New hoplite book

[Paralus]

[...] to 338 B.C. (Chaironeia), each with a systematic listing of important characteristics.

Given the wretched source tradition on this defining battle, I'd love to see his treatment. I've always had a soft spot for Paul Rahe's contention of an Alexander on foot in this battle; I certainly can't subscribe to Markle's contention of the Sacred Band being broken by an Alexander leading a sarisa-armed cavalry charge. Generally Diodorus' figure of 30,0000 infantry is accepted for the Macedonians. There will, of course, have been many "lights" amongst this total as well as mercenaries. Surprising, though, is the ready assumption of 24,000 Macedonian phalangites amongst this array. This is often seen as the full Macedonian levy and can only be based on the wobbly assumption that Alexander took 12,000 and supposedly left Antipater 12,000. Far more likely is a lower figure - possibly half or little more - and those likely brigaded in "wing" phalanxes in the manner of Doson's array at Sellasia. Did Philip leave Macedonia without troops?

As a result, some conclusions presented about the nature of Macedonian warfare are (in my opinion) quite wrong (lacking reference to key research from folks like Waldemar Heckel and Nick Secunda among others in popular publications) and his concept of Persian warfare is likewise vague and incomplete (Nick Secunda's popular-edition works on this subject would have been of great use here). Since conclusions are drawn relative to hoplites from their performance against these differing military systems, it was important to have had a better grasp of their true attributes.

The great question: just how the Macedonian phalanx physically fought. The big gap in any understanding is a near complete lack of any artistic evidence or clear “guts and all” literary descriptions of this formation engaging an enemy. We are reduced to literary conventions such as “fell heavily upon” and “cut to pieces in hand to hand fighting” etc. Thus many have assumed a somewhat less than “active” participation: the phalanx "charges" a formation and pins it with those serried sarisae. Such assumptions then do not bother to ask what happens after front rank sarisae are buried in opponents’ shields or guts.

That the phalanx was more active is indicated by the routs it occasioned and the descriptions of its enemies suffering great slaughter. Describing same, in a logical and defensible manner, has tasked me I must say. Be nice to have a time machine…