text of Polybios and the tacticians, who speak of physical pressure of the bodies of the rear rankers making "charge very forcible": the men "press on with the weight of their bodies." It's a real physical pressure, not just a closing of the back door to prevent front rankers from taking early military retirement.

Initially there is actual pressure. But the pressure is your own rear ranks pushing forward for the initial clash.

I would imagine that if a phalanx is moving forwards, there is no pushing of rank against rank at all - you can't walk properly when someone is pushing you in the back, and the fellow behind you would more likely than not trip over your feet if he got that close to you. Smythe has 'marching step with step' but that's not pushing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRRhC-h4ON8

Fine. That's three ranks, front rank leaning back, second rank upright, third rank leaning forwards to clear the legs. Now try it with 16 ranks.

I suspect this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zK2a8sglkDU) is the only way it could be made to work.  ::)
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 05:03:02 PM
This is far more likely. Notice by the way, that no one is being killed.  This would be a very low pressure othismos. The kind of packing that probably happened ephemerally in any ranked line combat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1v0jB3OswM
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 05:15:12 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 05:03:02 PM
This is far more likely. Notice by the way, that no one is being killed.  This would be a very low pressure othismos. The kind of packing that probably happened ephemerally in any ranked line combat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1v0jB3OswM

Mmmmh...front rank stops. Second rank moves to contact. Third rank moves to contact with second rank, and so on. Entire formation, now stationary, exerts pressure on brick wall. After 15 minutes, individual band members are carried away in strait jackets for psychological evaluation.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 12, 2019, 06:38:12 PM
QuoteWhat units is the impact energy measured in?

The axis is marked in Joules.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 07:05:12 PM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 12, 2019, 06:38:12 PM
QuoteWhat units is the impact energy measured in?

The axis is marked in Joules.

Difficult to know how to translate that into weight x cross-section of pikehead.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 07:38:08 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 05:15:12 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 05:03:02 PM
This is far more likely. Notice by the way, that no one is being killed.  This would be a very low pressure othismos. The kind of packing that probably happened ephemerally in any ranked line combat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1v0jB3OswM

Mmmmh...front rank stops. Second rank moves to contact. Third rank moves to contact with second rank, and so on. Entire formation, now stationary, exerts pressure on brick wall. After 15 minutes, individual band members are carried away in strait jackets for psychological evaluation.

Yep, that is othismos. No rank is ever pushed into spears as in the old Hanson-Schwartz style charge into spear points.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Dangun on March 13, 2019, 08:16:11 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 12:45:18 PM
If you understood my position on what othismos was, then my surety in its existence in a Macedonian context is all but banal. 

Excuse me, I had to read that a couple of times.
But did you just say that if only I understood your position then I would agree with you?

And you wonder why academics don't engage with re-enactors.

The basic problem remains that if we can't convincingly understand what othismos meant - or what historical battlefield behaviour was, then it is very difficult to draw conclusions about history from re-enactment. No matter how interesting it is.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 13, 2019, 04:13:53 PM
Quote from: Dangun on March 13, 2019, 08:16:11 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 12:45:18 PM
If you understood my position on what othismos was, then my surety in its existence in a Macedonian context is all but banal. 

Excuse me, I had to read that a couple of times.
But did you just say that if only I understood your position then I would agree with you?

And you wonder why academics don't engage with re-enactors.

The basic problem remains that if we can't convincingly understand what othismos meant - or what historical battlefield behaviour was, then it is very difficult to draw conclusions about history from re-enactment. No matter how interesting it is.

I make no claim about you agreeing with anything. Only that if you forget everything you ever read about othismos, most of which is based on a faulty understanding of how groups of men generate pressure, and understand my presentation of othismos as a state of crowding together of men in close combat, then imagining sarissaphoroi is othismos is not a controversial statement. Such crowding occurs in any group of men who are massed fighting another mass of men due to the rear ranks moving forward.  What differs is not the state, but the amount of force projected along a specific vector.  For example, all of the men can try to move a step forward in random directions, which essentially leads to Brownian diffusion. This could occur under panic conditions, but more likely is that the men try to move along a shared vector.  The most obvious is a rout, where the vector of the men is away from the enemy line. Because there is no boundary behind them, the army disperses. Men entering combat on the other hand have a shared movement vector towards the enemy line.  This causes ranks to bunch up- much like the marching band in animal house linked to above. In the tearless battle, Spartans were doing this even before they advanced and had to be told to seperate. Once the opposing lines meet, the forward progress of both is halted.  At this point the ranks behind have to pull up short to give them room to fight. If they do not, then the front ranks themselves have to nudge back against their own rear ranks to get them to back off.

Where the state of othismos begins, it is a noun, not a verb, is when the rear ranks move up tight in support. At first in hoplites, this is only the second rank, closing up on the first to help protect the front line men with their spears.  But when the combat moves to shield on shield and the fight goes to short swords or long knives, the rear ranks of all files close. This is probably universal in linear combat with all but the most disciplined forces. Again, if the front lines need more room to fight, they can nudge back on their own ranks and hopefully they respond by moving back.  You may also want a couple ranks close behind you to act as a wall at your back, so your foe cannot knock you back. But if you are a hoplite, with an aspis that we have shown can keep you completely safe under high levels of compression, then you can allow all of the men in your file to pack against you while you fight with your sword in your free right arm. Unless your foe also has such support, he cannot stand up to you and has to give ground.  Giving ground on a hoplite battlefield is what defines victory and the site of the Tropaeon, so his men break and run and you win.

Pretty straightforward really when you understand how crowds generate force. I think everything up to the last part, where huge pressure is exerted is not to controverial.  The last part, as I have always contended, cannot be proven without a time machine.  But if we accept that there was an othismos that involved pushing, this is surely how it happened. I would argue that those who try to show othismos was a "state of hard fighting", shield on shield, maybe with some localized pushing, but not as a whole unit, would have to explain why the whole unit did not join in.  Traditionally, as you yourself suggested, they have said that the front ranks would get crushed.  With an aspis, this is simply not the case. The mechanical properties of wood and bronze as well as human flesh have not changed in the last few thousand years.

As both an academic and a reenactor, I don't find myself self-conflicted.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 13, 2019, 04:18:06 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 05:15:12 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 05:03:02 PM
This is far more likely. Notice by the way, that no one is being killed.  This would be a very low pressure othismos. The kind of packing that probably happened ephemerally in any ranked line combat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1v0jB3OswM

Mmmmh...front rank stops. Second rank moves to contact. Third rank moves to contact with second rank, and so on. Entire formation, now stationary, exerts pressure on brick wall. After 15 minutes, individual band members are carried away in strait jackets for psychological evaluation.

Othismos is by definition stationary.  The moment one side takes a step back, the pressure drops and unless they stand again, allowing the enemy ranks to pack up against them, they are simply herded back until they break.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 13, 2019, 05:15:31 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 04:24:22 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
I can think of two ways of refuting the sarissmos hypothesis: a) proving the phalangite pelta could not endure the strain of 400-odd kg of pressure, and b) proving that an aspis or phalangite pelta would generally be pierced by a sarissa pikehead applied to it with 100kg pressure. Does anyone have numbers?
As I said, the real problem is grip strength.  But here is the only data I have on aspis piercing, from De Groote.

Looking at this again, your reenactors actually got to 368kg when in six ranks and supported by flanking files. Which suggests that 400kg would have been about the maximum force generated. That comes out at 80kg between 5 sarissas or 67kg between 6 sarissas. I found the article by De Groote (https://www.academia.edu/18007252/_Twas_when_my_shield_turned_traitor_Establishing_the_combat_effectiveness_of_the_Greek_hoplite_shield) but can't make up my mind whether it indicates that a rounded aspis or even more rounded Macedonian pelta would be pierced sometimes, half the time or most of the time by a sarissa. Jury's out.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 13, 2019, 07:00:44 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 13, 2019, 05:15:31 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 12, 2019, 04:24:22 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 12, 2019, 06:04:12 AM
I can think of two ways of refuting the sarissmos hypothesis: a) proving the phalangite pelta could not endure the strain of 400-odd kg of pressure, and b) proving that an aspis or phalangite pelta would generally be pierced by a sarissa pikehead applied to it with 100kg pressure. Does anyone have numbers?
As I said, the real problem is grip strength.  But here is the only data I have on aspis piercing, from De Groote.

Looking at this again, your reenactors actually got to 368kg when in six ranks and supported by flanking files. Which suggests that 400kg would have been about the maximum force generated. That comes out at 80kg between 5 sarissas or 67kg between 6 sarissas. I found the article by De Groote (https://www.academia.edu/18007252/_Twas_when_my_shield_turned_traitor_Establishing_the_combat_effectiveness_of_the_Greek_hoplite_shield) but can't make up my mind whether it indicates that a rounded aspis or even more rounded Macedonian pelta would be pierced sometimes, half the time or most of the time by a sarissa. Jury's out.

What you are thinking of is the physics behind a flying butress- each sarissa acting like a butress to take some % of the mass being transferred throught the file of men, shield to back.  The problem is that they are not static, and balancing the ratio of mass between shield and sarissa would not be as simple as you envision.

The bigger problem is as I posted earlier, no man can grip a 70kg pole for very long.  Just holding a sledge hammer with the shaft verticala nd the head down is tough for extended periods.  Go get 70kg worth of weights and try to hold it up by a rope.

I think what you envision is in fact what probably happened in a push of pike, but it also failed, which is why Smythe tells the front rank to go to the sword. They can't just stand there and be pushed through the pike.  And pikeman held the right hand over the but which would allow them to hold far more weight than gripping the shaft of a sarissa. Perhaps this is why they held the butt in hand.  Anyway, they would get the initial push of pike, but sustained force would have to be far lower than in hoplite othismos.

Let me be clear, they could push, but at far lower levels than hoplites. If this push was through a spear point though, they did not need 400kg of force- especially if the points had already damaged shields in the initial collision.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on March 13, 2019, 07:14:33 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 13, 2019, 07:00:44 PM
The bigger problem is as I posted earlier, no man can grip a 70kg pole for very long.  Just holding a sledge hammer with the shaft vertical and the head down is tough for extended periods.  Go get 70kg worth of weights and try to hold it up by a rope.

I hope this is not a stupid question, but should we be considering force rather than weight?  There is a difference: a bullet weighs a few grammes but can arrive with enough force to knock a man off his feet.  The weight of the sarissa presumably does not change no matter what force is being applied to the owner.  Granted that at a certain level of strain the user's grip will suffer, but is it quite likely that the point will go through the opponent's shield and perhaps the opponent before that level is actually reached?

QuoteLet me be clear, they could push, but at far lower levels than hoplites. If this push was through a spear point though, they did not need 400kg of force- especially if the points had already damaged shields in the initial collision.

Seems fair.  The 64,000 drachma question is of course how much push they actually needed to start things moving.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 13, 2019, 09:15:09 PM
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on March 13, 2019, 07:14:33 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 13, 2019, 07:00:44 PM
The bigger problem is as I posted earlier, no man can grip a 70kg pole for very long.  Just holding a sledge hammer with the shaft vertical and the head down is tough for extended periods.  Go get 70kg worth of weights and try to hold it up by a rope.

I hope this is not a stupid question, but should we be considering force rather than weight?  There is a difference: a bullet weighs a few grammes but can arrive with enough force to knock a man off his feet.  The weight of the sarissa presumably does not change no matter what force is being applied to the owner.  Granted that at a certain level of strain the user's grip will suffer, but is it quite likely that the point will go through the opponent's shield and perhaps the opponent before that level is actually reached?


In othismos force and Mass are fairly interchangeable because there is so little net movement.  In something like the collision of an advancing phalanx, velocity will be at its highest, but the physical link between men in file and the synchronicity of push timing will be low.  This is why a crowd-like othismos beats the old-style charging othismos hands down.  A single man cannot generate anything near the force of a stationary but synchronized file at the speeds he can run. 

That said, I am unsure that a man's grip would even suffice to hold onto his pike in the initial collision.  More likely, his arms give way and are propelled back and the shaft slips in his grasp- which is a failure of "linkage".  You guys can test this.  Get a broom stick and walk into a wall holding it like a pike.  See how fast you can do it until everything gives way.  Just watch out the shaft does not splinter.

I can predict that your arms will fail faster when held shoulder high, at the waist, you can brace your forearm across your body.  By the way, all of this changes if you have either a wrist strap on the shaft or a swelling in front of the hand as we see on lances for this reason.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 14, 2019, 05:47:42 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 13, 2019, 09:15:09 PM
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on March 13, 2019, 07:14:33 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 13, 2019, 07:00:44 PM
The bigger problem is as I posted earlier, no man can grip a 70kg pole for very long.  Just holding a sledge hammer with the shaft vertical and the head down is tough for extended periods.  Go get 70kg worth of weights and try to hold it up by a rope.

I hope this is not a stupid question, but should we be considering force rather than weight?  There is a difference: a bullet weighs a few grammes but can arrive with enough force to knock a man off his feet.  The weight of the sarissa presumably does not change no matter what force is being applied to the owner.  Granted that at a certain level of strain the user's grip will suffer, but is it quite likely that the point will go through the opponent's shield and perhaps the opponent before that level is actually reached?


In othismos force and Mass are fairly interchangeable because there is so little net movement.  In something like the collision of an advancing phalanx, velocity will be at its highest, but the physical link between men in file and the synchronicity of push timing will be low.  This is why a crowd-like othismos beats the old-style charging othismos hands down.  A single man cannot generate anything near the force of a stationary but synchronized file at the speeds he can run. 

That said, I am unsure that a man's grip would even suffice to hold onto his pike in the initial collision.  More likely, his arms give way and are propelled back and the shaft slips in his grasp- which is a failure of "linkage".  You guys can test this.  Get a broom stick and walk into a wall holding it like a pike.  See how fast you can do it until everything gives way.  Just watch out the shaft does not splinter.

I can predict that your arms will fail faster when held shoulder high, at the waist, you can brace your forearm across your body.  By the way, all of this changes if you have either a wrist strap on the shaft or a swelling in front of the hand as we see on lances for this reason.

Got it. A pike phalanx didn't have to generate 400kg of force through its sarissas; it just had to generate enough to outpush a hoplite phalanx. Hoplites form up at about 60 cm per file, probably a little more. Phalangites (stated by manuals and Polybios, to be confirmed by reenactors) form up at 48cm per file. That's roughly 3 phalangites for every 2 hoplites. So to equalise pressures, phalangites need to generate 2/3 the pressure of the hoplites, which comes out at 267kg - 53,5kg per sarissa if 5 sarissas, 44,5kg per sarissas if 6 sarissas (slightly more to outpush the hoplites).

Furthermore, it is likely that the hoplites would be generating less forward pressure if the front ranker was pushing a shield against pikeheads. It's a far less stable arrangement than shield against enemy shield. And if the front ranker saw that the pikeheads were penetrating his shield he would almost certainly go into reverse gear, pushing backwards in order to not get skewered. That's something like 40kg pressure removed from the hoplites' combined pressure and added to the phalangites' pressure, so hoplites now at 360kg face phalangites at 267kg - 40kg = 227kg, which comes out at 45.5kg per sarissa for 5 sarissas and 38 kg per sarissa at 6 sarissas. All rather theoretical but it starts looking reasonable.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on March 14, 2019, 07:35:05 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 13, 2019, 09:15:09 PM
In othismos force and Mass are fairly interchangeable because there is so little net movement.


Thanks, Paul - although have we not already observed that a key characteristic of phalanx vs phalanx interaction is movement?

QuoteIn something like the collision of an advancing phalanx, velocity will be at its highest, but the physical link between men in file and the synchronicity of push timing will be low.  This is why a crowd-like othismos beats the old-style charging othismos hands down.  A single man cannot generate anything near the force of a stationary but synchronized file at the speeds he can run.

Understood.

QuoteThat said, I am unsure that a man's grip would even suffice to hold onto his pike in the initial collision.  More likely, his arms give way and are propelled back and the shaft slips in his grasp- which is a failure of "linkage".  You guys can test this.  Get a broom stick and walk into a wall holding it like a pike.  See how fast you can do it until everything gives way.  Just watch out the shaft does not splinter.

For increased veracity, my preference would be to walk, complete with broomstick, into something resembling a person rather than a wall - otherwise one is getting the wrong idea about what happens on the other side of the equation.  (Any volunteers? ;) ) 

QuoteI can predict that your arms will fail faster when held shoulder high, at the waist, you can brace your forearm across your body.  By the way, all of this changes if you have either a wrist strap on the shaft or a swelling in front of the hand as we see on lances for this reason.

Mmmmh ... is this actually what happened with Montluc's merry men?  Rightly or wrongly, I think that what happens at the point of a sarissa means we do not run into problems with the grip.  If using blunt sarissas and relying on pressure alone, yes, I see the reasoning that the men exerting force would soon be shaftless; using sharp ones maybe changes the way we should be looking at the interaction.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 14, 2019, 01:49:40 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 14, 2019, 05:47:42 AM

Got it. A pike phalanx didn't have to generate 400kg of force through its sarissas; it just had to generate enough to outpush a hoplite phalanx. Hoplites form up at about 60 cm per file, probably a little more. Phalangites (stated by manuals and Polybios, to be confirmed by reenactors) form up at 48cm per file. That's roughly 3 phalangites for every 2 hoplites. So to equalise pressures, phalangites need to generate 2/3 the pressure of the hoplites, which comes out at 267kg - 53,5kg per sarissa if 5 sarissas, 44,5kg per sarissas if 6 sarissas (slightly more to outpush the hoplites).

Furthermore, it is likely that the hoplites would be generating less forward pressure if the front ranker was pushing a shield against pikeheads. It's a far less stable arrangement than shield against enemy shield. And if the front ranker saw that the pikeheads were penetrating his shield he would almost certainly go into reverse gear, pushing backwards in order to not get skewered. That's something like 40kg pressure removed from the hoplites' combined pressure and added to the phalangites' pressure, so hoplites now at 360kg face phalangites at 267kg - 40kg = 227kg, which comes out at 45.5kg per sarissa for 5 sarissas and 38 kg per sarissa at 6 sarissas. All rather theoretical but it starts looking reasonable.

You are way overthinking this one. In your vision all of those pikes have to be stuck in the same aspis for this to work the way you calculate.  More likely, I think, and still along the lines of what you wish to see, is that the front rank get's stuck into the enemy aspis, as they did the later scutii, on the initial charge.  The ranks behind the first sarissaphoroi move up behind him just as hoplites would to go to othismos- this happens very fast, as part of the charging motion.  Now they would enter othismos if the opposing hoplites also packed in tight.  But remember, those hoplites are still in their spear fencing phase, where they normally did not pack in tight.  So they probably did not here initially either.  Now the front rank, or two since the second joined in spear fencing, are getting pushed by a sarissa in the shield of the foremost hoplite.  Pressures are still low enough for both the sarissa to be held and the point not to be forced through the aspis.  The hoplites obviously give ground to the pressure, which signals their own rear ranks to close on them in support. 

What we have seen up to now is a sort of othismos, low pressure, but making use of force propagation from the rear.  It can only be done in the medium order, when the sarissaphoroi can stand square to the fore with the sarissa a hip height.  If they have the sarissa high, they cannot support the weight pushing on them, if they are t closer distance they have to be side-on (sorry, that is what every recreation has shown).  When side on, they are trading the ability to transfer mass forward in files, for extra points each foe must face. Perhaps this is why we are told the closest spacing is defensive.

If the hoplites do begin a high pressure othismos against sarissa points, they are likely to get the front rank skewered, so the front rank is unlikely to allow it, and instead will push back on their own ranks. What you end up with is a stalemate at low pressure othismos of whatever force can be sustained that does not either cause the shaft to slip in the hands or the point to go through the aspis (remember aspis faces are rather thin). Surely often this stalemate failed and hoplites got skewered or the shaft slipped and the second rank sarissa was brought to bear.  It could be that shafts usually slipped before shields gave way, then something like the flying buttress of multiple ranks of sarissa could occur. Unfortunately, every new point stuck in the shield makes it less likely that one of them will go through since now you have to divide the total force by the number of points.

Probably what happened is that they were stuck in this stalemate, with all of the advantages on the sarissa side. The next sarissa after the one or ones stuck would surely be able to strike sometimes, while the dory was useless.  The hoplites will have pined for their great-great-grandfather's auxilliary throwing spear. In fact, given Diodorus's confusion about spears being thrown in many of his hoplite battle descriptions, and the possibility that thureophoroi held two spears, I have wondered if late hoplites did go back to a second spear in the age of sarissaphoroi. All a hoplites could do otherwise is hope that some of their own men, not pinned to sarissa, could fight their way through the hedge of pikes. The outcomes of all the major battles say this is unlikely to be easy.  This too is why you do not want all five front ranks with progressively longer sarissa stuck in the enemy shields. It would be impossible to stop the hoplites from slipping beneath their own front ranks and slaughtering your defenseless men.

So there is definitely pushing. We can even call it othismos, because the mechanics are the same in many ways as hoplite othismos.  Just at a much lower pressure.

Last note, it is not due to a lack of stability that hoplite can't push forward.  The men beside them is what stabilized their forward progress.  Far worse would be is some men were halted and other's not.  Shield overlap midigates this to a large extent. I our 3 file experiments, only the center file was pushing on a force meter, yet the other ranks added force laterally.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Jim Webster on March 14, 2019, 01:59:35 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 14, 2019, 01:49:40 PM

Last note, it is not due to a lack of stability that hoplite can't push forward.  The men beside them is what stabilized their forward progress.  Far worse would be is some men were halted and other's not.  Shield overlap midigates this to a large extent. I our 3 file experiments, only the center file was pushing on a force meter, yet the other ranks added force laterally.

BUT the hoplites have to be able to win, because historically they did. They beat one phalanx in the field at Thebes and Alexander had to send in another. That didn't break them either, it was their flanks going that broke them
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 14, 2019, 02:17:26 PM
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on March 14, 2019, 07:35:05 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 13, 2019, 09:15:09 PM
In othismos force and Mass are fairly interchangeable because there is so little net movement.


Thanks, Paul - although have we not already observed that a key characteristic of phalanx vs phalanx interaction is movement?

This is one of those things that is very hard to describe, but obvious once you see it.  I do have an example I have used before to make it clear.  Push your hands together in front of your chest in an isometric fashion.  As you squeeze from both sides you get quite a bit of pressure. Your palms are quite good at sensing this.  Now let your left arm move back and you will feel a drop in pressure that drops depending on how fast you let your arm move. (don't cheat and add more pressure to the advancing arm :))

As in othismos, the pressure is greatest when both sides resist completely. You can maintain this pressure for quite some time because the aspis keeps you alive and the means of generating force is mostly through leaning your weight forward on the man in front of you rather than pushing with the legs. What happens then is that the rear ranks of one side give back a step.  Instantly the pressure drops as they let off and as they go back a step, it makes room for the next man in front to also go back a step.  Because the pressure is a function of resistance on both sides, it drops as a whole and the victorious men shuffle forward.  It is not that there is no pushing while this happens, only that it is far lower than the peak pressure, and more in line with the type of jostling we see in many combat situations.  It is the fact that othismos is such a fragile thing, with both parties needing to resist fully, that makes it something we do not see in all battles of linear infantry.  Try to othismos-ize a roman, and he just steps back a step and keep stabbing you.

I guess I should comment on why a hoplite would do it then.  First off because he grew up on stories of heroes who fought over the dead bodies of other heroes. He grew up in a culture that made the decisive factor in battle holding the ground that the dead bodies of his fellow citizens were on.  Maybe he even grew up playing ground acquisition games like the "plane tree battles" described by Pausanias. For whatever reason, hoplites seem to have a particular dislike for giving ground. You can of course beat men back, or eliminate them through attrition, but if you can also push their whole unit back while stabbing them, that seems a plus to me.

Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 14, 2019, 02:24:55 PM
Quote from: Jim Webster on March 14, 2019, 01:59:35 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 14, 2019, 01:49:40 PM

Last note, it is not due to a lack of stability that hoplite can't push forward.  The men beside them is what stabilized their forward progress.  Far worse would be is some men were halted and other's not.  Shield overlap midigates this to a large extent. I our 3 file experiments, only the center file was pushing on a force meter, yet the other ranks added force laterally.

BUT the hoplites have to be able to win, because historically they did. They beat one phalanx in the field at Thebes and Alexander had to send in another. That didn't break them either, it was their flanks going that broke them

Good point, but they win very rarely, and I wish we had descriptions how.  Maybe this is a case where a few men did fight past the hedge of sarissa.  Maybe they pulled a Cleonymus and just grabbed the sarissa, or broke the heads off Persian style.  Maybe they just wore them out in the stalemate. Hard to say.  Granicus may be another, but here I think disarray the culprit. There is a tale of a medieval pikeman jumping on the enemy pike, with his own held crosswise in front of him and taking the whole enemy rank of pikes down.  I never say never when men's valor may shine.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 02:47:03 PM
QuoteThere is a tale of a medieval pikeman jumping on the enemy pike, with his own held crosswise in front of him and taking the whole enemy rank of pikes down.

I think your are referring to Arnold von Winkelried (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_von_Winkelried), the Swiss hero, at Sempach.  As summarised by Wikipedia

According to legend, the Swiss initially could not break the close ranks of the Habsburg pikemen. Winkelried cried: "I will open a passage into the line; protect, dear countrymen and confederates, my wife and children..." He then threw himself upon the Austrian pikes, taking some of them down with his body. This broke up the Austrian front, and made an opening through which the Swiss could attack.

Unfortunately, Arnold is first named 150 years after the event and his feat, attributed to an anonymous soldier, first appears about 80 years after the event.  So he may not have existed.  Good story to inspire future citizens though, whether true or not.

Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 14, 2019, 03:14:41 PM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 02:47:03 PM
QuoteThere is a tale of a medieval pikeman jumping on the enemy pike, with his own held crosswise in front of him and taking the whole enemy rank of pikes down.

I think your are referring to Arnold von Winkelried (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_von_Winkelried), the Swiss hero, at Sempach.  As summarised by Wikipedia

According to legend, the Swiss initially could not break the close ranks of the Habsburg pikemen. Winkelried cried: "I will open a passage into the line; protect, dear countrymen and confederates, my wife and children..." He then threw himself upon the Austrian pikes, taking some of them down with his body. This broke up the Austrian front, and made an opening through which the Swiss could attack.

Unfortunately, Arnold is first named 150 years after the event and his feat, attributed to an anonymous soldier, first appears about 80 years after the event.  So he may not have existed.  Good story to inspire future citizens though, whether true or not.

Thanks, it is a great story.  If any of you have a publishable reference for Smythe and Monluc, I would be thankful. I have them from online sources.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 04:03:32 PM
Firstly, thanks to Paul for his explanations - I think they help a lot.  One comment on throwing things.  Byzantine hoplites could, according to their manuals, throw their 12 ft spears in melee at times, so maybe a frustrated hoplite could hurl his dory and try and get in with his sword?  Throwing things at pikemen by people who can't really reach to do other harm is not unknown at other times e.g. the English cavalry threw axes and maces and the Scots schiltrons.  At the Battle of Langside, aforementioned, pistols were thrown when the pike push siezed up.  And, of course, Smythe recommends the front rankers in a stalled push throw their pikes into the enemy ranks prior to drawing swords (though I suspect there that is the best way of getting them out of the way so they don't get tangled underfoot).

On the idea of targetting shields for spiking and pushing, Paul has a point that the pelta would be very hard to hold vertical at right angles to the file direction - sloping in some direction seems more intuitive.  From previous discussions I know we don't know how the shield was held, except it wasn't like an aspis and it had a handle (sometimes mistranslated as strap).  Justin, do you have one of your graphics that show how it is held in your reconstruction?

Final point on that energy graph for splitting an aspis.  The energy seems quite low compared with the test figures for impact energy from other weapons (alas spears seems to be the one missing).  But knife stabs have been measured at an average of around 30 J impact energy (and peak much higher), which suggests to me that a strong phalangite with a small headed sarissa could easily push it through an aspis if these figures are right (or at least I read them right).  Then what happens?  Is the hoplite going to play the game, or does he angle his shieldto turn the blow? 
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 04:19:19 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 14, 2019, 03:14:41 PM

If any of you have a publishable reference for Smythe and Monluc, I would be thankful. I have them from online sources.

There is a facsimile of a translation of Monluc here (https://archive.org/details/blaisedemonluc00montiala) - the description of the pike fight at Cerisoles is p187-9.  Like you, I'm using old sources online, so don't know any modern editions.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 15, 2019, 05:47:00 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 14, 2019, 01:49:40 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 14, 2019, 05:47:42 AM

Got it. A pike phalanx didn't have to generate 400kg of force through its sarissas; it just had to generate enough to outpush a hoplite phalanx. Hoplites form up at about 60 cm per file, probably a little more. Phalangites (stated by manuals and Polybios, to be confirmed by reenactors) form up at 48cm per file. That's roughly 3 phalangites for every 2 hoplites. So to equalise pressures, phalangites need to generate 2/3 the pressure of the hoplites, which comes out at 267kg - 53,5kg per sarissa if 5 sarissas, 44,5kg per sarissas if 6 sarissas (slightly more to outpush the hoplites).

Furthermore, it is likely that the hoplites would be generating less forward pressure if the front ranker was pushing a shield against pikeheads. It's a far less stable arrangement than shield against enemy shield. And if the front ranker saw that the pikeheads were penetrating his shield he would almost certainly go into reverse gear, pushing backwards in order to not get skewered. That's something like 40kg pressure removed from the hoplites' combined pressure and added to the phalangites' pressure, so hoplites now at 360kg face phalangites at 267kg - 40kg = 227kg, which comes out at 45.5kg per sarissa for 5 sarissas and 38 kg per sarissa at 6 sarissas. All rather theoretical but it starts looking reasonable.

You are way overthinking this one. In your vision all of those pikes have to be stuck in the same aspis for this to work the way you calculate.  More likely, I think, and still along the lines of what you wish to see, is that the front rank get's stuck into the enemy aspis, as they did the later scutii, on the initial charge.  The ranks behind the first sarissaphoroi move up behind him just as hoplites would to go to othismos- this happens very fast, as part of the charging motion.  Now they would enter othismos if the opposing hoplites also packed in tight.  But remember, those hoplites are still in their spear fencing phase, where they normally did not pack in tight.  So they probably did not here initially either.  Now the front rank, or two since the second joined in spear fencing, are getting pushed by a sarissa in the shield of the foremost hoplite.  Pressures are still low enough for both the sarissa to be held and the point not to be forced through the aspis.  The hoplites obviously give ground to the pressure, which signals their own rear ranks to close on them in support. 

What we have seen up to now is a sort of othismos, low pressure, but making use of force propagation from the rear.  It can only be done in the medium order, when the sarissaphoroi can stand square to the fore with the sarissa a hip height.  If they have the sarissa high, they cannot support the weight pushing on them, if they are t closer distance they have to be side-on (sorry, that is what every recreation has shown).  When side on, they are trading the ability to transfer mass forward in files, for extra points each foe must face. Perhaps this is why we are told the closest spacing is defensive.

If the hoplites do begin a high pressure othismos against sarissa points, they are likely to get the front rank skewered, so the front rank is unlikely to allow it, and instead will push back on their own ranks. What you end up with is a stalemate at low pressure othismos of whatever force can be sustained that does not either cause the shaft to slip in the hands or the point to go through the aspis (remember aspis faces are rather thin). Surely often this stalemate failed and hoplites got skewered or the shaft slipped and the second rank sarissa was brought to bear.  It could be that shafts usually slipped before shields gave way, then something like the flying buttress of multiple ranks of sarissa could occur. Unfortunately, every new point stuck in the shield makes it less likely that one of them will go through since now you have to divide the total force by the number of points.

Probably what happened is that they were stuck in this stalemate, with all of the advantages on the sarissa side. The next sarissa after the one or ones stuck would surely be able to strike sometimes, while the dory was useless.  The hoplites will have pined for their great-great-grandfather's auxilliary throwing spear. In fact, given Diodorus's confusion about spears being thrown in many of his hoplite battle descriptions, and the possibility that thureophoroi held two spears, I have wondered if late hoplites did go back to a second spear in the age of sarissaphoroi. All a hoplites could do otherwise is hope that some of their own men, not pinned to sarissa, could fight their way through the hedge of pikes. The outcomes of all the major battles say this is unlikely to be easy.  This too is why you do not want all five front ranks with progressively longer sarissa stuck in the enemy shields. It would be impossible to stop the hoplites from slipping beneath their own front ranks and slaughtering your defenseless men.

So there is definitely pushing. We can even call it othismos, because the mechanics are the same in many ways as hoplite othismos.  Just at a much lower pressure.

Last note, it is not due to a lack of stability that hoplite can't push forward.  The men beside them is what stabilized their forward progress.  Far worse would be is some men were halted and other's not.  Shield overlap midigates this to a large extent. I our 3 file experiments, only the center file was pushing on a force meter, yet the other ranks added force laterally.

This is very plausible and may well be what happened, but I just wonder if it doesn't sufficiently take into account the weight of the rear ranks as described by the sources - if 11 out of 16 ranks "press forward those in front by the weight of their bodies; and thus make the charge very forcible" wouldn't that produce a high pressure rather than low pressure othismos?

Re packing to close order for this kind of othismos, Polybios seems clear enough that it happened at Sellasia: "Finally, the troops around Antigonus, packing their sarissas closely together and making use of the phalanx's unique close-order disposition, attacked the Lacedaimonians with force, driving them back from their field-defences."*

I feel we are missing something that would account for considerable pressure by a pike push but without the sarissa points generally penetrating the hoplites' or other phalangites' shields. What we really need are a couple of thousand dedicated reenactors willing to sacrifice their lives for the cause of Knowledge. They form two mini-phalanxes and go at it until the front ranks turn each other into kebabs. Then we'll know.  :)

* the "unique close-order disposition" is my own translation from the Greek. We can argue about it if you like.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 15, 2019, 05:57:47 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 04:03:32 PM
On the idea of targetting shields for spiking and pushing, Paul has a point that the pelta would be very hard to hold vertical at right angles to the file direction - sloping in some direction seems more intuitive.  From previous discussions I know we don't know how the shield was held, except it wasn't like an aspis and it had a handle (sometimes mistranslated as strap).  Justin, do you have one of your graphics that show how it is held in your reconstruction?

Not yet. This needs a replica shield and some experimentation. My own working hypothesis is that the ochanon was a loose armband that enabled the phalangite to carry the shield at his side - 90 degrees to the facing of his body - at shoulder height by sliding the armband up to his upper arm with his elbow held high and his forearm level at chest height. He holds the sarissa shaft with his left hand but it is the sarissa that bears the weight of his left arm whilst his right arm bears the weight of the sarissa. He also has a strap that works with the ochanon.

He need to keep his shield beside his should like this in order to be able to double from intermediate to close order. If the shields are in front there isn't enough space between the intermediate files for the rear half files to move up between the front half files. Once doubling is done and the phalangites are in close order each phalangite lowers his elbow. His shield slides down until the ochanon is now around his elbow. The shield naturally rotates to a forward facing angle - the strap pulls it forwards - and we have synaspismos. Just a theory

Quote from: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 04:03:32 PMFinal point on that energy graph for splitting an aspis.  The energy seems quite low compared with the test figures for impact energy from other weapons (alas spears seems to be the one missing).  But knife stabs have been measured at an average of around 30 J impact energy (and peak much higher), which suggests to me that a strong phalangite with a small headed sarissa could easily push it through an aspis if these figures are right (or at least I read them right).  Then what happens?  Is the hoplite going to play the game, or does he angle his shieldto turn the blow?

That's the $20 000 question.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: RichT on March 15, 2019, 09:53:02 AM
Justin
Quote
* the "unique close-order disposition" is my own translation from the Greek. We can argue about it if you like.

What would be the point? But I'll comment on it.

Pol 2.69.9
τέλος οἱ περὶ τὸν Ἀντίγονον συμφράξαντες τὰς σαρίσας καὶ χρησάμενοι τῷ τῆς ἐπαλλήλου φάλαγγος ἰδιώματι, βίᾳ προσπεσόντες ἐξέωσαν ἐκ τῶν ὀχυρωμάτων τοὺς Λακεδαιμονίους.

Shuckburgh (on Perseus):
"At length Antigonus ordered a charge in close order and in double phalanx; the enormous weight of this peculiar formation proved sufficient to finally dislodge the Lacedaemonians from their strongholds."

Paton (Loeb):
"Until, on Antigonus ordering the Macedonians to close up in the peculiar formation of the double phalanx with its serried line of pikes, they delivered a charge which finally forced the Lacedaemonians from their stronghold."

Swanton:
"Finally, the troops around Antigonus, packing their sarissas closely together and making use of the phalanx's unique close-order disposition, attacked the Lacedaimonians with force, driving them back from their field-defences."

Me:
"Finally those about Antigonus, crowding together their sarissas and making use of the features of the double phalanx, forcibly attacking the Lacedaimonians pushed them out of their strongholds."

Comments:
"crowding together their sarissas" is sumphraxantes, the same phrasso verb we talked about last time we had this discussion.

"double phalanx" - literally 'one after another phalanx' - the Macedonians were already in double phalanx, Pol 2.66.9: "Owing to the narrowness of the ground, the Macedonians were arranged in a double phalanx". Strictly speaking a double phalanx is one phalanx formed behind another rather than the usually assumed double depth.

"strongholds" - the Spartans had already pulled down and advanced in front of their fortifications according to 2.69.6, so perhaps Pol has in mind the hill rather than then palisade.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 15, 2019, 03:42:57 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 15, 2019, 05:47:00 AM

* the "unique close-order disposition" is my own translation from the Greek. We can argue about it if you like.

I am with Rich on this one.  Redoubling would not have allowed them to take this hill, but stacking units would.  The explanation of why goes to the heart of Theban deep rank tactics.

As we showed with the force curve you posted earlier, and in fairness was presaged by Hanson himself without data, you get diminishing returns as you add men in file after 8 and these gains become smaller after about 12-16. This might in part explain the common file depths we see. So the question I am often asked is what did the 49th rank hoplites add at Leuktra? Or the baggage handlers for that matter.  The key is understanding how a unit in othismos is defeated.  Anything that makes it difficult for that last man in file to take a step back helps you stay in the game.  This could be the fact that stepping back is moving up a slope, but what would be best is to have a wall at their backs.  You could crush a hoplite unit against a wall all day and it could not break.  The next best thing to a wall is another crowd of men. There is a great deal of inertia, in the colloquial sense, to trying to get a large group of men to move back. Those men have no clue what is happening a dozen or more ranks ahead. They judge how the battle is going by the way the men right in front of them are acting. You have to transfer the information to the rear of that mass to get the last ranks to move.

Thus, even if deep ranks add zero pressure to the enemy unit, they do press on their own men and make it difficult to move back.  The result is a ratcheting advance, where the natural fore and back movement of men in the pushing struggle is now biases in one direction.  50 ranks may not be able to put out more force than 12, but they are much much harder to move back. Unless the 12 ranks can kill enough men to cause a general panic in the 50 ranks, they will inevitably lose.  Interestingly, the whole time they are losing, they may think they are winning, because at the front, they are out-pushing the men directly in front of them.  But like punching a boxer on the ropes, they just would not go back. If you were a bird looking down, you would see each side stretching and contracting like an accordion, but the stretches back would be a bit farther for the 12 ranks.

At sellasia, the Spartans have the help of the slope.  We do not need to invoke a high pressure othismos to get them to push the Macedonians down the hill. Even the relatively smaller force that can be pushed through sarissa is enough to get them moving back.  The answer is to invoke the wall-like function of a mass of men and throw the second phalanx directly behind the first. Now we have a more equal fight, where both sides have something hindering rearward movement.

I left out any notion of the deep rear ranks adding force because our experiments showed that there is a drop of.  But that is not the whole story.  Remember that this drop off occurs because the men cannot fully coordinate their movements over such distance.  My hoplites had never done this and only had 10 minutes of my instruction on how to push.  The group I did not instruct, who tried to push in the old-style sideways manner performed terribly.  But even my group would have done better if they had any history of moving in a group- as in group dancing.  Also, if they had someone calling out time like men would rowing a galley. One reason why rock concerts are so dangerous for crowd crushing disasters is that the beat caused synchronicity of movement. There is a whole field of study on this.  What can happen in deep ranks is that you can get synchronicity by accident.  Just as you will get waves at sea that are freakishly tall due to a perfect alignment of wave periods, you can get a theoretically huge pulse every now and them with deep ranks.  We had peaks that were far higher than the 400kg we reported as the maximum sustained force- meaning the number stayed stable on the scale long enough for me to record it. Many times pulses were a blur of numbers higher than the one that it settled on. I hope I am not making this more confusing, because instant pulses like this are so quick that they can't push anyone very far, but they can do things like lift men off their feet momentarily. I bring this up because I think it is through such pulses that shields may have been crushed at Coronea, and even in a lower pressure setting, such spikes would force a sarissa point through a shield.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 16, 2019, 03:40:29 AM
Let's do some Greek:

τέλος - the issue/resolution (of the battle)
οἱ περὶ τὸν Ἀντίγονον - those round about Antigonus
συμφράξαντες - pressing/packing closely together
τὰς σαρίσας - the sarissas
καὶ - and
χρησάμενοι - making use of
τῷ - the (refers to ἰδιώματι)
τῆς ἐπαλλήλου φάλαγγος - of the phalanx close behind/in close order
ἰδιώματι, - peculiarity, specific property, unique feature
βίᾳ - with force
προσπεσόντες - falling upon/attacking
ἐξέωσαν - thrust out, expelled
ἐκ τῶν ὀχυρωμάτων - from the strongholds (field defences in this case)
τοὺς Λακεδαιμονίους. - the Macedonians

The key word here is ἐπαλλήλου which can be translated (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=e%29pallh%2Flou&la=greek&can=e%29pallh%2Flou0&prior=th=s&d=Perseus:text:1999.01.0233:book=2:chapter=69:section=9&i=1#lexicon) as either 'close behind' or 'in close order'.* If it is translated as 'close behind' in the sense that a second phalanx moves up behind the first to lend it support then we would expect to find this elsewhere since Polybios says it is a 'peculiarity, specific property, unique feature' of the phalanx (of the Macedonian phalanx as opposed to the hoplite phalanx). But I'm not aware of any other mention in the sources of two phalanxes lining up one behind the other so that the second phalanx can act as a backstop to an othismos push by the first phalanx. And using depth to help othismos was very much a feature of hoplite phalanxes, at least of Theban ones.

Taking ἐπαλλήλου in the sense of 'close order' makes better sense. The one cubit close order file of the phalanx was peculiar to that formation, not being found in any other infantry formation, and in this context it complements the 'packing the sarissas closely together'.

Which means that Antigonus wins the othismos (sorry! sarissmos) contest by doubling files to close order. Two Macedonian files now press against every Spartan one - the implication is that the Spartans, new to the game of pike phalanxes, did not know how to use close order. The Spartans are out-shoved and lose the battle.

* reading all the uses of the word it seems to have the overall meaning of 'one close to another' - 'close behind' is just one of the applications.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 16, 2019, 04:48:05 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 16, 2019, 03:40:29 AM
Let's do some Greek:

But I'm not aware of any other mention in the sources of two phalanxes lining up one behind the other so that the second phalanx can act as a backstop to an othismos push by the first phalanx.

Polybius uses the term 4 times.  Here are the other three, all stacked in series:

Plb. 2.66
Owing to the narrowness of the ground, the Macedonians were arranged in a double phalanx, one close behind the other, while the mercenaries were placed in front of them.
( προτάξας οὖν τοὺς μισθοφόρους ἐπέστησεδιφαλαγγίαν ἐπάλληλον τῶν Μακεδόνων: ἐποίει δὲ τοῦτο διὰ τὴν στενότητατῶν τόπων.)


Plb. 11.11
Meanwhile Philopoemen too had arranged his army in three divisions, and was leading them out of Mantinea, the Illyrians and the men with body armour by the gate leading to the temple of Poseidon, and with them all the rest of the foreign contingent and lightarmed troops; by the next gate, toward the west, the phalanx; and by the next the Achaean cavalry. He sent his light-armed men forward to occupy the hill, which rises to a considerable height above the road called Xenis and the above-mentioned temple: he stationed the men with body armour next, resting on this hill to the south; next them the Illyrians; next them, in the same straight line, the phalanx, drawn up in companies, with an interval between each, along the ditch which runs towards the temple of Poseidon, right through the middle of the plain of Mantinea, until it touches the range of mountains that forms the boundary of the territory of the Elisphasii. Next to them, on the right wing, he stationed the Achaean cavalry, under the command of Aristaenetus of Dyme; while on the left wing he led the whole of the foreign contingent, drawn up in lines one behind the other. ( πρὸς μὲν τούτοις ἐπὶ τὸδεξιὸν κέρας ἐπέστησε τοὺς Ἀχαϊκοὺς ἱππεῖς, ὧν Ἀρισταίνετος ἡγεῖτο Δυμαῖος:κατὰ δὲ τὸ λαιὸν αὐτὸς εἶχε τὸ ξενικὸν ἅπαν ἐν ἐπαλλήλοις τάξεσιν.)


Plb. 12.18
If therefore he were to put his whole thirty thousand on the ground, he would have to mass his cavalry alone nearly three times the usual depth; and then what room is left for his large force of mercenaries?
(ἐὰν δὲ πάνταςἐκτάττῃ τοὺς τρισμυρίους, βραχὺ λείπει τοῦ τριφαλαγγίαν ἐπάλληλον εἶναι τῶνἱππέων αὐτῶν.)

Lest you think a diphalanx is doubled rather than stacked, think of Polybius's mention of the Tetraphalanx which has to be stacked:

Plb. 12.20.7]  It was, therefore much better to march twice or four times the ordinary depth of a phalanx1 in good order, for which sufficient ground could possibly be found.

διόπερ οὐδὲ παρὰ μικρὸν ἦν κρεῖττον ἄγειν διφαλαγγίαν ἢ τετραφαλαγγίαν ἁρμόζουσαν, ᾗ καὶ τόπον πορείας εὑρεῖν οὐκ ἀδύνατον, καὶ τὸ παρατάξαι ταχέως ῥᾴδιόν γε, δυνάμενον διὰ τῶν προδρόμων ἐκ πολλοῦ γινώσκειν τὴν τῶν πολεμίων παρουσίαν.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 16, 2019, 06:49:09 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 16, 2019, 04:48:05 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 16, 2019, 03:40:29 AM
Let's do some Greek:

But I'm not aware of any other mention in the sources of two phalanxes lining up one behind the other so that the second phalanx can act as a backstop to an othismos push by the first phalanx.

Polybius uses the term 4 times.  Here are the other three, all stacked in series:

Plb. 2.66
Owing to the narrowness of the ground, the Macedonians were arranged in a double phalanx, one close behind the other, while the mercenaries were placed in front of them.
( προτάξας οὖν τοὺς μισθοφόρους ἐπέστησεδιφαλαγγίαν ἐπάλληλον τῶν Μακεδόνων: ἐποίει δὲ τοῦτο διὰ τὴν στενότητατῶν τόπων.)

Ummm...

προτάξας - He placed in front
οὖν τοὺς μισθοφόρους - the mercenaries.
ἐπέστησε - He placed
διφαλαγγίαν - the diphalanx
ἐπάλληλον - close behind
τῶν Μακεδόνων - of the Macedonians.

ἐποίει - He was doing
δὲ τοῦτο - this
διὰ -owing to
τὴν στενότητα - the narrowness
τῶν τόπων. of the ground

Polybius uses the term διφαλαγγία in 12.20.6-7:

      
And what can be less prepared than a phalanx advancing in line but broken and disunited? How much easier indeed it would have been to develop from proper marching-order into order of battle than to straighten out and prepare for action on thickly wooded and fissured ground a broken line with numerous gaps in it. It would, therefore, have been considerably better to form a proper double or quadruple phalanx [διφαλαγγίαν ἢ τετραφαλαγγίαν], for which it was not impossible to find marching room and which it would have been quite easy to get into order of battle expeditiously enough, as he was enabled through his scouts to receive in good time warning of the approach of the enemy.

'Diphalanx' here refers to a phalanx marching in a double column (and a quadruple phalanx in 4 parallel columns) that is not in line but 'can get into order of battle' with speed once near the enemy. Arrian describes the diphalanx as a marching formation in a double column: Tactics: 29.1-2, as does Arrian: Tactics: 36.

So Antigonus forms his phalanx up in two columns, fronted by the mercenaries, and marches up to the hill where they quickly deploy in line. Notice that the diphalanx is 'close behind' the mercenaries, not one phalanx close behind another.

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 16, 2019, 04:48:05 AMPlb. 11.11
Meanwhile Philopoemen too had arranged his army in three divisions, and was leading them out of Mantinea, the Illyrians and the men with body armour by the gate leading to the temple of Poseidon, and with them all the rest of the foreign contingent and lightarmed troops; by the next gate, toward the west, the phalanx; and by the next the Achaean cavalry. He sent his light-armed men forward to occupy the hill, which rises to a considerable height above the road called Xenis and the above-mentioned temple: he stationed the men with body armour next, resting on this hill to the south; next them the Illyrians; next them, in the same straight line, the phalanx, drawn up in companies, with an interval between each, along the ditch which runs towards the temple of Poseidon, right through the middle of the plain of Mantinea, until it touches the range of mountains that forms the boundary of the territory of the Elisphasii. Next to them, on the right wing, he stationed the Achaean cavalry, under the command of Aristaenetus of Dyme; while on the left wing he led the whole of the foreign contingent, drawn up in lines one behind the other. ( πρὸς μὲν τούτοις ἐπὶ τὸδεξιὸν κέρας ἐπέστησε τοὺς Ἀχαϊκοὺς ἱππεῖς, ὧν Ἀρισταίνετος ἡγεῖτο Δυμαῖος:κατὰ δὲ τὸ λαιὸν αὐτὸς εἶχε τὸ ξενικὸν ἅπαν ἐν ἐπαλλήλοις τάξεσιν.)

ἐπαλλήλοις τάξεσιν - can be (and is in some translations) rendered as 'companies close together' or 'in close order.' There was a close order formation for cavalry. But sure, taxeis one behind the other also works (though why would Machanidas deploy cavalry in depth?)

Quote from: PMBardunias on March 16, 2019, 04:48:05 AMPlb. 12.18
If therefore he were to put his whole thirty thousand on the ground, he would have to mass his cavalry alone nearly three times the usual depth; and then what room is left for his large force of mercenaries?
(ἐὰν δὲ πάνταςἐκτάττῃ τοὺς τρισμυρίους, βραχὺ λείπει τοῦ τριφαλαγγίαν ἐπάλληλον εἶναι τῶνἱππέων αὐτῶν.)

Here Polybios makes clear that the three supposed groups of Persian cavalry would be one behind the other since one group alone would occupy the breadth of the available space. So fine.



Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 16, 2019, 03:20:13 PM
Yes, but in each case they stacked, either laterally or in depth. In no case are they doubled to closer order as you would read Sellasia. 

The double phalanx is akin to Xenophons Orthoi lochoi, which are intentionally not dense so as to move quickly.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 16, 2019, 05:04:44 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 16, 2019, 03:20:13 PM
Yes, but in each case they stacked, either laterally or in depth. In no case are they doubled to closer order as you would read Sellasia. 

The double phalanx is akin to Xenophons Orthoi lochoi, which are intentionally not dense so as to move quickly.

Sure, but the point is that the diphalanx of Antigonus' deployment is not the same as the phalanx that fights the Spartans. That phalanx is not paired (no 'di-'). The diphalanx is a marching formation, or more precisely, a marching formation in close proximity to the enemy. The ἐπαλλήλου φάλαγγος isn't following anything or close to anything, so ἐπαλλήλου can only mean - as it does in several translations - that the phalanx is close in itself, i.e. its files are close together.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: RichT on March 16, 2019, 05:14:19 PM
Like I said - what would be the point of arguing about it? It leads to no greater understanding, and spreads a load of misinformation. Pointless.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on March 17, 2019, 12:02:51 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 16, 2019, 05:04:44 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 16, 2019, 03:20:13 PM
Yes, but in each case they stacked, either laterally or in depth. In no case are they doubled to closer order as you would read Sellasia. 

The double phalanx is akin to Xenophons Orthoi lochoi, which are intentionally not dense so as to move quickly.

Sure, but the point is that the diphalanx of Antigonus' deployment is not the same as the phalanx that fights the Spartans. That phalanx is not paired (no 'di-'). The diphalanx is a marching formation, or more precisely, a marching formation in close proximity to the enemy. The ἐπαλλήλου φάλαγγος isn't following anything or close to anything, so ἐπαλλήλου can only mean - as it does in several translations - that the phalanx is close in itself, i.e. its files are close together.

So here is my problem: The ground is too narrow for two deployed phalanxes, so Antigonos deploys two phalanxes in marching column as they approach with the mercs in front.  Then what?  Surely it is still too narrow to deploy two phalanxes unless they were deployed in closest order as soon that they formed.  This gives you no room to double later. Is it your position that there was no change in formation later when the tide turns, but just a simple rally that made use of the already, and previously losing, formation's close order?  Doesn't it make more sense that even if he were describing the approach in two columns undeployed that one would move ahead and deploy and the other move up behind?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on March 17, 2019, 05:33:28 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 17, 2019, 12:02:51 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on March 16, 2019, 05:04:44 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on March 16, 2019, 03:20:13 PM
Yes, but in each case they stacked, either laterally or in depth. In no case are they doubled to closer order as you would read Sellasia. 

The double phalanx is akin to Xenophons Orthoi lochoi, which are intentionally not dense so as to move quickly.

Sure, but the point is that the diphalanx of Antigonus' deployment is not the same as the phalanx that fights the Spartans. That phalanx is not paired (no 'di-'). The diphalanx is a marching formation, or more precisely, a marching formation in close proximity to the enemy. The ἐπαλλήλου φάλαγγος isn't following anything or close to anything, so ἐπαλλήλου can only mean - as it does in several translations - that the phalanx is close in itself, i.e. its files are close together.

So here is my problem: The ground is too narrow for two deployed phalanxes, so Antigonos deploys two phalanxes in marching column as they approach with the mercs in front.  Then what?  Surely it is still too narrow to deploy two phalanxes unless they were deployed in closest order as soon that they formed.  This gives you no room to double later. Is it your position that there was no change in formation later when the tide turns, but just a simple rally that made use of the already, and previously losing, formation's close order?  Doesn't it make more sense that even if he were describing the approach in two columns undeployed that one would move ahead and deploy and the other move up behind?

Antigonus is emerging from a pass, so the ground where he initially deploys is too narrow to set up the whole phalanx at its full width (just the part that attacks Cleomenes' son on the other hill). The Spartans on their two hills beyond the pass have plenty of lateral space - they don't form double lines. So Antigonus is obliged to advance towards the Spartan left in double column and deploy in line only when near the Spartans at the base of the hill. The mercenaries are a screen for the column to prevent the Spartans from attacking the phalangites whilst they are still in column. Once at the base of the hill Antigonus now has plenty of room to deploy his phalanx in a single intermediate-order line that matches the frontage of Cleomenes' phalanx, and has no problem doubling to close order later on.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 06, 2019, 10:53:51 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 04:03:32 PM
On the idea of targetting shields for spiking and pushing, Paul has a point that the pelta would be very hard to hold vertical at right angles to the file direction - sloping in some direction seems more intuitive.  From previous discussions I know we don't know how the shield was held, except it wasn't like an aspis and it had a handle (sometimes mistranslated as strap).  Justin, do you have one of your graphics that show how it is held in your reconstruction?

I finally made a working replica of the shallower shield using layers of cardboard, making the shield strap out of plastic cord and the telamon from part of an old belt. After experimenting with the attachments points for the strap on the shield I got it to work: one can keep the shield at one's side with the telamon around the upper arm and the elbow raised (the shield naturally sits at 90 degrees to the facing of the body, meaning that doubling from intermediate order to at 48cm wide close order becomes possible - the shield doesn't get in the way).

To bring the shield around to the front one wold have to ground the sarissa, continuing to hold it with one's left arm, and use the right arm to pull the shield around whilst lowering the left elbow. It's quickly done. The telamon is now around the elbow and the shield faces forwards. Resuming one's right hand grip on the sarissa, one simply raises it and tips it forwards so it is presented over the edge of the shield to the right (pole vaulter grip). The left elbow rests on the telamon and the shield strap carries the weight of the arm and shield. The right arm, close to the chest, holds the sarissa in a relaxed way - the arm bones are actually carrying the weight. I could maintain this pose for ages.

The shield  is very firmly braced on a 5-point position - lower edge  resting against the hip, upper right edge braced by left arm, centre held by left elbow, and two points to the left and right of the telamon held by the strap. The shield is very rigid. One can advance like this in a 3/4 pose, raise the shield to block enemy thrusts at the face, and make one's own sarissa thrusts up to 2 feet forwards or so.

Forming up into a 48cm close order is no problem as the shield straps are fastened fairly close to the centre of the shield, allowing neighbouring shields to overlap without knocking against them.

I'll post some photos shortly.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on April 06, 2019, 08:53:20 PM
Sounds promising, Justin: it will be interesting to see this.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on April 07, 2019, 04:07:53 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 06, 2019, 10:53:51 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 04:03:32 PM
On the idea of targetting shields for spiking and pushing, Paul has a point that the pelta would be very hard to hold vertical at right angles to the file direction - sloping in some direction seems more intuitive.  From previous discussions I know we don't know how the shield was held, except it wasn't like an aspis and it had a handle (sometimes mistranslated as strap).  Justin, do you have one of your graphics that show how it is held in your reconstruction?

I finally made a working replica of the shallower shield using layers of cardboard, making the shield strap out of plastic cord and the telamon from part of an old belt. After experimenting with the attachments points for the strap on the shield I got it to work: one can keep the shield at one's side with the telamon around the upper arm and the elbow raised (the shield naturally sits at 90 degrees to the facing of the body, meaning that doubling from intermediate order to at 48cm wide close order becomes possible - the shield doesn't get in the way).

To bring the shield around to the front one wold have to ground the sarissa, continuing to hold it with one's left arm, and use the right arm to pull the shield around whilst lowering the left elbow. It's quickly done. The telamon is now around the elbow and the shield faces forwards. Resuming one's right hand grip on the sarissa, one simply raises it and tips it forwards so it is presented over the edge of the shield to the right (pole vaulter grip). The left elbow rests on the telamon and the shield strap carries the weight of the arm and shield. The right arm, close to the chest, holds the sarissa in a relaxed way - the arm bones are actually carrying the weight. I could maintain this pose for ages.

The shield  is very firmly braced on a 5-point position - lower edge  resting against the hip, upper right edge braced by left arm, centre held by left elbow, and two points to the left and right of the telamon held by the strap. The shield is very rigid. One can advance like this in a 3/4 pose, raise the shield to block enemy thrusts at the face, and make one's own sarissa thrusts up to 2 feet forwards or so.

Forming up into a 48cm close order is no problem as the shield straps are fastened fairly close to the centre of the shield, allowing neighbouring shields to overlap without knocking against them.

I'll post some photos shortly.

I have shown you video of this done with the aspis, haven't I?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 07, 2019, 04:40:24 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 07, 2019, 04:07:53 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 06, 2019, 10:53:51 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 04:03:32 PM
On the idea of targetting shields for spiking and pushing, Paul has a point that the pelta would be very hard to hold vertical at right angles to the file direction - sloping in some direction seems more intuitive.  From previous discussions I know we don't know how the shield was held, except it wasn't like an aspis and it had a handle (sometimes mistranslated as strap).  Justin, do you have one of your graphics that show how it is held in your reconstruction?

I finally made a working replica of the shallower shield using layers of cardboard, making the shield strap out of plastic cord and the telamon from part of an old belt. After experimenting with the attachments points for the strap on the shield I got it to work: one can keep the shield at one's side with the telamon around the upper arm and the elbow raised (the shield naturally sits at 90 degrees to the facing of the body, meaning that doubling from intermediate order to at 48cm wide close order becomes possible - the shield doesn't get in the way).

To bring the shield around to the front one wold have to ground the sarissa, continuing to hold it with one's left arm, and use the right arm to pull the shield around whilst lowering the left elbow. It's quickly done. The telamon is now around the elbow and the shield faces forwards. Resuming one's right hand grip on the sarissa, one simply raises it and tips it forwards so it is presented over the edge of the shield to the right (pole vaulter grip). The left elbow rests on the telamon and the shield strap carries the weight of the arm and shield. The right arm, close to the chest, holds the sarissa in a relaxed way - the arm bones are actually carrying the weight. I could maintain this pose for ages.

The shield  is very firmly braced on a 5-point position - lower edge  resting against the hip, upper right edge braced by left arm, centre held by left elbow, and two points to the left and right of the telamon held by the strap. The shield is very rigid. One can advance like this in a 3/4 pose, raise the shield to block enemy thrusts at the face, and make one's own sarissa thrusts up to 2 feet forwards or so.

Forming up into a 48cm close order is no problem as the shield straps are fastened fairly close to the centre of the shield, allowing neighbouring shields to overlap without knocking against them.

I'll post some photos shortly.

I have shown you video of this done with the aspis, haven't I?

Don't think so. Could you point me to it?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on April 08, 2019, 09:10:04 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 07, 2019, 04:40:24 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 07, 2019, 04:07:53 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 06, 2019, 10:53:51 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 04:03:32 PM
On the idea of targetting shields for spiking and pushing, Paul has a point that the pelta would be very hard to hold vertical at right angles to the file direction - sloping in some direction seems more intuitive.  From previous discussions I know we don't know how the shield was held, except it wasn't like an aspis and it had a handle (sometimes mistranslated as strap).  Justin, do you have one of your graphics that show how it is held in your reconstruction?

I finally made a working replica of the shallower shield using layers of cardboard, making the shield strap out of plastic cord and the telamon from part of an old belt. After experimenting with the attachments points for the strap on the shield I got it to work: one can keep the shield at one's side with the telamon around the upper arm and the elbow raised (the shield naturally sits at 90 degrees to the facing of the body, meaning that doubling from intermediate order to at 48cm wide close order becomes possible - the shield doesn't get in the way).

To bring the shield around to the front one wold have to ground the sarissa, continuing to hold it with one's left arm, and use the right arm to pull the shield around whilst lowering the left elbow. It's quickly done. The telamon is now around the elbow and the shield faces forwards. Resuming one's right hand grip on the sarissa, one simply raises it and tips it forwards so it is presented over the edge of the shield to the right (pole vaulter grip). The left elbow rests on the telamon and the shield strap carries the weight of the arm and shield. The right arm, close to the chest, holds the sarissa in a relaxed way - the arm bones are actually carrying the weight. I could maintain this pose for ages.

The shield  is very firmly braced on a 5-point position - lower edge  resting against the hip, upper right edge braced by left arm, centre held by left elbow, and two points to the left and right of the telamon held by the strap. The shield is very rigid. One can advance like this in a 3/4 pose, raise the shield to block enemy thrusts at the face, and make one's own sarissa thrusts up to 2 feet forwards or so.

Forming up into a 48cm close order is no problem as the shield straps are fastened fairly close to the centre of the shield, allowing neighbouring shields to overlap without knocking against them.

I'll post some photos shortly.

I have shown you video of this done with the aspis, haven't I?

Don't think so. Could you point me to it?

I cannot share it widely, it is not my video, but suffice to say that an authentic porpax can be word just above the elbow on an aspis, and you can use two hands freely. Images of the porpax like this exist on vases.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 09, 2019, 09:10:39 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 08, 2019, 09:10:04 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 07, 2019, 04:40:24 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 07, 2019, 04:07:53 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 06, 2019, 10:53:51 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 04:03:32 PM
On the idea of targetting shields for spiking and pushing, Paul has a point that the pelta would be very hard to hold vertical at right angles to the file direction - sloping in some direction seems more intuitive.  From previous discussions I know we don't know how the shield was held, except it wasn't like an aspis and it had a handle (sometimes mistranslated as strap).  Justin, do you have one of your graphics that show how it is held in your reconstruction?

I finally made a working replica of the shallower shield using layers of cardboard, making the shield strap out of plastic cord and the telamon from part of an old belt. After experimenting with the attachments points for the strap on the shield I got it to work: one can keep the shield at one's side with the telamon around the upper arm and the elbow raised (the shield naturally sits at 90 degrees to the facing of the body, meaning that doubling from intermediate order to at 48cm wide close order becomes possible - the shield doesn't get in the way).

To bring the shield around to the front one wold have to ground the sarissa, continuing to hold it with one's left arm, and use the right arm to pull the shield around whilst lowering the left elbow. It's quickly done. The telamon is now around the elbow and the shield faces forwards. Resuming one's right hand grip on the sarissa, one simply raises it and tips it forwards so it is presented over the edge of the shield to the right (pole vaulter grip). The left elbow rests on the telamon and the shield strap carries the weight of the arm and shield. The right arm, close to the chest, holds the sarissa in a relaxed way - the arm bones are actually carrying the weight. I could maintain this pose for ages.

The shield  is very firmly braced on a 5-point position - lower edge  resting against the hip, upper right edge braced by left arm, centre held by left elbow, and two points to the left and right of the telamon held by the strap. The shield is very rigid. One can advance like this in a 3/4 pose, raise the shield to block enemy thrusts at the face, and make one's own sarissa thrusts up to 2 feet forwards or so.

Forming up into a 48cm close order is no problem as the shield straps are fastened fairly close to the centre of the shield, allowing neighbouring shields to overlap without knocking against them.

I'll post some photos shortly.

I have shown you video of this done with the aspis, haven't I?

Don't think so. Could you point me to it?

I cannot share it widely, it is not my video, but suffice to say that an authentic porpax can be word just above the elbow on an aspis, and you can use two hands freely. Images of the porpax like this exist on vases.

On the subject of using an aspis with two hands free, Cleomenes taught his Spartans to use the ochane rather than the porpax in the Macedonian fashion. How would you get your hand past the edge of the shield in that case? Move the ochanon/porpax nearer the side of the shield?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 09, 2019, 09:13:14 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 06, 2019, 10:53:51 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 04:03:32 PM
On the idea of targetting shields for spiking and pushing, Paul has a point that the pelta would be very hard to hold vertical at right angles to the file direction - sloping in some direction seems more intuitive.  From previous discussions I know we don't know how the shield was held, except it wasn't like an aspis and it had a handle (sometimes mistranslated as strap).  Justin, do you have one of your graphics that show how it is held in your reconstruction?

I finally made a working replica of the shallower shield using layers of cardboard, making the shield strap out of plastic cord and the telamon from part of an old belt. After experimenting with the attachments points for the strap on the shield I got it to work: one can keep the shield at one's side with the telamon around the upper arm and the elbow raised (the shield naturally sits at 90 degrees to the facing of the body, meaning that doubling from intermediate order to at 48cm wide close order becomes possible - the shield doesn't get in the way).

To bring the shield around to the front one wold have to ground the sarissa, continuing to hold it with one's left arm, and use the right arm to pull the shield around whilst lowering the left elbow. It's quickly done. The telamon is now around the elbow and the shield faces forwards. Resuming one's right hand grip on the sarissa, one simply raises it and tips it forwards so it is presented over the edge of the shield to the right (pole vaulter grip). The left elbow rests on the telamon and the shield strap carries the weight of the arm and shield. The right arm, close to the chest, holds the sarissa in a relaxed way - the arm bones are actually carrying the weight. I could maintain this pose for ages.

The shield  is very firmly braced on a 5-point position - lower edge  resting against the hip, upper right edge braced by left arm, centre held by left elbow, and two points to the left and right of the telamon held by the strap. The shield is very rigid. One can advance like this in a 3/4 pose, raise the shield to block enemy thrusts at the face, and make one's own sarissa thrusts up to 2 feet forwards or so.

Forming up into a 48cm close order is no problem as the shield straps are fastened fairly close to the centre of the shield, allowing neighbouring shields to overlap without knocking against them.

I'll post some photos shortly.

Edit: by 'telamon' in the description I meant 'ochane/ochanon'. Photos hopefully this evening.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on April 09, 2019, 06:10:26 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 09, 2019, 09:10:39 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 08, 2019, 09:10:04 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 07, 2019, 04:40:24 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 07, 2019, 04:07:53 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 06, 2019, 10:53:51 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on March 14, 2019, 04:03:32 PM
On the idea of targetting shields for spiking and pushing, Paul has a point that the pelta would be very hard to hold vertical at right angles to the file direction - sloping in some direction seems more intuitive.  From previous discussions I know we don't know how the shield was held, except it wasn't like an aspis and it had a handle (sometimes mistranslated as strap).  Justin, do you have one of your graphics that show how it is held in your reconstruction?

I finally made a working replica of the shallower shield using layers of cardboard, making the shield strap out of plastic cord and the telamon from part of an old belt. After experimenting with the attachments points for the strap on the shield I got it to work: one can keep the shield at one's side with the telamon around the upper arm and the elbow raised (the shield naturally sits at 90 degrees to the facing of the body, meaning that doubling from intermediate order to at 48cm wide close order becomes possible - the shield doesn't get in the way).

To bring the shield around to the front one wold have to ground the sarissa, continuing to hold it with one's left arm, and use the right arm to pull the shield around whilst lowering the left elbow. It's quickly done. The telamon is now around the elbow and the shield faces forwards. Resuming one's right hand grip on the sarissa, one simply raises it and tips it forwards so it is presented over the edge of the shield to the right (pole vaulter grip). The left elbow rests on the telamon and the shield strap carries the weight of the arm and shield. The right arm, close to the chest, holds the sarissa in a relaxed way - the arm bones are actually carrying the weight. I could maintain this pose for ages.

The shield  is very firmly braced on a 5-point position - lower edge  resting against the hip, upper right edge braced by left arm, centre held by left elbow, and two points to the left and right of the telamon held by the strap. The shield is very rigid. One can advance like this in a 3/4 pose, raise the shield to block enemy thrusts at the face, and make one's own sarissa thrusts up to 2 feet forwards or so.

Forming up into a 48cm close order is no problem as the shield straps are fastened fairly close to the centre of the shield, allowing neighbouring shields to overlap without knocking against them.

I'll post some photos shortly.

I have shown you video of this done with the aspis, haven't I?

Don't think so. Could you point me to it?

I cannot share it widely, it is not my video, but suffice to say that an authentic porpax can be word just above the elbow on an aspis, and you can use two hands freely. Images of the porpax like this exist on vases.

On the subject of using an aspis with two hands free, Cleomenes taught his Spartans to use the ochane rather than the porpax in the Macedonian fashion. How would you get your hand past the edge of the shield in that case? Move the ochanon/porpax nearer the side of the shield?

The problem in using a spear in the left hand is not getting past the rim, it is getting the hand out of the bowl of the shield. You can do this and hols the spear easily with the biceps in the porpax. You just cannot stand with the shield perpendicular to the enemy, but as you know I do not believe they did anyway.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 09, 2019, 07:05:10 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 09, 2019, 06:10:26 PM
The problem in using a spear in the left hand is not getting past the rim, it is getting the hand out of the bowl of the shield. You can do this and hols the spear easily with the biceps in the porpax. You just cannot stand with the shield perpendicular to the enemy, but as you know I do not believe they did anyway.

You mean shield facing enemy, i.e. protecting your torso? If you have the ochanon/porpax round your upper arm the shield is sideways to your body which is then exposed to the enemy.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 10, 2019, 05:30:23 PM
Ok here we go. I would really have preferred a volunteer to pose for this but nobody was available (the photographer was the missus and, no.)

First photo shows the shield with the improvised ochanon and telamon. The shield is 64cm wide and unfortunately not nearly deep enough - only 5 cm instead of the minimum 10 cm. I'll make a deeper version next time.

Photos 2 and 3 show the shield with the ochanon around the upper arm. The shield naturally faces to the side of the body. Doubling files to close order by rear half-files advancing up alongside front half-files is practicable as the shield does not get in the way.

Photos 4 and 5: I ground the pike and, continuing to hold it with my left hand, use my right to pull the shield around to the front whilst lowering my left elbow. With a bit of practice I could keep the pike fairly immobile during the process.

Photos 5 and 6: the shield is now in front, braced against my left wrist, elbow, hip and the telamon now pulled taut. I can rest my left elbow on the ochanon and let the telamon carry the weight of the shield and arm. My right  hand holds the pikeshaft about two feet back from the left hand and, being close to the body, my right arm does not suffer muscle fatigue. The shield is very rigid and I can easily advance in this position, moving the shield forwards clear of my hip if necessary.

(https://i.imgur.com/Kpnwru0.jpg)
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Mark G on April 10, 2019, 06:09:11 PM
Curious about your ability to thrust with the over arm shield raised position.

Simply walking forward seems a not very effective military tactic in a hand held weapon era
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 10, 2019, 06:12:23 PM
Quote from: Mark G on April 10, 2019, 06:09:11 PM
Curious about your ability to thrust with the over arm shield raised position.

Simply walking forward seems a not very effective military tactic in a hand held weapon era

Thrusting the sarissa is no problem - I loosen my left hand grip and shove the shaft forward with right arm. One gets some nice 2-ft long jabs that way.  What I can't do though is move the left arm much except up and down, so this is a one-arm strike, as with a dory.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on April 10, 2019, 06:29:53 PM
Interesting; it looks as if it would not be difficult to advance files on a 1-cubit individual frontage; the shields would overlap slightly, but that is all to the good and might explain why period sources refer to pike phalanxes being in synaspismos.

Quote from: Mark G on April 10, 2019, 06:09:11 PM
Simply walking forward seems a not very effective military tactic in a hand held weapon era

But simply walking forward in step with a bristling array of long, sharp-pointed shafts levelled at the foe can be quite effective, especially if the enemy does the hard work by trying to advance against you.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Erpingham on April 11, 2019, 09:26:55 AM
QuoteBut simply walking forward in step with a bristling array of long, sharp-pointed shafts levelled at the foe can be quite effective, especially if the enemy does the hard work by trying to advance against you.

This is certainly possible but so far we seem to be rather short of information on how they fought, as opposed to how they drew up (and we debate that).
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on April 11, 2019, 09:56:32 AM
Quote from: Erpingham on April 11, 2019, 09:26:55 AM
This is certainly possible but so far we seem to be rather short of information on how they fought, as opposed to how they drew up (and we debate that).

Quite so; just making the point that rows of sharp points properly presented are effective as of and in themselves. Not suggesting at all that this was the entire limit of the phalanx's repertoire. :)
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: RichT on April 11, 2019, 11:32:51 AM
Nice shield - can you give any details how you made it? I guess lathed?

Don't worry about the 10cm depth, that figure is entirely arbitrary anyway.

Have you tried using a wrist cord (like Matthew does) so that you don't have to manually pull the shield round in front of you? Of course doing so might match Plut. Aem. 19.1 "And when he saw that the rest of the Macedonian troops also were drawing their targets from their shoulders round in front of them" which may be your intention. Plus you want the shield parallel to line of advance for doubling purposes?

What are you aiming to demonstrate with this reconstruction? I know you are keen on the high hold, and clearly it's possible, but wouldn't the difficulties that concern you about one cubit synspismos with the sarissa at 7 o'clock apply just as much with it at 11 o'clock? I understand your concern is the sarissas fitting between the shields - it's a shame you can't get two or three similarly equipped people together. What purpose does the telamon serve? Also that last shot shows you'd need to put a lot of faith in your pteruges, since you are shall we say highly vulnerable to someone holding their sarissa low (but maybe you imagine only second and subsequent ranks doing this).
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 11, 2019, 12:19:24 PM
Quote from: RichT on April 11, 2019, 11:32:51 AM
Nice shield - can you give any details how you made it? I guess lathed?

No, just a lot of layers of corrugated cardboard cut into discs and glued together. I'm no carpenter.  :)

Quote from: RichT on April 11, 2019, 11:32:51 AMHave you tried using a wrist cord (like Matthew does) so that you don't have to manually pull the shield round in front of you? Of course doing so might match Plut. Aem. 19.1 "And when he saw that the rest of the Macedonian troops also were drawing their targets from their shoulders round in front of them" which may be your intention. Plus you want the shield parallel to line of advance for doubling purposes?

Trouble is that when the ochanon is around your upper arm your wrist would project well beyond the edge of the shield, and with wrist in wristband you couldn't hold a sarissa and keep the shield at your side anyway. But a wrist cord for when the shield is in front of the body is a good idea. I must try it. And yes, I did have Plutarch in mind.  This seems to replicate nicely what he was talking about - phalanx advances in intermediate order with shields at the side. Once near the Romans it stops, doubles to close order, shields now overlapping in front, and slowly inches forwards over the last stretch of ground to contact the legions.

Quote from: RichT on April 11, 2019, 11:32:51 AMWhat are you aiming to demonstrate with this reconstruction? I know you are keen on the high hold, and clearly it's possible, but wouldn't the difficulties that concern you about one cubit synspismos with the sarissa at 7 o'clock apply just as much with it at 11 o'clock? I understand your concern is the sarissas fitting between the shields - it's a shame you can't get two or three similarly equipped people together.

That's the problem. Ideally I need about a hundred, deployed in a 10x10 block which should show up all the hidden problems. Why I'm trying to establish is the possibility of doubling files to close order without the shield getting in the way and the possibility of presenting sarissas with shields facing front and overlapping in close order. It seems to be theoretically possible. I've been looking at the gradients at Sellasia, Chaeronea (Philip's right flank) and Cynoscephalae and IMHO only an overarm presentation of sarissas, angled somewhat upwards for the front ranks, would allow a phalanx to advance up a slope any steeper than a few degrees. Trying to cross a river (Granicus, Issus) would be stopped by the far riverbank if the phalanx was in close order and the pikes were presented beneath the shields. Matthew recognises this problem and rightly discounts the 1-cubit close order as impossible for a pike phalanx with pikes below the shields.

Quote from: RichT on April 11, 2019, 11:32:51 AMWhat purpose does the telamon serve?

When presenting the pike overarm both arms have to be supported in some way or muscle fatigue sets in - something Matthew pointed out. The right arm, held close to the torso, is supported by its own bone structure. The left arm rests on the ochanon and its weight along with the shield is borne by the telamon. The hold then isn't fatiguing at all. The telamon also braces the shield laterally - it can't swing sideways.

Quote from: RichT on April 11, 2019, 11:32:51 AMAlso that last shot shows you'd need to put a lot of faith in your pteruges, since you are shall we say highly vulnerable to someone holding their sarissa low (but maybe you imagine only second and subsequent ranks doing this).

I noticed that. A 64cm wide shield isn't large enough to cover your neck and, ehrm, nether regions. You have to choose. I could lengthen the telamon and hold the shield lower but then my neck is exposed. I'm feeling my way with this but I suspect Hellenistic pikemen didn't try to target exposed areas of their opponent (they might miss) but aimed at their shields instead in order to shove them back and disrupt their formation. I probably need a lower hold so the shield covers the vitals as its default position but I am free to raise it if necessary to protect my neck. Let me try it.

Another idea of course is that the front rank presented their pikes underarm (much stabler against a cavalry charge) with the shields held lower. The phalanx can advance up a slope with the front rank presenting pikes underarm - they can easily angle the pikeshafts upwards without knocking them against overlapping shields in front.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 11, 2019, 06:50:30 PM
I experimented lengthening the telamon and then trying the shield with the overarm and underarm grip. The results were interesting. With the overarm grip I can get the shield down to below my chin but not lower, and the nether regions are still somewhat exposed (though not so much with a 3/4 stance). It is easy to raise the shield to protect the head.

Using exactly the same configuration of telamon and ochanon an underarm grip works fine, with the left forearm passing below the telamon on the right rather than above it as for the overarm grip. With the underarm grip the shield position changes substantially: the top edge of the shield rests against the shoulder whilst the bottom edge projects well forwards, a foot or more away from the body, supplying good protection for the hips. It is however impossible to raise the shield with this hold though it is possible to increase the angle at which the lower edge projects forward simply by extending the left arm. This looks a lot like the angled shields of the standing phalangites on the pergamon plaque.

So ideally a combination of grips would work: the front rank man uses an underarm grip and moves his head to dodge enemy strikes to his face (or pikes of all ranks are used to parry such strikes). The rear ranks adopt an overarm grip, which protects them from missiles and enables them to present pikes over the shoulders of the forward ranks. All ranks are able to angle their pikes upwards when climbing a slope or riverbank, which makes Antigonus' phalanx advance up Olympus and Euas (23 degree slope in the latter case) feasible.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on April 11, 2019, 07:58:30 PM
Let me distill what I am seeing and you can tell me if I have the right of it. 

A) the ochanon can be worn on the upper arm. (With a shield of 60cm or less, you should be able to rotate this to face forward as well as sideways. this works very well in underhand, but also overhand)
B) The ochanon can be worn on the forearm, but in a position that the the elbow can rest on it.

My problem is that I do not see any reason to do both if you you are doing one or the other.  I am all on board with the notion that you can strike overhand with a sarissa, in fact I have shared the videos of Marrozzo's teaching on this. If you are wearing it on the forearm to deploy, why not just swing it around the back or to the side using the telamon?

So, in short, I like the solution you have come up with of both using an ochane and a telamon to support the shield.  My question would be, why would you need to use both at the same time? The pelta is not that heavy, and it spends most of its time held very close to the body, which makes bearing it easy.

One thing I wish you would do so we could end this roundabout discussion is find yourself a sliding door and close it to 45cm. Then stand in said doorway and try the different stances you proffer. From my experience you will rapidly find that you want to turn your body side-on so as to have room to strike. I am larger than the average sarissaphoroi, but not beyond the range of men of the time, see below. I am standing squared forward, then side-on, then trying to squish into 45cm.  Note how much more room you have side on.

As an aside, you can see why a hoplite could not stand at 45cm and actually strike with full range of motion. Anything less than a full range strike loses both power and range.

Lastly, there seems to be a trend toward lengthening the underlayer of ptyruges on Hellenistic armor. Could this have compensated for the higher grip that exposes the thighs?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 11, 2019, 08:37:39 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 11, 2019, 07:58:30 PM
Let me distill what I am seeing and you can tell me if I have the right of it. 

A) the ochanon can be worn on the upper arm. (With a shield of 60cm or less, you should be able to rotate this to face forward as well as sideways. this works very well in underhand, but also overhand)

Yes. With the ochanon on the upper arm the shield can be brought to the front of the body, though at an angle, by bringing the upper arm around as much to the front as possible. It's an awkward stance though. I wouldn't try to use the shield defensively like this.

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 11, 2019, 07:58:30 PMB) The ochanon can be worn on the forearm, but in a position that the the elbow can rest on it.

Yes.

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 11, 2019, 07:58:30 PMMy problem is that I do not see any reason to do both if you you are doing one or the other.  I am all on board with the notion that you can strike overhand with a sarissa, in fact I have shared the videos of Marrozzo's teaching on this. If you are wearing it on the forearm to deploy, why not just swing it around the back or to the side using the telamon?

I tried that. If you pull on the telamon to bring the shield to your side the ochanon tends to slide up to the upper arm anyway. And to keep the shield sideways to the body you have to raise your upper arm to a horizontal position, otherwise the shield just flops around to the front. Keeping in mind you have to retain the grip of your left hand on the sarissa during all this. My pose in the photos above was the only way I could do it.

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 11, 2019, 07:58:30 PMSo, in short, I like the solution you have come up with of both using an ochane and a telamon to support the shield.  My question would be, why would you need to use both at the same time? The pelta is not that heavy, and it spends most of its time held very close to the body, which makes bearing it easy.

Bear in mind that besides the shield the left arm carries the entire weight of the sarissa as it holds it at its centre of balance. But I did also find that without an ochanon it is impossible to brace the shield vertically or horizontally, i.e. so that it does swivel sideways and up-and-done. The telamon makes the shield rigid in both directions. To do this I fastened its two ends to the shield below the level of the ochanon (which works better than fasting it above for some reason).

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 11, 2019, 07:58:30 PMOne thing I wish you would do so we could end this roundabout discussion is find yourself a sliding door and close it to 45cm. Then stand in said doorway and try the different stances you proffer. From my experience you will rapidly find that you want to turn your body side-on so as to have room to strike. I am larger than the average sarissaphoroi, but not beyond the range of men of the time, see below. I am standing squared forward, then side-on, then trying to squish into 45cm.  Note how much more room you have side on.

As an aside, you can see why a hoplite could not stand at 45cm and actually strike with full range of motion. Anything less than a full range strike loses both power and range.

Tried it. A sideways stance does work better for striking. I'm thinking though that if I was pressed from behind in an othis sarissmos crush I would be forced to face forwards, shield braced against my sternum and hip, and right hand brought forward to hold the sarissa next to the left hand, at the sarissa's centre of balance BTW.

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 11, 2019, 07:58:30 PMLastly, there seems to be a trend toward lengthening the underlayer of ptyruges on Hellenistic armor. Could this have compensated for the higher grip that exposes the thighs?

Could be.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 03:53:09 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 11, 2019, 08:37:39 PM


Tried it. A sideways stance does work better for striking. I'm thinking though that if I was pressed from behind in an othis sarissmos crush I would be forced to face forwards, shield braced against my sternum and hip, and right hand brought forward to hold the sarissa next to the left hand, at the sarissa's centre of balance BTW.


Whew, glad we passed that.  Yes, I agree. In fact it shows something that I try to stress. Othismos is not based on lateral packing, but packing along files. You can get more force per unit width by bringing the files together, but as you surmised there is a point where fouling diminishes your returns.

It is my contention that the 45cm spacing did not exist before sarissaphoroi, created of whole cloth, supposedly inspired by the Illiad, but really a result of the men leading with the left hand and standing side on. I think it was designed to be Un-othismosable, because you cannot close on it.  Are there any records of a phalanx at the 45cm spacing ever being penetrated frontally, as opposed to out fought by other sarissa? So I agree with what you wrote, IF they pushed in some fashion, it happened in the looser order.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 05:12:34 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 03:53:09 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 11, 2019, 08:37:39 PM


Tried it. A sideways stance does work better for striking. I'm thinking though that if I was pressed from behind in an othis sarissmos crush I would be forced to face forwards, shield braced against my sternum and hip, and right hand brought forward to hold the sarissa next to the left hand, at the sarissa's centre of balance BTW.


Whew, glad we passed that.  Yes, I agree. In fact it shows something that I try to stress. Othismos is not based on lateral packing, but packing along files. You can get more force per unit width by bringing the files together, but as you surmised there is a point where fouling diminishes your returns.

I agree that othismos is about pressure down the length of the file, though your reenactors in Greece had trouble with members of a file popping out sideways until they were braced by two adjacent files. I'm guessing those adjacent files' shields were overlapping the shields of the middle file, i.e. that each file occupied a width of about 60-70cm? My own take is that othismos in a 90cm intermediate order wouldn't work very well since files would be too far apart to brace each other, hence the need for a closer order if there's a proper othismotic push going on.

Given that a sideways or 3/4 stance is best for a strike, it remains that once your sarissa is stuck in your enemy's shield, if the phalanx closes up ranks, pressure from the file will rotate you to a forward facing. So long as you hang on to your sarissa (not difficult in this position) you can contribute to the phalanx's very real forward pressure.

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 03:53:09 PMIt is my contention that the 45cm spacing did not exist before sarissaphoroi, created of whole cloth, supposedly inspired by the Illiad, but really a result of the men leading with the left hand and standing side on. I think it was designed to be Un-othismosable, because you cannot close on it.  Are there any records of a phalanx at the 45cm spacing ever being penetrated frontally, as opposed to out fought by other sarissa? So I agree with what you wrote, IF they pushed in some fashion, it happened in the looser order.

Actually my contention is that they certainly pushed in close order and maybe in intermediate order, though the latter has problems (see above). I have the impression that the pike phalanx was a development of the hoplite phalanx on all points rather than being something radically new, i.e. it developed every advantageous aspect of the hoplite phalanx whilst minimising the weaknesses.

So shields get smaller partly to allow a 2-handed grip (though that could also be and was achieved with an aspis by moving the ochanon near the top/side of the shield) but also to permit a more packed order which could apply more pressure.

Spears became longer to further extend the reach of the hoplite dory, itself made long to outreach shorter spears of the Archaic period. The longer sarissa overcomes the principal weakness of the hoplite phalanx - the fact a determined and well-protected enemy could get past its spear guard. Holding the sarissa overarm would also follow on naturally from holding the dory overarm.

Files retain the same optimum depth - 8 men - when in close order, which maximises the othismos push for the minimum number of men.

Even the unit of manoeuvre is transposed: the 8x8 Spartan pentekonty becomes the 16x16 syntagma.

I don't know of any cases of phalangite shields being penetrated by pikes, just Roman ones. But enough clear descriptions of a pike phalanx physically driving an enemy back.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 10:17:29 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 05:12:34 PM

I agree that othismos is about pressure down the length of the file, though your reenactors in Greece had trouble with members of a file popping out sideways until they were braced by two adjacent files. I'm guessing those adjacent files' shields were overlapping the shields of the middle file, i.e. that each file occupied a width of about 60-70cm? My own take is that othismos in a 90cm intermediate order wouldn't work very well since files would be too far apart to brace each other, hence the need for a closer order if there's a proper othismotic push going on.
My guess is you have seen Giannis' video. He unfortunately mischaracterized what happened with is edit.  The trial where a man slipped out of file only happened once and it happened because he tried to slam into the man in front of him and careened off sideways.  All of the data we recorded except for one trial was done with men pushing in a single file and there was no problem with slippage.  So no, you don't need a man on each side to keep from falling over. 

This is one of those things that drives me crazy with historians. Why would you "have your own take" having never seen this? It is like me having an opinion on the value of Pi. Since we have done it now many times, why not just ask me or someone who has?  Yes, you can do it in 90cm. Yes it is better in less than 90cm, not so much because the bodies can slide sideways, but because the shields are locked into a solid rank and all movement is coordinated tactilely.  Coordination is everything in othismos. We tried different overlaps. Either around 80+cm with the just the rims overlapped or overlapped to the shoulder of the shield, about 72cm, worked fine. You can get down to about 60cm before you start getting jabbed with the rim of the aspis next to you, which is uncomfortable, or having to turn side-on a bit, which could be deadly because you may not be able to get your aspis in front of your diaphragm again.

Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 05:12:34 PM
Given that a sideways or 3/4 stance is best for a strike, it remains that once your sarissa is stuck in your enemy's shield, if the phalanx closes up ranks, pressure from the file will rotate you to a forward facing. So long as you hang on to your sarissa (not difficult in this position) you can contribute to the phalanx's very real forward pressure.

This is another thing I try to get across to those who have not struck.  You may start with a ¾ stance, but you finish twisted forward.  If not, all you are doing is swaying your arms innefectually with no torso rotation.  This is more important in hoplites where the ¾ stance is seen as an explanation for how to stand at 45cm.  You have to have room to bring the shoulder forward with the strike.

Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 05:12:34 PM
Actually my contention is that they certainly pushed in close order and maybe in intermediate order, though the latter has problems (see above). I have the impression that the pike phalanx was a development of the hoplite phalanx on all points rather than being something radically new, i.e. it developed every advantageous aspect of the hoplite phalanx whilst minimising the weaknesses.

So shields get smaller partly to allow a 2-handed grip (though that could also be and was achieved with an aspis by moving the ochanon near the top/side of the shield) but also to permit a more packed order which could apply more pressure.

I would agree with this most of the way.  I think they were trading a more effective spear fighting for a less effective pushing through the spear shafts. I will try pushing through spears in 2021 at a big get together of hoplites to demonstrate why it is weaker. I learned with hoplite othismos that one demonstration is worth a million words. I also think sarissaphoroi stood side on in synaspismos. If true there can be no true othismos, transmission of force forward in files, but men can still push individually.

Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 05:12:34 PM
Spears became longer to further extend the reach of the hoplite dory, itself made long to outreach shorter spears of the Archaic period. The longer sarissa overcomes the principal weakness of the hoplite phalanx - the fact a determined and well-protected enemy could get past its spear guard. Holding the sarissa overarm would also follow on naturally from holding the dory overarm.

This is very insightful and again I agree most of the way, but when you say an enemy could not get past the spear guard, that is the precondition for othismos in hoplites.  So as I wrote, they trade a better spear hedge for a different, and from what I have seen weaker, othismos.

I did a test at the gym the other day and held a 100lb barbell in a two handed grip, vertically.  Rather quickly fatigue set in and it slipped through my grip. This I could not have held 100lbs pushing through my hands for very long.  Our othismos put out a sustained 800+lbs, with higher instantaneous pulses.  But I think we are agreed that hoplites could not have gone into full othismos when pushing against a spear point that would transfix their aspides.

But, that said, there is a prediction I can make.  If pushing through spears with more than moderate force were a thing, we should see a wrist strap or a bulge ahead of the hand like the balls we see on horseman's lances to keep the lance from slipping back in the grip.

Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 05:12:34 PM
Files retain the same optimum depth - 8 men - when in close order, which maximises the othismos push for the minimum number of men.
Even the unit of manoeuvre is transposed: the 8x8 Spartan pentekonty becomes the 16x16 syntagma.

Just to make sure you don't misunderstand my data.  8 men in files is more of a minimum depth needed for othismos than an optimum depth. Up until 8, men are each adding significant force. 8-12, they are still adding force, but less efficiently.  Over 16 they are adding very little per each additional man- 5-10 lbs each. So optimum would be someplace between 12 and 16 in terms of adding to the forward push, but more ranks help keep you from being pushed back.

In a real world setting, this means that a taxis of 12 ranks can produce more forward thrust than one of 8, but one of 12 is only a bit weaker than one of 16 ranks, and 16 ranks can probably put out comparable forward thrust as any number of ranks give or take 20-30lbs.  Where the benefit of further ranks comes in is by proving a wall-like mass behind your ranks and also in raising the likelihood of random super-high pressure waves.

I think the 4th century Spartan files were 12x3, not 8x8, though of course this could be altered. The Theban/other Greek model looks to have been 8, 16, 24, 48 by not doubling down or by stacking formed taxis of 8 ranks. Perhaps by the 4thc, Sparta was trying to get away with the minimum number of men in file to meet a 16 rank foe.

Check out below.  This is my "skeletal aspis" it has a cut out to show why you cannot use a flat shield to imitate an aspis, but that your arm has to pass through and be on the far side of the wooden disk to be in the right position.  But forget all of that because I am using it like a flat shield here to show you what an aspis sized shield looks like strapped above the elbow.  Note how it covers my body in both orientations. The key is that it has to fit snug, same as on the forearm.  Unlike the forearm though, every time you flex your bicep it holds in on tighter.  I think this could work, while tight telamon just gets in my way.  Again, this is 90cm.  It would work better with a smaller diameter.  Compare the last frame to the Pergamon plaque.




Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 10:20:37 PM
Here is what it would look like on the arm. I have this one handy, but I think there are 3 images that show this.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 11:07:32 PM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 10:17:29 PM
This is one of those things that drives me crazy with historians. Why would you "have your own take" having never seen this? It is like me having an opinion on the value of Pi. Since we have done it now many times, why not just ask me or someone who has?  Yes, you can do it in 90cm. Yes it is better in less than 90cm, not so much because the bodies can slide sideways, but because the shields are locked into a solid rank and all movement is coordinated tactilely.  Coordination is everything in othismos. We tried different overlaps. Either around 80+cm with the just the rims overlapped or overlapped to the shoulder of the shield, about 72cm, worked fine. You can get down to about 60cm before you start getting jabbed with the rim of the aspis next to you, which is uncomfortable, or having to turn side-on a bit, which could be deadly because you may not be able to get your aspis in front of your diaphragm again.

Good. I needed to know this. I thoroughly appreciate the need to try these things out. Right now I want about 200 re-enactors, properly kitted out, and formed up in two 10x10 blocks that go at each other in various configurations until we can figure out how this really worked. But until I get that, all I can do is try to visualise and experience it mentally whilst paying attention to numbers. Incidentally I based my take on this passage:  ;)

      
Average pushing weights are shown on the graph, but the maximum force generated by a single file of ten men was 247 kg (544 lbs). This is surely an underestimate of ancient reality in that a lone file like this must spend some of its energy on maintaining lateral stability and not falling out of line. In the large masses of men within an actual phalanx, files standing alongside would have forced centrally located files into alignment and eliminated their need to expend energy staying in line. And, indeed, when a shorter file of six men pushing against a compression sensor as above was flanked on each side by six man files and all pushed together, mass transferred through the central aspis reached 368 kg (811 lbs).

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 10:17:29 PMThis is another thing I try to get across to those who have not struck.  You may start with a ¾ stance, but you finish twisted forward.  If not, all you are doing is swaying your arms innefectually with no torso rotation.  This is more important in hoplites where the ¾ stance is seen as an explanation for how to stand at 45cm.  You have to have room to bring the shoulder forward with the strike.

Good. This works with a pike phalanx where the men advance in a 3/4 posture until in striking range. They then strike, shoving their sarissas at each other's shields and ending up facing forwards as you describe, and immediate close ranks for othismos. With files occupying a 48cm wide frontage (or perhaps a bit wider - these measurements are all rather flexible) there shouldn't be any problem.

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 10:17:29 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 05:12:34 PM
Actually my contention is that they certainly pushed in close order and maybe in intermediate order, though the latter has problems (see above). I have the impression that the pike phalanx was a development of the hoplite phalanx on all points rather than being something radically new, i.e. it developed every advantageous aspect of the hoplite phalanx whilst minimising the weaknesses.

So shields get smaller partly to allow a 2-handed grip (though that could also be and was achieved with an aspis by moving the ochanon near the top/side of the shield) but also to permit a more packed order which could apply more pressure.

I would agree with this most of the way.  I think they were trading a more effective spear fighting for a less effective pushing through the spear shafts. I will try pushing through spears in 2021 at a big get together of hoplites to demonstrate why it is weaker. I learned with hoplite othismos that one demonstration is worth a million words. I also think sarissaphoroi stood side on in synaspismos. If true there can be no true othismos, transmission of force forward in files, but men can still push individually.

I missed something obvious. In a pike vs. pike pushing match, neither side is going to shove too hard as both sides's shields would end up being pierced and both front ranks killed. A classical application of MAD. Methinks there was a lot of the psychological in this - who's going to push a little harder and risk shields getting pierced and who's going to back off?

Which explains why we read of Roman shields and armour getting pierced - no need for the phalangites to hold back in this case. It doesn't however explain how the Athenians were able to shove the Macedonians back at Chaeronea unless the Macedonian phalanx couldn't generate enough pressure going uphill to penetrate the Athenian shields, but could when it had pulled back and was uphill itself (thus winning the battle).

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 10:17:29 PMI did a test at the gym the other day and held a 100lb barbell in a two handed grip, vertically.  Rather quickly fatigue set in and it slipped through my grip. This I could not have held 100lbs pushing through my hands for very long.  Our othismos put out a sustained 800+lbs, with higher instantaneous pulses.  But I think we are agreed that hoplites could not have gone into full othismos when pushing against a spear point that would transfix their aspides.

Try this: lie on a table or something similar so your head and upper shoulders project beyond the table edge and hold the barbell just above your shoulder with your two hands together so it points upwards. The barbell's weight pulls your arms downwards against your chest. See how long you can maintain your grip. This simulates the pressure of the sarissa counteracted by the chaps behind you pushing against your back.

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 10:17:29 PMBut, that said, there is a prediction I can make.  If pushing through spears with more than moderate force were a thing, we should see a wrist strap or a bulge ahead of the hand like the balls we see on horseman's lances to keep the lance from slipping back in the grip.

We really need to test pike-othismos to see how much pressure is actually generated. A few dead bodies for the cause of Science.  ::)

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 10:17:29 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 05:12:34 PM
Files retain the same optimum depth - 8 men - when in close order, which maximises the othismos push for the minimum number of men.
Even the unit of manoeuvre is transposed: the 8x8 Spartan pentekonty becomes the 16x16 syntagma.

Just to make sure you don't misunderstand my data.  8 men in files is more of a minimum depth needed for othismos than an optimum depth. Up until 8, men are each adding significant force. 8-12, they are still adding force, but less efficiently.  Over 16 they are adding very little per each additional man- 5-10 lbs each. So optimum would be someplace between 12 and 16 in terms of adding to the forward push, but more ranks help keep you from being pushed back.

In a real world setting, this means that a taxis of 12 ranks can produce more forward thrust than one of 8, but one of 12 is only a bit weaker than one of 16 ranks, and 16 ranks can probably put out comparable forward thrust as any number of ranks give or take 20-30lbs.  Where the benefit of further ranks comes in is by proving a wall-like mass behind your ranks and also in raising the likelihood of random super-high pressure waves.

I think the 4th century Spartan files were 12x3, not 8x8, though of course this could be altered. The Theban/other Greek model looks to have been 8, 16, 24, 48 by not doubling down or by stacking formed taxis of 8 ranks. Perhaps by the 4thc, Sparta was trying to get away with the minimum number of men in file to meet a 16 rank foe.

8 still seems to be the commonest depth. Why is that if 12-16 is better for othismos?

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 10:17:29 PMCheck out below.  This is my "skeletal aspis" it has a cut out to show why you cannot use a flat shield to imitate an aspis, but that your arm has to pass through and be on the far side of the wooden disk to be in the right position.  But forget all of that because I am using it like a flat shield here to show you what an aspis sized shield looks like strapped above the elbow.  Note how it covers my body in both orientations. The key is that it has to fit snug, same as on the forearm.  Unlike the forearm though, every time you flex your bicep it holds in on tighter.  I think this could work, while tight telamon just gets in my way.  Again, this is 90cm.  It would work better with a smaller diameter.  Compare the last frame to the Pergamon plaque.

Can you hold a pike vertical at your right side with your left hand whilst keeping the shield at your left side?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 11:13:24 PM
 I added two more images.  One that shows the strike motion when side-on.  The other that shows coverage of my 90cm aspis and a virtual 60cm pelta in intermediate sarissaphoroi order and overhand, and how you could push with moderate strength with the shoulder.  As with hoplites, this gets you killed in true othismos, but they could pressumably move to cover the diaphram and stand squared forward.  I think it very possible that sarissaphoroi could find themselves in the old style shield to shield othismos, and this is why they could not lose their shields as other pikemen did.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 11:39:15 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 11:07:32 PM

Good. This works with a pike phalanx where the men advance in a 3/4 posture until in striking range. They then strike, shoving their sarissas at each other's shields and ending up facing forwards as you describe, and immediate close ranks for othismos. With files occupying a 48cm wide frontage (or perhaps a bit wider - these measurements are all rather flexible) there shouldn't be any problem.
Yes, if we move the bar above 45cm, there is no problem 50+ should do it for men with 60cm peltae, but the minimum will be 60 with 60cm pelta if they are very deep because there is no way to overlap very deep rimless shields.


[
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 11:07:32 PM
I missed something obvious. In a pike vs. pike pushing match, neither side is going to shove too hard as both sides's shields would end up being pierced and both front ranks killed. A classical application of MAD. Methinks there was a lot of the psychological in this - who's going to push a little harder and risk shields getting pierced and who's going to back off?
Yes, this was my point. You do not need true othismos level pressures if you are pushing against a spear point because it is unsurvivable.  But also note that no Roman would enter true othismos unless trapped against a wall or an unyielding mass of men. He would just give ground slowly at some reduced level of pressure. It is very difficult to convey because we are really talking quantitatively rather than qualitatively.  Romans at Zama, Sarissaphoroi in many battles and Hoplites at the end stages of many battles all pushed, but the levels of pressure put out is probably very different just due to survivability and the ability to transfer force in files.

Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 11:07:32 PM
Which explains why we read of Roman shields and armour getting pierced - no need for the phalangites to hold back in this case. It doesn't however explain how the Athenians were able to shove the Macedonians back at Chaeronea unless the Macedonian phalanx couldn't generate enough pressure going uphill to penetrate the Athenian shields, but could when it had pulled back and was uphill itself (thus winning the battle).
If you understand what I wrote above, you will see why it does not matter what the Sarissa do, the Romans would simply give way- as they did. Except the poor Pelignae 
You are assuming that the Athenians faced sarissaphoroi and not hoplites....

Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 11:07:32 PM
Try this: lie on a table or something similar so your head and upper shoulders project beyond the table edge and hold the barbell just above your shoulder with your two hands together so it points upwards. The barbell's weight pulls your arms downwards against your chest. See how long you can maintain your grip. This simulates the pressure of the sarissa counteracted by the chaps behind you pushing against your back.
It was not my arms that gave way, but my grip, so this would make no difference.  In fact it is worse because I cheated at the end as my grip began to fail by tilting the bar and adding more friction by having it at an angle.
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 11:07:32 PM
We really need to test pike-othismos to see how much pressure is actually generated. A few dead bodies for the cause of Science.  ::)
I will do it with dorys, but the mechanics should be the same.

Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 11:07:32 PM
8 still seems to be the commonest depth. Why is that if 12-16 is better for othismos?
Because, as Epameinondas learned at Mantinea, there is more to combat than othismos.  Remember how the allies tried to limit the Thebans to 16 ranks because since Pagondas, they had been "cheating" and giving themselves an advantage in othismos at the cost of cyclosis for the whole army. So until Pagondas, the accepted trade off seems to be around 8 ranks.  I wonder if the Spartans had started cheating with 12 already, but they were probably able to maximize any depth due to greater coordination, so maybe 12 was a reaction to 16. 16 being a simple stacking or undoubling of files of 8.

Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 11:07:32 PM

Can you hold a pike vertical at your right side with your left hand whilst keeping the shield at your left side?
Yes, not problem. You just rotate it on the bicep.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 13, 2019, 12:04:44 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 11:39:15 PM
You are assuming that the Athenians faced sarissaphoroi and not hoplites....

I am assuming, yes. We can start a thread on the hypaspists' panoply if you like.  :)

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 12, 2019, 11:39:15 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 12, 2019, 11:07:32 PM
8 still seems to be the commonest depth. Why is that if 12-16 is better for othismos?
Because, as Epameinondas learned at Mantinea, there is more to combat than othismos.  Remember how the allies tried to limit the Thebans to 16 ranks because since Pagondas, they had been "cheating" and giving themselves an advantage in othismos at the cost of cyclosis for the whole army. So until Pagondas, the accepted trade off seems to be around 8 ranks.  I wonder if the Spartans had started cheating with 12 already, but they were probably able to maximize any depth due to greater coordination, so maybe 12 was a reaction to 16. 16 being a simple stacking or undoubling of files of 8.

Which leaves the question: why was 8 ranks the accepted trade off? Why not 12 ranks? What is so special about 8?
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on April 13, 2019, 12:29:21 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 13, 2019, 12:04:44 AM
I am assuming, yes. We can start a thread on the hypaspists' panoply if you like.  :)

I'll bet that thread has been done to death, but I think they were hoplites at that date.


Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 13, 2019, 12:04:44 AM
Which leaves the question: why was 8 ranks the accepted trade off? Why not 12 ranks? What is so special about 8?

Well, let's look at rank depths.  Minimum depth for a shield wall is 1 rank.  This is good if you are putting up a barrier, such as Sparabara or Spartans besieging long walls. If you have 3 ranks, no amount of ranks cash charge into you and break through immediately. So, three is a good minimum for anyone close-in fighting.  4 is three with a file closer and appears to be the minimum that Hoplites could double down to as Xenophon shows.  5,6, and 7, will outpush 4, but 8 is 4 doubled.  Thus 8 is the next logical jump up from 4 given the way hoplites deploy. 16 is the next, then 24.  Spartans appear to break the system because they deployed in 3 files, not 4, of 6, 9 or 12, but this is tied to the size of enomotia and the age groups called up.

But if you look at the force curve below, you can see there is an inflection at 4 ranks and another at 8, so maybe this is important.  I should note that depth of file adds many not othismos related benefits. Goldsworthy's paper, though ultimately wrong about othismos, demonstrates these well.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 13, 2019, 07:37:59 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on April 13, 2019, 12:29:21 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 13, 2019, 12:04:44 AM
Which leaves the question: why was 8 ranks the accepted trade off? Why not 12 ranks? What is so special about 8?

Well, let's look at rank depths.  Minimum depth for a shield wall is 1 rank.  This is good if you are putting up a barrier, such as Sparabara or Spartans besieging long walls. If you have 3 ranks, no amount of ranks cash charge into you and break through immediately. So, three is a good minimum for anyone close-in fighting.  4 is three with a file closer and appears to be the minimum that Hoplites could double down to as Xenophon shows.  5,6, and 7, will outpush 4, but 8 is 4 doubled.  Thus 8 is the next logical jump up from 4 given the way hoplites deploy. 16 is the next, then 24.  Spartans appear to break the system because they deployed in 3 files, not 4, of 6, 9 or 12, but this is tied to the size of enomotia and the age groups called up.

But did the Spartans habitually deploy 12 deep? They did at Leuctra, (371BC), but they deployed 8 deep at Mantinea (418BC), in Thrace (402BC), at Maeander (399BC) and Corcyra (373BC). They also deployed 9-10 deep at Mantinea (370BC), 2 deep at Thebes (394BC), 4 deep at Athens (408BC) and very deep at Syracuse and Piraeus. It seems that the Spartans were flexible in their depths but overall did prefer 8 ranks. The flexibility may in part be due to the number of their eligible age classes they called up for a particular campaign.

Quote from: PMBardunias on April 13, 2019, 12:29:21 AMBut if you look at the force curve below, you can see there is an inflection at 4 ranks and another at 8, so maybe this is important.  I should note that depth of file adds many not othismos related benefits. Goldsworthy's paper, though ultimately wrong about othismos, demonstrates these well.

My take (sorry! my suggestion) is that the Greeks were very practical about their line depths. A hoplite phalanx was beaten either by being outflanked or outpushed, so they had two things to consider: a) making the line as long as possible in order to outflank their opponent and not be outflanked themselves, and b) making the line deep enough so it could offer a decent othismos. I suspect an 8-deep line would last a reasonable time against a deeper opponent as the pressure difference between 8 and 16 or 50 ranks is much less than between 4 and 8 ranks, enabling one's own longer line to outflank the enemy before the othismos contest was lost. Just a theory.

Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on April 13, 2019, 10:05:29 PM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 13, 2019, 07:37:59 AM
But did the Spartans habitually deploy 12 deep? They did at Leuctra, (371BC), but they deployed 8 deep at Mantinea (418BC), in Thrace (402BC), at Maeander (399BC) and Corcyra (373BC). They also deployed 9-10 deep at Mantinea (370BC), 2 deep at Thebes (394BC), 4 deep at Athens (408BC) and very deep at Syracuse and Piraeus. It seems that the Spartans were flexible in their depths but overall did prefer 8 ranks. The flexibility may in part be due to the number of their eligible age classes they called up for a particular campaign.

Yes, as I noted the Spartan deployment depended on the number of age groups called up, but depth was always at the discretion of the unit commanders.  This is why I greatly prefer Thucydides's Parataxeis to Xenophon's Phalanx as a description of the hoplite battle line.  Each unit had great independence, from initial deployment to ultimate fate in battle. That said, the treaty before Nemea shows that they were making the calculation you describe, balancing length of line with depth of file.

4 ranks being the smallest shown by Xenophon in his Cilician show, is probably the hoplite minimum of that day and I think probably 3-4 ranks was the early Archaic depth. This was the depth of line that the missile troops of Tyrtaios were shooting over in the same fashion that Persians shot over Spara. Shooting over 8 ranks is a problem. Which is what in my opinion explains the "missile treaty" during the Lelantine war. In this Greek WWI, the great number of troops made deeper ranks necessary for control and resulted in the missile troops behind being ineffective. We don't have depth information for the transition from archaic to classic phalanx- perhaps because until othismos became a common arbiter of battle rather than a thing that happens at the end of some battles, ranks depth was not the sort of thing that needed to be mentioned. So Pagondas comes out of nowhere with 25 ranks.  My guess is that Pritchett is correct that 8 is an urtiefe for hoplites, probably for the reasons we both agree on. But what I do not know is if Athens, Thebans or someone else had been forming at 16 for advantage if they had the numbers to do so before Pagondas.


Quote from: Justin Swanton on April 13, 2019, 07:37:59 AM
My take (sorry! my suggestion) is that the Greeks were very practical about their line depths. A hoplite phalanx was beaten either by being outflanked or outpushed, so i.e. they had two things to consider: a) making the line as long as possible in order to outflank their opponent and not be outflanked themselves, and b) making the line deep enough so it could offer a decent othismos. I suspect an 8-deep line would last a reasonable time against a deeper opponent as the pressure difference between 8 and 16 or 50 ranks is much less than between 4 and 8 ranks, enabling one's own longer line to outflank the enemy before the othismos contest was lost. Just a theory.

Ah, here you can have an enlightened opinion. I presented you above with the data from the only othismos study ever done. Thus, you now have as much information about the force curve as I do, and I am very much opened to the way others interpret the data.  Here, as you can see above, I largely agree. There is a clear inflection around 8 men, so this would be a natural depth.
Many, perhaps most hoplite battles did not end in othismos though. One side have way at the initial clash of spears, or after a period of spear fencing. For this phase, my experience suggests only the two font ranks were actively fighting. This is not meant to alter your calculation, because the threat that a battle could go to othismos meant that a) you had to have enough ranks, and b) that you had to be armed with an aspis of round, concave shape.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on April 26, 2019, 12:52:32 PM
Just for interest, here is my hypothetical reconstruction of a phalanx in close order (minus the 4 rear ranks). Front rank presents pikes underarm, other ranks overarm. Each rank alternates in holding the pike on the left and right side (so leaders right, followers left), which minimises the problems of 5 or 6 pikes and their sauroters all close together on one side*, and also means that pikes are no more than about 24cm apart - creating an impenetrable wall. Using my improvised shield I found no problem in holding it with right as well as left arm, with pike at my right and left shoulder, and without changing the ochanon-telamon arrangement.

*just as much a problem for the standard underarm model.

(https://i.imgur.com/UeBRHsl.jpg)
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: PMBardunias on May 04, 2019, 04:23:06 PM
Except it won't work with any peltae that are not nearly flat- hense "not too deep".  See why you cannot overlap deep peltae below; two methods of overlap.  The only way to have a straight line like you show is to have the peltae angled anyway. I am actually not against an angled line, as long as both lines angled obliquely, they still meet even. It also adds the tendency to win on the right, or leading edge, but it would look much different that your image above.  My bigger problem is that overlapping on such a sloped and rimless shields would not be very effective. There is no need to  make too much of overlapping in any case, a shield wall functions fine without it. The main benefit is the tighter physical link between men that makes moving in unison easier.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Justin Swanton on May 14, 2019, 09:13:03 AM
Quote from: PMBardunias on May 04, 2019, 04:23:06 PM
Except it won't work with any peltae that are not nearly flat- hense "not too deep".  See why you cannot overlap deep peltae below; two methods of overlap.  The only way to have a straight line like you show is to have the peltae angled anyway. I am actually not against an angled line, as long as both lines angled obliquely, they still meet even. It also adds the tendency to win on the right, or leading edge, but it would look much different that your image above.  My bigger problem is that overlapping on such a sloped and rimless shields would not be very effective. There is no need to  make too much of overlapping in any case, a shield wall functions fine without it. The main benefit is the tighter physical link between men that makes moving in unison easier.

A shieldwall without overlapping may work but I prefer to take the sources at their word - close order 48cm-wide files and shields at least 60cm wide, which makes overlapping shields mandatory unless you try that peculiar idea of holding the shields angled at something like 60 degrees to the forward facing of the phalangites. My own impression is that the phalangite shields faced forwards but were angled a bit when overlapping to keep the line straight, as you suggest.

I still wonder why Macedonian shields were so deep. Must have been for a reason.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: Patrick Waterson on May 14, 2019, 09:35:49 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on May 14, 2019, 09:13:03 AM
I still wonder why Macedonian shields were so deep. Must have been for a reason.

Did they form a 'bowl' around the left elbow?  I have in mind the Swanton experiments with the left elbow seeming to fit naturally through the armgrip at the centre.
Title: Re: Did the Macedonian Phalanx practise othismos with its sarissas?
Post by: aligern on May 14, 2019, 09:43:37 AM
Perhaps it is related to deflecting thrusting weapons? A spearman , with the spear in the right hand and the shield on the left arm can move the shield to deflect incoming spears. However, holding a pike in both hands means that the user cannot influence deflection as easily. Perhaps a flat form to the  pelta might mave made it easier for incoming spears to penetrate.
Roy