07-07-2009, 01:47 AM
George/Macedon wrote:
"I prefer to use sources when giving new info or sources which were not introduced before me by the people I have a discussion with."
I think you misunderstand, George. By cite your sources I mean not just “Polybius”, but where possible chapter and verse e.g “Polybius XVIII.18-27 “. This saves those following the discussion having to wade through the whole work to find the passage you refer to.
“Here, in order to understand his words, we have to establish the density of his formation. Is he talking about open order? No, this is certain, because he talks about fighting in the formation and according to him (later on I will produce the text), open order was a marching and not a fighting formation. Can he mean "synaspismos" (or yperpykne)? My opinion is again no, since again according to him, the latter is a defensive formation used when the enemy is advancing upon the phalanx and not when the phalanx is advancing upon the enemy. So, most possibly he speaks about the "pykne" dense fomation we here call "closed". Thus, according to Aelian, the common formation in close order would be 16 deep and could be doubled or halfed, according to circumstances. (Of course such a phalanx would march 32 deep in open order and 8 deep in synaspismos, which are the numbers I proposed above). Here he does not mention nor does he imply any line fighting 4 deep.”
I would agree ‘normal/open’ order was used for marching, and to approach the enemy in line, and I maintain that ‘close order’ – fighting formation as you say - was only formed when within striking distance of the enemy. Neither Aelian nor any other writer states that the phalanx is 16 deep in close order…..this a modern supposition, based largely on the fact that modern military drills are usually performed in ‘close order’.But in contrast we are specifically told by Ascepiodotus that: 'open order' "is the natural/normal order, and hence has no special name" ....at 4 cubits/6 ft/1.8 m frontage per man. Pyknosis ( close order - 2 cubits per man ) is the actual 'fighting formation'.
“Actually Aelian is suggesting that the general should contract his line and thus lessen his frontage (see chapter XXXII).”
Yes, it is apparent that by the end of the Phalanx’s evolution, there were 3 ways for it to close up; By half-files; by every second man stepping forward; and by contracting the frontage either to the left, right or centre. All are described in the manuals.
IIRC, we only hear of the Phalanx being 32 deep on three occasions.
The first is Alexander’s debouching in column from the pass before deploying before Issus. It is highly likely that Polybius/Callimachus is referring to the left wing being behind the right wing at the point where he says they are 32 deep. The wings deploy side by side and are then 16 deep, the normal Phalanx depth. Finally they close up into close order 8 deep to fight.
The second occasion is the Hellenistic battle of Sellasia, when Antigonus marches his Phalanx up a mountain ridge against the Spartans ( see “Ancient Warfare” magazine issue Vol II issue 2 for a full account), again we hear of one phalanx behind the other ( the “white shields” behind the “Peltasts” – literally a double phalanx ) and thus some 32 deep. After closing up for action, they would be each 8 deep, making a total of 16 deep. On this occasion one phalanx interpenetrates the other (“epalellos”;interlocked phalanx) to achieve ‘synaspismos’, presumably 8 deep.
The third occasion is Magnesia, when we are told Antiochus formed up his Phalanx 32 ranks deep, (Livy XXXVII.40; Appian “Syrian Wars” XXXII) likely because he could do so and still more than match the Roman frontage.
"I prefer to use sources when giving new info or sources which were not introduced before me by the people I have a discussion with."
I think you misunderstand, George. By cite your sources I mean not just “Polybius”, but where possible chapter and verse e.g “Polybius XVIII.18-27 “. This saves those following the discussion having to wade through the whole work to find the passage you refer to.
“Here, in order to understand his words, we have to establish the density of his formation. Is he talking about open order? No, this is certain, because he talks about fighting in the formation and according to him (later on I will produce the text), open order was a marching and not a fighting formation. Can he mean "synaspismos" (or yperpykne)? My opinion is again no, since again according to him, the latter is a defensive formation used when the enemy is advancing upon the phalanx and not when the phalanx is advancing upon the enemy. So, most possibly he speaks about the "pykne" dense fomation we here call "closed". Thus, according to Aelian, the common formation in close order would be 16 deep and could be doubled or halfed, according to circumstances. (Of course such a phalanx would march 32 deep in open order and 8 deep in synaspismos, which are the numbers I proposed above). Here he does not mention nor does he imply any line fighting 4 deep.”
I would agree ‘normal/open’ order was used for marching, and to approach the enemy in line, and I maintain that ‘close order’ – fighting formation as you say - was only formed when within striking distance of the enemy. Neither Aelian nor any other writer states that the phalanx is 16 deep in close order…..this a modern supposition, based largely on the fact that modern military drills are usually performed in ‘close order’.But in contrast we are specifically told by Ascepiodotus that: 'open order' "is the natural/normal order, and hence has no special name" ....at 4 cubits/6 ft/1.8 m frontage per man. Pyknosis ( close order - 2 cubits per man ) is the actual 'fighting formation'.
“Actually Aelian is suggesting that the general should contract his line and thus lessen his frontage (see chapter XXXII).”
Yes, it is apparent that by the end of the Phalanx’s evolution, there were 3 ways for it to close up; By half-files; by every second man stepping forward; and by contracting the frontage either to the left, right or centre. All are described in the manuals.
IIRC, we only hear of the Phalanx being 32 deep on three occasions.
The first is Alexander’s debouching in column from the pass before deploying before Issus. It is highly likely that Polybius/Callimachus is referring to the left wing being behind the right wing at the point where he says they are 32 deep. The wings deploy side by side and are then 16 deep, the normal Phalanx depth. Finally they close up into close order 8 deep to fight.
The second occasion is the Hellenistic battle of Sellasia, when Antigonus marches his Phalanx up a mountain ridge against the Spartans ( see “Ancient Warfare” magazine issue Vol II issue 2 for a full account), again we hear of one phalanx behind the other ( the “white shields” behind the “Peltasts” – literally a double phalanx ) and thus some 32 deep. After closing up for action, they would be each 8 deep, making a total of 16 deep. On this occasion one phalanx interpenetrates the other (“epalellos”;interlocked phalanx) to achieve ‘synaspismos’, presumably 8 deep.
The third occasion is Magnesia, when we are told Antiochus formed up his Phalanx 32 ranks deep, (Livy XXXVII.40; Appian “Syrian Wars” XXXII) likely because he could do so and still more than match the Roman frontage.
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
