How did pikemen hold their pikes?

[RGA]

We all know the overarm vs underarm debate of how hoplites hold their spears. In comparison, no such question has been raised concerning pike.

We all take for granted that Macedonian-style pikemen hold their pikes at waist level. Given their shield strapped onto an arm, I do not see any viable alternative to that. I'm however yet to see a graphical evidence of how pikemen looked like in Ancient times. All we have are description in ancient texts, which might be sometimes ambiguous.

Fast forward to Renaissance, where pikes again were widely used on battlefields. We know that Renaissance pikemen didn't carry shield, which could arguably be attributed to the advance of armour making. I saw some pike drill manuals and actually, in many cases, pike was hold at shoulder level, like in the following picture.




While it looks awkward at first, it is actually much superior to the normal waist-level holding stance, since the pike (which is very heavy) is properly locked onto user's body. Such stance will result in much less exhaustion in any prolonged period of time.

What do you think about this difference and if it had any impact on tactical use of pike on battlefield?

[ImperatorAndreas]

We all know the overarm vs underarm debate of how hoplites hold their spears. In comparison, no such question has been raised concerning pike.

We all take for granted that Macedonian-style pikemen hold their pikes at waist level. Given their shield strapped onto an arm, I do not see any viable alternative to that. I'm however yet to see a graphical evidence of how pikemen looked like in Ancient times. All we have are description in ancient texts, which might be sometimes ambiguous.

Fast forward to Renaissance, where pikes again were widely used on battlefields. We know that Renaissance pikemen didn't carry shield, which could arguably be attributed to the advance of armour making. I saw some pike drill manuals and actually, in many cases, pike was hold at shoulder level, like in the following picture.




While it looks awkward at first, it is actually much superior to the normal waist-level holding stance, since the pike (which is very heavy) is properly locked onto user's body. Such stance will result in much less exhaustion in any prolonged period of time.

What do you think about this difference and if it had any impact on tactical use of pike on battlefield?

I think the main difference is the role of the pikemen on the battlefield. If I am correct, in Renaissance warfare, the pikes had a supportive role and where there to neutralize enemy pikes, protect the cannons and the infantry from cavalry charges. This position on the image is a great defensive/holding positions, but unless I am wrong you can't really thrust with this position while when at the waist level you can effectively thrust your pike. In Hellenic warfare, pikes were use offensively, they advanced and threatened the enemy units to lock them in place and then outflank them with cavalry.

[JaM]

posture on the picture is actually offensive one.. it is fixing the pike so it uses whole momentum of body.. defensive use would accommodate pike being secured against ground at some angle.. believe me, you would not want to face armored cavalry holding pike like this..

[Caligula's_Horse]

I believe the forward ranks held their pikes lower then the back ones, and possibly used a shorter pike as well (the records suggest pikes of varying lengths, but the shafts all rotted away long ago so we can't say for sure). It also depends whether the pikemen are advancing or bracing against the ground (both of which pikemen knew how to do just fine both in ancient and late medieval times, though advancing aggressively became less popular as the pike became a supporting weapon for muskets and cannons).

My guess is that the back ranks would have theirs at roughly shoulder level, while the forward ones would carry it towards the waist, with middle ranks somewhere in between. Conceivably, it could also work the other way around, so long as each row carries theirs at roughly the same height. Makes you wonder if they stuck the shorter men up front though...
Seeing as you only have to hold the pike in place, and getting any real force behind a thrust is a none issue (since you're not thrusting), you can hold the pike in pretty much any position you want. The only real limitation is that the lowest pikes be at least as waist level so the enemy couldn't duck under them without resorting to crawling on hands and knees.

[Caligula's_Horse]

posture on the picture is actually offensive one.. it is fixing the pike so it uses whole momentum of body.. defensive use would accommodate pike being secured against ground at some angle.. believe me, you would not want to face armored cavalry holding pike like this..

It doesn't actually matter all that much.
The horses would simply refuse to charge into the pikes. No matter how much they like their rider, they won't commit suicide for him; they'll refuse in much the same way if you tell then to run head first into a brick wall.
Granted some horses were blindfolded for this particular purpose, but in that case, the horse and rider both end up skewered. Sure they'll take a handful of unbraced pikemen with them, but financially speaking, armored cavalry is much, much more expensive then a handful of pikemen, and your average horseman doesn't want to commit suicide anymore then his mount. There's a reason horses usually weren't blindfolded for a charge.

Bracing pikes are more for fighting infantrymen, where the zeal of the back ranks might push the front ones into something they wouldn't normally do (unless we're dealing with berserkers or something, they don't like to charge into pikes any more then horses). Its the same mechanism that causes people to be crushed to death against walls when crowds panic. In this case, bracing the pikes actually is important.

[Smiling Hetairoi]

It doesn't actually matter all that much.
The horses would simply refuse to charge into the pikes. No matter how much they like their rider, they won't commit suicide for him; they'll refuse in much the same way if you tell then to run head first into a brick wall.
Granted some horses were blindfolded for this particular purpose, but in that case, the horse and rider both end up skewered. Sure they'll take a handful of unbraced pikemen with them, but financially speaking, armored cavalry is much, much more expensive then a handful of pikemen, and your average horseman doesn't want to commit suicide anymore then his mount. There's a reason horses usually weren't blindfolded for a charge.

Bracing pikes are more for fighting infantrymen, where the zeal of the back ranks might push the front ones into something they wouldn't normally do (unless we're dealing with berserkers or something, they don't like to charge into pikes any more then horses). Its the same mechanism that causes people to be crushed to death against walls when crowds panic. In this case, bracing the pikes actually is important.

Do you have any sources concerning horses refusing to charge spears or pikes?

[JaM]

it doesn't matter. You arm would suffer a lot of pain even against walking horse.. Your body is not strong enough to stop 500kg weight moving even at slow speed.. it would dislocate your shoulder at best or rip your arm at worst... to face cavalry, Renaisance pikemen used this:

look at the front rank: pike is 45 degrees against the ground, fixed by the foot.. thats the most effective thing you can do, and horse running into this would get killed by own weight.

[ImperatorAndreas]

But if you look at your picture, this pikemen just hold their ground and protect the other infantry from the cavalry, and again I don't think this is an offensive position, the pikes behind have the same position as in the eearlier image and you cannot thrust effectively like this, even aginst another infantry man you would probably break your shoulder or arm. If you hold your pike at waist, your wrists do all the effort and they transfer the arm's energy without threatening to break the arms upon impact and you can thrust much more effectively. Now I know i am repeating myself but I really don't think this is position is an effective, offensive position.

[andrew881thebest]

I wonder why cavalry against mass formation of pikes never used simple wooden or metal "Shields" on wheels in front of the horse. So the horse running would not see the pikes (having this wooden shield on 2 wheels in front) and would not avoid them. Then the shield (maybe with an angle of 30/60 degrees to deflect pikes) would have rolled down all the pike formation like a bowling ball using enormous kinetic energy of running horse.
Otherwise they could have used fired wagons thrown into pike squares to make people get scared and break formation.
There are several ways to defeat pike men in a phalanx formation. You simply have to have a bit of imagination.

[JaM]

might work on flat ground, but any bump and such cart would fly up... plus, Cavalrymen thought about themselves they are descendants of Knights... they would not want to look ridiculous while running at enemy

[Caligula's_Horse]

Pikes aren't about their actual physical effectiveness at killing people. Because to be perfectly honest, pikes are some of the poorest weapons out there when it comes to actually kill the enemy. Instead, they're all about psychology.

Men and horses alike refuse to charge into them. Hell, horses are well recorded to shy away from the much less imposing wall of bayonets, and practically any other body of infantry standing its ground in formation. Charging into pikes is suicide, and both men and beast knew that perfectly well. Now this didn't stop some of the men from occasionally trying, but the rate of success for forcing their way through pike formations is extremely low, at least from the front in flat terrain; this probably has something to do with the fact that many of their more cowardly but more intelligent comrades would refuse to charge into the wall of spear points. Soldiers knowingly take risks, but very few of them would willingly commit suicide.

The pikemen on their end, would usually try to advance on the enemy, usually at walking pace, though some of the better ones could do it at a light jog. They can't actually thrust their weapons. The pike is too long, too cumbersome, and most of the men can't even tell which pike end is theirs in the whole mess.
Seeing as none of the enemy wants to come into contact with the wall of sharp pointy things comings its way, the enemy retreats, with or without orders. A less disciplined enemy might route right then and there, but there is really nothing stopping a better disciplined one from re-grouping. After all, only a few of them actually tried to force their way through the pikes, so most of them are uninjured, and the pikemen can only stay in formation at a light jog at best, which isn't fast enough to chase down anyone.

So to recap, the pikemen are very good at getting the enemy to retreat, but can't actually chase him down to make sure the retreat sticks.
If they have a proper cavalry arm supporting them, the cavalry could easily use the enemy's disorganization during a retreat to turn the battle into a route with one good charge. Without cavalry though, note how the pikemen have a very hard time actually killing anyone, even if the enemy retreated and the battle was won.

Note that none of this actually involves bracing the pike particularly well; that's for the scenario I described above with the back ranks pushing the front ones against their will. The rest of the time, a pike formation is one big game of chicken, rigged so that the pikemen will almost always win if the terrain is flat and the flanks secure. Being a game of chicken however, casualty rates from the pikes themselves are pretty low.

[ImperatorAndreas]

I wonder why cavalry against mass formation of pikes never used simple wooden or metal "Shields" on wheels in front of the horse. So the horse running would not see the pikes (having this wooden shield on 2 wheels in front) and would not avoid them. Then the shield (maybe with an angle of 30/60 degrees to deflect pikes) would have rolled down all the pike formation like a bowling ball using enormous kinetic energy of running horse.
Otherwise they could have used fired wagons thrown into pike squares to make people get scared and break formation.
There are several ways to defeat pike men in a phalanx formation. You simply have to have a bit of imagination.

Because the shield would protect from the first pike, maybe if you are lucky the second pike, and then you still need to deal witht the three last ranks that are pointing towards you.

[JaM]

Actually, Spanish pikemen used round metalic shields initially, same shields Rodeleros (sword and buckler men) used.. but it was dropped after some time..

[andrew881thebest]

Because the shield would protect from the first pike, maybe if you are lucky the second pike, and then you still need to deal witht the three last ranks that are pointing towards you.

lol not. The shield I imagine would protect from every frontal pike. First second third forth fifth ET cetera. If you don't get this maybe you have not understood what I have in mind. I would need to draw it but I am not enough good in drawing. Anyway my idea is so simple that it could not but work.
Basically, imagine a wooden wagon, but on 2 wheels not 4. Linked to the horse with 2 solid wooden shafts. The wooden shield would have, seen from above, a V shape, like the roof of some houses in high mountain. Then make the horse run forward. The pikes will meet the wooden /wooden covered by iron plates shield and will be simply deflected sideways.
Everything met by horse running will be rolled down like a bowling ball. Since the pikes, the only defense, would have been made useless by this system. Simple and effective. It cannot but work.
I wond3r why no man thought about it.

For the problem of flat ground, it is better but not absolutely necessary. If you make large solid wheels on the side of the Shields they will jump a bit if they meet some rocks or obstacle but that is all. Exactly as chariots did in the past. Anyway if you are fighting against a pike phalanx I think that you are in a open flat ground rather than on the mountains.

[Caligula's_Horse]

lol not. The shield I imagine would protect from every frontal pike. First second third forth fifth ET cetera. If you don't get this maybe you have not understood what I have in mind. I would need to draw it but I am not enough good in drawing. Anyway my idea is so simple that it could not but work.
Basically, imagine a wooden wagon, but on 2 wheels not 4. Linked to the horse with 2 solid wooden shafts. The wooden shield would have, seen from above, a V shape, like the roof of some houses in high mountain. Then make the horse run forward. The pikes will meet the wooden /wooden covered by iron plates shield and will be simply deflected sideways.
Everything met by horse running will be rolled down like a bowling ball. Since the pikes, the only defense, would have been made useless by this system. Simple and effective. It cannot but work.
I wond3r why no man thought about it.

For the problem of flat ground, it is better but not absolutely necessary. If you make large solid wheels on the side of the Shields they will jump a bit if they meet some rocks or obstacle but that is all. Exactly as chariots did in the past. Anyway if you are fighting against a pike phalanx I think that you are in a open flat ground rather than on the mountains.

That's not going to work for a variety of reasons (or I suppose couldn't have worked, as we're dealing with something that we have no evidence of ever being attempted).

For a start, while its fair to assume you'll have flat terrain if dealing with pikemen is an issue, its not necessarily going to be good terrain. Pikemen operate just fine in the mud, which wheels sink in. Pikemen work well enough if the terrain is flat but full of small obstacles (bushes, small rocks, etc...) which will slow down wooden wheels to a crawl, and prevent the horses from getting the run-up they need.
This is the same reason chariots were abandoned. Wooden wheels are extremely limited in where they can operate effectively.

Another problem is momentum. Assume your horse charged through the ranks, and the pikemen didn't move out of the way. If the pikes and men holding them are properly braced (as they would be when faced with a horse powered battering ram), the horse will run out of momentum after knocking a couple of men down, probably no more then 2-3 ranks, 4 if you're feeling generous; its rare to find a pike formation operating at less then 10 men deep. Even if the horse doesn't fall over and take the rider and their battering contraption with him, the horseman is now surrounded by several ranks of pikemen which can easily drop their pikes and take him out in a matter of seconds. A cavalryman at hand-to-hand range with no speed is essentially dead.
I suppose this would disrupt the pike phalanx, but unless it frightened the pikemen enough to route, it would be a suicide mission for the horseman. Worse still, war horse+rider (inevitably a nobleman)+armor+battering contraption are significantly more expensive then the dirt cheap pikemen they'll take down with them. Victory would require either frightening them into a route with a single charge (not really an option if they're properly diciplined) or massively outspending your opponent. Not to mention finding riders with the required suicidal bravery.

And for the final nail in the coffin, what's to stop the pikemen from doing what Scipio had his men do to elephants at Zama, or Alexander did with scythed chariots?
With a bit of discipline, they could simply open the ranks and move out of the way of the battering horse (it needs a good run up in a straight line, easily predictable). Then as the horse passes, the pikemen pull out secondary weapons and have a go at its unarmored flank, taking it down in seconds. They then reform into a solid line in short order, quickly enough to engage the enemy with their formation uninterrupted.

In short, it might work once or twice for pure shock value, but once people get the hang of it, its not lacking in counters or limitations. High expense doesn't help; war horses cost a fortune and armored contraptions strapped to them aren't much better.

[JaM]

And for the final nail in the coffin, what's to stop the pikemen from doing what Scipio had his men do to elephants at Zama, or Alexander did with scythed chariots?
With a bit of discipline, they could simply open the ranks and move out of the way of the battering horse (it needs a good run up in a straight line, easily predictable). Then as the horse passes, the pikemen pull out secondary weapons and have a go at its unarmored flank, taking it down in seconds. They then reform into a solid line in short order, quickly enough to engage the enemy with their formation uninterrupted.

that is btw one of the reasons cavalry wont charge prepared infantry even equiped with shortswords... they could do exactly this, allowing them in like this, and kill horses from unprotected and open sides...

[RGA]

Cavalry's most formidable weapon is fear, which does not require actual contact to work.

[Caligula's_Horse]

Cavalry's most formidable weapon is fear, which does not require actual contact to work.

And fear's most effective counter is discipline, which standing in formation helps uphold.

People fighting in a disorderly mob have a much easier time turning to flee then those in formation, both physically and psychologically. The pikes themselves do help by adding an extra barrier between the men and the cavalry, psychologically speaking, in much the same way the overlapping shield coverage helps a regular phalanx stay cohesive. Seeing as there are reports of entire phalanxes slowly drifting right towards their right-most fellow's shield, the effect is obviously significant, and its fair to assume the mutual protection of pikes had a similar psychological impact.

Levy and militia troops often had practically no discipline or experience; a cohesive formation was often the only thing keeping such units from fleeing the field at first sight of a frightening enemy. As we have records of such units not only surviving but actually beating back charges by heavy cavalry of far superior quality, its obviously good for something.

[andrew881thebest]

That's not going to work for a variety of reasons (or I suppose couldn't have worked, as we're dealing with something that we have no evidence of ever being attempted).

For a start, while its fair to assume you'll have flat terrain if dealing with pikemen is an issue, its not necessarily going to be good terrain. Pikemen operate just fine in the mud, which wheels sink in. Pikemen work well enough if the terrain is flat but full of small obstacles (bushes, small rocks, etc...) which will slow down wooden wheels to a crawl, and prevent the horses from getting the run-up they need.
This is the same reason chariots were abandoned. Wooden wheels are extremely limited in where they can operate effectively.

Another problem is momentum. Assume your horse charged through the ranks, and the pikemen didn't move out of the way. If the pikes and men holding them are properly braced (as they would be when faced with a horse powered battering ram), the horse will run out of momentum after knocking a couple of men down, probably no more then 2-3 ranks, 4 if you're feeling generous; its rare to find a pike formation operating at less then 10 men deep. Even if the horse doesn't fall over and take the rider and their battering contraption with him, the horseman is now surrounded by several ranks of pikemen which can easily drop their pikes and take him out in a matter of seconds. A cavalryman at hand-to-hand range with no speed is essentially dead.
I suppose this would disrupt the pike phalanx, but unless it frightened the pikemen enough to route, it would be a suicide mission for the horseman. Worse still, war horse+rider (inevitably a nobleman)+armor+battering contraption are significantly more expensive then the dirt cheap pikemen they'll take down with them. Victory would require either frightening them into a route with a single charge (not really an option if they're properly diciplined) or massively outspending your opponent. Not to mention finding riders with the required suicidal bravery.

And for the final nail in the coffin, what's to stop the pikemen from doing what Scipio had his men do to elephants at Zama, or Alexander did with scythed chariots?
With a bit of discipline, they could simply open the ranks and move out of the way of the battering horse (it needs a good run up in a straight line, easily predictable). Then as the horse passes, the pikemen pull out secondary weapons and have a go at its unarmored flank, taking it down in seconds. They then reform into a solid line in short order, quickly enough to engage the enemy with their formation uninterrupted.

In short, it might work once or twice for pure shock value, but once people get the hang of it, its not lacking in counters or limitations. High expense doesn't help; war horses cost a fortune and armored contraptions strapped to them aren't much better.

you could solve these problems easily. For the idea of opening ranks like in Gaugamela, it would not help since all the line would be covered by these chariots, so the guys would be rolled down anyway. That idea could work in a situation where horses could see the gaps and move instinctively towards them, but with these devices in front horses could not see the gaps so they would not work as intended.
Then, you could have more lines of these "inverted chariots" so that if the first line rolls down first 4 lines, the second continues the rolling down jobs.
But first of all you could have highly mobile infantry or cavalry following the first wave of these devices so that if these break the pike wall, then the infantry or cavalry behind complete the job.
If you don't find horsemen with suicidal intentions, you could simply train them to fall out of horses when they are near the enemy lines, something like stuntman are trained to do for some Hollywood movies. Not easy but it can be done with some training.
As for dips in the ground, chariots have been used for millennia with no problems on almost every flat ground. Yes, there can be bushes or rocks or muddy ground but usually ground of battlefields is simply flat with no particular obstacle, because that place has been chosen for that reason.
Anyway I never said that these devices could be work in every situation, but with no doubt in SOME situations and some battlefields they could operate with no particular problems.
If you have a flat ground, with no particular obstacle (if you have some small obstacle, the worst which could happen is that wheels would bump and jump a lot, but who cares), no muddy ground, no trees... I guess they could work. And shield in front would work as protection not only against pikes but against missiles too.
You could even have something like the shape of the thing in front ancient trains https://www.google.it/search?q=locom...IT587IT588&tbm to clear ground from small rocks or other minor obstacles.
Obviously these devices could work against people in hoplite phalanx or simply in close formation. Basically against everything.
Imagine how many battles would have changed with these devices.

[Caligula's_Horse]

You speak as if rough terrain is no object. Its a huge object; you can't always choose your terrain. Mud is an incredibly common battlefield sight you can do nothing about, as are small rocks and shrubs, even snow if you go far enough north. All of these render wooden wheeled vehicles completely useless under battlefield conditions; clearing them out the night before just isn't realistic unless the terrain is already almost perfect.
While chariots were still a common battlefield sight, clever commanders would often force an opponent with better chariots to fight them in terrain where the wooden wheels got stuck. Its really not that hard, as chariots require very specific conditions to work well. What makes you think your contraption will be different?

As for covering the whole pike line with these contraptions, the only way that could conceivably work is if you massively outspend the enemy. Assuming the pike line is 10 men deep (a bare minimum, mind), and that each contraption is two columns wide, you'll need a war horse, suicidal rider (if they're shoulder to shoulder he has no room to bail out), and contraption per every 20 men the enemy has.
Assuming both you and your enemy have similar funds, its just not realistic. The pikeman's primary advantage is that he requires a minimum of training and is dirt cheap; they can and will massively outnumber any gimmicky solution trying to counter them.
In short, the pikemen will have the room they need to move out of the way and reform seconds later.

Gimmicks also have a hard time trying to actually make contact with the enemy. Take a look at Rome's anti-elephant gimmicks in their second battle with Pyrrhus; they worked fairly well against the elephants, for a few minutes at least; that's when some of Pyrrhus' peltasts came along and drove them off the field. Your contraptions would have a similar problem. A flexible enemy can easily dodge the initial straight line bull-rush (it really is very predictable) then have a go at the unprotected flanks and finish the fight in seconds.
Cheap and readily available skirmishers you usually see screening in front of pike formations in particular are going to be an issue. They can't pull this trick on normal cavalry lancers, because horses are themselves flexible enough to change direction mid charge. A horse with an iron shield contraption strapped to it though is pretty much stuck in a straight line.