Othismos true nature

[Anonymous]

A pity! If you know of any Czech re-enactors of Ancient Greeks, please let them know about the Festival!

[hoplite14gr]

My friend Spyros got these fotos from an vase,
A rather unsusual depiction of a Hoplite fighting 2-handed.
http://s40.photobucket.com/albums/e238/ ... h=imgAnch7
it seem he supports someone fighting with overarm thrust.
http://s40.photobucket.com/albums/e238/ ... h=imgAnch8

Can I have your thoughts?
Kind regards

[Peter Raftos]

This seems to be typical of fighting through many ages. In my experience of medieval re-enactment, in combat against a line of the enemy, it is not always the person you are facing / fighting that will "kill" you. More often than not some one behind them will use an opening and take a shot. These images also imply a looser order than a tight phalanx in the othismos. Unless the artist is trying to portray a second ranker taking a shot at at target of opportunity through a gap.

[Felix]

The images do not show a tightly packed combat; but this may reflect a different phase of a battle, i.e. during the rout phase of a hoplite battle rather than reflecting the othismos.

Artists make choices about what kind of combat they want to show. If the othismos was indeed a densely packed scrum, it wouldn't make for the most clear artistic images: all the figures would be overlapped in multiple ways, the position and motions would be cramped, etc. I can think of one case where art deliberately misleads: WW I aerial fighter combat. Almost all films showing this sort of fighting choose to show complex dogfights, with lots of fancy maneuvers. In fact, the accounts of the really successful aces were very different - the best way of fighting is to close in on your target rapidly, before they are aware of you, and shoot them accurately - and then move away very fast, before they have a chance to react. Either they die, or they are too far away to engage in dogfighting. This could easily be shown on film, but it isn't - probably because it isn't dramatic enough. If this combat were judged by the surviving art, an entirely wrong concept would be believed.

[hoplite14gr]

Peter is right that the second line is usally the deadlier.
Felix thanks for your input. I agree with your points too.
Asked a couple friends to try this think with their shields.
Both said that is not easy to perform 2-handed grip with hoplon shield.
I am also og the opinion that the artist tried to depict the earlier Geometric battle with the equipmet of his time buit it is also speculative.
Kind regards

[P. Lilius Frugius Simius]

Now...,

we are in August: did you manage to test some of these things in the Festival?

greetings!

[Anonymous]

Now...,

we are in August: did you manage to test some of these things in the Festival?

greetings!

No, we didn't. I did provide a large number of "safety" spears, but we were never able to get enough Hoplites together at one time to experiment with Phalanx-style fighting, largely because I was too busy elsewhere to organise it. My thanks go to all those who helped in the production of the spears, which are still available for the NEXT festival!
I may be able to get the Hoplite Association to try them out for me.

I have to say that I don't think your image, Stefanos, does show a man fighting with a double-handed grip on his spear. The crack hides some of the evidence, but his shield-hand appears to have an upright fist, with the fingers wrapped around the antilabe in a way which would make it impossible for him to grip the spearshaft as well.

What's more, he would need to let go of the antilabe altogether to be able to use a two-hand grip effectively. Finally, I doubted that a two-hand grip could even be achieved, given the way an aspis is constructed. I've tried it with two of my shields and the ergonomics just don't work out - the rim comes across too far and pushes the spear shaft away.

[hoplite14gr]

Thanks Paul. Probaly you have good points.

A group of 20 hoptlites at Thermopulae event in which I had the honour of being a participant tested a few things.

The 3rd line in "Proptosis" (overarm thrust) is more a hindrance than benefit.
A single line in "Proptosis" can turn 90 degrees but 2 lines have deficulty.
Most mauevering is easier with spears vertical and not in synaspismos.
The aim wass to get optimum position and place and then perform the attack.
The square block was frontage 5, depth 4.
Best results were acheived when the commands were given in the folloing order:
1. Dress rankss
2. "Proptosis" (overarm thrust)
3 Synaspismos (lock shileds)
4. Advance
5. Charge

We hope to test more at Plate in September.

Kind regards

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Is it not just the spear passing in fron of his hand which is holding the cord around the rim of his hoplon?

[Comerus Gallus]

Is it not just the spear passing in fron of his hand which is holding the cord around the rim of his hoplon?

Exactly!... I had it on high resolution, but Photobucket is in short maintenance, so I will post it as soon they end.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Cheers Gioi! You know I only just noticed that your signature pics were animated las t week! hock: :lol: Still freaking out about Napoleans schizo expression change! :lol: :lol:

[hoplite14gr]

Byron I think you are right.
Plus 2-handed grop with hoplon was unsuccessfull in our experiments.
Kind regards

[Comerus Gallus]

Here Stefane

Cheers Gioi! You know I only just noticed that your signature pics were animated las t week! hock: :lol: Still freaking out about Napoleans schizo expression change! :lol: :lol:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[PMBardunias]

I noticed that this thread commented on Goldsworthy's 1997 paper on the othismos. I just critiqued this on my blog if any are interested.

http://hollow-lakedaimon.blogspot.com/

[Mitra]

One specification about Montecuccoli:

The extract takes by Goldsworthy (taken from Barker). Montecuccoli in this "incomplete" (in the G. article) passage speak of cavalry formation depth.

THe general explicates why a cavalry unit has to be in more that one line:

1 - only a minor part of men in a unit have the necessary courage to be in first or second rank, the other follow the first, don't press
2 - when a cavalry unit attack with a single line, the men with minor courage, fall back or lost contact because have minor velocity, so great holes are created in the line. and also the more intrepids, discouraged by lost support of fellow soldier, make only a attempt and fall back.

In other passage Montecuccoli tell to be against too depth formations, only six ranks are necessaries the other cannot fight because the pike cannot arrive to the line.

For restart this interesting post, i quote a passage take from Delbruck about the "True advice and reflections of a well tested and experienced warrior" document probably write from the same Frundsberg

"The document rejects the opinion that "the formation should be tight" and should be the decision as a result of pression from the rear, "for the foremost men, who are supposed to do the work, do not wish to be too closely pressed, they must be left room for freely jabbing" otherwise they would be pushed in "as one pushes people into a ditch""