Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Book Recommendation: Greek Warfare: Myths and Realities
#16
Here is a good review

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2005/2005-07-66.html
"History, despite its wrenching pain, cannot be unlived, but if faced with courage, need not be lived again." Maya Angelou
Reply
#17
What is loose order? What is close order? 3 ft is loose and synaspismos are close? I dont think the 1,5 ft formation are compatible with a run-clash like this described Hanson.

But, away from the the question how compact was the phalanx, the density don't implies the othismos like rugby scrum. No primary source or picture describe the othimos, only the battle terminology are to the base of orthodoxy (but the term are used also for cavalry clash by Arrian), in this Van Wees have reason.
"Each historical fact needs to be considered, insofar as possible, no with hindsight and following abstract universal principles, but in the context of own proper age and environment" Aldo A. Settia

a.k.a Davide Dall\'Angelo




SISMA- Società Italiana per gli Studi Militari Antichi
Reply
#18
Quote:What is loose order? What is close order? 3 ft is loose and synaspismos are close? I dont think the 1,5 ft formation are compatible with a run-clash like this described Hanson.

Normal if 3 ft. for each soldier, not between each soldier.
Close order (synaspismos) is 1 - 1.5 ft. for each soldier. Yes, packed ranks. try moving them!
No, you can't wield a sword in synaspismos, but then I don't think that's expected from you.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#19
Apart from the sword, the Hanson all speed run also isn't possible without to touch the soldier's shield and arms one to another.
"Each historical fact needs to be considered, insofar as possible, no with hindsight and following abstract universal principles, but in the context of own proper age and environment" Aldo A. Settia

a.k.a Davide Dall\'Angelo




SISMA- Società Italiana per gli Studi Militari Antichi
Reply
#20
We have not tried running in synaspismos.
We are going to attempt it in Platea.
But I assure you from personal experience that sizable blocks of men can move while jogging beteem 100 to 800 meters without loosing formation.
Kind regards
Reply
#21
I dont think the problem is loosing but the minimun space necessary to not to collide to a determinate velocity with large shields, armour, spear.

Monteccucoli affirm that for a '600 pikeman advancing in battle a square of 3 "piedi modenesi" x 3 (2,5 piedi modenesi corresponding to 1,25 meters) is necessary. When the arrive to contact with the enemy the space can be restricted to 1,5 "piedi". And we speak of soldiers without shield and marching not running.
"Each historical fact needs to be considered, insofar as possible, no with hindsight and following abstract universal principles, but in the context of own proper age and environment" Aldo A. Settia

a.k.a Davide Dall\'Angelo




SISMA- Società Italiana per gli Studi Militari Antichi
Reply
#22
I would second Stefanos. In 2 weeks you can have blocks of 100+ men able to manuever and jog together. As long the rythm is held by stepping hard the left leg its quite easy. After a couple of months men can hold the rythm themselves. The distance of ranks is usually an arm away.

I suspect that this distand would be sufficient for hoplites also. Judging from my experience if men had a training season each year it would be easy not onl;y for them but for the officers-citizens to manage them. I used to be first surgeant during my military service, of a reinforced company. That means 165 men plus 20 officers and jr officers. Every morning i had to set the ranks for report and parade the men and set tem for inspection. I was just a coscript with no formal experience (im graphic designer) and i had no problem doing that. So i guess the same stands for citizens officers managing the ranks.

If men are trained at least one time a year they can surely perform manouvers and jogging in close ranks. However what i suspect is that they would be able to jog most distance if needed to the enemy but the assault with locked shields would be performed in fast pace. The othismos would be achieved by the mechanical energy that would be transmitted to front lines from the back ones. Basically like moshing in rock concerts :lol: .
aka Yannis
----------------
Molon lave
Reply
#23
Ido i know isn't difficult to march in formation and not take great time to training (me too have maked military service) but the run with shield like Hanson idea and have fast pace or trot only with rifle cannot request the same distance from the men.

THe mechanical energy from last line isn't trasmitted to enemy; the major part of cinetic energy remain to the body front to you, a living mass, wich are damaged from this. THe body hit dont press forward with major force, fall forward with considerable phisical shock.
"Each historical fact needs to be considered, insofar as possible, no with hindsight and following abstract universal principles, but in the context of own proper age and environment" Aldo A. Settia

a.k.a Davide Dall\'Angelo




SISMA- Società Italiana per gli Studi Militari Antichi
Reply
#24
I find the idea that they fought with a more open formation rather hard to believe mostly due to the low importance of cavalry in classical Greek warfare. Its the tight packed formation of close order infantry that protect them from cavarly attacks. Its hard to get a horse to charge into a seemingly solid wall of men in armor wether from the front or the rear.

In my opinion it was probably the shift to a tighter formation that made the chariot of the homeric age of less importance to the classical greeks.
David Minto
Reply
#25
The chariot was never used for shock tactics until the development of the Persian scythed chariot in the Iron Age. Bronze age chariots were universally used as archer platforms from China, through to India, the Near East, and Mykenaian Greece. The adoption of the phalanx formation is largely unrelated to the phasing out of chariots on Greek battlefields.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply
#26
Never meant to imply that the chariot was used in shock tactics but its utility as a mobile archer platform had to have been greatly dimenished when tighter packed formations in general were adopted making archery in general more of a side show to the main conflict.

Of course the idea of the chariot as a mobile weapons platform is still rather controversial as well with many scholars like Alan Schulman who propose that while the bow was the main weapon of egyptian charioteers they generally fired from stable ground.

The idea that it was close order infantry that defeated the Chariot warfare mode is well argued by Robert Drews in his book The End Of the Bronze Age
David Minto
Reply
#27
If I recall correctly, Drews actually argued that it was infantry in open order, like chariot runners, who ended the use of the battle chariot.

Closed order formations make great archery targets, by the way. If you look at the arms of the Sumerians and Egyptian infantry (basically largish shield and spear) these are often used in close order - that is certainly what is shown in Mesopotamian works like the Vulture Stele. So it would seem that close order formations may have resisted chariots passing through them, but also made targets which is was impossible to miss, even firing from a bouncing chariot.
Felix Wang
Reply
#28
oops your right felix it was swarms of skirmishers havent read that book since my last year in college and only really remembered where he talked about the increased use of the sword and shield. Which seems an odd combination with skirmishers but maybe thats just me.

I still think your a little off about how effective archery is on close order infantry they make a good target but with large shields and armor its hard to be effective against them. Examples of archery being descisive in ancient battles are rather few i can only think of the conclusion of the battle of thermoplaye(sp?) where the greeks were totally encircled and carrhae where if memory servers the romans were as well.

Sorry didnt mean to hijack this thread guys.
David Minto
Reply
#29
The chariot archer disappeared from the battlefield because he moved to horseback and became a horse archer. I dout that Bronze Age infantry formations ever had to worry about coming into direct contact with chariots. It wasn't until the Iron Age that chariots began to be used for shock tactics.

One possibility explaining the general decline of archery in the Aegean is the increased use of body armour among infantry and tight formations of men. javelins are more likely to penetrate heavy body armour and shields than arrows.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply
#30
Well at Watford Paul in full hoplite panoply ran against Edwin who is an experienced archer at a ditance of 100 meter. The archer manged to shoot only a couple of arrows fefore the hoplite was upon him.
I support Dan when it says that increased armor was of great aid.
Also is is quite unnerving seeing a compact block of nasty pointed things pressing relentlessly against you, so you fire a couple os shots and run as far way from them with the chariot. That has the side effect of forcing your friently infantry to run away too!

Kind regards
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The role of marines in Greek naval warfare Rizzio 0 1,474 07-01-2016, 10:08 PM
Last Post: Rizzio
  Historical Dictionary of Ancient Greek Warfare Tarbicus 0 1,255 03-23-2013, 05:22 PM
Last Post: Tarbicus
  Questioning two myths about ancient Greek cavalry Agonis 1 1,577 03-16-2013, 09:13 PM
Last Post: Eleatic Guest

Forum Jump: