The Hoplite phalanx

[Jim Webster]

No, reenactment debunks false claims about history.

I think this is one thing reenactment can do in some circumstances. It can say, frankly, that "with various provisos, it seems very unlikely that this option is possible."
(Which is pretty much as good as it gets with a lot of history    )

It can also flag up options, "when using materials produced in as close to authentic conditions as we can manage, this now becomes possible."

There's also the. "Try living with option A and option B for three weeks and option B is the once people gradually reverted to.

None of it is definitive but it informs the debate.  Given that there is very little that is definitive, informing the debate is generally a good thing 

[PMBardunias]

No, reenactment debunks false claims about history.

I think this is one thing reenactment can do in some circumstances. It can say, frankly, that "with various provisos, it seems very unlikely that this option is possible."
(Which is pretty much as good as it gets with a lot of history    )

It can also flag up options, "when using materials produced in as close to authentic conditions as we can manage, this now becomes possible."

There's also the. "Try living with option A and option B for three weeks and option B is the once people gradually reverted to.

None of it is definitive but it informs the debate.  Given that there is very little that is definitive, informing the debate is generally a good thing 

Much of the ability to falsify arguments hinges on how they are put forth.  If we take an argument like "when we see spears held overhand on vases they are being thrown", this can be debunked with a few images.  If the argument is "men will die and shields be crushed if men pushed", an experiment can counter this.  But an argument like "Othismos is not a mass coordinated push, but simply an intense period of fighting, where the promachoi may clash shields and even push at each other", I can do nothing to counter that.

[RichT]

Out of interest are  there any examples of othismos being used in connection with thureophoroi ?

An interesting question - perhaps Paul or Rich could answer that.  It is certainly of used of non-aspis bearers.

Not specifically applied to thureophoroi, no.

Bear in mind (as I point out with tedious regularity) that the word 'othismos' is very rarely applied to anything (outside the pages of Procopius). The search is usually widened to any otheo- word, and in this case such words are applied to heavy infantry, elephants, ships, light infantry, walls etc although not AFAIK to thuerophoroi specifically - though it is generally very difficult to tell who is a thureophoros and who isn't. At any rate, there is no restriction to Argive aspis bearers.

[Flaminpig0]

Accepting the 'scrum;' othismos as fact I wonder if having multiple people pushing on a front ranker's back would make it difficult for the individual to defend himself , dodge blows etc.

[Patrick Waterson]

I am not sure that hoplites would need to bother to dodge blows: they had a big shield to put in the way of trouble and a neighbour on each side with another big shield.  Having the pressure of a file behind them would indeed inhibit dodge options, and more importantly the ability temporarily to adjust their shield position or their own position relative to their shield, but this would be equally true of their opponents, and wielding weapons under such circumstances, while possible, presents its own challenges, because actually getting the sharp end into an opponent in a high-pressure situation is at least in theory fraught with problems of reach, constraint and aim.  So in the circumstances, simply shoving would be easier and more effective.  And coordinated shoving beats uncoordinated shoving any day.

So yes, othismotic pressure would reduce an individual's defensive capabilities, but would correspondingly reduce the ability of the opponent to inflict harm.

[Jim Webster]

Accepting the 'scrum;' othismos as fact I wonder if having multiple people pushing on a front ranker's back would make it difficult for the individual to defend himself , dodge blows etc.

given that both sides are in a scrum, both front ranks would be so desperately trying to stay upright then I suspect their spears would be a damned nuisance 

Not only that but if it was a scrum we'd have accounts in battles about when the scrum collapsed and scores of men if not more ended up in an embarrassing heap in the ground with any number of serious injuries

Whatever othismos was, I don't think we should even use the word 'scrum' because whatever our illustrious processors did when they were playing rugby, it's nothing like the sort of scrum we have.
It's nothing like a 'ruck' or a 'maul' either because those start off with half the participants on the ground.

If a hoplite battle degenerated into a scrum both sides had lost control

[RichT]

I will continue to use the word 'scrum'. It's an analogy, not an exact parallel - nobody suggests Greeks bent double and put their heads between the bottoms of the men in front (at least, not in battle).

As a matter of rugby terminology, in a maul nobody is on the ground - otherwise, it would be a ruck. I think maul might be a better analogy for the hoplite scrum than scrum, but that's a debatable point in itself. So I'll stick with scrum, which is the word that the originators of the theory used.

I agree about collapsing the scrum - I think it's a big problem with the theory (as it is with the game of rugby).

As to self defence in a scrum - it would not be reduced, it would impossible, so far as dodging and shield use are concerned. We talked about this with Paul Bardunias in the context of his reenactment experiments in this thread: http://soa.org.uk/sm/index.php?topic=3276.0

To save time for the interested, I'll post relevant bits here:

PMB:

5) It says they fought and pushed! You can't use weapons in othismos. In fact you can. When done properly you are free to use your right arm for a vicious, close range fight. It helps that the head of your foe helps shield you from strikes of his friends. You would want to quickly bind up your foe's blade.

Me:

Fighting while pushing - is there anything a man in the front few ranks can do to avoid being stabbed in the face? "You would want to quickly bind up your foe's blade" - sorry, not sure what that means. If so stabbed and dead or dying in the file, how does this affect the dynamics of pushing? A man in such a state could I suppose still lean, but the direction of his lean would be somewhat undefined, and he could not participate actively. Would he be held up, dead but supported by those around him (like some of these othismos threads)?

PMB

You both have one free hand, so have to hook his arm or catch his weapon blade to blade.  You are essentially arm wrestling while pushing. The man behind you is trying to get to him as well, while the man behind him is defending him. The strikes that work in this type of battle are all delivered from above, which makes sense of the growth in popularity of the pilos, which best deflects strikes from above due to its conical shape. The khopis and to a lesser extend the xiphos are point heavy and can be used close-in like a hatchet, with all the power coming from the wrist rotation. The best weapon for this though is surely whatever Xenophon calls an enchiridion (dagger) in his description of the second phase of Coronea in Agiselaus. We have some great vase images of swords being brought down into the joint of the shoulder and neck in the classic gladiator coup de gras strike, perfect for this. Your best defense is that it is hard to hit you and not your foe's head, so his allies cannot easily strike at you.

Me

OK understand - but you are assuming this would all be with swords/daggers - I would assume most men would still have their spears (why not?), and the reach of a spear would be several ranks back in such a packed formation.

PMB

I think the driving force to enter othismos was either being outmatched by your opponent, fatigue, or having your spear break (which happened often).  If you are facing a spearman who will kill you, you cannot easily fall back out of range, so the best bet is to close to within the reach of a 8' dory with about 5-6' of reach. We know for a fact that some men in battle ended up fighting shield on shield.  At this range a dory is useless, and the spearman must drop his spear and go to the sword if his opponent does.  One could imagine how this might propagate down the line like a zipper.  However it happened, I think it was only after this occurred that the rear ranks moved up to physically support the front. No one was ever thrust from behind into spears.

I'm still not convinced by any of this; others are. Take your pick (but - let's not just repeat conversations we have already had multiple times - the forum search tool works quite well).

[Flaminpig0]

Accepting the 'scrum;' othismos as fact I wonder if having multiple people pushing on a front ranker's back would make it difficult for the individual to defend himself , dodge blows etc.

given that both sides are in a scrum, both front ranks would be so desperately trying to stay upright then I suspect their spears would be a damned nuisance 

Not only that but if it was a scrum we'd have accounts in battles about when the scrum collapsed and scores of men if not more ended up in an embarrassing heap in the ground with any number of serious injuries

Whatever othismos was, I don't think we should even use the word 'scrum' because whatever our illustrious processors did when they were playing rugby, it's nothing like the sort of scrum we have.
It's nothing like a 'ruck' or a 'maul' either because those start off with half the participants on the ground.

If a hoplite battle degenerated into a scrum both sides had lost control

Another consideration is that the societies leaders would be expected to be in the front rank; so the othismos would involve social inferiors bodily shoving their betters forward deeper into the enemy formation and corresponding danger whilst the latter having given up any ability to control their fate desperately try and remain upright. Sorry, I just don't find the 'scrum' othismos model at all convincing.

[Dangun]

Not only that but if it was a scrum we'd have accounts in battles about when the scrum collapsed and scores of men if not more ended up in an embarrassing heap in the ground with any number of serious injuries

I agree.

The mosh pit is an illustrative experiences.
When several thousand closely packed people surge towards the stage, I have experienced hundreds of people falling down simultaneously.
It is frightening enough without someone trying to kill you with a pointy stick.

PMB:

5) It says they fought and pushed! You can't use weapons in othismos. In fact you can. When done properly you are free to use your right arm for a vicious, close range fight. It helps that the head of your foe helps shield you from strikes of his friends. You would want to quickly bind up your foe's blade.

Me:

Fighting while pushing - is there anything a man in the front few ranks can do to avoid being stabbed in the face? "You would want to quickly bind up your foe's blade" - sorry, not sure what that means. If so stabbed and dead or dying in the file, how does this affect the dynamics of pushing? A man in such a state could I suppose still lean, but the direction of his lean would be somewhat undefined, and he could not participate actively. Would he be held up, dead but supported by those around him (like some of these othismos threads)?

PMB

You both have one free hand, so have to hook his arm or catch his weapon blade to blade.  You are essentially arm wrestling while pushing. The man behind you is trying to get to him as well, while the man behind him is defending him. The strikes that work in this type of battle are all delivered from above, which makes sense of the growth in popularity of the pilos, which best deflects strikes from above due to its conical shape. The khopis and to a lesser extend the xiphos are point heavy and can be used close-in like a hatchet, with all the power coming from the wrist rotation. The best weapon for this though is surely whatever Xenophon calls an enchiridion (dagger) in his description of the second phase of Coronea in Agiselaus. We have some great vase images of swords being brought down into the joint of the shoulder and neck in the classic gladiator coup de gras strike, perfect for this. Your best defense is that it is hard to hit you and not your foe's head, so his allies cannot easily strike at you.

Me

OK understand - but you are assuming this would all be with swords/daggers - I would assume most men would still have their spears (why not?), and the reach of a spear would be several ranks back in such a packed formation.

PMB

I think the driving force to enter othismos was either being outmatched by your opponent, fatigue, or having your spear break (which happened often).  If you are facing a spearman who will kill you, you cannot easily fall back out of range, so the best bet is to close to within the reach of a 8' dory with about 5-6' of reach. We know for a fact that some men in battle ended up fighting shield on shield.  At this range a dory is useless, and the spearman must drop his spear and go to the sword if his opponent does.  One could imagine how this might propagate down the line like a zipper.  However it happened, I think it was only after this occurred that the rear ranks moved up to physically support the front. No one was ever thrust from behind into spears.

I'm still not convinced by any of this; others are. Take your pick (but - let's not just repeat conversations we have already had multiple times - the forum search tool works quite well).

The basic rhythm of this exchange is: P posits the possible without sources. R notes lack of source and disagrees for its implications or assumptions. Repeat.

[Erpingham]

If a hoplite battle degenerated into a scrum both sides had lost control

Given that one of the things we can agree on is that othismos is not the start point of a battle, the chance that it involves progressive chaos must be there in the mix of possibilities.

Re-reading Paul's comments as quoted by Richard,  I am reminded again of Sir John Smythe's instructions on pike fighting in Instructions, Observations and orders Mylitarie , which can be found here.  He notes that, if the first impact with pikes doesn't break the enemy, the use of pikes by the front ranks becomes impossible because of the crowding effect of the rear ranks, so the front men should ditch pikes and go in with short swords and daggers.  Obviously, there's two thousand years of difference (but then we are including re-enactment four hundred years later) but perhaps there are some mechanics of close-order fighting which tend to naturally re-occur.

However, I would not wish to reopen the debate on the big "O" as I suspect nothing new will have occured to change anyone's minds.

[RichT]

Given that one of the things we can agree on is that othismos is not the start point of a battle

Actually I don't agree about that    But I do (strongly) agree that we don't need to go over it all again. I'm sure we can all predict and formulate in our heads exactly what each of us will say on the topic (e.g. mosh pit not valid analogy - coordinated push by whole file - etc etc etc).

[Erpingham]

Given that one of the things we can agree on is that othismos is not the start point of a battle

Actually I don't agree about that 

Dammit, so much for the search for common ground. 

[Andreas Johansson]

Lest people assume there's only two options on that point, bear in mind that Maurice has othismos happen after the start of battle but before contact, which should be incompatible with Rich and Orthodoxy alike

(Whether Maurikian othismos is the same thing as the Classical, or if indeed either is really a "thing", is of course at least three further Diets of Worms.)

[Patrick Waterson]

Avoiding the word 'scrum' and its connotations would certainly be helpful in attempting to understand (as opposed to obfuscate) what went on between two hoplite phalanxes.

What I suggest is that those genuinely interested in trying to find out what happened have an open discussion, while those who are convinced we can never know anything occupy their minds with other matters - we know what they are going to say, anyway.

[Flaminpig0]

Avoiding the word 'scrum' and its connotations would certainly be helpful in attempting to understand (as opposed to obfuscate) what went on between two hoplite phalanxes.

What I suggest is that those genuinely interested in trying to find out what happened have an open discussion, while those who are convinced we can never know anything occupy their minds with other matters - we know what they are going to say, anyway.

Perhaps we could go with physical force othismos