09-19-2010, 06:16 PM
Paul B,
As your post above indicates, your theory supposes, "whatever happens, happens," or as the old joke goes, "and then a miracle happens." As our experiments have explored possible positions those men could be pushing in conditions your theory requires (i.e. collapsed to front in a packed mass, pushing square to fore) they do represent valid, if negative tests of it.
That said, none of this dervies from any particular desire to prove or disprove your theory, as it , but rather to test the efficacy of Arrian, the only classical source we have describing the mechanism of collective pushing. Since your theory happens to be the only other game in town, even if not rooted in classical sources, it has proven a useful foil for relative testing.
At this point, based on what we've observed, I'm fairly happy with Arrian as a method for collective pushing. A further 8 man test will be sufficient to finalize the discussion from a classical perspective.
However, your defensiveness regarding data that could be perceived as contradicting your theory does require me to discuss what I view to be a number of fundamental flaws in it.
At the foundation you continue to cling to what is an assertion: That pressure to the rear must collapse people from a side on or 3/4 stance into the bowl of their shield. However, this has not been borne out in our experiments. Ultimately we will test with a full 8 man file, but what we saw on Friday tends to indicate that there is no impetus to turn in.
Second, you assert that that this turned in position generates a more effective push than the side on position, which is also not borne out in our experiments with aspides, as a much lighter man was able to stand off a much stronger one despite his best efforts.
Third, as you cannot describe how, "whatever happens, happens," actually happens in a way that can be reproduced by a fairly capable group of people is a fairly gaping hole in the theory. Its also nice that you assert this miraculous collapsed mass generates a far more effective push than Arrian, as this method is fundamentally flawed according to your earlier assertions. A bit circular.
Tieing in to crowd theory to assert that this will generate some massive force seems to me to be a false analogy. Hoplites are not masses rushing away from or towards some point in a panic or frenzy through structural choke points. There are no masses of thousands pressing the unlucky few in those choke points, but a mere 7 men behind the lead man at any point.
So, all in all, for these reasons you'll probably be fairly glad to hear that I'm disinclined to use "crowd-theory" in future historical experiments.
Thanks,
As your post above indicates, your theory supposes, "whatever happens, happens," or as the old joke goes, "and then a miracle happens." As our experiments have explored possible positions those men could be pushing in conditions your theory requires (i.e. collapsed to front in a packed mass, pushing square to fore) they do represent valid, if negative tests of it.
That said, none of this dervies from any particular desire to prove or disprove your theory, as it , but rather to test the efficacy of Arrian, the only classical source we have describing the mechanism of collective pushing. Since your theory happens to be the only other game in town, even if not rooted in classical sources, it has proven a useful foil for relative testing.
At this point, based on what we've observed, I'm fairly happy with Arrian as a method for collective pushing. A further 8 man test will be sufficient to finalize the discussion from a classical perspective.
However, your defensiveness regarding data that could be perceived as contradicting your theory does require me to discuss what I view to be a number of fundamental flaws in it.
At the foundation you continue to cling to what is an assertion: That pressure to the rear must collapse people from a side on or 3/4 stance into the bowl of their shield. However, this has not been borne out in our experiments. Ultimately we will test with a full 8 man file, but what we saw on Friday tends to indicate that there is no impetus to turn in.
Second, you assert that that this turned in position generates a more effective push than the side on position, which is also not borne out in our experiments with aspides, as a much lighter man was able to stand off a much stronger one despite his best efforts.
Third, as you cannot describe how, "whatever happens, happens," actually happens in a way that can be reproduced by a fairly capable group of people is a fairly gaping hole in the theory. Its also nice that you assert this miraculous collapsed mass generates a far more effective push than Arrian, as this method is fundamentally flawed according to your earlier assertions. A bit circular.
Tieing in to crowd theory to assert that this will generate some massive force seems to me to be a false analogy. Hoplites are not masses rushing away from or towards some point in a panic or frenzy through structural choke points. There are no masses of thousands pressing the unlucky few in those choke points, but a mere 7 men behind the lead man at any point.
So, all in all, for these reasons you'll probably be fairly glad to hear that I'm disinclined to use "crowd-theory" in future historical experiments.
Thanks,
Cole
