Why can pikemen run in phalanx?! And why cant hoplites run?!

[andrew881thebest]

Gotta love when someones idea of how a hoplitai formation works comes from 300. HOLD The LINE!!!!!!!!! PUSH!!!!!!!! THEY LOOK THIRSTY!!!!!!!

i think that that event could happen sometimes, even if was not the rule. For the simple reason that we know for sure that sometimes hoplites charged in mass against enemies (usually other hoplites), so do you think a mass of men in bronze armor spears and shields 8 or more rows would stop exactely one meter from the enemy ranks, beginning to stab with spears? or it would probably crush into the enemy lines, trying to break them even with its kinetic energy?
Maybe, maybe soldiers were trained not to push their front mates, but to stop some cm from them, enough to give them a confined space where to fight. Exactely not what persians made in "300".
Anyway the meaning of the hoplite charge (and consequent pushing of shields) was same of the medieval knights' charge, adding to the spear the energy of all own body running, to give a very powerful strike, maybe even capable to go through a shield, or an armor.

[Scharfrichter]

This is why, i believe but should read more, pike phalanx was very effective especially at the beginning, while men charged with pikes down, adding the energy of their body moving to the cinetic energy of pike, making it almost impossible to stop (and useless shields). After the first charge, phalanx got immobile and should only defend, though.

do you mean (by this) the macedon phalanx?

because chgarging in phalanx is complete nonsense, especially with a sarissa..

[andrew881thebest]

do you mean (by this) the macedon phalanx?

because chgarging in phalanx is complete nonsense, especially with a sarissa..

you should really read more about how a Macedonian phalanx worked. The idea of a slow moving engine is totally wrong. During the charge the first 5 rows (not 3) put sarissa down making it almost impossible to stop.

[Vassileios]

Actually the only historical evidence we have of hoplites running are the Battle of Marathon and the Battle of Plataea. On both occasions, it ist stated that it was unusual for hoplites to charge, but it was a last resort in order to avoid getting pinned down by the mass of the Persian Archers raining down arrows.

The only hoplites that were by design able to run were the "Ekdromoi" of the Hellenistic era, which wore no armor and were used as an anti-peltast unit. In Rome 2 all hoplites charge like Ekdromoi, which is complete nonsense and I hope this is not happening by design.

[Scharfrichter]

you should really read more about how a Macedonian phalanx worked. The idea of a slow moving engine is totally wrong. During the charge the first 5 rows (not 3) put sarissa down making it almost impossible to stop.

so please, dear andrew, provide us with some evidence.
The Macedon Phalanx was the defensive counterpart to the offensive cavalry wing, also an anvil in Alexander's hammer-and-anvil tactics.

Also, using common sense, how would you imagine to run, or better, charge(!) with a sarissa?

Charging hoplites make more sense, and at the battle of marathon, as Vassileos correctly said, is proofed and was an effective mean to counter the persian archers. (also they used only 8ft-spears!)

[Col. Tartleton]

You can definitely run in armor with a Dory and Aspis. Although it wasn't the norm as can be attested from the specific incidents of when it was done.

Good luck running with a Sarissa and a Pelte. They marched at a good pace at the enemy and forced them to give ground or die, but you can't run around unless you drop your pikes.

Unfortunately Pikemen in R2 can't drop their pikes and then fight without them as swordsmen or return to them. It'd be nice if pikes were treated like horses in that respect. That would in my eyes solve the pikemen issues. Ponderous with pikes, but able to "dismount" and fight as swordsmen. Improved reach is balanced by reduced mobility with a regular spear being the optimum middle way.

[andrew881thebest]

before I find the source I remember to have read some years ago, simply use damn Google search. You will find plenty of information about Macedonian phalanx charging at fast pace, even though not properly running. It depends on what you mean by running. Surely they tended to go as fast as they could while keeping formation in order to make the impact of pikes devastating. This could even be added in the game or with mods as special ability maybe.
Anyway http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...with-the-enemy

[Durnaug]

before I find the source I remember to have read some years ago, simply use damn Google search. You will find plenty of information about Macedonian phalanx charging at fast pace, even though not properly running. It depends on what you mean by running. Surely they tended to go as fast as they could while keeping formation in order to make the impact of pikes devastating. This could even be added in the game or with mods as special ability maybe.
Anyway http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...with-the-enemy

Some researchers also regard the Macedonian pikemen as primarily offensive, suggesting they were far more flexible than the "heavy infantry" moniker would imply, i.e. they should not be regarded as heavy infantry at all.

"The men that comprised the Macedonian heavy infantry are almost exclusively referred to collectively as 'the phalanx' by both ancient and modern authors. The adoption of this term is partly due to convenience, and partly due to a lack of understanding by of some as to the tactical role of the heavy infantry. In this article it will be shown that the use of the term 'phalanx' is misleading, and that the Macedonian pezhetairoi, as they should be more accurately called, were not heavy infantry at all, but instead were essentially light infantry."

http://www.karwansaraypublishers.com...fare-ii-1.html

Although others point out such views are controversial and, apparently, part of an ongoing debate (lol as usual).

http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-revi...owViewpoints=0

There is absolutely no doubt that these units were used offensively and over varied terrain (although questions have been raised as to whether they always used the sarisa in such occasions).

[JaM]

its all answered by simple physics... you can only deliver as much energy with pike, as you can hold in your both hands... every action causes reaction, if you fix the pike and charge into enemy, final energy against him will also go against your grip. so amount of energy dealt depends on how well you can fix the pike or spear... this is btw one of the main reasons why overarm spear thrust can never work... human wrist is not capable resisting such impact energies, attempting it would result in twisted or broken wrists (something that would be definitely mentioned by Greek historians)

[Dago Red]

It's pretty clear hoplites ran in some occasions. People should stop using such absolutes (they never ran, it's impossible!) to counter incorrect assertions (hoplites are supposed to charge at full speed and mash shields!).


Separate:

human wrist is not capable resisting such impact energies, attempting it would result in twisted or broken wrists (something that would be definitely mentioned by Greek historians)

What do you say then, to the historical evidence (let's say roughly 50%) of overarm depictions in pottery, sculpture and relief?


PS.
I am not a proponent of either side of the over or under argument.

[JaM]

What do you say then, to the historical evidence (let's say roughly 50%) of overarm depictions in pottery, sculpture and relief?


PS.
I am not a proponent of either side of the over or under argument.

these are depicting javelin throws. on some vases, you can even see ankyle attached to javelins. (chigi vase for example) Problem with these is, usually these pictures are not fully posted as they are, but only partially..

look here:



On the side you can see two Hoplites preparing themselves, and several javelins with leather ankyle attached. battlegroup is moving with large silver head spears, while front line has small black head javelins portrayed and also large silver head spears. if you make a good detail on how they held these javelins, you can clearly see several fingers up, which is exactly how ankyle was held for throws.


ankyle:

[Harnis]

I don't think pikemen were considered light infantry.........I don't think they were considered heavy infantry either........they were pikemen.

And you can't run with an 18 foot wood pole with a spike at the end levelled at the enemy. You can advance slowly with it.



And JaM, something just clicked with me. I was already familiar with the whole underhand vs overhand spear thing and how overhand was for throwing spears, but something I just realized.....

does that mean hoplite units should have precursor javelins?

[Col. Tartleton]

No, Alexander's Foot Guards appear to have done a quick march, and stormed the enemy line, but calling that running is silly.

Hoplites definitely carried javelins in most sources so yes, they should have them. I mean they might not even be proper javelins, they might be throwing their spears at the faces on the incoming soldiers so they can get in close with their swords and do that wonderful shield push stab the other dude in the throat stuff that really shouldn't happen if spears are being used for thrusting at a distance. I would think that some hoplites would be equipped with a few javelins with an emphasis on swordplay. Others on thrusting spears and keeping their swords for back up. They're Medium to Heavy Infantry depending on their weaponry. Peltasts being light infantry are different because they're skirmishers with a bunch of javelins and almost no armor. They're purely going to trade shots and try to get out. Well, then again some of the Macedonian Peltasts seemed to be more like special forces and had more armor, but that's something else.

Pretty much if you go to any period there's going to be similarities between how people fought. The Gauls to my understanding focused on Medium infantry and had limited use of skirmishers but I would say that Gauls should have precursor javelins. The Britons were different, a lot of skirmishing and medium infantry. The Greeks used medium infantry with javelins and used skirmishing light infantry with javelins. They had an affinity for the weapon as can be seen from our modern Olympics. It was hardly a unique Roman tactic to have throwing spears for close quarters on the line troops. If you can be bothered to carry a couple javelins around on campaign you're going to have them. Importantly Hoplites didn't have to carry all of their battle gear, they had people for that. Not unlike later knights had squires to replace their lances and back them up if things got really dire. I mean who goes to war without a slave or two? Seems impractical. The fact the Romans had to carry all of their own crap (well most of it, there were two porters per eight soldiers which is why a century only had 80 combatants plus officers) is why they were Marius' mules. The poor bastards had to carry their camp in pieces with them.

I mean how the hell is a Spartan soldier supposed to get laid if he doesn't have any boys with him? Women? Gross.

[Dago Red]

@Jam, yes I have seen that before (probably posted by you). It's a great example. Still, there are many reliefs and other materials showing overhand usage of a weapon and its not always so clear as this that it's a javelin.

does that mean hoplite units should have precursor javelins?

Basically everyone should. Javelins, darts, rocks, broken furniture.... people in battle threw anything they could get their hands on, all the time, every time. There is never a reason NOT to throw something at the enemy to keep them away from you, or at the very least, wound/disrupt them before they clash with you.

In the Middle ages (where in some cases we have better documentation) it was the same, just with fewer javelins. Still, depending on where you were, javelins, darts, rocks, maces, hand axes, broken furniture..... Throwing a mace upon contact with the enemy was mentioned many times.

Sometimes its best to take what we know and then apply common sense. Wouldn't you carry a javelin or two with you if you knew you were heading into a pitched battle as a hoplite?

(yes you would).

For some reason only "Royal Peltasts" carry javelins in Rome 2 (they are essentially elite hoplites). In mods for Rome I, many units carry a throwing weapon. A lot of times people get too narrow minded about unit design IMO/.

[JaM]

I don't think pikemen were considered light infantry.........I don't think they were considered heavy infantry either........they were pikemen.

And you can't run with an 18 foot wood pole with a spike at the end levelled at the enemy. You can advance slowly with it.



And JaM, something just clicked with me. I was already familiar with the whole underhand vs overhand spear thing and how overhand was for throwing spears, but something I just realized.....

does that mean hoplite units should have precursor javelins?

look at it this way - Javelin throw was one of the Olympic sports.. originally, they were done in full Hoplite panoply, and they were understood as a competition between citizen soldiers to show who is the best.. If javelin throws were reserved for unskilled mob, it would not end up being an Olympic discipline.

and of course everything what Dago Red said..

[Harnis]

@Jam, yes I have seen that before (probably posted by you). It's a great example. Still, there are many reliefs and other materials showing overhand usage of a weapon and its not always so clear as this that it's a javelin.

all you have to do is pick up an 8 foot wood shaft and try holding it both ways. In underarm grip, you can thrust at low targets, high targets, under your shield, around your shield, over your shield, you can brace it under your armpit, you can parry other spears, you have greater reach since you can hold the spear closer to the butt.

With overarm you can.....thrust above your shield.....and there's pretty much only one thrust where you have good strength (at the opponent's chest)......you can't really thrust low at all. You can't parry really at all. You can't brace it under your arm. You have less reach (which was the whole point of using a spear) because you can't extend your arm fully with the thrust and you are holding the spear further away from the butt. Oh, there's one thing you CAN do really well in overarm grip........you can throw the spear.

Any pottery artwork always needs to be taken with a very large grain of salt. It's like looking at a movie poster from Rambo to try and judge how M60 machine guns were used. Artwork can be a great source, but it shouldn't be taken as 100% fact. Practical experimentation shows that overarm grip is really only useful if you want to throw your spear

[Aenima]

all you have to do is pick up an 8 foot wood shaft and try holding it both ways. In underarm grip, you can thrust at low targets, high targets, under your shield, around your shield, over your shield, you can brace it under your armpit, you can parry other spears, you have greater reach since you can hold the spear closer to the butt.

With overarm you can.....thrust above your shield.....and there's pretty much only one thrust where you have good strength (at the opponent's chest)......you can't really thrust low at all. You can't parry really at all. You can't brace it under your arm. You have less reach (which was the whole point of using a spear) because you can't extend your arm fully with the thrust and you are holding the spear further away from the butt. Oh, there's one thing you CAN do really well in overarm grip........you can throw the spear.

Any pottery artwork always needs to be taken with a very large grain of salt. It's like looking at a movie poster from Rambo to try and judge how M60 machine guns were used. Artwork can be a great source, but it shouldn't be taken as 100% fact. Practical experimentation shows that overarm grip is really only useful if you want to throw your spear

The issue I have with this, though, is that if you're using a spear underhand in a hoplite formation (what many of us consider it to be anyways, tightly packed) then surely you'd end up smacking it into the man behind you if you thrust underhand? A spear of that length would have to be held not at either end but more towards the centre, so there'd be at least some of the shaft (I imagine a fair bit) that would be behind you at all times. If you're packed together tightly you'd just end up stabbing it into the guy's leg/groin behind you if you used it underhand, surely?

The only alternative I can think of is either it being used overhead or hoplites simply didn't fight in such a rigid shield wall as we've been led to believe, just because the spacing would be horrendous.

[JaM]

Aenima: Not really if you hold it like this:



sauroter counterweighted the spear so it was easier to use from the rear, this posture gives you great reach...

[Harnis]

Aenima: Not really if you hold it like this:



sauroter counterweighted the spear so it was easier to use from the rear, this posture gives you great reach...

exactly this JaM, thanks

I am holding in my hand right now an 8 foot hickory shaft 1.25" thick. It doesn't have a metal spearhead on it, but it also doesn't have a sauroter. The balance point of it is right around 4 feet, the middle. I can comfortably hold it around 3 feet from the butt. It results in the butt sticking out 1-2 feet behind me. To be honest, if the man behind me is within 2 feet, he's extremely close and it will be hard for me to fight effectively. I couldn't even take a half step or lean back to avoid a blow.

Of course, with a proper Hoplite spear, I'd be holding it even closer to the butt, resulting in even less sticking out, similar to the picture JaM posted.

Also, you face the same problem anyways (if it's even a problem with a properly weighted spear) with overarm grip. Because of the mechanics of the arm, you can't hold it as close to the butt, so that means more spear sticking out backwards, except now it's at head level.

[Col. Tartleton]

I don't think the rank behind you would be breathing down your neck. The lateral space might have been tight but the ventral dorsal directions should be looser. I mean you want a strong fighting position, not to cram as many people in as possible. If you're eight ranks deep you're not all engaging. I would think it would be one on one for the most part with some danger of getting stabbed from adjacent enemies. The guy behind you was there to take your place if you got injured or tired (or you know killed.) The front rank soldier was going to be the best of the eight however in terms of gear and possibly experience. Fairly certain he was also going to be the best paid man. Well, him or the last guy in the formation, as he was the NCO.