+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Greek Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: New hoplite book (/showthread.php?tid=16779)
New hoplite book - PMBardunias - 04-26-2010
Anyone read this? Interesting to see the wildly unlikely theory of Homeric combat during the Persian wars labelled the "new orthodoxy". I was less than impressed with Schwartz's last article on the topic, for it was simply a rehash of old arguements (something which largely holds true for all of the recent debate on this topic). I can only hope he read my article and gave up on the many elements of othismos put forth by its supporters that don't stand up to scientific scrutiny. Both sides in this debate are like the blind men around the elephant.
Quote:Reinstating the hoplite: Arms, armour and phalanx fighting in Archaic and Classical Greece
by Adam Schwartz
Recent research into the military history of ancient Greece has questioned the central role traditionally ascribed to the famous hoplite phalanx by historians and suggests that even as late as the Persian Wars of 480-479 BC, Greek battles consisted essentially of open fighting and duels between individual combatants, in an almost Homeric fashion. In this meticulous study, Adam Schwartz in turn questions the new orthodoxy. Departing from a detailed scrutiny of hoplite equipment and its physical characteristics, the author demonstrates that this equipment must in fact have been developed specifically to meet the needs of warriors fighting in phalanx formations, which, it is shown, can be traced back into the eighth century BC. In this way, the study is not only a reappraisal of the role of the phalanx, but also a significant contribution to the study of Archaic Greek history. Great emphasis is, furthermore, placed upon the illumination of such crucial questions as the duration of the average hoplite battle and the role of the othismos - pushing - in deciding the outcome. In short, this book will quickly claim its place as one of the basic studies of ancient Greek hoplite battle. ca. 320p
Re: New hoplite book - Praefectusclassis - 04-26-2010
I've received a review copy for AW. It's with a reviewer now.
Re: New hoplite book - PMBardunias - 04-27-2010
I look forward to reading it. I've read his earlier article, which set for itself the admirable task of debunking some of Van Wee's more extreme anti-pushing othismos arguments. The problem is than in doing so he propagates a few myths that have become integral to the pro-pushing analysis. If your reviewer happens to be a Rat member and view this, I can demonstrate the flaw in these notions rather quickly.
"The rim on the aspis evolved as the shield became heavier to allow the weight to be borne on the shoulder as well as the arm." If you look at the cross-section of an aspis, it is clear that the rim section is far thicker than the core of the face of the shield. Thus a substantial portion of the weight of the shield is in the very rim that they would hypothesize grew to ease the carrying of said weight! A rimless aspis is no heavier than many other single grip shields. Sure, there are images that show the hoplites hanging the shield of their shoulder by the rim, but there are far more showing hoplites with their Corinthian helms pushed back, and I doubt many would support fighting with them in this position. Hanging the aspis by its rim on the shoulder simply takes advantage of the profile, which evolved for a very different purpose.
"Hoplites pushed en masse with their bodies side-on, their left shoulders in the bowl of the aspis, pressing into the back of the man in front." The illogic of this one becomes apparent if we try to envision a file doing so. Clearly this can only work for the second ranker pushing the first ranker. Beyond that the men's backs are perpendicular to the men behind them! The could push into the right shoulder of the men in front, but that renders weapons play impossible- something the side-on stance is supposed to allow. The other problem is that at anything approaching maximum pushing force for a file, the men would collapse into the bowl of their shields in any case and be square to the foes as they should be.
"Hoplites charge rapidly to add momentum to othismos." This one is counterintuitive, so I don't blame them for not foreseeing it, but a slow packed advance generates more force, faster than a series of single men impacting like rams. With no need to move to othismos directly from the charge, an extended period can occur of spear fencing prior to a pushing occurring. This eliminates a major difference between the pro- and anti- push crowds.
There are more, and as always I am opened to questions. A general overview can be found in my Ancient Warfare article: "The Aspis: Surviving Hoplite Battle" and of course on my blog: http://hollow-lakedaimon.blogspot.com/ Because I support a literal pushing othismos, I am particularly troubled by these mistakes in the understanding of mechanics and crowd behavior that leave weak spots in the theory for those against it to exploit.
Re: New hoplite book - Demetrios - 04-27-2010
I do not know if this is the right place to raise the question but :
did anybody experience a phalanx formation marching and, doing this, did one experience this drift to the right side ?
I tell you my own experience afterwards.
Thank you in advance for your contributions.
Re: New hoplite book - PMBardunias - 04-27-2010
Quote:did one experience this drift to the right side ?
I have not marched in a long line, but some reenactors that have tell me that there is a rightward creep to bayonette charges. One reason for this and for the hoplite drift comes from the body position of the men. If you hold your aspis up in front of you, you must twist your shoulders to the right. You are now advancing with your shoulders angled right and your hips straight ahead. It is only natural for your hips to want to swivel to match your shoulders. This I have tried, and without spotting on an object to hold your course, you will drift right every time.
As to the drift of hoplites, I think they not only drifted right, but closed up to the right, reducing the distance between hoplites. This makes sense of Thukydides famous quote and add to the overlap of the right wings over the opposite left. The result of two phalanxes drifting right and closing up right would largely be the same; overlapping on the left of each force. It would be difficult for a man on the ground to tell the difference without reference to landmarks.
Re: New hoplite book - Demetrios - 04-28-2010
We agree.
My concern is this mention of a phalanx drift to the right due to the fear of hoplites trying to hide behind the colleague's aspis on his right side, thus leading the Greeks to place the best troops on the right of the front.
1) We built a phalanx fully equiped, up to 12 men, in 2 or 4 rank depth.
2) We marched (not fought) = with no fear at all at this stage, because nobody was facing us,
3) indoors, in a sport hall, on even and confortable floor.
4) I was, as a commander, on the right side, first place
In this situation I felt the drift to the right absolutely natural and I had to push firmly to the left (hardly successfully !) to avoid further drift.
It was all the more obvious that lines where marked in the floor for playing basket ball, so I could see and measure the drift...
We lost +/- one meter to the right on a 30 meter distance (?).
When trying to push to the left, if you take into account that the front line was (in close order) not wider than 6 shields, the fact that the left wing of the phalanx tended to still drift to the right all but resulted in a mess in the center of the formation, at least the hoplites felt squeezzed a bit !
So my conclusion is that fear is not in question, but the position of the body, slightly turned to the right, for shield overlap, leading to assymetrical steps, pushes you inevitably to the right.
I just wanted to check if it had been experienced too or to the contrary, somebody managed to master this drift (not at all costs of course !).
Our next attempt will gather (I hope) up to 30 hoplites, and outdoors, which might be even more difficult to lead.
Re: New hoplite book - PMBardunias - 04-28-2010
Demetrios, I'm very glad to see this confirmed with a small group. I believe that hoplites formed at something just more than an aspis width of spacing. In fact the shield worked quite well as a measuring stick. When the actually engaged they were slightly overlapped- right over left forms the strongest shield wall, but every other shield forward is strong as well and attested to in sculpture. Of course it may have been much more random in actuality for any given phalanx.
The natural tendency to veer right does not negate the wish to be close to the man on your right, it simply means that there was more at play than Thukydides understood. The mechanics of many elements of hoplite combat were probably not conciously understood by the men doing them, ther is no need. For example I don't need to understand why its easier to balance on a bicycle when its moving than when it is stopped to ride a bike.
Thirty hoplites would be great. If you'd like some other ideas to test, feel free to email me and check out my blog above.
Re: New hoplite book - Giannis K. Hoplite - 04-28-2010
Certainly the lines were helping your hoplites to walk straight,a bit. The outdoor trial should have more significant differences. As for the fear factor,it can't be tested without having really many men. I mean, even a mock game between two lines with some potivation could result to the re-enactors wanting to secure themselves to the right,but it needs many men to make the efect visible.
(The person that will stay alive will be given five euros from every other member of the group :lol: :twisted: )
Khaire
Giannis
Re: New hoplite book - Demetrios - 04-28-2010
Thanks for you comments.
In fact this is the reason why I pointed out the fact of best quality circumstances :
small group but wide and deep enough to start figuring a little phalanx,
indoor (heated), lines on the floor, even ground, etc
no challenge (no ennemy), no run...
hoplites could just concentrate on marching without any other worries, and nevertheless, we went to the right !
I guess that in a more realistic situation (even mock battle with some tension), outdoors, wider and deeper phalanx, the drift would be all the bigger... may be ending in a big mess in the middle !
As far as men's width is concerned, we use to overlap shields by 20 % on each side.
In fact, to my opinion, in a very close order it must have been 30%, but we make it a bit wider so that our phalanx doesn't appear too narrow and ridiculous to the public ! 6 aspis wide is nothing !
And for me, overlap is inevitably right over left :
- if you put your bent left arm in front of you, it will not be 100% perpendicular to your marching direction, unless you make a special effort for it. I am rather tall and strong but my aspis is heavy enough not to create extra efforts in a unnatural position !
- when we go "en garde" the right foot goes bakwards to put us in a kind or matial arts position which you find everywhere.
- if you hold you shield on the left side (normal) and you close it in front of you, the right part of your rim will naturally overlap the left side of your colleague on the right.
(of course, by doing so, I find everytime one of ours to overlap the "wrong" way, which annoys the whole line... all the more when marching, not to mention running, nor the othismos...)
- when you come to shock, if your shield overlaps the "wrong" way,
1 you get it into your breast,
2 you prevent yourself from using your doru at ease (you cannot fence, change grip etc) while in the "right" way, you can open you shield to strike the way you want or can
3 you give an opportunity to your foe in presenting your left shoulder to his weapon.
- finally, when you abandon this position to go back to normal, you cannot open your shield without striking the one on your left side.
For all these reasons, I cannot see how one could willingly overlap left on right.
But if anybody experienced it otherwise please let me know.
Re: New hoplite book - PMBardunias - 04-28-2010
Quote:As far as men's width is concerned, we use to overlap shields by 20 % on each side.
They should overlap at least far enough so that the rim of the right shield rests on the "shoulder" section of the left shield (the rim near the edge where the shield deepens rapidly).
Quote:In fact, to my opinion, in a very close order it must have been 30%, but we make it a bit wider so that our phalanx doesn't appear too narrow and ridiculous to the public ! 6 aspis wide is nothing !
Frankly, phalanx combat looked far sillier than most are willing to believe. It also worked very well, rarely would a foe who entered the field laughing leave so.
Quote:And for me, overlap is inevitably right over left :
- if you put your bent left arm in front of you, it will not be 100% perpendicular to your marching direction, unless you make a special effort for it. I am rather tall and strong but my aspis is heavy enough not to create extra efforts in a unnatural position !
It is unclear that we are describing the same thing. Right over left is the right shield forward, the left shield coming up behind it, forming a line like this: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ left over right is: ////////////////.
Re: New hoplite book - ouragos - 04-28-2010
Just an observation from reenactment - but a right drift in the line is a natural consequence of the helmet. Once your aspis is to the front, in a helmet with a pronounced cheekpiece (corinthian) you cannot turn your head to the left with ease but and see forward and to your right. Thus the consequential dressing to the right in a tightly formed body encourages bunching to the right as you strive to hold the shields together.
On the locking of shields, I certainly agree that if you lock shields within a formed line, then the right side of the the shield of a person on the left will automatically fall in front of the left side of the shield of the person on the right (which I took as what both descriptions were saying
) That structure again encourages drift to the right as people try to ensure that a gap does not appear and as one person 'overcompensates', it very quickly encourages bunching.
Re: New hoplite book - PMBardunias - 04-28-2010
Quote:On the locking of shields, I certainly agree that if you lock shields within a formed line, then the right side of the the shield of a person on the left will automatically fall in front of the left side of the shield of the person on the right
This is the reverse of what I advocate, and by convention on RAT, termed left over right. The fact that it occurs "automatically" has to do with the way you are holding your shields, with your bodies more perpendicular to the enemy than straight on is my guess. If you advance with your hips square to the foe and the shield up in front of your chest, which you must do to advance quickly and not side-step forward, then coming up behind the flange of shield jutting out to the left from your righthand fellow is more natural. There are a variety of reasons why this is superior for othismos.
I'll note that many reenactors I have chatted with stand with their bodies too side-on to the enemy. When fighting solo this makes sense, but in groups this is less advantageous. For maximum reach and power, you must end your strike with your shoulders squared forward and you are "shielded" on both flanks in any case. If you overlap left over right, you can find yourself pressed side-on and unable to square forward, thus strinking over your own head or a man beside you and giving up some 2' of reach. In my opinion, you should be standing at a common fighting stance of about a 45 degree angle, not 90 degrees as is sometimes advocated. Ideally you do not want anything coming between your chest and your own shield, so you don't want the righthand fellows rim in your chest. In general there is a trade-off between what would be ideal for a single combatant and what must be done to survive group combat and othismos.
Re: New hoplite book - hoplite14gr - 04-28-2010
Strongly agree with Demetrios and Ouragos in "right drift".
Paul, when we have new recruits when they perform synaspismos both types of overlapping occur.
We favor the left over right (////) based on the "Gigantomachy" of Delfi.
But are there any things that you could suggest we can check on the issue the next time we meet for training?
Kind regards
Re: New hoplite book - PMBardunias - 04-29-2010
Quote:We favor the left over right (////) based on the "Gigantomachy" of Delfi.
There are some reasons to think of left over right, but please don't base it on images like that one or the Chigi. In most of these cases it can be shown that they are advancing with the aspis edge on, not in front of them. They may well have done this to limit the drift we discussed above until their final advance or missile fire required it. I can't rule out even fighting in this way, edge on is how renaissance fencers with a long stabbing sword and a shield not very much smaller than an aspis strapped to their forearm fenced. Remember how long the dory is, they had to stand some 5' apart to use it effectively, you can't both shield bash and dory fence unless you have room to keep moving up and back, which they didn't, but why would you anyway? So it could be that only in the final move to close range, when men went shield to shield that the aspis was across the chest. I don't necessarily believe that, but I can't say its "wrong" or wrong for all the centuries of hoplite combat.
My guess is that hoplites fought at dory range, some 5' from their foes, as part of a wall of overlapping aspides (of whichever way). This greatly limited individual mobility and fighting ability, but was made up for by sheer density. Some have found this limitation on mobility too much and assumed that hoplites needed more individual space, but the scale of these clashes is not easy to replicate. Loose packed fighters, like those that attacked in small groups at Plataea will have a problem attacking this shield wall because they will each face multiple dorys from the front rank and should they get past, dorys from the second ranker protecting the man in front (I doubt rank three stabbed over top).
Quote:But are there any things that you could suggest we can check on the issue the next time we meet for training?
There are many, some I think are too dangerous to play with without serious precautions. Human testing is a problem, there are specific regulations I would have to follow even in something so informal or I could get into trouble if I tell you to do something and someone gets hurt. For example trying to form a real othismos can be very dangerous and if not carefully monitored can cause injury or death. One thing you could try real easily that will show you why I think left over right is a problem in othismos is to press your aspis against something solid like a post, then let the man to your right place his rim between your chest and aspis as though pressed in othismos that way. Now have him move forward and back just a bit, slowly. I have done this, and you will find that the rim of his aspis cuts into your body as he moves forward and into your arm as he moves back. In the kind of jostling that would occur during othismos, this would be bad if not lethal. Again, I should note that I could be wrong and there could be no pushing in mass, but if there was, there are very specific ways to both maximize the pushing force of the group and protect yourself from injury.
You should try is: fighting, shield to shield with your foe with very limited space. Some authors have claimed that this cannot be done, but it can with a sword in the upraised right arm and the shield across your chest. I know no one but myself who has tried this- we tied ourselves chest to chest as though pressed tight. It is vicious, but I found that if you don't get killed quick, it was not too hard to bind up your opponent's weapon. Then you spend a lot of time sort of arm wrestling with the locked weapons. It may explain why battles could be so long. You will find yourself helmet crest to helmet crest as Tyrtaios describes, just to limit his cuts. Incidentally a pilos that wards blows from above and a short Laconian sword would be great for this. How this works with more men and perhaps dorys from rear rankers stabbing blind into the mass I don't know.
Something that helps make the aspis fit against the chest more comfortably is to drop the arm to a 45 degree angle. This position is seen on many early bronze statuettes. It is easier on the arm and makes the width of the shield fit better without choking you with the rim. And it keeps your forearm out of your diaphragm.
For anyone willing to try testing, contact me by email and we can discuss what would be useful to test and safe.
Re: New hoplite book - Macedon - 04-29-2010
We had a very interesting discussion with Paul regarding "othismos" and how shields were locked here link from old RAT some months ago. Although the thread was about the Macedonian phalanx, we brought it a little further stating our opinions on hoplitic warfare. I also tend to agree with Paul that right over left is more advantageous in ordered combat. I am of the opinion that it facilitates order and as such makes the phalanx more formidable, since the individual warrior cannot easily open his defense and as such endanger the line. I have practiced both styles and I find both usable, left over right (///) being best suited when the hoplites wish to be able to engage in personal combat and have freedom of movement, right over left (\\) when order is necessary as during a challenging battle in lines. I also had posted an image I had made to make my ideas visible.
Regarding the rightward drift, I think that it is mostly a problem which has to do with natural movement. Yes, people tend to have a difficulty walking in a straight line if there is no clear, visible line to coordinate their movement with (in parades, they do march in specific distances from the pavements). On the other hand, it is logical, as also attested, that men would try to close up in order to feel more secure. But this would not lead to a rightward movement. It would lead to a more dense formation and thus a shorter line, since the rightmost hoplites would not do that. On the other hand another psychological factor also given in some books regarding hoplites is the wish of the rightmost man to avoid the engagement, so he walks to the right to outflank the enemy, but I am not a proponent of this theory since it would simultaneously lead to a leftward movement of the leftmost men and thus to a thinning of the lines never attested.