Testing hoplite combat

[RichT]

I had a thought on the cereal bowl concept concerning the purpose of such a dished shield - a flat shield held at 45 degrees just deflects on oncoming pike point deeper into the formation, but a bowl shaped shield at 45 degrees has at least some flat surface facing forward which could catch and hold a pike point (assuming that is a desirable thing). So the need to carry shields at an angle in close formation might account for the adoption (in at least some cases) of the dished shape.

[Justin Swanton]

The overlapping shields in a close order formation would probably look like this, with the shield taken from a Seleucid tetradrachm coin. I've given two options that reflect the range of pelta shields sizes. Would the overlapping be workable?

[Patrick Waterson]

Justin, how would it look if the shields were held the other way round - I mean with the edges at 2 o'clock and 8 o'clock rather than 4 o'clock and 10 o'clock as in the picture?

[Justin Swanton]

Justin, how would it look if the shields were held the other way round - I mean with the edges at 2 o'clock and 8 o'clock rather than 4 o'clock and 10 o'clock as in the picture?

Thus. It might be rather awkward holding the shield this way with the right arm though.




Unless done like this?

[RichT]

The bottom pictures are closer, but move the men across to the right relative to the shields so that the left shoulder is more or less in the centre of the shield, left hand (elbow bent 90 degrees) poking out of the right side of the shield. You'll need to angle the shields a bit more so that sarissas can fit past them () - try 45 degrees. It works for me.

Also your men are rather slender - I'm not the bulkiest but my shoulders are about 48 cm across.

[Justin Swanton]

The bottom pictures are closer, but move the men across to the right relative to the shields so that the left shoulder is more or less in the centre of the shield, left hand (elbow bent 90 degrees) poking out of the right side of the shield. You'll need to angle the shields a bit more so that sarissas can fit past them () - try 45 degrees. It works for me.

Also your men are rather slender - I'm not the bulkiest but my shoulders are about 50 cm across.

There are problems. You can move the men only so far to the right before they knock against the shield to their right. Re shoulders, I'm working on an average shoulder width of about 45cm for men in Antiquity. In this model the sarissas go over or under the shields. To leave a little space between shields you would need to angle them to this extent (which makes me wonder why they would bother with shields at all):

[Mark G]

if the shields all have a clear ridge, why are they overlapping in some random bit of curved shield with no purchase?

[Justin Swanton]

if the shields all have a clear ridge, why are they overlapping in some random bit of curved shield with no purchase?

To keep the files 48cm (1 cubit) wide, as per the Tacticians' width for close order.

This whole thing really needs to be tried out by reenactors with deep shields.

[RichT]

Your bottom left picture looks fine. Your bottom right, the shields are so big they are like coracles, and they don't need to be at such an extreme angle. Of course with your under/over sarissa model the upper row of pictures would work fine, only with the standard (low hold) model does the angle need to open out more. As to whether an angled shield is worse than no shield at all - well they still protect the body from the front, which is what matters. Pikemen managed for centuries without having shields at all, so I don't think having the shield at an angle is too great a disadvantage. But as you say, diagrams can only get you so far, it really needs to be done for real (and it has been...).

Do keep in the back of your mind that they wouldn't really be spaced '48 cm' apart - I don't suppose officers went up and down the line with a measuring stick. Also that this isn't 'close order' but 'closest order' or 'locked shields' or what have you - close order is two cubits.

[PMBardunias]

Do keep in the back of your mind that they wouldn't really be spaced '48 cm' apart - I don't suppose officers went up and down the line with a measuring stick. Also that this isn't 'close order' but 'closest order' or 'locked shields' or what have you - close order is two cubits.

It is best to not get too caught up in the precision of the Hellenistic manuals. These are just average or idealized figures. Also, do not assume these are square boxes- 48x48cm or 90x90cm.  Hoplites in combat might be 90cm apart with the second, maybe 3rd, ranks right on their backs and the 3rd or fourth rank 6 feet back.

I readjusted the figure because the arm was not in the center of the shield where the center arm grip was. Note as well that just above the level of the mid line of the shield is also a workable solution while still bearing the weight on the strap, see on the right.

[RichT]

It is best to not get too caught up in the precision of the Hellenistic manuals. These are just average or idealized figures. Also, do not assume these are square boxes- 48x48cm or 90x90cm.  Hoplites in combat might be 90cm apart with the second, maybe 3rd, ranks right on their backs and the 3rd or fourth rank 6 feet back.

I agree with your agreement with me but also want to disagree on one small thing.

No doubt in combat conditions there would be lots of variation and these neat intervals, like all plans, would not survive contact with the enemy. However in principle, intervals were 'by rank and file', that is the interval was the same between ranks and between files, making a square box. Note I'm talking Hellenistic drill here - I expect hoplites, being largely undrilled, would vary more, and I think it's very bad practice to apply the Hellenistic manuals to Classical hoplites anyway.

[PMBardunias]

However in principle, intervals were 'by rank and file', that is the interval was the same between ranks and between files, making a square box. Note I'm talking Hellenistic drill here - I expect hoplites, being largely undrilled, would vary more, and I think it's very bad practice to apply the Hellenistic manuals to Classical hoplites anyway.

This is exactly my point. Hellenistic drill cannot be anachronistically applied back in time.  Note as well that all of the existent manuals were not written until rather late in the history of the sarissaphoroi. The "rank and file" in equal measure may well be the fevered dream of philosophers dabbling at applying mathematics to military drill, rather than a true statement about what one of Alexander's men did on a battle field. Never mind a hoplite.

[Patrick Waterson]

This is perhaps worth testing next time one can assemble 60 or so would-be phalangites - and alert them that from time to time you will want to freeze the action and take measurements!

I would think - for what it is worth - that Hellenistic officers would insist on lining up properly, hence the idea of mathematically precise intervals is perhaps not so far-fetched as it may seem on first thought.  The actual results achieved would probably vary somewhat with familiarity and experience, and troops like the original Argyraspides may have derived as much of their effectiveness from accurate and interdependent station-keeping as from skilled weapon use.

(Yes, I am pretty much agreeing with Richard Taylor.  It can happen. )

[PMBardunias]

This is perhaps worth testing next time one can assemble 60 or so would-be phalangites - and alert them that from time to time you will want to freeze the action and take measurements!

I would think - for what it is worth - that Hellenistic officers would insist on lining up properly, hence the idea of mathematically precise intervals is perhaps not so far-fetched as it may seem on first thought.  The actual results achieved would probably vary somewhat with familiarity and experience, and troops like the original Argyraspides may have derived as much of their effectiveness from accurate and interdependent station-keeping as from skilled weapon use.

(Yes, I am pretty much agreeing with Richard Taylor.  It can happen. )

We may not be writing about the exact same thing when we discuss precision.  For example, when I line up a bunch of hoplites in close order they line up shield rim to shield rim. If their aspides are of similar diameter, their intervals will look amazingly precise.  So much so that they appear to be measured with a yardstick- because they have if the aspides are some 90cm wide. line up in opened order, they use their left arms and aspides as a measuring stick.  If the men's arms and shields are of similar length, then this will appear to be a precise measure.  Around 72cm is another natural distance, a "comfort zone". 60 cm is just "hey get really close".

But these are deployment intervals, not fighting intervals.  It is the fighting intervals that I say are not precise because keeping such is more difficult the further apart men are. So 2m is near impossible to maintain accurately, 90cm difficult, 72 fairly easy, 60cm easier still, though many will want to open out if you are moving. As I am sure I have written here before, I believe much of the famous rightward drift is really a closing to the right.

An example I can share is that we lined up at 3'x 3' spacing, then charged. The spacing between files is maintained or actually converges right, but the ranks pull apart to almost double distance as men run.  So at the moment you arrive at the enemy line, your force looks like the depiction on the Chigi, which I think was the design, with the first rank engaging while the second is still coming up.

PS: by the way, generals could and did walk the ranks and put men into alignment prior to battle, so it could be quite exact prior to engagement. Think Byrhtnoth at Maldon.

In 2021 we will have a drone over the battlefield and enough men to measure just this sort of thing.  They will be hoplites, but some will have peltae with them, maybe we can try.  We will have a lot more time than I had a few weeks back. By the way, you guys should give some thought to coming to Greece to be a part of this. We can always throw chitons on you and you can be kibbutzy sophists watching the action

[Patrick Waterson]

As I am sure I have written here before, I believe much of the famous rightward drift is really a closing to the right.

"All armies are alike in this: on going into action they get forced out rather on their right wing, and one and the other overlap with this their adversary's left; because fear makes each man do his best to shelter his unarmed side with the shield of the man next him on the right, thinking that the closer the shields are locked together the better will he be protected." - Thucydides V.71.1

So yes, this sort of thing would, or at any rate should, result in closing. Thucydides does note actual rightward drift, and ascribes it to:

"... the first (protostates) upon the right wing, who is always striving to withdraw from the enemy his unarmed side; and the same apprehension makes the rest follow him." - idem

Whether the majority of frontage change is compression or displacement is something we can consider.  What was apparently most noticeable was the drift, which at First Mantinea led the Sciritae on the Spartan left being overlapped, enveloped, minced and routed.

How far the closure manages to overtake the drift, or vice versa, could perhaps be a hidden agenda for the next experiment.

An example I can share is that we lined up at 3'x 3' spacing, then charged. The spacing between files is maintained or actually converges right, but the ranks pull apart to almost double distance as men run.  So at the moment you arrive at the enemy line, your force looks like the depiction on the Chigi, which I think was the design, with the first rank engaging while the second is still coming up.

This Thucydides confirms, at least for armies which close rapidly.

"After this they joined battle, the Argives and their allies advancing with haste and fury, the Lacedaemonians slowly and to the music of many flute-players—a standing institution in their army, that has nothing to do with religion, but is meant to make them advance evenly, stepping in time, without breaking their order, as large armies are apt to do in the moment of engaging."  - Thuc V.70

The Spartans prized order over enthusiasm and, presumably, impact.  Looking at how often they won, perhaps they were right.  Of course, being on the right of the line helped ...

PS: by the way, generals could and did walk the ranks and put men into alignment prior to battle, so it could be quite exact prior to engagement. Think Byrhtnoth at Maldon.

True.  We even have instances which suggest that individuals may have been stationed specifically by generals, e.g. Phocion's "Young man, are you not ashamed to have twice quitted your post, first the one to which I assigned you, and second the one to which you assigned yourself?"

In 2021 we will have a drone over the battlefield and enough men to measure just this sort of thing.  They will be hoplites, but some will have peltae with them, maybe we can try.  We will have a lot more time than I had a few weeks back. By the way, you guys should give some thought to coming to Greece to be a part of this.

Nice!

We can always throw chitons on you and you can be kibbutzy sophists watching the action

Or tipsy kottabus-players, depending ... regarding another possible role, I am not sure if we have many, or even any, flute-players.