Empirical testing of hoplite performance

[PMBardunias]

It could well be that the rate of the first person is decreased but that it is compensated by the additional points striking.

I agree completely, it is the total output that matters in the end, but we need to know how the individual men interact. The first introductory test centers on the promachoi, but this focus of course can be altered. One big problem with thirst rank striking is that we'd need to define a target for them. Unless the promachoi are choking up on their dorys, they have something like a 3' reach advantage. This becomes more obvious with sarissaphoroi where the distances are greater, and the 4th or fifth rank of sarissas cannot engage a line simultaneously with the first rank.

The design of the disorder test sounds fine too. I'm not so sure about measuring the distance between feet. Is there a particularly compelling reason for not measuring for instance the distance between the subjects hips (or wherever their 'point of balance' would be)?

Yes, because we can have the men "freeze" their feet in position but not their hips. Also the feet are already on the fround making the measurement easier.

And do you see any more problems, compared to the stabbing test, with using subjects that are less fit and drilled than what they probably were back in the days? It seems that individual skills could have a greater impact on how different contexts (formations, spacing, postures) affects variations in disorder.

This is where the experimental design comes in. We'll be getting averages, so any truly dismal hoplite will shake out. Even if our modern men are not the equal to their ancestors, it will probably just mean the averages are all lower, but the trends should be the same. Do you agree? I suppose it is possible to have something of a phase change due to training, but then most hoplites were not so well trained.