Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Phalanx Mobility
#1
Ave,<br>
<br>
I apologize for my relative lack of knowledge concerning this, as I am predominantly a modern military historian.<br>
<br>
How easily were Spartan Hoplites in a Phalanx able to maneuver on the battlefield? It doesn't seem very much like a flexible formation. Were they able to turn very quickly without losing formation? How quickly could a group facing east completely wheel and be facing southwest?<br>
<br>
-Spatha <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#2
I can't give you times for exactly how quickly a phalanx could wheel. I can say that the formation was not really designed to do that. Rather, it was just meant to be lined up and then go straight forward toward the enemy (with a bit of a drift to the right as each man sought to stay behind the shield of the man next to him).<br>
The Spartans may have been able to maneuver relatively more quickly than other Greeks due to their constant training, but I'm not sure of any evidence for this (which someone else may know of). <p></p><i></i>
Dan Diffendale
Ph.D. candidate, University of Michigan
Reply
#3
Yes, like you already said, the main target was to get one line (a wall of shields and spears actually) straight up against the enemy lines. When they had to flee (which didn't happen a lot, certainly not with the Spartans) one by one, starting at the back, the lines had to get their spears up into the air, turn around which was quite hard with a shield of 70-80-90 cm, and start running in full armour. Then the line in front of them had to do so, and eventually when all the lines (8 in the beginning around 800BC and 16 at the time of Alexander) turned around, half of the army was slaughtered by the enemy.<br>
<br>
The main advantage they had was they were almost unbreakable when they could form up in one line, spears in front and march on. But from the moment a gab appeared by a natural obstacle (rocks and so on) or one of the hoplites fell, they were doomed. Or, like the Romans did, missile-units like spearmen of archers were effectively against a phalanx. By the time of Alexander the phalanx existed of 16 man deep and lines 5 to 16 held their spears up into the air to break the impact of missiles. You can imagine it didn't help a lot, though. <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#4
Ave,<br>
<br>
Thanks for responding! I am not surprised, but thank you for confirming my suspicions. How quickly could a group of scattered men form up? I would assume fairly quickly. Could a group of men who had never fought together form a phalanx very quickly? Could the phalanxes form a "tortuga" similar to the one portrayed in Troy?<br>
<br>
-Spatha <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#5
I don't think a tortuga like we saw in Troy was used in Greek warfare. The armour in the movie was a mixure of fantasy and reality, which made it possible to do so. The most of the shape of the shields were used in reality, but the Greeks didn't form up this way. Though at the time of Troy you had no phalanx. During the battle of Troy (at least as the story goes, I don't believe there was actually a battle or siegement of Troy) it were the so called Dark Ages of Greek history, and it were the 'hero-fighters' who fought for their own honour, and a group of trained, armed soldiers behind them. The phalanx was first used around 800 BC, almost 400 years after Troy.<br>
<br>
A phalanx could be drawn up quite quickly. During the marches they hold up their spears in the air, like every ancient army did. They marches in lines of 3 man in the beginning of the phalanx (around 800 BC) and at the end 16 man wide (the most common know phalanx order: squares from 16x16 man). When they lined up for a battle, the first unit (or enomotia (I think it was names)) stood still, the second unit formed up on their left side, the third unit on the second unit's left side, and so on, until they had a "wall", sometimes almost a kilometre long. Then they marched straight onto the enemy.<br>
<br>
A group of men who never fought in a phalanx: do you mean who never fought together or men who never really trained to hoplites (like mercenaries or something like that)? <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#6
Ave,<br>
<br>
Soldiers who have never fought together before, all phalanx trained Hoplites. Even if the men all had the same training, could they form up very quickly? I guess this question is mostly asking, were men used to occupying a certain place in a phalanx? Were the strongest usually in front, or did they just come together? I would imagine that the men had preferences, but would come together in the quickest fashion.<br>
<br>
-Spatha <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#7
Ave,<br>
<br>
Also, (thanks for your patience) how were the rather long spears held? I guess it is difficult to explain without visuals, but did some men use both hands to wield a spear while the others held the shields? Were spears braced against something or someone? The spears seem a bit long to wield one handed.<br>
<br>
=Spatha <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#8
The shield was held with a sling around the neck and shoulder. The arm was put through the shield and the hand was free, but the shield moved with the arm. The back hand would hold the rear of the spear and the front would grasp farther up. By putting the front hand across your body and on the spear the shield was naturaly in front of you. Valete <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#9
Just a quick response, I'll add a bit when I get a chance, but I ran across a mention in Herodotus of the Spartans, who apparently favored the tactic of pretending to run away and then quickly forming up again to take their pursuers by surprise. I'll get the specific reference when I have the time. <p></p><i></i>
Dan Diffendale
Ph.D. candidate, University of Michigan
Reply
#10
They could have done that, but the word 'speed' is, I guess, a bit incorrect to the phalanx. But, like we all know, the Spartans were very hard trained soldiers so it might could have happened.<br>
<br>
And yes, like said before, the long spears (5-7 meters) were two-handed with the shield moved by the lower arm and the spears itself were right next to the shield. But that's in case of the time of Alexander, the first phalanxes (if this is spelled the good way) had spears of 2-3 meters and they could be singlehanded, over the shields which were in those times much bigger than the one used with the longer spears. <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#11
Hi there,<br>
<br>
We have to clearly distinguish between an athenian/spartan kind of phalanx, and a macedonian one (when we are speaking of greek phalanxes).<br>
<br>
The athenian/spartan phalanx (which was the commonest kind of phalanx in the ancient times, used by basically all heavy infantries everywhere: etruscans, early italic tribes, including picenans, early samnites, and early romans; carthagian hoplites, persians, egyptians, hittites, and so on) was a solid, heavy wall of shields (aspis) with spikes (2-2.5 meters) held with one hand at shoulder/head height that moved against you at a constant and unstoppable pace. Think on a spiked version of the Star Wars garbage dispenser were the starrings were about to be smashed, and you'll get a good picture. Basically only the three or four first ranks were able to fight on the battle line, and the rest of the hoplites (usually 8 ranks, sometimes 12, once at least even 50) would have to simply wait behind, or carefully proyecting their spears over their partners, simply push with their shields, to add to the collective momentum.<br>
<br>
Basic maneuvers before combat were certainly possible, and the spartans were famous for using smaller combat units ("enomotia" of 25-32 soldiers, and then "pentekostys" (2 enomotiai), and "lochos" (4-6 enomotiai) (100-12, "mora" (512) and several morae to comprise the whole of the army) that constantly drilled different combat maneuvers, and different column depths and other maneuvers that could make the phalanx more flexible. Being able to change your combat formations before the battle begun was a huge tactical and strategical advantage, as communications were severily limited by then, and battles were very hard to modify and carried a great amount of inertia, which could mean victory or defection before your new orders could be carried by your troops.<br>
<br>
However, most phalanxes were formed by trained citizens, but not professionals, and would, therefore, be unable to perform the more complex movements. However some maneuvers like turning the whole front to the sides was easily (if maybe not pretty fast, as the pivoting units would have to basically rotate in place and the ones on the end of the lever would have to run to maintain the phalanx integrity), as Marathon and other battles were non-spartan units (mainly athenians, thebans, or corinthians).<br>
<br>
The macedonian phalanx, however, was very different in concept. As Fillupus II of Macedonia couldn't affort a heavy armored infantry, he provided his men with long "sarissas" of 5-7 meters long which were held with both hands. Phalanxites carried a small dagger and shield that carried on the left arm or hanging from the neck, and the sarissas held at head level (over the heads/shoulders of the ranks before you) except the first row which held them at hip height (much stronger). As shields were smaller, they could be in a tighter formation, and usually the first 4, 5 ranks would be able to proyect their pikes ahead of the front, and any enemy trying to avoid one of the sarissas would find his face on the next one.<br>
<br>
Lighter formations of "syntagmas" (256=16x16, or 32x men would allow the macedonian phalanx more flexibility, but the lighter armor meant that any breach on the front would expose them to certain death. Thus lighter infantry was used to defend the phalanx integrity. Anyway, the phalanx was an auxiliary tool for the cavalry with both Phillip and Alexander, and Pyrrus simply used it in order to hold the roman legionnaires long enough for his cavalry/elephants to break havoc on them, and it only the seleucids and other Alexander's generals' descendants the first ones to use the phaanx as the main weapon, as a true smashing machine, and Hannibal Barca the one who transformed it into the most versatile heavy infantry until Marius' reform of the Roman legions (Cornelius Scipio's innovations in echelon tactics and manipular warfare were a dire consequence fo his learning from Hannibal's).<br>
<br>
In all instances, the phalanx was very weak against flank attacks, and vulnerable to gapping because of terrain accidents. However it wasn't as inflexible as it may seem: classical authors tell us how the phalaxes avoided scythian chariots at Cunaxa (spartan and other greek mercenaries), Gaugamela (macedonian), and depictions of Thermopylae recall that spartans ran towards their walls with their shields on their backs and suddenly changed ways and charges against now confident enemies; and so on...<br>
<br>
Hope this helps,<br>
<br>
P. Lilius Frugius Simius<br>
a.k.a Argyros <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#12
Hello again.<br>
Everything that I will tell you now comes from first hand experience.<br>
I did my national service in the Greek Army (lasted) 18 months.<br>
The first month, except fire arms training we did close drill and close formation maneuvers. Some of us were picked up for the presidential guard and other ceremonial troops and they did this routine for 18 months!<br>
You have to see with your own eyes to believe how complex maneuvers recruits will do with the encouragement of a barking sergeant. (i.e. change formation in less than 2 minutes. - jogging and keeping tight dressing while carrying a 30 kilogram bergen pack. execute precision movements with the rifle etc. etc<br>
If recruits with 30 days training can perform quickly assembly and change formation maneuvers how much more people that their battle tactics were based on this!<br>
Ok, the Spartan started performing these maneuvers from the age of seven like school games but in the other city states the youth were going to the stadion and palestra and started what we today would call "para-military training" at around the age of sixteen.<br>
I see no reason to assume that ancient drill instructors or trainers were any different than modern day sergeants.<br>
Ancient Athenians required military service from the youth between 18 to 20 years before give them the right to be named citizens. (Again think 30 days drill miracles and 24 months drill!) <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#13
The description by Aug33, of how to hold shield and spear relates to the later, Macedonian, Phalanx. In the Archaic and Classical periods, spears seem to have been from 7' 3" to 9" long, quite slender, and counterpoised with a sauroter. This makes them surprisingly easy to use, single-handed, and puts most of the length where it belongs - towards the foe. Even so, it takes a bit of practice to wield spears in formation without clouting people round the back of the head with the butt ends, simply because of the length. We are finding that we have made our spears too stout, and need to reduce the thickness.<br>
Paul <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#14
[url:vo3deu5e]http://www.soldiers-russia.com/niena/amazons_greeks/macedonian_28.htm[/url]
On this figurine you can see the man's left hand holding the sarissa the generally accepted way, that is with an underhand grip.
But with such a grip, the shield lies diagonally to the shoulders(as seen from above), unless the left arm is kept very close to the torso. Otherwise, getting the shield to lie parallel to the shoulders will need a difficult twist of the wrist.
So I wonder if, in fact, the sarissa was not held by the left hand with a overgrip, instead of the accepted undergrip.
This way the shield can lie parallel to the shoulders without the need of wrist twisting..
Has anybody tried?
Pascal Sabas
Reply
#15
What other possible way could a spear of this length be held? Overarm would not be possible. That figurine does not have a guige on the shield, as mentioned by Aug33. A shield strap would allow a lot more shield manoeuvrability, since both arms would be occupied by the sarissa.

Regarding the "phalanx". Homer uses the word many times and Professor Joachim Latacz has analysed the hexameter composition of the Iliad and demonstrated that it can be dated back to the time of Linear B, so it is possible that the phalanx was around a lot earlier than many assume. It is also possible that Homer's phalanx and the classical phalanx were different formations.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply


Forum Jump: