Since we've been talking about Greek shields, what do we all make of the chap at https://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=464981&partId=1 ?
He's from Egypt, early-ish Ptolemaic, wearing a pilos helmet and swathed in a cloak, with a round rimmed shield. At first I would have said that the shield is a straightforward hoplite's Argive aspis. The thing that gives me pause is the size. If we go by the size of his head and his helmet, then the shield looks to be very small for an Argive shield (but of course too broadly-rimmed for a typical pikeman's shield). However, while it is hard to judge because of his crouching posture, I wonder if the head is somewhat over-scale.
If this chap is a traditional hoplite with an Argive shield, then he provides support for the idea that Greek mercenaries in early Hellenistic armies were still equipped as hoplites, not re-armed as pikemen or as "Iphikratean peltasts". If not, then what is he?
Isn't the shield pretty similar in size and design to those on some of the purported 'machimoi' figures (though I know there could be scale issues with those as well).
The pose is right for a hoplite supporting the weight of his hoplon on his shoulder rather than on his arm. I'd go for him being a hoplite
In composition and modelling terms, I think it would have been difficult to have given him a larger shield. I think he has great character though, wrapped in his cloak huddling over a watchfire, maybe.
Quote from: Swampster on August 21, 2019, 11:01:38 PM
Isn't the shield pretty similar in size and design to those on some of the purported 'machimoi' figures (though I know there could be scale issues with those as well).
Not sure what figures you might mean. The Kom Madi swordsmen (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=5ig4uQC20_IC&pg=PA96-IA7&lpg=PA96-IA7&dq=%22kom+madi%22+wall+painting+bodyguards&source=bl&ots=viKEnGq3zG&sig=uRyRsNhh_MwFcXWd5kMMYSBCmSY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q0aZVeuvF4uu-QHXxLeoCg&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22kom%20madi%22%20wall%20painting%20bodyguards&f=false) have shields that might be of a comparable size, but look to have a much narrower rim.
Comparing the shield size to the head, the shield is way too small to be any known type. Which suggests it is not in proportion. Given that the soldier is squatting, I imagine the sculptor deliberately made the shield smaller to fit the composition (otherwise the top of the shield would be above his head). It looks like an aspis though. I suspect that Successor armies initially used hoplite-equipped troops to give their phalanxes an outflanking capability. A hoplite unit can wheel on the battlefield; a phalangite unit with lowered pikes can't. I don't think it was an accident that the hypapists were always stationed on the right of the phalanx - that enabled them to outflank the enemy left wing as they did at Issus and Gaugamela. Later pike phalanxes seem to have given up on the idea.
If you look at the warrior/protector Bes figures, they often have small rimmed round shields. But, looking at those with thureos or scutum, I think undersizing the shield is a conscious compositional decision and may be so in the squatting/seated soldier too.
I suppose I'd have a more general question. I don't know, or know if anyone knows, what the purpose of these terracotta figures was or who made them or who used them. But what do people think is the likelihood that they accurately depict specific pieces of contemporary military equipment, rather than just being 'toy soldiers'? The pilos helmet suggests some level of accuracy, but shape and size of shield? It's an interesting figure though. I'd say it represents a Greek soldier, type unknown, and probably unspecified and unimportant. Could be a phalangite as easily as anything else, or a non-thureophoros mercenary.
Quote from: Justin Swanton on August 22, 2019, 09:09:22 AM
A hoplite unit can wheel on the battlefield; a phalangite unit with lowered pikes can't.
Permit me to disagree in passing with that statement... Or to disagree partially (why would they need or want to wheel with lowered pikes?)
Quote from: RichT on August 22, 2019, 09:27:43 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on August 22, 2019, 09:09:22 AM
A hoplite unit can wheel on the battlefield; a phalangite unit with lowered pikes can't.
Permit me to disagree in passing with that statement... Or to disagree partially (why would they need or want to wheel with lowered pikes?)
To outflank the enemy infantry as the Spartans did.
Quote from: Justin Swanton on August 22, 2019, 09:09:22 AM
I don't think it was an accident that the hypapists were always stationed on the right of the phalanx - that enabled them to outflank the enemy left wing as they did at Issus and Gaugamela.
Not my period so I'll step in _very_ gingerly here: has the matter of hypaspist armament been settled? I thought there's a school of thought that they were phalangites as well.
Also, who was outlanked by the hypaspists at Gaugamela? Been a while since I read the details but I thought the Companions did the heavy lifting.
Cheers
Mick
Quote from: Mick Hession on August 22, 2019, 10:19:17 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on August 22, 2019, 09:09:22 AM
I don't think it was an accident that the hypapists were always stationed on the right of the phalanx - that enabled them to outflank the enemy left wing as they did at Issus and Gaugamela.
Not my period so I'll step in _very_ gingerly here: has the matter of hypaspist armament been settled? I thought there's a school of thought that they were phalangites as well.
No, it hasn't been settled. But several recent writers have opted for the hypaspist-hoplite explanation; it seems to be in fashion again.
The only new
evidence I know of is Pierre Juhel's argument that the regulation helmet of the Macedonian phalanx was the
pilos; therefore, whoever the hoplite-shielded Thracian-helmeted figures on the Alexander Sarcophagus are, they are not accurate representations of ordinary phalangites. This must
slightly increase the chances that they are representations of some other unit, namely the hypaspists. (While leaving entirely open the idea that they are not entirely accurate representations of anyone...)
Quote from: Justin Swanton on August 22, 2019, 10:14:35 AM
Quote from: RichT on August 22, 2019, 09:27:43 AM
Permit me to disagree in passing with that statement... Or to disagree partially (why would they need or want to wheel with lowered pikes?)
To outflank the enemy infantry as the Spartans did.
Why would they need to lower their pikes for that?
Hypaspist armament is second only to the 0-word for being the cause of vast meandering unresolved debates. FWIW I think they were 'peltasts' in the Hellenistic sense, more or less Iphicratean peltasts.
Outflanking - Gaugamela is too vague to make much of. Issus, Arrian (Anab.2.11.1) says "Now the taxeis on the right wing... overlapping (hyperphalangesantes) the now broken Persian left". A case could be made for the taxeis in question being Hypaspists but I wouldn't make it - I think it means the rightmost taxeis of the main phalanx. At any rate, sarissa armed phalangites certainly could wheel and outflank - the tacticians provide the drills for it (step one - raise sarissas to the vertical...)
Quote from: RichT on August 22, 2019, 10:43:17 AM
Hypaspist armament is second only to the 0-word for being the cause of vast meandering unresolved debates. FWIW I think they were 'peltasts' in the Hellenistic sense, more or less Iphicratean peltasts.
Outflanking - Gaugamela is too vague to make much of. Issus, Arrian (Anab.2.11.1) says "Now the taxeis on the right wing... overlapping (hyperphalangesantes) the now broken Persian left". A case could be made for the taxeis in question being Hypaspists but I wouldn't make it - I think it means the rightmost taxeis of the main phalanx. At any rate, sarissa armed phalangites certainly could wheel and outflank - the tacticians provide the drills for it (step one - raise sarissas to the vertical...)
The trouble is, raising pikes in the middle of a battle is IMHO a bad idea as it exposes the pikemen to nearby enemy units. The wheeling takes a certain amount of time, being done
taxis by
taxis, and the pikemen are helpless during the process if charged. Spear-armed hoplites on the other hand can instantly respond to an enemy attack. The tacticians gives examples of march columns forming lines which I think is what they had in mind when describing wheeling
taxeis. There is no mention of any wheeling manoeuvre employed in the course of a battle.
Quote from: Duncan Head on August 22, 2019, 08:40:16 AM
Quote from: Swampster on August 21, 2019, 11:01:38 PM
Isn't the shield pretty similar in size and design to those on some of the purported 'machimoi' figures (though I know there could be scale issues with those as well).
Not sure what figures you might mean. The Kom Madi swordsmen (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=5ig4uQC20_IC&pg=PA96-IA7&lpg=PA96-IA7&dq=%22kom+madi%22+wall+painting+bodyguards&source=bl&ots=viKEnGq3zG&sig=uRyRsNhh_MwFcXWd5kMMYSBCmSY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q0aZVeuvF4uu-QHXxLeoCg&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22kom%20madi%22%20wall%20painting%20bodyguards&f=false) have shields that might be of a comparable size, but look to have a much narrower rim.
Things like the axeman right at the end of this https://strator.livejournal.com/68761.html
This is one of the more natural looking examples - others look like they have been influenced by the Bes figures mentioned elsewhere.
There are various small rimmed shields shown in the Montvert. They are a variety of sizes though generally smaller than the one in the OP. Quite a few are in a religious context with the interpretation issues that goes with that.
Sekunda interprets the axeman's shield as being a pointed oval but I'd have thought that was down to perspective.
I guess https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789004324763/B9789004324763_016.xml has some examples going by the links to it, but I don't have access. One of them is an armoured figure with a more definitely round shield.
Quote from: Justin Swanton on August 22, 2019, 10:50:54 AMThere is no mention of any wheeling manoeuvre employed in the course of a battle.
Quote... he did not run away in a panic nor give up the battle in despair, but, withdrawing under cover of his phalanx, waited until the enemy had passed him in their pursuit, and left the ground on which the fighting had taken place empty, and then immediately gave the word to the first companies (tois protois telesi) of the phalanx to wheel to the left, and advance at the double, without breaking their ranks.
I guess we have different understandings of how far away before contact it was necessary to lower sarissas, and how long it took.
Duncan's quote is Pol.11.15 and it's only fair to say that Pol actually says "turn (klinon) to the shield (left)".
Quote from: Duncan Head on August 22, 2019, 11:17:46 AM
Quote from: Justin Swanton on August 22, 2019, 10:50:54 AMThere is no mention of any wheeling manoeuvre employed in the course of a battle.
Quote... he did not run away in a panic nor give up the battle in despair, but, withdrawing under cover of his phalanx, waited until the enemy had passed him in their pursuit, and left the ground on which the fighting had taken place empty, and then immediately gave the word to the first companies (tois protois telesi) of the phalanx to wheel to the left, and advance at the double, without breaking their ranks.
Were Tarentine mercenaries phalangites?
Achaean phalangites were phalangites.
The Tarantines have run away.
Oh, right. Do we know the Achaean mercenaries were phalangites?
There again, the "enemy had passed him in their pursuit, and left the ground on which the fighting had taken place empty,"which would make wheeling safe enough for phalangites.
Quote from: RichT on August 22, 2019, 11:24:51 AM
I guess we have different understandings of how far away before contact it was necessary to lower sarissas, and how long it took.
Given that we have been unable with any certainty to show how the sarissa was held, such useful drill information probably doesn't exist :(
Taking inspiration from renaissance practice, I suspect though that lowering sarissas was a simple drill movement (or couple of movements - it's two in Dutch drill, one to put your left hand on the pike, the other to swing the pike down), would take a couple of seconds and could be done while advancing.
Quote from: Justin Swanton on August 22, 2019, 11:39:29 AM
Oh, right. Do we know the Achaean mercenaries were phalangites?
The mercenaries, or most of them, ran away as well. It is specifically the phalanx that is wheeling (or turning).
Plutarch's version says also that the Achaians attacked the Spartan phalanx in front and flank, and since we are told that any rallied mercenaries were posted to face off the return of the pursuers, then:
- It is hard to see who delivered a flank attack except part of the phalanx, and
- It is hard to see how they did that without wheeling (or turning)
But Polybios doesn't explicitly mention any flank attack, so that's less certain.
Quote from: Erpingham on August 22, 2019, 11:43:19 AM
Quote from: RichT on August 22, 2019, 11:24:51 AM
I guess we have different understandings of how far away before contact it was necessary to lower sarissas, and how long it took.
Given that we have been unable with any certainty to show how the sarissa was held, such useful drill information probably doesn't exist :(
Taking inspiration from renaissance practice, I suspect though that lowering sarissas was a simple drill movement (or couple of movements - it's two in Dutch drill, one to put your left hand on the pike, the other to swing the pike down), would take a couple of seconds and could be done while advancing.
The manuals say that a wheeling syntagma had to bunch up first to close order, which would have made it impossible to do anything with the pikes in mid-wheel. The Renaissance pike phalanx was IMHO a different animal.
Personally I'm of two minds about hoplite-armed hypaspists. Notice that the lot at Issus make sure the enemy in front of them are gone before turning against the mercenary hoplites, just like this lot only change direction when the battlefield is empty, which may indicate they had to raise pikes first and hence had to make sure they weren't in range of any enemy.
But there are a number of converging indicators that suggest hypaspists were hoplite-armed:
- the two shield types at Veria,
- the hypaspist expeditionary sorties in terrain entirely unsuitable for phalangites,
- Alexander's guards have spears, not pikes,
- the see-saw fight on Philip's right flank at Chaeronea (hoplites should have had no chance against phalangites, certainly not pushing them back),
- the positioning of hypaspists on the right of the line, classic place for outflankers (phalangites could wheel, but only in ideal circumstances),
- the fact that Darius chariots targeted only Alexander's unit on the right flank at Gaugamela. I think chariots charging pike-armed phalangites would have been suicide
So, yeah, thinking about it.
QuoteThe manuals say that a wheeling syntagma had to bunch up first to close order, which would have made it impossible to do anything with the pikes in mid-wheel.
Ultra-close? Renaissance phalanxes could do this stuff in their regulation 3x7 blocks. I see no reason to believe ancient phalanxes were less capable but I must admit, I've not studied them in depth.
QuoteThe Renaissance pike phalanx was IMHO a different animal.
True. The parallel was on a practical basis - if the renaissance pike block could develop a quick and simple drill, why couldn't the Hellenistic phalanx do likewise? I see little sense in having a drill so awkward and cumbersome that it can only be done in open order while halted.
Quote
The manuals say that a wheeling syntagma had to bunch up first to close order, which would have made it impossible to do anything with the pikes in mid-wheel.
I take it you are assuming that 'close order' here means 'closest order' (synaspismos), and that you buy Matthew's argument that it was impossible for a phalanx in closest order to lower its sarissas?
Quote
The Renaissance pike phalanx was IMHO a different animal.
Given their drill was based on Aelian, I don't think they were all that different. Except for the way they held their pikes of course. :)
In my vision of pikes in battle, a phalanx might not want to wheel while an enemy was 'in range', but range could be a very short distance indeed. With an enemy 50-100 metres away there would still be ample time to (parp) halt, (parp-parp) dress ranks, (parp-parp-parp) lower sarissas. The parping is trumpet signals, not flatulence.
Hpyaspist armament - I'd rather gnaw off my own arm than go through all that again....
Quote from: RichT on August 22, 2019, 12:14:38 PM
Quote
The manuals say that a wheeling syntagma had to bunch up first to close order, which would have made it impossible to do anything with the pikes in mid-wheel.
I take it you are assuming that 'close order' here means 'closest order' (synaspismos), and that you buy Matthew's argument that it was impossible for a phalanx in closest order to lower its sarissas?
I was thinking of Asklepiodotus:
It is a quarter-turn, when we close up [πυκνώσαντες]
the entire syntagma by file [λόχον]
and rank [ζυγὸν]
and move it like the body of one man in such a manner that the entire force swings on the first file-leader as on a pivot, if to the right on the right file-leader, and if to the left on the left file-leader, and at the same time takes a position in advance and faces 'by spear' if pivoting right and 'by shield' if pivoting left. -
Tactics: 10.4
If the men are closed up by rank and file and they are holding their pikes vertical I can't see how they can lower the pikes to horizontal whilst wheeling. Of course it depends on how long the actual wheeling takes.
Quote from: RichT on August 22, 2019, 12:14:38 PM
Quote
The Renaissance pike phalanx was IMHO a different animal.
Given their drill was based on Aelian, I don't think they were all that different. Except for the way they held their pikes of course. :)
And they didn't have shields to get in the way. But they seem to have behaved differently - the Swiss pike block was much more of an offensive formation, charging in at speed.
Quote from: RichT on August 22, 2019, 12:14:38 PMIn my vision of pikes in battle, a phalanx might not want to wheel while an enemy was 'in range', but range could be a very short distance indeed. With an enemy 50-100 metres away there would still be ample time to (parp) halt, (parp-parp) dress ranks, (parp-parp-parp) lower sarissas. The parping is trumpet signals, not flatulence.
True. If dressing ranks meant getting from close to intermediate order at speed, or at least spacing out the ranks so the pikes could be rotated to a horizontal position, then it could work.
Quote from: RichT on August 22, 2019, 12:14:38 PM
Hpyaspist armament - I'd rather gnaw off my own arm than go through all that again....
The evidence is too patchy and circumstantial to reach even the best-fit hypothesis level.
Without desiring to render Richard armless, I did find Luke Ueda-Sarson's idea that hypaspists were essentially 'smart' phalangites armed with both sarissa and lonche quite appealing.
Justin, could you be more specific about which war or years of the renaissance you are referring to please.
There are huge differences between the start and the end of the era. It would be helpful to be certain which you are talking about when you make a comparison to the ancients