08-22-2016, 05:57 PM
(08-22-2016, 05:42 PM)JaM Wrote: but you dont need to do it over a whole line... even a local feint would force part of enemy line to fell... and that would be enough... and of course you can do it, you just need coordination which should be not that big problem anyway.. I'm not talking about 50 vs 50 formation with one side feinting.. im talking about let say 4rank vs 8rank with those 4 ranks feinting, let say on the far right side... its a common tactics even in today's sports so i dont see why it would not be possible back then.
yet, im just trying to give points against this theory. Both Matthew and Lindybeige gave valid points i didnt see anybody "debunked"... but yes, i will read Paul's book when available and then will give my feedback.
about Thureos - that it came from Gallic invasion is just one theory.. at the same time, Pyrrhos was fighting Romans and had a lot of Italians in his army as well... he returned home and brought some of them back, to fight his wars in Greece.. he wanted Macedonic throne, because he believed he has a claim on it. and who knows what would happen if he was not killed during that siege... Besides, seen some arguments that Thureos/ Scutum was Italic design altogether and Celts actually adopted it from them. (but that's for a different thread i suppose)
You can't do a local feint when fighting in close combat with an enemy, within a phalanx, especially with one that has overlapping shields. To do so breaks the integrity of the line.
Modern sports is not ancient Greek warfare, you can't compare the complexity of plays in a game. For instance,American football, some men draw back, other push forward, while some push left, to open holes, all on a pre-arranged signal, creating new holes in the opponent's line to exploit. But that is not at all how Greek warfare was done. Nor like any other modern sport.
At Thermopylae the Spartans are known to have conducted feigned retreats, but not while actually engaged with the enemy. And even know there is much commentary stating that the Spartans, being the only fully professional Greek soldiers at the time, were capable of pulling off something so complex. Helping them of course was that their enemy, Persian/Mede/Immortal infantry, didn't fight as aggressively as Greek hoplites, and therefore could not take advantage of such a feint. No other hoplite vs hoplite battle repeated the tactic. Macedonians refused lines and possibly withdrew forces under contact, but they had the offset distance of the forward sarissa as safe space, the hoplites, pressing shield to shield, would have had no safe space.
Besides this, exactly how would this maneuver been executed? What Greek signaling device would have been used? Which Greek officer fighting in the very front ranks would give the order? How would you prevent the whole line from acting on said signal, instead of a single part of the phalanx?
