The Makedonian phalanx -- why such depth?

[Paullus Scipio]

Paralus wrote:

One needs to be careful in extrapolating information from Alexander's "mixed" phalanx.Ditto late tactical manuals. Arrian only denotes the position of "file leader". Nowhere does Arrian state that the "double pay men" or "ten stater" men are half file leaders or officers of any description. Indeed he describes them being paid such due to their valour and that the ten stater man is held as more honoured than the ordinary soldier. He nowhere describes these men as officers of any description - that descriptor is clearly only applied to the file leader. Were either of these an officer - half-file leader as you claim - Arrian would no doubt have stated so. He felt oblidged to identify the file leader why would he omit the half-file leader?

.....This is something of an assumption on your part, he does not omit the dimoirites/half-file leader, and if Arrian does not specifically tell us that the Dimoirites was the 'Half-file leader', Aelian very specifically does!
" ..the half-file of course consists of a like number of men and is called a semi-dekuria and it's leader is called dimoirites..." and Aelian also tells us he is writing of the Phalanx of Alexander.....

Arrian, when finishing off this description then baldly states: so that in each company there were twelve Persians and four Macedonians, three of whom received higher pay, and the fourth was in command of the company. Again, only one is denated officer status.

No mystery here, the others are equivalent to "NCO's"...we might say in modern terms the file was led by an officer, his second in command a sargeant, and two corporals...only the Leader has officer status

Alexander is likely making the best of what he has ergo, limited numbers. The fighting is going to be done by the front ranks and so he places his bravest men in front - men honoured for their bravery not because they are officers. If we are to apply this information as reflecting the Macedonian phalanx prior to making do with Persians then such men occupied the same positions and there is no "half-file" leader.

Again, this is mere supposition, and when considered holistically, the evidence is consistent and surely points to 'Half-file Leaders' and probably quarter-file Leaders too...

The "tactical manuals" - idealised treatises - are written with an ideal phalanx in mind

This is an old-fashioned view propagated by the likes of Lammert, or Kochly and Rustow. Whist the value of the Hellenistic manuals, likely all deriving from Poseidonius, in turn relying probably on a lost section of Polybius is debated, most modern students of Macedonian Military Systems accept them as largely accurate. You are also in a minority regarding the Phalanx having 'Half-file Leaders' - Connolly, Sekunda, Devine and many others all posit, like me, that Alexander's Phalanx had 'Half' and 'Quarter' file leaders.

Anab, 7.22-23:

Then he proceeded to pass along this order himself and bade the others send it on--to ground their arms in battle line. [23] The men acted as their own marshals, and within a short time the hoplites had fallen into line eight deep and the peltasts had got into position on either wing.

The troops here are in a town (Byzantium) and are told to 'fall in' in their 'normal/proper' formations for a Parade and address by Xenophon in a paved square, and naturally they form up in files in 'normal/open' order, eight deep. They are not about to meet a foe, forming up in the last stages of an advance.Elsewhere, Xenophon tells us that for a fight they stood four deep i.e. 'half files' in close order. D

Why does Thucydides mention them as not keeping out the arrows? They are translated as felt helemts or "caps".

Again, the idea that the Spartans were wearing "felt caps' is an old-fashioned one, but nowadays most accept the 'piloi' were of bronze, not least because of contemporary iconography. The reason they did not keep out arrows is simple. Unlike the 'Corinthian' or 'Chalcidian' which protected the face and sides of the head, the 'pilos' with it's rim around the temples, did not.