Phalanx fallacies - hoplites again

[Erpingham]

It seems some months since we argued about hoplites, so I thought I'd I'd raise this conference piece from 2014 mentioned in Sean Manning's blog.

Josho Brouwers goes in hard (straight to othismos?) and the sound of the boot hitting Hanson's body is almost palpable.

[Erpingham]

Further browsing of this site led me to a recent article (April 2020) by Browers on the Chigi Vase which is also worth a read.

[aligern]

I like Brouwers, he talks of the Graeco Anatolian  'koine'.
I would still subscribe, though, to the idea that Greek mercenaries were hired in large numbers because they were very effective fighters. I see them as the Swiss of their time and employers were not hiring Swiss to make up the numbers.
Roy

[Erpingham]

I would still subscribe, though, to the idea that Greek mercenaries were hired in large numbers because they were very effective fighters.
Roy

The idea it was just about cannon fodder is a bit of a kneejerk I think.  They were hired because they had things that locals didn't have. We might reject any technological determinist argument but it doesn't cover off all the other angles, like experience or skill or operational efficiency.

[Jim Webster]

I would still subscribe, though, to the idea that Greek mercenaries were hired in large numbers because they were very effective fighters.
Roy

The idea it was just about cannon fodder is a bit of a kneejerk I think.  They were hired because they had things that locals didn't have. We might reject any technological determinist argument but it doesn't cover off all the other angles, like experience or skill or operational efficiency.

Certainly they had the advantage of all mercenaries, they were unlikely to get mixed up in local politics and tended to be loyal so long as they were paid

[aligern]

Though didn't Xenophon's mercenaries turn down an offer of better pay in order to stay loyal? 
Roy

[RichT]

Difficult to argue with since I think Brouwers is basically right. Plus how can anyone argue with the characterisation of "Victor Davis Hanson's 1989-abomination, The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece".

The question of what if anything made Greek infantry different from non-Greek infantry is the key one (we had a long thread on it here a few years ago), and I hope that all the usual old answers ('the Greeks were real men', 'the Greeks wore bronze armour', 'the Greeks knew how to stand close together', 'the Greeks didn't fight, they pushed') have been thoroughly discredited, but they haven't yet been replaced by anything more plausible (given that I don't think 'nothing' is a good answer either). I have some thoughts which will appear in print in the not too distant future I hope (nothing very startling TBH).

[Chuck the Grey]

Though didn't Xenophon's mercenaries turn down an offer of better pay in order to stay loyal? 
Roy

I think you're correct Roy about the 10,000. I would also point out that the Greek mercenaries hired by Darius III remained loyal despite his ineptitude as a commander. They even tried to warn Darius about the plot to depose him by his "loyal" Persian nobles. Admittedly, the mercenaries were probably also motivated by a hatred of Alexander and Macedonians, but they honor their commitment to Darius.

[Imperial Dave]

it's a very good article/conference piece. Hardly groundbreaking for me as I certainly ascribe to the holistic approach. I think however it is a very succinct and thought provoking piece which whets the appetite for further discourse and debate

[Dangun]

Difficult to argue with since I think Brouwers is basically right. Plus how can anyone argue with the characterisation of "Victor Davis Hanson's 1989-abomination, The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece".

Which characterisation? In the vase article, he just says, Hanson offered, "nothing new."

[Dangun]

Further browsing of this site led me to a recent article (April 2020) by Browers on the Chigi Vase which is also worth a read.

I didn't like this article much.
His first paragraph of argument is - its not a photograph.
And then he argues in the opposite direction in the very next paragraph.??

[Cantabrigian]

'the Greeks were real men'

Of course, if the Greeks truly believed that to be the case, while truly believing that the Persians were effeminate cheese-eating surrender monkeys, then that would give them a definite advantage whether it was true or not.

[Imperial Dave]

effeminate cheese-eating surrender monkeys

quote of the year! 

[Martin Smith]

'the Greeks were real men'

Of course, if the Greeks truly believed that to be the case, while truly believing that the Persians were effeminate cheese-eating surrender monkeys, then that would give them a definite advantage whether it was true or not.

...' effeminate TROUSER-WEARING surrender-monkeys...'....in fact...😶🇬🇷

[Erpingham]

'the Greeks were real men'

Of course, if the Greeks truly believed that to be the case, while truly believing that the Persians were effeminate cheese-eating surrender monkeys, then that would give them a definite advantage whether it was true or not.

But surely this would only be true if the Persians held the same belief?  If the Persians felt they were real men, there would be a mismatch in expectations and the issue would be in doubt.