Roman pikeman and spearman

[Robert Vermaat]

As in other posts, here we have again to be cautious about the translation and the text itself.

This is how Arrian describes the Roman "kontos": "The impact of the spear will make the flexible iron point stuck in their shield and body armour and the weight will make the horseman useless." (kai thyreooi kataphraktooi thooraki empagentos tou kontou kai dia malakotèta tou sidèrou epikamphthentos archeion ton anabatèn poièsontes.)

That's Acies 17, and if you read the whole text, it's very odd what Arrian writes here. The sentence itself is odd, because the Alan cavalry did not have any shields, and in acies 31, the last surviving part of the text, Arrian even writes that the enemy does not wear armour at all, which flies in the face of the description in acies 17.

It's my belief that Arrian is not being literal here at all, but inserting a ‘topos’, a literary reworking of traditional material, particularly the descriptions of standardized settings, but extended to almost any literary meme. A topos was meant to create an ‘aha-erlebnis’ with the reader. Such a topos, which was a common concept in ancient writings, would show the author to be a man of learning who had read a lot. As a concept, this would not be strange to Arrian’s purpose, who dedicated his works to the emperor. Also, a topos could be a description of something that was not literally correct (Philip Rance describes a topos about elephants supposedly being very tall, noisy and very smelly, which was used by many authors almost verbatim throughout the classical period).

And this "kontos" can be used for throwing as well as for thrusting: "The fourth rank will throw their javelins overhead and the first rank will stab or throw spears at them and their horses without pause." (tèn tetartèn de hyperakontizein tas lonchas: kai tèn prootèn paiein è akontizein tois kontois apheidoos es te hippous kai autous.)

That's Acies 26, but the Loeb translation is slightly different:
"The fourth rank will throw their javelins overhead and the first rank will stab at them and their horses with their spears without pause".
The difference being that the text does not say that the first ranks stabs or throws spears at the horses.
Therefore I do not agree that Arrian's kontos can be used for throwing and thrusting, as based on his text.

[Ilya Litsios]

The sentence itself is odd, because the Alan cavalry did not have any shields, and in acies 31, the last surviving part of the text, Arrian even writes that the enemy does not wear armour at all, which flies in the face of the description in acies 17.

Still, it does not change the fact that Arrian believes that kontos has "flexible iron point" which can "stuck in... shield and body armour and the weight will make the horseman useless".

That's Acies 26, but the Loeb translation is slightly different:

If you read the original text than you shall see that Arrian uses the word "ἀκοντ-ίζω" to describe this action, which usually means "to throw or hurl" something.

ἀκοντ-ίζω , Att. fut. -ιῶ, （ἄκων)
A. [select] hurl a javelin, τινός at one, “Αἴαντος . . ἀκόντισε φαίδιμος Ἕκτωρ” Il.14.402, cf. 8.118; also “Αἵας . . ἐφ᾽ Ἕκτορι . . ἵετ᾽ ἀκοντίσσαι” 16.359; ἀ. ἐς or καθ᾽ ὅμιλον, Od.22.263, Il.4.490; “ἔς τινας” Th. 7.40; “εἰς τὸ φῶς ἐκ τοῦ σκότους” X.An.7.4.18: c. dat., of the weapon, “ἦ καὶ ἀκόντισε δουρί” Il.5.533; ἀ. δουρὶ φαεινῷ ib.611, al.; “αἰχμαῖς” Pi.I.1.24: also c. acc., “ἀκόντισαν ὀξέα δοῦρα” Od.22.265; “ἀκοντίζουσι θαμειὰς αἰχμὰς ἐκ χειρῶν” Il.12.44, cf. 14.422: abs., use the javelin, “τοξεύειν καὶ ἀ.” Hdt.4.114, cf. Hp.Aër.17, Th.3.23, etc.:— Pass., “κῶλα . . ἐς πλευρὰ καὶ πρὸς ἧπαρ ἠκοντίζετο” E.IT1370; “ἀ. ἀπὸ τῶν ἵππων ὀρθός” Pl.Men.93d.
2. [select] after Hom., hit or strike with javelin, or simply aim at, “ἀ. τὸν σῦν” Hdt.1.43, etc.:—Pass., to be hit or wounded, E.Ba.1098, Antipho 3.1.1, X.HG4.5.13.
3. [select] hurl, throw, ἑαυτούς, i.e. leap overboard, Ach.Tat.5.7; jettison cargo, Id.3.2: metaph., τινὰς εἰς ἄπειρον χρόνον Olymp.Alch.p.75B.
4. [select] shoot forth rays, of moon, E.Ion1155:—Med., flash, Arist.Mu. 392b3.
5. [select] metaph., “μῦθον” Nonn.D.34.299; μερίμνας ἀνέμοισιν ib.12.258.
II. [select] intr., dart or pierce, metaph., of curses, “εἴσω γῆς” E.Or.1241.

Therefore "paiein è akontizein", in all probability, means "to strike or throw".

In fact, Arrian uses the same word in Acies 17:
"οἱ δευτεροστάται δὲ καὶ οἱ τῆς τρίτης καὶ τετάρτης τάξεως ἐς ἀκοντισμὸν προβεβλήσθων τοὺς κοντοὺς ὅπου τύχοιεν", in Acies 25: "οὕτω δὲ ταχθέντων σιγὴ ἔστω ἔστ̓ ἂν πελάσωσιν ἐντὸς βέλους οἱ πολέμιοι: πελαζόντων δὲ ἤδη ὡς μέγιστον καὶ φοβερώτατον ἀλαλάζειν σύμπαντας τῷ Ἐνυαλίῳ, καὶ βέλη τε ἀπὸ μηχανῶν καὶ λίθους ἀφίεσθαι καὶ βέλη ἀπὸ τόξων, καὶ τὰς λόγχας οἱ λογχοφόροι ἀκοντιζόντων, οἵ τε ψιλοὶ καὶ οἱ θειασταί." and, indeed, in Acies 26: "τὴν τετάρτην δὲ ὑπερακοντίζειν τὰς λόγχας".

[Macedon]

Actually, Ilya has a good point. Of course, my opinion was that kontoi were generally not hurled, not that they never were in all thousands of years that the word was used. It is also true that the verb "akontizein" almost always means to hurl a javelinlike object (hence the kontos within the word) but was also used for blood that spurt from wounds, for stones etc. That said, Arrian's text is unfortunately not as clear in its meaning as we would like it to be and this is why some have translated it into "stab" instead of "throw".

That the kontos is a longer, heavier type of spear is evident within the text. Arrian has the first four ranks of his line armed with them. That some have hypothesized that his kontoi are some type of long pilum it is also true, because of the detail of their iron part. Yet, more interesting details are given. The first rank, the one that is supposed later on to hurl the kontos, are holding their spear εἰς προβολὴν aiming at the horses' chests. They are not wielding their kontous like the ranks in their back but how are they wielding them? It seems that for Arrian it means that the kontoi are almost upright (ἀλλὰ κοντοὺς γὰρ τὰ μὲν πρῶτα ὀρθοὺς ὡς εἰς προβολὴν φέροντες ἐπελαύνουσιν, Tact.43.2.3). This would mean that the first rankers would be kneeling or at least bending. If this is correct then from this position it is virtually impossible to effectively throw a long spear. He also calls the position of the second-third and four rankers "εἰς ἀκοντισμὸν προβεβλήσθων τοὺς κοντοὺς", which does not imply throwing, just wielding them with an overhand stabbing grip. When he speaks about the missiles, he does not include the kontous but he does include the loghai (καὶ βέλη τε ἀπὸ μηχανῶν καὶ λίθους ἀφίεσθαι καὶ βέλη ἀπὸ τόξων, καὶ λόγχας οἱ λογχοφόροι ἀκοντιζέτωσαν οἵ τε ψιλοὶ καὶ οἱ θειασταί.)

In conclusion, I cannot say with certainty that Arrian does not have his kontoi being hurled, but if I understand the εἰς προβολὴν stance correctly coupled with his mentioning that it is the first rank that does the akontizein, I am inclined to believe that he uses the word as "stab" instead of "throw".

[Ilya Litsios]

He also calls the position of the second-third and four rankers "εἰς ἀκοντισμὸν προβεβλήσθων τοὺς κοντοὺς"

It may mean "as for throwing" or "for throwing".

It's very doubtful that Arrian would use in his instruction the same technical word for two different actions: throwing and stabbing (and "stabbing" is, at least, a very unusual meaning here).
By the way, when Maurice in his Strategicon gives his version of Arrian's anti-cavalry formation, he says that: "The first, second and third man in each file form a foulkon, interlocking their shields, fix their spears [kontaria] firmly in the ground, holding them inclined forward and straight outside their shields... The third man... and the fourth man hold their spears like javelins so when the foe gets close they can use them either for thrusting or for throwing and then draw their swords." When Maurice's infantry fights against infantry, then all four ranks should throw their spears and draw swords.

[Renatus]

Forgive me but is Arrian not using kontos as a synonym for pilum? If he is, the tactics seem to make perfect sense.

Incidentally, Robert speaks of a Loeb translation. I did not know that there was one.

[Ilya Litsios]

Forgive me but is Arrian not using kontos as a synonym for pilum?

Ah, that's the mother of all questions!

[Macedon]

This "as for throwing" is the overhand, over the shoulder wielding of spears. He does not say "to throw". He speaks of how the kontoi are being held. We are actually only debating about the use of the word "akontizein" in regard with the first rank only, which is peculiar in itself. Why only the first rankers, who will be least efficient in this and not all four ranks, as Maurice says? As I already mentioned, I cannot say that Arrian does not mean "to throw", I just think that he does not or if he does he only suggests it as a secondary or opportunity driven choice of action.

My stated opinion is that the use of the word "kontos" is usually reserved for heavier spears that are not regularly supposed to be thrown, whereas the logche is more like a light spear and translating as "lance" can be sometimes also misleading. The "kontarion" is a more encompassing term than a "kontos" is generally, so we cannot really use Maurice as a perfect analogy, although he clearly (in contrast with Arrian) states that these "kontaria" can be thrown at the enemy when he is near enough, the problem being that we are debating the regular meaning of "kontos" and not the use of any spear being employed in a foulcon. In my opinion we cannot say in all certainty whether Arrian has his "kontoi" thrown or not, but even if he is, that would not mean that these were made as throwing weapons, they (contrary to the logchai) were designed for close combat use. Javelins were missile weapons, yet one could perfectly well sometimes use them in close combat too. That would not make them a melee weapon.

[Macedon]

Forgive me but is Arrian not using kontos as a synonym for pilum? If he is, the tactics seem to make perfect sense.

It has been suggested, as I mentioned in a previous post, but Arrian's "kontos" in his Tactica is definitely not a pilum. One should also explain the use of the word "logche" for the back ranks, which could better apply as a pilum in use. A last hint is that he has four ranks reaching the enemy which would require a rather long spear. If my memory serves me well, there are types of Roman spears that also had a long iron "neck" that could fit Arrian's description.

[Ilya Litsios]

This "as for throwing" is the overhand, over the shoulder wielding of spears. He does not say "to throw". He speaks of how the kontoi are being held.

And this implies that Arrian uses the verb "ἀκοντίζω" only for throwing - "to hold as for throwing" and so "to strike or throw".

We are actually only debating about the use of the word "akontizein" in regard with the first rank only, which is peculiar in itself.

Apparently, originally Arrian wrote that the third rank should throw their spears (Bosworth, Arrian and the Alani) and, as far as I know, it was Theodor Mommsen who suggested to correct the original text and to read "first" instead of "third".

[rrgg]

Is it possible that it is talking about two different types of pilum, one longer/sturdier than the other? For instance some evolution of the fine and stout versions mentioned by Polybius?

[Macedon]

And this implies that Arrian uses the verb "ἀκοντίζω" only for throwing - "to hold as for throwing" and so "to strike or throw".

Again, I cannot say that with your certainty. I already said that it is very possible, gave some arguments that could ultimately explain such an order, but I cannot be sure.

Apparently, originally Arrian wrote that the third rank should throw their spears (Bosworth, Arrian and the Alani), as far as I remember, it was Theodor Mommsen who offered to correct the original text to read "first" instead of "third".

Actually Bosworth (in this 1977 article) is certain that Arrian talks about the heavy, long and thrusting kontos and not about a pilum or another light spear/javelin. He says that scholars have regarded Arrian's kontos in this work as "an especially heavy pilum which could be thrown as well as thrust" and then proceeds discussing the "akontizein" issue. He also thinks that in this instance it is used not as "to throw" but as "to stab" and gives some examples of similar use by Arrian in other works. Yet, he seems to me he makes a mistake since he has the third rank "paiein or akontizein" instead of the the first as my texts state.

He says that Mommsen has proposed changing "first" to "third" and not that it originally read "third". He again disagrees with this idea.

He actually supports exactly what I supported in my posts above, including the possibility that some kontoi could have been thrown to exploit certain opportunities but not that this is proposed as a regular tactic.

In all, to Bosworth, with whose conclusions I often disagree, a "kontos" is indeed a heavy thrusting spear, designed for use in the line and not for throwing and he maintains that Arrian's use of the term in the Acies should not (as some do) be interpreted as a peculiarly heavy pilum.

[Ilya Litsios]

Yet, he seems to me he makes a mistake since he has the third rank "paiein or akontizein" instead of the the first as my texts state.
He says that Mommsen has proposed changing "first" to "third" and not that it originally read "third". He again disagrees with this idea.

I do not have Bosworth's article now, but as far as I remember he argued that it was Mommsen who proposed change from "third" to "first" - could you give a quote? In my copy of Arrian "first" is attributed to Mommsen and "third" to manuscript "F". As for the rest of Bosworth's arguments, they are rather doubtful, especially the part concerning the verb "ἀκοντίζω". Didn't he revisit this verb in his article Arrian and Rome (1993)?

[Macedon]

Yet, he seems to me he makes a mistake since he has the third rank "paiein or akontizein" instead of the the first as my texts state.
He says that Mommsen has proposed changing "first" to "third" and not that it originally read "third". He again disagrees with this idea.

I do not have Bosworth's article now, but as far as I remember he argued that it was Mommsen who proposed change from "third" to "first" - could you give a quote? In my copy of Arrian "first" is attributed to Mommsen and "third" to manuscript "F". As for the rest of Bosworth's arguments, they are rather doubtful, especially the part concerning the verb "ἀκοντίζω". Didn't he revisit this verb in his article Arrian and Rome (1993)?

Here is the page in question. Both the "mistake" I talked about and the Momssen addition are discussed here.
[attachment=974]bosw.jpg[/attachment]

[Ilya Litsios]

Hmm, I see that, as I have mentioned before, he claims that Mommsen suggested altering "the third" to "the first", doesn't he?

[Macedon]

oops... yes.... sorry... "lost in translation"... this is why I thought he made a mistake... Both texts I have state "first" and I obviously misread/misremembered Bosworth's comment. Yet, it changes nothing in regard with the "kontos" issue.