Macedonian Phalangites Considered Harmless

[Cantabrigian]

Does anyone else miss the threads where someone advanced an outlandish theory, and then the knowledgeable debated it with an array of detailed evidence that we all learnt from?  Well here's my attempt at starting such a thread.

I should say, that this outlandish idea is based, as all the best outlandish ideas are, on almost no knowledge of the subject...

So as I understand it, when Philip of Macedon inherited the throne, he also inherited an army consisting of:

- some exceptionally good cavalry
- some pretty good hoplites
- large amounts of rubbish levy infantry.

His early experience was that however good his cavalry and hoplites were, he couldn't win a battle because the levies would run away if attacked by Mr Blobby.

So his cunning plan was not to make the levies any good, but simply improve them to the point where they could hang around a bit longer and give him a chance to win with his other troops.  So he armed them with an exceptionally long spear that made them very difficult to get at.

This didn't mean the levies could actually beat anyone.  Face them off against pretty much any heavy infantry and they would eventually lose.  But it would take a while, and that made them perfect for pinning the opposition's best troops while Philip got busy with the cavalry and hoplites.

Of course he explained all this to his son, but he didn't make it public.  I mean, if everyone else realised that the levies could safely be ignored while the rest of the battle was fought, then they'd become pretty useless again.  Alexander continued his policy of bigging up the phalangites, especially as once he moved away from Macedon they actually had some political power under the Macedonian constitution.

Unfortunately, when Alexander died, his successors actually believed the propaganda, and considered the phalangites as some sort of super-weapon.  Which was fine when they only had other successors to fight, but came off the rails badly when they encountered the Romans.

So, am I wrong, or am I wrong?

[Erpingham]

Interesting.  I have sometimes wondered how much Philip in his reform of the Macedonian infantry intended to create a super weapon, as opposed to have a force of solid infantry within his budget limitations.  However, I'd be interested to see further exposition of the evidence that early phalangites were harmless.  They seem to do OK at Chaeronea against citizen hoplites and they certainly don't disgrace themselves in Alexander's battles.

[Andreas Johansson]

Unfortunately, when Alexander died, his successors actually believed the propaganda, and considered the phalangites as some sort of super-weapon.  Which was fine when they only had other successors to fight, but came off the rails badly when they encountered the Romans.

The Romans didn't seem to think phalangites harmless, and as I've pointed out before, none of the big Roman-Successor battles was decided by the legionaries beating the phalangites in a straight fight.

[Imperial Dave]

maybe, they started off as peasants armed with a very long stick and developed into something very very remarkable almost by accident

[Ian61]

The Romans didn't seem to think phalangites harmless

Indeed, even though there may be some grains of truth in the initial founding my impression was that the Romans distinctly disliked the idea of facing them. I would certainly not have wished to do so. I also got the impression from Richard T's book that they were given quite a bit of training and that always makes a difference.

[Mark G]

I take it we are still only accepting evidence from history, and my failure to ever manage a win with the Macedonian phalangites is irrelevant

( that's not irrelevant, a relevant is a great big animal with ears and a long trunk)

[lionheartrjc]

The idea that any infantry from a kingdom that was sandwiched between the Illyrians and Thracians were useless levy seems basically wrong to me. I suspect they were pretty tough to begin with.

[Imperial Dave]

Tough but not well led and used to failure until....

[Erpingham]

Tough but not well led and used to failure until....

Until?  They were re-organised and re-armed? Leadership improved?  They were finally integrated into a military set-up that exploited their toughness, alongside other arms of service?  All or none of the foregoing?

[Imperial Dave]

Philip and Alexander etc

[Keraunos]

To add to the question, isn't there some uncertainty as to whether Phillip and Alexander's phalangites carried really long pikes?  Training and discipline seems to have been a bigger part of the package, even allowing them to overawe some enemies with displays of precision marching, which while not bloody was certainly effective so doesn't count as harmless?

[Erpingham]

Philip and Alexander etc

Dave, you are the soul of brevity 

In the spirit of Mike's OP, how do you think Philip and Alexander transformed their levy's performance?  Was it by force of personality and vision of empire?  Was it by armament and training? And was their intention to create a harmless but rather more durable base around which the arms of decision could operate?

[Jim Webster]

Just reading  PHILIP II AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE MACEDONIAN STATE by Cynthia Kimball Phillips

One interesting footnote reads

214 Gabriel, Philip II, 64-65. Gabriel demonstrates that this Macedonian pike probably
originated in Homeric times and is related to the Homeric battle spear: "a miniature
fresco from Akrotiri dating from 1450 BCE depicts Mycenaean warriors using long
spears of the sarissa's length in battle" . . . "while later tomb paintings show men hunting
wild boars with long spears." Diodorus 16.3.2 also indicates that both the shields and the
"close order fighting" that characterized Philip's phalangites were in imitation of the
"warriors at Troy." While it is unlikely that the phalanx formation has origins in the
Bronze Age, the shield might.

The sources all say that Philip drilled his phalanx and did forced marches with them. To do this they had to be under arms.
So they had to be supported, fed at least. Given that they were initially 'peasant levies' they could have been cheaper to support. Later they may have been supported by land grants from lands captured and confiscated.

[Mark G]

If only we had a published expert here ...

[Nick Harbud]

Well, this approach of bringing along hoardes of dross armed with long, pointy sticks and hoping to win the battle is one I intend to try out with my kardakes under Darius. 

I suspect it might simply prove that that as well as the toothpick, the boys need to have a bit of fighting spirit.  I mean, does anyone really believe that, say, William Wallace's fine fellows were comparable to a bunch of Swiss pikemen?