Hoplite spacing and formation

[Sean Manning]

Oh dear ! What a lot of confusion here...(sigh)

Robert wrote:-

I agree with Paul here, from the viewpoint of Late Roman formations. A depth of 16 is a depth of 16. You could halve that to 8 if needed (for example to extend the front), or turn 8 ranks around to face an attack from the rear. There were commands for all those formations.

But there was no 'normal' procedure where 16 ranks deployed in open order and then had 8 ranks come up to the front simply to get to a close order. When synaspismos was needed, e.g. in a fulcum formation, the ranks pulled together, no doubt also shorthening the front in such a manouvre.

To begin with, one should not look to compare Greek and later Roman drill, because there was a fundamental difference between the two - Greek drill was based on Files whilst Roman drill was based on Ranks
Thus, to be clear about this, and taking a Spartan formation as an example, and taking a typical age call-out, we have an enomotia of 36 men who, on the march are 3 abreast and 12 deep, in open order ( 6' aprox frontage per man). To form phalanx, each enomotia takes station to the left of the preceding one until all the enomotia are side-by-side, in open order 12 deep. In this formation the phalanx maneouvres, and psiloior peltasts can easily withdraw through the files. When the time for the phalanx to go into action comes, the order is given and the rear half of each file closes up, to the left,. The formation is now in close order ( 3' aprox frontage per man, shields just touching/overlapping) and has a depth of 6. All this is clearly set out in Xenophon's Cyropaedia and no other sensible interpretation is really possible.
Incidently, I am not the originator of this interpretation, and almost all others who study Thucydides, Xenophon and the surviving Hellenistic Manuals ( the 3 are probably drawn from a single source) come to the same conclusions - see e.g. J.K.Anderson or Peter Connolly. There is really no need to 'debate' a subject where there is realistically only one interpretation..... D

P.S. Mike, you'd better chuck yer form guide out the window...it's gonna be a wet track fer the 'Cup........

I agree about how drilled Greek armies changed from closed to open order (our soruces are quite clear) but not that "n ranks" always means "in open order". In many cases I think it is clear that our sources are referring to a final (close-formation) or current depth.

And I suspect that many earlier or smaller armies may have drilled just enough to line up across from the enemy, march forwards and charge!