The Makedonian phalanx -- why such depth?

[Paullus Scipio]

Paul B. wrote:

With respect Paul, ....oh, dear, in my experience that phrase usually means the opposite! :wink: as I have mentioned before it is irrelevent to the physics as to what the mass is pushing against. Anything that can push back with enough force to resist the advance of the crowd will do. This can be a retaining barrier, but it can also be other people in a crowd. ...this is where we differ! Unlike an inanimate immovable object, people generally can and do move, and psychology/fear prevents the deliberate 'crushing' of the front of one crowd against another...in this instance I would venture to suggest that the leading ranks of Hoplites would push back against their own side rather than be propelled forward onto the spearpoints of their opponents! Even when fatalities occur in a crowd of the type you are thinking of, it is not simply because people are crushed up against a wall, but because they are crushed between people resisting being crushed up against a wall and people behind pushing them forward. The "wall" is irrelevent to all of the people pushing forward behind those immediately up against the wall. The wall simply creates a condition where a bottle-neck occurs. No crowd of rational people want to be in a lethal density, thus if they were free to move they would....but it is clear that the wall/barrier plays a key role in every case, for without it the conditions necessary simply don't occur - as you say, people free to move do!

Riots are different all together for they are a single crowd being "herded" by police through physical and psychological threat. They could achieve crowd-like density if encircled as those on the outside backed up into the group to avoid the threat from police. This is essentially what happened at Cannae for example.

The rioters are often armed also, and sometimes battles take place between rival groups. Even when rioters form up with the intent of 'pushing through' a thin line of police, they rarely succeed. I agree with you that something of this sort probably occurred at Cannae, and other battles too - there are rare instances described of the crowd being 'dense' enough that the dead can't fall. This is not however a regular occurrence, deliberately brought about, as you envisage. It occurs accidently, and rarely enough to be commented on, not something deliberately done.

There are examples of crowds colliding along streets for example or famously in a very lethal incident in Mexico where part of the crowd was trying to get back into a football stadium while the other part was trying to get out. So yes, there are examples of crowds converging lethally, but there must always be some constraint to movement that causes a crowd to form dense or people would just move past each other. Hoplites are obviously not going to let their foes simply pass through their ranks, but will resist them, by pushing if need be.

....once again, your examples involve 'crowds' in constrained circumstances, and I am not aware of crowds confronting one another on a street generating sufficient force to cause Mass Casualties. Could you be more specific?

In the context of phalanx combat we have two groups of men who are actively resisting each other, not acting like rational pedestrians. Thus they themselves form equal and opposite forces which lead to a each side forming as if a crowd against a wall (the wall being the other phalanx, which is impenitrable, a literal shield "wall" in this sense). They were free to disengage at any time- what we would call a rout- and frequently did.

You agree, I think, that initially the two phalanxes would be divided by a short ( the length of the spears! ) 'no man's land', and that spear fencing and thrusting took place (doratissimos) Just how does that convert to your 'othismos' of two 'shield walls' shoving? Mutual consent? How is this 'shoving' co-ordinated along a line a thousand yards long? Isn't it more likely that, assuming both sides were willing to fight, they "charged", spontaneously stopped at spear-fighting distance and fought in groups alternately attacking and withdrawing to catch their breath, so that the 'battle-front' seethed and writhed until one sides 'will to fight' wavered, through casualties and/or morale? ( We see similar fighting in modern riots, sometimes lasting hours, just like ancient battles).
At that point, sensing this, the other side might well 'push' the other back, but it need not be a literal push, rather a 'push' in the sense that modern armies push one another back. Epaminondas' infamous "Just one more step" need not involve any literal 'shoving' at all, rather just the morale pressure of getting the other side to start falling back. However, don't get me wrong, I am not saying that no physical 'shoving' ever took place, just that it was more likely to be spontaneous and localised to small groups or individuals seeking to 'break' the line rather than some mass co-ordinated shove by thousands of men acting as a thousand yard long human bulldozer. I believe your idea would fall down on that point alone ! The pressure could not possibly be even all along the front.

Asking if there is an example of two groups of people in an open field who crashed into each other like lethal crowds is a bit like asking for an example of pedestrians bumping into each other on the street and breaking out into a full-blown Sumo pushing match. They surely could do it, but why would they? Put the same two guys trying to push through a narrow door in a burning building and you will see lots of pushing.

...have you not just handily demonstrated that some sort of physical constraint is needed to produce what you envisage? A Hoplite battle on an open battlefield has no such constraints. Any attempt by part of the formation to 'squeeze' others would simply result in equal and opposite resistance. Without a 'wall' or similar there is nothing to push against. No huge forces, just a crowd packed like sardines trying to shuffle forward and impale their front line officers on their opponents spears, and you can bet that in such a situation the front couple of ranks would be 'pushing' alright - back against those behind them !!! :lol: :lol:

Crowd densities naturally emerge as rear ranks move up to support those in front, the process is gradual and smooth so there is never a moment where the ranks in front are being knocked forward. Unpacking is just as gradual so there is no moment when front rankers suddenly have no resistance and fall forward. They are free to pack and unpack just as cars do on a highway during a traffic jam. You will notice that you (usually) do not plow into the car in front of you as it comes to a stop.

Surely you have demolished your own case ! If the front ranks aren't being propelled forward by the mass force of those behind and can't be knocked forward, then there is no pressure on them, just as in the car analogy you describe there is no pressure on the cars in front. But perhaps what you really mean is that each rank begins 'shoving' gradually, until all are, and disengage similarly, so that the build-up or die-down of your postulated shove is gradual. If so, as I suggested, the front ranks, being all too human will resist and push back !

But perhaps the best way to short circuit a hoplite phalanx was to force them to push suicidally against a hedge of sharp-pointed sarissa.

....or push equally suicidally against a hedge of sharp-pointed dorys? D lol: