Macedonian cavalry success against close order infantry

[Justin Swanton]

And were then replaced by Legionaries who were from the cavalry's point of view inferior hoplites with no pike to prevent cavalry just riding down the files.
But the cavalry had forgotten how to do this and never remembered again

Not quite. There are references to earlier Republican Roman cavalry charging through their own infantry to attack the enemy. Sure, the infantrymen would have moved so as not to be shoved (too much) by the horses, the the point is it proves the file system made it pretty easy for horses to pass through infantry - at speed.

And it is possible that the cavalry had not forgotten how to do it, but neither had the infantry forgotten how it was done, and had devised an anti-file-slice tactic accordingly. The Romans for example: all they would need to do is rotate their oval shields 90 degrees and overlap them so that the top and bottom end of each shield rests on a different man. That should, a priori, stop a horse. Just an idea.

3) There is a reference, made by a greek at least three hundred years afterwards, that the wounds were made by Sarissas. As the only sarissophoroi we appear to know of were (and I think Duncan said this) light cavalry scouts, then according to you Alexander charged not at the head of the companions but at the head of a bunch of light cavalry.

I don't know about anyone else, but somehow I cannot equate carting a 13' sarissa around the place with the idea of light scouting. Light cavalry scouts are, well, light, n'est-ce pas?    What was the sarissa for?

[Jim Webster]

And were then replaced by Legionaries who were from the cavalry's point of view inferior hoplites with no pike to prevent cavalry just riding down the files.
But the cavalry had forgotten how to do this and never remembered again

Not quite. There are references to earlier Republican Roman cavalry charging through their own infantry to attack the enemy. Sure, the infantrymen would have moved so as not to be shoved (too much) by the horses, the the point is it proves the file system made it pretty easy for horses to pass through infantry - at speed.

The Spartans file system allowed young hoplites to charge out of the ranks to attack light troops, so obviously by this reckoning it would have allowed Theban or Athenian hoplites to charge into their ranks, because the file system made it pretty easy for infantry to pass through infantry, also at speed.   

Jim

[Jim Webster]

3) There is a reference, made by a greek at least three hundred years afterwards, that the wounds were made by Sarissas. As the only sarissophoroi we appear to know of were (and I think Duncan said this) light cavalry scouts, then according to you Alexander charged not at the head of the companions but at the head of a bunch of light cavalry.

I don't know about anyone else, but somehow I cannot equate carting a 13' sarissa around the place with the idea of light scouting. Light cavalry scouts are, well, light, n'est-ce pas?    What was the sarissa for?

This one you can take up with Duncan and all the others who have agreed with this

Jim

[Justin Swanton]

And were then replaced by Legionaries who were from the cavalry's point of view inferior hoplites with no pike to prevent cavalry just riding down the files.
But the cavalry had forgotten how to do this and never remembered again

Not quite. There are references to earlier Republican Roman cavalry charging through their own infantry to attack the enemy. Sure, the infantrymen would have moved so as not to be shoved (too much) by the horses, the the point is it proves the file system made it pretty easy for horses to pass through infantry - at speed.

The Spartans file system allowed young hoplites to charge out of the ranks to attack light troops, so obviously by this reckoning it would have allowed Theban or Athenian hoplites to charge into their ranks, because the file system made it pretty easy for infantry to pass through infantry, also at speed.   

Jim

Mmmm....try holding a 3' wide shield in front of you and then using it to barge your way between two files of burly Spartan hoplites whose own shields touch or even overlap. If you are The Rock you might just do it...

[Erpingham]

Not quite. There are references to earlier Republican Roman cavalry charging through their own infantry to attack the enemy. Sure, the infantrymen would have moved so as not to be shoved (too much) by the horses, the the point is it proves the file system made it pretty easy for horses to pass through infantry - at speed.

We have accounts of scythed chariots and elephants moving through lanes in hostile troops.  The key is that these were opened to let the chariot/elephant through - they didn't permanently exist.  It is possible that Republican Roman infantry could also open lanes to let cavalry through.  There is also, to me, a significant difference between moving through a group of people trying to stay out of your way and a group trying to block your way and kill you.

And it is possible that the cavalry had not forgotten how to do it, but neither had the infantry forgotten how it was done, and had devised an anti-file-slice tactic accordingly. The Romans for example: all they would need to do is rotate their oval shields 90 degrees and overlap them so that the top and bottom end of each shield rests on a different man. That should, a priori, stop a horse. Just an idea.

Given we have no evidence for it, we must assume it was a highly successful tactic until a counter measure was dreamed up, then forgotten about

I do think the argument is getting rather cyclic though.  Perhaps a fresh angle, like why did Macedonian scouting light cavalry have very long spears as Justin asks, is what is needed - perhaps as part of a Alexanders cavalry - what sorts were there and what did they all contribute to his success thread?

[Jim Webster]

And were then replaced by Legionaries who were from the cavalry's point of view inferior hoplites with no pike to prevent cavalry just riding down the files.
But the cavalry had forgotten how to do this and never remembered again

Not quite. There are references to earlier Republican Roman cavalry charging through their own infantry to attack the enemy. Sure, the infantrymen would have moved so as not to be shoved (too much) by the horses, the the point is it proves the file system made it pretty easy for horses to pass through infantry - at speed.

The Spartans file system allowed young hoplites to charge out of the ranks to attack light troops, so obviously by this reckoning it would have allowed Theban or Athenian hoplites to charge into their ranks, because the file system made it pretty easy for infantry to pass through infantry, also at speed.   

Jim

Mmmm....try holding a 3' wide shield in front of you and then using it to barge your way between two files of burly Spartan hoplites whose own shields touch or even overlap. If you are The Rock you might just do it...

I merely used your own example to show how silly it was, what is possible, moving from the back of a friendly unit to the front of a friendly unit, may not be possible if done from the front of a hostile unit trying to move to the back of a hostile unit

Jim

[Justin Swanton]

I do think the argument is getting rather cyclic though.  Perhaps a fresh angle, like why did Macedonian scouting light cavalry have very long spears as Justin asks, is what is needed - perhaps as part of a Alexanders cavalry - what sorts were there and what did they all contribute to his success thread?

Good idea. To help it along, I posit that any mounted unit armed with sarissas is meant to charge opponents, which automatically classifies it as shock, heavy cavalry.

[Erpingham]

I do think the argument is getting rather cyclic though.  Perhaps a fresh angle, like why did Macedonian scouting light cavalry have very long spears as Justin asks, is what is needed - perhaps as part of a Alexanders cavalry - what sorts were there and what did they all contribute to his success thread?

Good idea. To help it along, I posit that any mounted unit armed with sarissas is meant to charge opponents, which automatically classifies it as shock, heavy cavalry.

Fair point.  No reason why scouting should just be done by specialist light cavalry.  Medieval armies used their knights and men-at-arms for this and they were certainly shock cavalry.

[Patrick Waterson]

The idea that sarissaphoroi were, or became, scouts seems to rest on their later designation as prodromoi, which literally suggests 'runners before', plus some examples of actual scouting.  In Arrian III.7.7 the prodromoi report a sighting of enemy cavalry, and in III.8.1 Alexander takes the ile basilike, one ile of Companions and his Paeonians prodromon to deal with them.  Prodromon here may mean 'at speed' or simply 'in advance', or even both, as the main body of the army are told to follow at their own pace.

If the prodromoi were given a scouting role it may well have dated from Alexander's reign: when Alexander was operating in Thrace and Illyria just after his accession there are no references to scouts but a few to him 'receiving messages', making me wonder if the sarissophoroi (who are not mentioned, sources being similarly quiet about prodromoi) were as yet not rearmed with xystons or were away with Parmenio, or both.  They are present at the Granicus, commanded by Aretes and termed 'sarissophoroi' there, but following the Granicus there are no references to sarissophoroi and when Aretes is next mentioned he is commanding prodromoi.

However the prodromoi were also effective shock troops: at Gaugamela, the Persian left, around 20,000 strong, is broken by "the powerful assault of Aretes and his men" (Arrian III.14.3).  As sarissophoroi, they led the assault across the Granicus together with the Paeonians (another useful shock contingent) plus supporting infantry (archers and Agrianes) and the Macedonian cavalry squadron of the day.

Curiously enough, Arrian renames the sarissophoroi in mid-battle: in I.14.1 they are sarissophorous hippeas but once they cross the river in I.14.6 they are prodromous hippeas.  For the rest of Arrian's history they are prodromoi, still commanded by Aretes.

The sarissophoroi/prodromoi and the Paeonians both exhibited this dual-use capability: not only did they seem to do vanguard work and scouting, they also did much shock work at the sharp end on the battlefield.  One wonders if the prodromoi would use lances when scouting; they would certainly find them helpful in battle.

[Justin Swanton]

For interest, here is a diagram (to be incorporated in an article on the subject) of a complete cavalry ile - 256 horsemen - charging in wedge an infantry formation of 300 men, 50 files wide and 6 ranks deep. Presuming it was the sarissophoroi who left their sarissas in the Sacred Band, the diagram shows that one ile attacking the Sacred Band was a feasible proposition.  The wedge is only a little wider than the 300-man phalanx. It is exactly 16 ranks deep from the tip of the wedge to the rear baseline, which itself is 31 horses wide. Add a few men to the Sacred Band and/or shave a few men from the ile and the correspondence will be exact (not that it needs to be of course).

A wedge in motion must have been an impressive sight.

[Imperial Dave]

not sure if this has been covered elsewhere in the thread but I was under the impression that a wedge is more likely to become a rhombus in actuality?

[Patrick Waterson]

For Thessalians, yes, Dave.  Less sure it would apply to others.

My one observation on Justin's diagram is that a wedge might work best if the men in the respective ranks overlapped rather than being strictly follow-my-leader.  Hence the ranks increase in a succession 1,2,3,4,5 etc. rather than 1,3,5,7 etc.  This seems to be the traditional understanding of a wedge formation, although it would be unwise to discard alternatives without good reason.

This more traditional arrangement would give an ile of 210 men (or 190 on a bad day?) with a base width of 20 horses rather than 31.  If this is correct, then Alex could have attacked the Sacred Band four files off dead centre and had enough room for another ile to join the fun four files in from the join where the Sacred Band prolonged the Theban hoplite line or four files from its outer flank, which would presumably have linked with the Theban cavalry.

Alternatively, if the Macedonian cavalry had attacked in a 'wedge of wedges', with Alex's wedge spearheading and two other ilai positioned so their wedge tips were adjacent to the rear corners of his own ile, he could have ridden through the centre of the Sacred Band and the two following wedges would have cleaned up anything he missed  (the two remaining ilai I would ascribe to his wing would either have been dealing with Theban cavalry or following up in support).  An arrangement of this nature may account for the Sacred Band suffering 100% casualties - and it would make sense for a leading wedge to have supports to create an expanded rupture of the enemy line rather than to punch an isolated hole and then look a bit foolish on its own in the enemy rear.

[aligern]

I think this imaginative reconstruction fails the test of the Sacred Band falling in heaps with their wounds to the front. If cavalry charged through as posited  then they would have bowled over the Banders who would have been crushed and bowled aside by the horses's chests. Cavalry destroy infantry when the infantry run and are speared from behind, generally not when they stand in their ranks.
Roy

[Erpingham]

We are back again to what Plutarch intended his words to convey.  Philip hasn't received a CSI report that says all the enemy have received penetrating wounds to the front from sarissa thrusts.  Plutarch is saying that the Sacred Band didn't break but fell where they fought - unlike some of their allies.  I'm not sure he intends us to interpret the type of combat, infantry or cavalry.  In fact, the most likely circumstance which would create a stand where everyone dies in a heap, all facing the front, is if they had formed an allround defence and fought to the last.  This would not fit with a reconstruction where Alexander overruns the Sacred Band in the first minutes, causing mass demoralisation, but rather that they were surrounded and killed later.

[Justin Swanton]

I'm about halfway through an article on the subject. The text of Diodorus is interesting, in that he gives details that seem to be authentic as opposed to being made up:

Then Alexander, his heart set on showing his father his prowess and yielding to none in will to win, ably seconded by his men, first succeeded in rupturing the solid front of the enemy line and striking down many he bore heavily on the troops opposite him. As the same success was won by his companions, gaps in the front were constantly opened. Corpses piled up, until finally Alexander forced his way through the line and put his opponents to flight.

This seems a different kind of fight to that led by Philip on the right flank:

Then the king also in person advanced, well in front and not conceding credit for the victory even to Alexander; he first forced back the troops stationed before him and then by compelling them to flee became the man responsible for the victory.

Notice that the infantry line on the Greek right flank is 'ruptured' several times, 'gaps' are opened, but the line is not immediately broken. It is only a little later that Alexander (or the troops led by Alexander) 'forced his way through the line' causing the Greeks to rout.

I'm reminded of the deployment of the Macedonians at Issus, as given by Diodorus:

He roused his soldiers with appropriate words for a decisive effort and marshalled the battalions of foot and the squadrons of horse appropriately to the location. He set the cavalry along the front of the whole army, and ordered the infantry phalanx to remain in reserve behind it. He himself advanced at the head of the right wing to the encounter, having with him the best of the mounted troops.

The battlefield at Issus was narrow, as was the battlefield at Chaeronea. Hypothesizing that the Macedonian cavalry deployed in front of the infantry at Chaeronea, the text of Diodorus then makes sense. Commanding several wedges of ilia, Alexander was the first to slice though the hoplite line, his sarissophoroi passing between the files of the hoplites and killing many as they did so. The following ilia did the same, and the Greek phalanx was punctured but not yet destroyed. Its final demolition came from the following Macedonian phalanx, which overran the decimated Greek line, causing it to rout.

To be honest the battle on the Macedonian right flank reads more like an infantry struggle. Philip 'forced back the troops stationed before him and then ... compelling them to flee'. Philip, like Alexander, leads the attack 'also in person', which precludes the notion that Alexander did not actually lead his own attack, but just took credit for it. Was Philip mounted? Most probably yes if Alexander was. Did he lead a cavalry wedge through the Greek infantry? The text does not say, but I can't imagine how he could lead an attack in person any other way.

What is curious about Diodorus's account is that the battle rages for some time in the balance before Alexander and Philip make their decisive attacks. This implies an infantry engagement before the Macedonian cavalry was committed. This is confirmed by Polyaenus:

Engaging the Athenians at Chaeroneia, Philippus made a sham retreat: and Stratocles, the Athenian general, ordered his men to push forwards, crying out, "We will pursue them to the heart of Macedonia." Philippus observed, "The Athenians know not how to conquer:" and ordered his phalanx to keep close and firm, and to retreat slowly, covering themselves with their shields from the attacks of the enemy. As soon as he had by the manoeuvre drawn them from their advantageous ground, and gained an eminence, he halted; and encouraging his troops to a vigorous assault, he attacked the Athenians and won a brilliant victory. - Strategems 4.2.2

Perhaps the best way to understand this is a drawn-out infantry engagement on the Macedonian right flank since the 'advantageous ground' of the Athenians precluded an effective cavalry charge. It is only once the Athenians have been drawn onto level ground that Philip, leading the cavalry, could attack them. This of course implies that his cavalry were on the flank of his phalanx and kept step with it as it retreated. Once it was on the high ground - or more importantly, once the Athenians were on the flat - then Philip was able to give them the wedge treatment which the phalanx, or fresh troops stationed behind the cavalry, could exploit. A hypothesis.