03-30-2005, 08:59 AM
Dear Stefanos,<br>
<br>
thanks a lot for your comments, I've found them very inspired and well within reason.<br>
<br>
I've been recommended an Osprey book, but it's not available in my local bookstores, and ordering through Internet would take too long for me (deadlines, you know).<br>
<br>
Thus, until a further revision (after I've ordered the book, etc) the information I have from classical sources and academic comentaries will have to suffice. I've also read with great interest the web page you linked in another post in this forum about spears in ancient times and the way they should have been handled. The arguments the author exposes are strong, indeed, but I still see several point that need to be addressed before something firm can be accepted, and I am sure scholastics will raise similar points. Nevertheless it's a very valuable resource, I'll post a link to it on the resources forum.<br>
<br>
Back to Marathon, I am well aware of the role the psiloi would have had on the battle. Pending new information from Sekunda's book, my understanding is that not even the armies deploy on the beach is certain. If Athenians lined up so that their right flank was proected by the sea, as I have read in Herodotus(?), then we can draw a north-south front of battle, where the Persians charged South from the upper part of the beach, while the Athenians and Plataeans charged North from the lower part of the beach. If the Persians managed to get some cavalry back from the ships into the field, and it's plausible, as the battle took longer than a single clash of the troops would indicate (thus, one or more lulls must have happened in between, making the battle longer), then the most affected troops would be the Athenian left wing, which would be performing the enveloping maneuver around the Persian center after routing the right wing. Psiloi must have played a very important role in harassing the Persian cavalry long enough to avoid a flank attack on the phalanx, which would have probably fallen (even if it was light cavalry, specially if heavy cavalry like cataphracts were involved!). The fact that it didn't, means that either the cavalry was not involved in the battle, or that entered into the battle too late to have any effect. Some classical sources point to some cavalry presence, and therefore it's what I am modelling for my story. Intelligently managed, light infantry can manage light cavalry very well, specially considering the beach sand would have made the cavalry charge vary slow, and the left wing of the Athenian phalanx must have been pretty close to the limits of the beach, where trees and dunes would have made light infantry much more effective.<br>
<br>
Thus, we are basically in agreement about the existence of the Athenian light infantry. I'd like to know your thoughts about its role in holding Persian cavalry.<br>
<br>
As for the role of harassing the Persians before the phalanx attack, I am less sure, but nevertheless your depiction is very plausible. From what I understand, many Persians would have been archers, probably scythians and regular sparabara. These were two men, one holding a spara (shield) and a spear, another armed with a composite bow. At least half the troops would be sparabara. That gives, at least, 5,000 archers (considering some combat 20,000 troops). We know the Persian center pushed and routed the Athenian center, which means there was a considerable number of shield-bearing spearmen in there, or they wouldn't have been able to resist the phalanx charge, even being just three, four ranks deep.<br>
<br>
The trouble here is to determine the Persian numbers and their formation, because the Athenian one must match (more or less) their front line to avoid being overflanked. If there's some 20,000 Persian infantry in 8 ranks, that implies that more than half the Athenian hoplites must have been spreaded over the 3 ranked center to match the Persians (8 ranks the flanks, not reinforced with 16 ranks and suggested somewhere, that would mean the flanks would be barely 100 men front, which is pretty thin for a wing).<br>
<br>
I'd love to know the Persian formation, it would make everything pretty much easier.<br>
<br>
Anyway, the light infantry harassing the Medes before the phalanx attack would mean they had to face some 10,000-15,000 shield-bearing spearmen and 5-10,000 archers. Even if the average psiloi could be equal with a weaker spearman, I doubt they were able to affect too much the archers, who would be behind the shields wall and harassing the psiloi themselves. Of course, if instead of moving the light infantry to the left wing, we allow them to stay behind the phalanx, specially in the center, they would be able to keep harassing the farther ranks (archers) while the hoplites kept the shield-bearers busy. But in that instance, we would have to accept that the Meded were not able to deploy a single knight on the battle. If their ships were still on the shore, embarking cavalry, it's dubious they wouldn't try to deploy at least a small force (I don't think some "turmae" were *that* hard to deploy, and being some 30 horses each, two or three of them would be a force big enough to be taken into account, specially since the left and right Athenian flanks would be extremely vulnerable to a cavalry attack once they started to turn inside to attack the Persian center from the flanks and backs.<br>
<br>
Some misteries still left to be thought. I'll appreciate a great deal any more light thrown over them.<br>
<br>
As for gaming, I don't do that (though I admit I'd like to) and thus all my modelling is "by hand". I have some computerized drawings to get the picture clear, but there are too many variables for me to present a solid model as of yet.<br>
<br>
Thanks for all!<br>
Khairete!<br>
<br>
P. Lilius a.k.a. Argyros <p></p><i></i>
<br>
thanks a lot for your comments, I've found them very inspired and well within reason.<br>
<br>
I've been recommended an Osprey book, but it's not available in my local bookstores, and ordering through Internet would take too long for me (deadlines, you know).<br>
<br>
Thus, until a further revision (after I've ordered the book, etc) the information I have from classical sources and academic comentaries will have to suffice. I've also read with great interest the web page you linked in another post in this forum about spears in ancient times and the way they should have been handled. The arguments the author exposes are strong, indeed, but I still see several point that need to be addressed before something firm can be accepted, and I am sure scholastics will raise similar points. Nevertheless it's a very valuable resource, I'll post a link to it on the resources forum.<br>
<br>
Back to Marathon, I am well aware of the role the psiloi would have had on the battle. Pending new information from Sekunda's book, my understanding is that not even the armies deploy on the beach is certain. If Athenians lined up so that their right flank was proected by the sea, as I have read in Herodotus(?), then we can draw a north-south front of battle, where the Persians charged South from the upper part of the beach, while the Athenians and Plataeans charged North from the lower part of the beach. If the Persians managed to get some cavalry back from the ships into the field, and it's plausible, as the battle took longer than a single clash of the troops would indicate (thus, one or more lulls must have happened in between, making the battle longer), then the most affected troops would be the Athenian left wing, which would be performing the enveloping maneuver around the Persian center after routing the right wing. Psiloi must have played a very important role in harassing the Persian cavalry long enough to avoid a flank attack on the phalanx, which would have probably fallen (even if it was light cavalry, specially if heavy cavalry like cataphracts were involved!). The fact that it didn't, means that either the cavalry was not involved in the battle, or that entered into the battle too late to have any effect. Some classical sources point to some cavalry presence, and therefore it's what I am modelling for my story. Intelligently managed, light infantry can manage light cavalry very well, specially considering the beach sand would have made the cavalry charge vary slow, and the left wing of the Athenian phalanx must have been pretty close to the limits of the beach, where trees and dunes would have made light infantry much more effective.<br>
<br>
Thus, we are basically in agreement about the existence of the Athenian light infantry. I'd like to know your thoughts about its role in holding Persian cavalry.<br>
<br>
As for the role of harassing the Persians before the phalanx attack, I am less sure, but nevertheless your depiction is very plausible. From what I understand, many Persians would have been archers, probably scythians and regular sparabara. These were two men, one holding a spara (shield) and a spear, another armed with a composite bow. At least half the troops would be sparabara. That gives, at least, 5,000 archers (considering some combat 20,000 troops). We know the Persian center pushed and routed the Athenian center, which means there was a considerable number of shield-bearing spearmen in there, or they wouldn't have been able to resist the phalanx charge, even being just three, four ranks deep.<br>
<br>
The trouble here is to determine the Persian numbers and their formation, because the Athenian one must match (more or less) their front line to avoid being overflanked. If there's some 20,000 Persian infantry in 8 ranks, that implies that more than half the Athenian hoplites must have been spreaded over the 3 ranked center to match the Persians (8 ranks the flanks, not reinforced with 16 ranks and suggested somewhere, that would mean the flanks would be barely 100 men front, which is pretty thin for a wing).<br>
<br>
I'd love to know the Persian formation, it would make everything pretty much easier.<br>
<br>
Anyway, the light infantry harassing the Medes before the phalanx attack would mean they had to face some 10,000-15,000 shield-bearing spearmen and 5-10,000 archers. Even if the average psiloi could be equal with a weaker spearman, I doubt they were able to affect too much the archers, who would be behind the shields wall and harassing the psiloi themselves. Of course, if instead of moving the light infantry to the left wing, we allow them to stay behind the phalanx, specially in the center, they would be able to keep harassing the farther ranks (archers) while the hoplites kept the shield-bearers busy. But in that instance, we would have to accept that the Meded were not able to deploy a single knight on the battle. If their ships were still on the shore, embarking cavalry, it's dubious they wouldn't try to deploy at least a small force (I don't think some "turmae" were *that* hard to deploy, and being some 30 horses each, two or three of them would be a force big enough to be taken into account, specially since the left and right Athenian flanks would be extremely vulnerable to a cavalry attack once they started to turn inside to attack the Persian center from the flanks and backs.<br>
<br>
Some misteries still left to be thought. I'll appreciate a great deal any more light thrown over them.<br>
<br>
As for gaming, I don't do that (though I admit I'd like to) and thus all my modelling is "by hand". I have some computerized drawings to get the picture clear, but there are too many variables for me to present a solid model as of yet.<br>
<br>
Thanks for all!<br>
Khairete!<br>
<br>
P. Lilius a.k.a. Argyros <p></p><i></i>
