What is the point of 16 ranks in a pike phalanx?

[aligern]

Or turned into a gap in the phalanx that a unit of 80  men could exploit :-))

Roy

[Mark G]

I'm nit sure those holes are evidence of attempts to turn a hoplin by stabbing.

They look more like the temwo places you would expect given where the man opposite can aim.

upper left - matches my overhand thrust over my shield.
Lower right matches my shield mates spear held under arm and under shield.

Remember. They used forearm straps which would make a simple spin point almost impossible, and they were anchored on the shield next to them

[andrew881runner]

I agree that most pikes would not be making holes in opponents but rather pushing them back; we see this at Cynoscephalae and Pydna.  It is only when the Romans try to exert counterpressure that they are impaled, which seems to act as a deterrent to others attempting to do so.

Greek hoplites would have tended to exert counterpressure (their fighting style depended on it) and so we would expect them to suffer more casualties in frontal combat against a phalanx.  However after Chaeronea, the Granicus and the sieges of Miletus and Halicarnassus they seem to have learned not to do this, because at Issus we see them fighting from behind a riverbank and in some sectors a palisade, suggesting they were content to let the phalanx come on rather than trying to attack and press against it.   The result at Issus seems to have been a stalemate which was resolved by Alexander's flank attack following Darius' departure.

Opponents who were prepared to be pushed back could survive against pikes, at least up to the point where being pushed back turned into being routed.

at chaeronea Macedonian left phalanx was pushed back by Greek hoplites. Maybe with their heavy armor, invulnerable to spear piercing, and othysmos they were able to push back the spear wall?
We should not overevaluate the offensive power of a spear wall of a pike phalanx. I would chose to be in front of a pike phalanx rather than being in front of a roman maniple. A pike can simply stab in front, it cannot do upward or downward attacks like a short spear. Since usually soldiers had Shields in front of them, a pike could simply block the shield PREVENTING every offensive moves of the enemy who as soon as loses his defensive position moves the shield and gets stabbed. A pike wall forces an offensive enemy to stay in defensive. And the physical and psychological stress, but even the casual deaths, in being in this condition for long, after some time lead enemies to feel "trapped", under constant threat, so they finally routed, possibly.

[aligern]

I suggest that the pikemen do perform some sort of drill because,when pike fights pike, the more experienced soldiers win. That suggests that there is  some skill that they get better at the more they practise it and that it is not meterly a matter of learning to hold the pike, keep it level  and advance in step.
Roy

[Patrick Waterson]

at chaeronea Macedonian left phalanx was pushed back by Greek hoplites. Maybe with their heavy armor, invulnerable to spear piercing, and othysmos they were able to push back the spear wall?

Is this a reference to Polyaenus IV.2.2?

"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."

This does not suggest that hoplites were invulnerable to a phalanx, rather the reverse.

We should not overevaluate the offensive power of a spear wall of a pike phalanx. I would chose to be in front of a pike phalanx rather than being in front of a roman maniple. A pike can simply stab in front, it cannot do upward or downward attacks like a short spear. Since usually soldiers had Shields in front of them, a pike could simply block the shield PREVENTING every offensive moves of the enemy who as soon as loses his defensive position moves the shield and gets stabbed. A pike wall forces an offensive enemy to stay in defensive. And the physical and psychological stress, but even the casual deaths, in being in this condition for long, after some time lead enemies to feel "trapped", under constant threat, so they finally routed, possibly.

There is truth in  this, but it is also true that Romans who tried to assault the pike formation at Pydna (to retrieve their standard) simply died, thrust through by pikes.

"The Romans, when they attacked the Macedonian phalanx, were unable to force a passage, and Salvius, the commander of the Pelignians, snatched the standard of his company and hurled it in among the enemy. Then the Pelignians, since among the Italians it is an unnatural and flagrant thing to abandon a standard, rushed on towards the place where it was, and dreadful losses were inflicted and suffered on both sides. [2] 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. [3] 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*. For this part of his army was retreating, and the rest of the Romans were turning aside from the phalanx, which gave them no access to it, but confronted them as it were with a dense barricade of long spears, and was everywhere unassailable." - Plutarch, Life of Aemilius Paulus, 20.1-3

(*This seems puzzling; why tear a perfectly good set of clothes?  The Greek katarrēxasthai ton khitōna means he did whatever he did to his chiton (tunic), which would seem a difficult and illogical piece of clothing for an armour-wearing Roman to tear, but katarrēgnumi can also mean to have a violent discharge of diarrhoea, and the chiton would be in the right place to be affected by this.  We can make up our own minds on this essentially trivial point of translation: would he need a seamstress or a laundress after the battle?)

I suggest that the pikemen do perform some sort of drill because, when pike fights pike, the more experienced soldiers win. That suggests that there is some skill that they get better at the more they practise it and that it is not merely a matter of learning to hold the pike, keep it level  and advance in step.
Roy

That does seem logical; with an easily-handled counterweighted pike, veterans could think up their own tricks like aiming for an opponent's thighs or, like Andrew's suggestion, aiming at a specific part of their opponent's shield, perhaps near the top so that the pike point is deflected into the opponent's throat.  So many possibilities, so few re-enactment opportunities.

[Duncan Head]

... so that even Aemilius, as Poseidonius tells us, when he saw it, rent his garments*...

(*This seems puzzling; why tear a perfectly good set of clothes?  The Greek katarrēxasthai ton khitōna means he did whatever he did to his chiton (tunic), which would seem a difficult and illogical piece of clothing for an armour-wearing Roman to tear, but katarrēgnumi can also mean to have a violent discharge of diarrhoea, and the chiton would be in the right place to be affected by this.  We can make up our own minds on this essentially trivial point of translation: would he need a seamstress or a laundress after the battle?)

Presumably a conventional expression of grief, in Rome as well as Judaea? "Then it was that the Sabine women, whose wrongs had led to the war, throwing off all womanish fears in their distress, went boldly into the midst of the flying missiles with dishevelled hair and rent garments" (Livy I.13).

[Erpingham]

I suggest that the pikemen do perform some sort of drill because, when pike fights pike, the more experienced soldiers win. That suggests that there is some skill that they get better at the more they practise it and that it is not merely a matter of learning to hold the pike, keep it level  and advance in step.
Roy

That does seem logical; with an easily-handled counterweighted pike, veterans could think up their own tricks like aiming for an opponent's thighs or, like Andrew's suggestion, aiming at a specific part of their opponent's shield, perhaps near the top so that the pike point is deflected into the opponent's throat.  So many possibilities, so few re-enactment opportunities.

Returning to our main thread topic, one of the significant areas of drill advantage may have been the technique of using the sixteen ranks to effect, rather than five rows of points and a crowd behind.

[Patrick Waterson]

Presumably a conventional expression of grief, in Rome as well as Judaea? "Then it was that the Sabine women, whose wrongs had led to the war, throwing off all womanish fears in their distress, went boldly into the midst of the flying missiles with dishevelled hair and rent garments" (Livy I.13).

Possible, despite a general lack of mention of other consuls in distress undertaking this procedure, though I understand that consuls in the field usually wore armour, which would make tearing a chiton (presumably worn under the armour) something of a challenge.

Returning to our main thread topic, one of the significant areas of drill advantage may have been the technique of using the sixteen ranks to effect, rather than five rows of points and a crowd behind.

Very true, and the drill may also have included the rear eleven ranks holding pikes in the right pattern to optimise missile deflection.

"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." - Polybius XVIII.30.2-4

[andrew881runner]

at chaeronea Macedonian left phalanx was pushed back by Greek hoplites. Maybe with their heavy armor, invulnerable to spear piercing, and othysmos they were able to push back the spear wall?

Is this a reference to Polyaenus IV.2.2?

"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."

This does not suggest that hoplites were invulnerable to a phalanx, rather the reverse.

We should not overevaluate the offensive power of a spear wall of a pike phalanx. I would chose to be in front of a pike phalanx rather than being in front of a roman maniple. A pike can simply stab in front, it cannot do upward or downward attacks like a short spear. Since usually soldiers had Shields in front of them, a pike could simply block the shield PREVENTING every offensive moves of the enemy who as soon as loses his defensive position moves the shield and gets stabbed. A pike wall forces an offensive enemy to stay in defensive. And the physical and psychological stress, but even the casual deaths, in being in this condition for long, after some time lead enemies to feel "trapped", under constant threat, so they finally routed, possibly.

I don't think reenacting this would be much hard (maybe don't use real spear points...) Anyway I had seen a video of a ancient martial art school where the teacher explained how hoplites fought and he mentioned that in order to hit the shielded enemies, differently from what we think, first purpose of skilled warrior was to hit the shield (hoplon) in peculiar areas so to make it rotate enough to stab the guy. Otherwise as you can imagine a guy covered by a big heavy Hoplon was quite invulnerable (ok you could hit him from above but only from very close distance since the shield was almost attached to the body). So you could hit in the shield's lower right (from the guys stabbing's point of view) or at the opposite into the shield's upper left (from same. point of vjew): in first case you made shied rotate so that the guy opened his chest area for other attacks, in the second case the shield could not rotate, since there was the head, but the hoplite would have taken an hard hit of the shield into the face, not lethal maybe but not pleasant too (maybe you could hit again and again until the guy could not stand anymore).
As for the Roman scutum, this tactic, at least in the sense of making the shield rotate, would be even easier, since there was only one central grip and the shield would have rotate upward or downward almost for sure with a hard strike (even if the Roman was trained to hold the shield firmly, this is main fault of having only one central grip) leaving a gap for other pikes to hit.  Maybe, maybe if you kept the scutum very close to the body, it would have rotated less, but you could have taken the rotating shield edges directly into your face of your thighs.
So in this sense I agree that a pike phalanx was quite unstoppable, both if you had a shield Hoplon or scutum style with central grip (same for celtic shields).
I imagine that this could be the "drill" more skilled pikemen could do better than less skilled ones, who maybe were trained simply to raise and lower their pikes together with all others (it could be strange that a person did not understand so basic things like the mentioned drill, but a lot of people are quite stupid even today, maybe more in the past, especially among the ignorant farmers)

I suggest that the pikemen do perform some sort of drill because, when pike fights pike, the more experienced soldiers win. That suggests that there is some skill that they get better at the more they practise it and that it is not merely a matter of learning to hold the pike, keep it level  and advance in step.
Roy

That does seem logical; with an easily-handled counterweighted pike, veterans could think up their own tricks like aiming for an opponent's thighs or, like Andrew's suggestion, aiming at a specific part of their opponent's shield, perhaps near the top so that the pike point is deflected into the opponent's throat.  So many possibilities, so few re-enactment opportunities.

I don't think reenacting this would be much hard (maybe don't use real spear points...) Anyway I had seen a video of a ancient martial art school where the teacher explained how hoplites fought and he mentioned that in order to hit the shielded enemies, differently from what we think, first purpose of skilled warrior was to hit the shield (hoplon) in peculiar areas so to make it rotate enough to stab the guy. Otherwise as you can imagine a guy covered by a big heavy Hoplon was quite invulnerable (ok you could hit him from above but only from very close distance since the shield was almost attached to the body). So you could hit in the shield's lower right (from the guys stabbing's point of view) or at the opposite into the shield's upper left (from same. point of vjew): in first case you made shied rotate so that the guy opened his chest area for other attacks, in the second case the shield could not rotate, since there was the head, but the hoplite would have taken an hard hit of the shield into the face, not lethal maybe but not pleasant too (maybe you could hit again and again until the guy could not stand anymore).
As for the Roman scutum, this tactic, at least in the sense of making the shield rotate, would be even easier, since there was only one central grip and the shield would have rotate upward or downward almost for sure with a hard strike (even if the Roman was trained to hold the shield firmly, this is main fault of having only one central grip) leaving a gap for other pikes to hit.  Maybe, maybe if you kept the scutum very close to the body, it would have rotated less, but you could have taken the rotating shield edges directly into your face of your thighs.
So in this sense I agree that a pike phalanx was quite unstoppable, both if you had a shield Hoplon or scutum style with central grip (same for celtic shields).
I imagine that this could be the "drill" more skilled pikemen could do better than less skilled ones, who maybe were trained simply to raise and lower their pikes together with all others (it could be strange that a person did not understand so basic things like the mentioned drill, but a lot of people are quite stupid even today, maybe more in the past, especially among the ignorant farmers)

[Mark G]

Well hence the position of the elbow