05-20-2008, 03:39 PM
Thanks, Stefanos. I read the whole thread, and a nice piece of work it is!
But there's some assumptions there, and I'd like to test them with reenactors, as proposed.
First, I think that evidence that most Greek hoplites did very much drill at all is an assumption and needs to be proven. Note I'm not saying it didn't happen--just that I feel it needs to be discussed. What's the evidence that young men were drilled? (Before the mid 4th c?). My impression, and it is only an impression, is that the only evidence goes the other way--Xenophon seems to think that ONLY the Spartans, the Thebans from 371 BC, and the mercenaries ever did drill. So, for example,
kai gar hoi men Boiôtoi egumnazonto pantes peri ta hopla
(Sorry for the latin transliteration!) Which is from Xenophon's Hellenika 6.5.23.
or (English Translation from Perseus, from "Constitution of the Lacedaemonians, 11.8 and following) showing how very well drilled the Spartans were, by contrast to any other state:
"The Lacedaemonians also carry out with perfect ease manoeuvres that instructors [hoplomachoi] in tactics think very difficult. Thus, when they march in column, every section of course follows in the rear of the section in front of it. Suppose that at such a time an enemy in order of battle suddenly makes his appearance in front: the word is passed to the second lieutenant to deploy into line to the left, and so throughout the column until the battle-line stands facing the enemy. Or again, if the enemy appears in the rear while they are in this formation, each file counter-marches, in order that the best men may always be face to face with the enemy."
Also note that the Spartans expect to counter-march by files throughout their phalanx, meaning that there is at least a man's gap between files. Again, it could be argued that this gap would be closed for combat. But if every man has a three foot gap to close (a file's minimum width) across the front of a real fighting force (say 4000 men in 8 ranks, or 500 files) than at the moment of closing fies, the difference int he formation between open and closed is 1500 paces! The danger of an opponent's better formed phalanx striking you while carrying out this maneuver would be so great that no general would dare employ it int he face of the enemy!
Second, I have done years of fighting in the SCA, and I agree that the model is flawed, but not entirely useless--as a single example, I'll note how FAST a melee with 100 guys a side goes, and how very quickly a person tires. SCA experience can inform us about things like fatigue and timescale--or at least educate our guesses!
Third, I spend my summers marching reenactors around various parade squares. I completely agree that in three weeks you can teach 500 people to march in step and perform some solid evolutions. I have to agree with the other point of view, however--add heat, armour, limited visibility and terrain, and my experience is that the line is much harder to maintain--add the aspis, and I'm not sure it could be done at all at a dead run. Fairly small errors of marching with people carrying a rifle and a pack, say, will be much more profound when everyone is trying to maintain a shield wall--much less trying to wheel or conform to ground. Again, this isn't armchair theory--I'm often a "brigade" commander, sometimes an "army" commander, and I'm used to moving blocks of 300 to 800 men.
My "group" (my brigade, in fact) practices a charge at the double in two ranks. After only five years of practice, we can now deliver the rapid attack across about 100 meters and still maintain our line. To do so, however, we HAD to open our files (not our ranks) to allow for the natural movement of the solider within his file area. Fortunately for us in that time period, there's excellent evidence (Phillips, vis Matt Springer's superb "Zeal and Bayonets Only) that rapidity in movement required the troops to open their files.
This experience, plus the fact that the Spartans had room to counter march their files, plus Herodotus's contention that the Athenians at Marathon were the first to charge at a run (with the implication that it was common thereafter, Herodotus 6.112.1 and following) suggest to me that the hoplite formation was never closed tight until the stress of combat forced it closed. They could close it, especially in small groups, Herodotus mentions one group of Phokians in the face of cavalry:
"The Phocians opposed them in every possible way, drawing in together and closing their ranks to the best of their power." Herodotus 9.18.1 The word used, puknôsantes, at it's root seems to mean "close in texture, dense, thick" according to my desktop Classical Greek lexicon. So the hard pressed Phokians were able to close their ranks in the face of the Thessalian cavalry.
I agree with all the points of view on the other thread that suggested that all of the different theses on Othismos were probably equally valid. And, to sum up (lest I appear unduly combative) I think that the answer lies with us reenactors--just as was said on the other thread. We need two blocks of 300 hoplites, and 600 open minds, so that we can test a number of different theories. Nothing makes me prouder as a reenactor than to look at the trireme project that gave birth to the Olympias--where reconstruction was able to prove and disprove theory.
Just my 2 cents worth, and apologies for the length.
But there's some assumptions there, and I'd like to test them with reenactors, as proposed.
First, I think that evidence that most Greek hoplites did very much drill at all is an assumption and needs to be proven. Note I'm not saying it didn't happen--just that I feel it needs to be discussed. What's the evidence that young men were drilled? (Before the mid 4th c?). My impression, and it is only an impression, is that the only evidence goes the other way--Xenophon seems to think that ONLY the Spartans, the Thebans from 371 BC, and the mercenaries ever did drill. So, for example,
kai gar hoi men Boiôtoi egumnazonto pantes peri ta hopla
(Sorry for the latin transliteration!) Which is from Xenophon's Hellenika 6.5.23.
or (English Translation from Perseus, from "Constitution of the Lacedaemonians, 11.8 and following) showing how very well drilled the Spartans were, by contrast to any other state:
"The Lacedaemonians also carry out with perfect ease manoeuvres that instructors [hoplomachoi] in tactics think very difficult. Thus, when they march in column, every section of course follows in the rear of the section in front of it. Suppose that at such a time an enemy in order of battle suddenly makes his appearance in front: the word is passed to the second lieutenant to deploy into line to the left, and so throughout the column until the battle-line stands facing the enemy. Or again, if the enemy appears in the rear while they are in this formation, each file counter-marches, in order that the best men may always be face to face with the enemy."
Also note that the Spartans expect to counter-march by files throughout their phalanx, meaning that there is at least a man's gap between files. Again, it could be argued that this gap would be closed for combat. But if every man has a three foot gap to close (a file's minimum width) across the front of a real fighting force (say 4000 men in 8 ranks, or 500 files) than at the moment of closing fies, the difference int he formation between open and closed is 1500 paces! The danger of an opponent's better formed phalanx striking you while carrying out this maneuver would be so great that no general would dare employ it int he face of the enemy!
Second, I have done years of fighting in the SCA, and I agree that the model is flawed, but not entirely useless--as a single example, I'll note how FAST a melee with 100 guys a side goes, and how very quickly a person tires. SCA experience can inform us about things like fatigue and timescale--or at least educate our guesses!
Third, I spend my summers marching reenactors around various parade squares. I completely agree that in three weeks you can teach 500 people to march in step and perform some solid evolutions. I have to agree with the other point of view, however--add heat, armour, limited visibility and terrain, and my experience is that the line is much harder to maintain--add the aspis, and I'm not sure it could be done at all at a dead run. Fairly small errors of marching with people carrying a rifle and a pack, say, will be much more profound when everyone is trying to maintain a shield wall--much less trying to wheel or conform to ground. Again, this isn't armchair theory--I'm often a "brigade" commander, sometimes an "army" commander, and I'm used to moving blocks of 300 to 800 men.
My "group" (my brigade, in fact) practices a charge at the double in two ranks. After only five years of practice, we can now deliver the rapid attack across about 100 meters and still maintain our line. To do so, however, we HAD to open our files (not our ranks) to allow for the natural movement of the solider within his file area. Fortunately for us in that time period, there's excellent evidence (Phillips, vis Matt Springer's superb "Zeal and Bayonets Only) that rapidity in movement required the troops to open their files.
This experience, plus the fact that the Spartans had room to counter march their files, plus Herodotus's contention that the Athenians at Marathon were the first to charge at a run (with the implication that it was common thereafter, Herodotus 6.112.1 and following) suggest to me that the hoplite formation was never closed tight until the stress of combat forced it closed. They could close it, especially in small groups, Herodotus mentions one group of Phokians in the face of cavalry:
"The Phocians opposed them in every possible way, drawing in together and closing their ranks to the best of their power." Herodotus 9.18.1 The word used, puknôsantes, at it's root seems to mean "close in texture, dense, thick" according to my desktop Classical Greek lexicon. So the hard pressed Phokians were able to close their ranks in the face of the Thessalian cavalry.
I agree with all the points of view on the other thread that suggested that all of the different theses on Othismos were probably equally valid. And, to sum up (lest I appear unduly combative) I think that the answer lies with us reenactors--just as was said on the other thread. We need two blocks of 300 hoplites, and 600 open minds, so that we can test a number of different theories. Nothing makes me prouder as a reenactor than to look at the trireme project that gave birth to the Olympias--where reconstruction was able to prove and disprove theory.
Just my 2 cents worth, and apologies for the length.
Qui plus fait, miex vault.
