Greek hoplite in battle dress
Modern reconstruction of the Greek phalanx.
The Greek phalanx was a dense battle formation of heavily armed warriors several ranks deep. During the battle, the main task was to preserve its integrity: the place of the fallen warrior was taken by another standing behind him. The main factor that influenced the development of the phalanx was the use of a large round shield (hoplon) and a closed helmet of the Corinthian type. Leather straps were attached to the inner surface of the hoplon, through which a hand was inserted. The shield was thus held on the left forearm. The warrior controlled the shield by holding the belt closer to its edge.
Protecting the hoplite on the left, such a shield left the right half of the body open. Because of this, in the Greek phalanx the soldiers had to stay in a tight line so that each hoplite covered his neighbor on the left, while being covered by his neighbor on the right. For a Greek, losing a shield in battle was considered a dishonor, since it was used not only for his own safety, but also for the protection of the entire rank. The head of a hoplite in the 6th-5th centuries. BC e. protected by a bronze helmet of the Corinthian (or “Dorian”) type, which was worn on a felt lining-cap. The solid Corinthian helmet provided complete protection for the head, but hindered peripheral vision and hearing. The warrior saw in him only the enemy in front of him, which did not pose any particular danger in a dense battle formation.
During the Greco-Persian Wars, so-called “anatomical” bronze armor, which consisted of a chest and back plate, was still common. The plates reproduced the muscular contours of the male torso in relief with sculptural precision. Hoplites wore linen tunics under their armor, and Spartans traditionally covered themselves with red cloaks over their armor. The disadvantage of bronze cuirasses was their unprotected hips. During this era, the so-called linothoraxes, shells based on many layers of flax impregnated with glue, had already appeared, which after a few decades replaced the “anatomical” bronze shells in Greece. In addition to being lighter in weight, linothoraxes made it possible to cover the hips without restricting the warrior’s movements.
The protective equipment also included bronze greaves. They followed the muscles of the calves to fit tightly around the legs and not interfere with walking.
The Spartans were armed with a spear and a short sword. The length of the spear was 2-3 meters. When approaching the enemy, the initial blow was delivered with a spear, and they continued the battle in formation, holding it with an overhead grip. The Spartans had the shortest swords in Greece - they were intended for close hand-to-hand combat, when long weapons became useless in a close fight.
- this is a unique combat formation of infantry units in Greece at one time, and subsequently parts of other states that tried to adopt military experience from the Greeks. Actually it was a dense formation of soldiers in several linear ranks. The first ranks of the phalanx took part in the battle itself, although the size of the spears used by the phalanx had a significant influence. The rear ranks supported the front ranks, simultaneously giving the phalanx “mass” and keeping them from retreating.
Formation of the Greek phalanx
In battles with less organized enemy formations Greek phalanx amazed by the unity of movements, indestructibility and combat effectiveness; breaking through such a formation was often possible only by using a similar formation.
The depth of the formation varied depending on the terrain and the opposing enemy forces, the “classical” formation Greek phalanx consisted of eight ranks, although a depth of twelve fighters was often used, and often more.
The armament of the fighters was divided into two options. In the first, classic one, the infantrymen had a large round shield (hoplon) and a one-handed spear in the other hand. Phalangite fighters were usually called hoplites in honor of their shield. The main disadvantage of this option was the poor ability to maneuver within the formation due to crowding and cramped conditions, as well as the exposed flanks, which were usually covered by light infantry and skirmishers.
Subsequently, a second type of equipment appeared, the so-called Macedonian, in which the spear was replaced by a two-handed sarissa up to six meters long, and the shield was significantly reduced in size and hung on the elbow.
The theory that the spears of the phalangite fighters were of different lengths - from short ones in the first row, to huge lengths of spears in the last rows - is erroneous. This also contradicts the principles of equipping armies, often consisting of militias, and interferes with the interchangeability of soldiers within the ranks.
A system with spears of different lengths requires a regular, constantly trained army, which was available only to the largest cities and formations. Usually, the militia of the Greek phalanx had standard weapons, and in the front ranks they fought in the best way and had the appropriate physical condition.
History Channel: Alexander the Great
Macedonian phalanx in the middle of the 4th century. BC e. , taught his subjects to fight in the ranks of the phalanx not from a good life. This was the only cheap way to organize an effective mass army from untrained peasants who did not have the opportunity to constantly practice with weapons and acquire armor. Even the wild Illyrians under the leadership of Bardill knew how to form into a rectangular square. The Athenian strategist Iphicrates, realizing the effectiveness of dense formation, armed his hoplites with long spears and lightweight round shields. Philip II organized the Macedonians into regiments, fed them with discipline and grueling training, as well as constant campaigns, taught them to fight in formation and provided them with weapons similar to those of Iphicrates’ hoplites.
Thus, it is enough to have only a quarter of experienced and well-armed warriors for the entire phalanx to turn into a formidable force. The strength of the phalanx does not lie in the heroism of individuals, as was practiced by the Hellenes, but in the subordination of all individuals to accomplish a combat mission. In the ranks of the phalanx it is difficult to become famous for a feat, but you also cannot become a coward.
Organizational structure
There are no indications from contemporaries about the numerical composition and structure of the Macedonian phalanx during the times of Philip II and Alexander the Great; all incomplete information is reported by authors of Roman and Byzantine times. Alexander involved in his battles 6 regiments of pedzetairs (ancient Greek. πεζεταιροι ), “foot comrades”, as the phalanx fighters were called. Regiment (ancient authors call regiments phalanxes or taxis (ancient Greek. ταξεις )) was the main tactical unit of the phalanx on the battlefield. Its number, apparently, could change, and according to indirect estimates it is at least 1,500 people. The regiments were staffed territorially; Diodorus reports on taxis from such regions of Macedonia as Tymphaea, Elymia, Orestida and Lyncestis. Later, Alexander, forced to disperse his forces across vast Asia, reduced the regiment to a chiliarchy, a unit of 1,000 people, maintaining the total number of the phalanx at 9 thousand.
Later authors in the manuals indicate the desired number of phalanx of 16 thousand fighters, which most likely refers to theoretical calculations rather than actual armies. Syrian king Antiochus in battle with the Romans in the 2nd century. BC e. put up a Macedonian-type phalanx of 16 thousand, 32 people deep, but it was divided into 10 regiments, which does not agree well with the calculations from the tactical manuals, but corresponds to the estimated number of regiments during the time of Alexander the Great. The phalanx of the Macedonian king Philip V at the same time numbered 20 thousand soldiers.
The basic unit of the phalanx was the loch (Greek: λόχος), a row deep of 16 fighters. The first in the row, the lochag (or protostat), acts in the front and directs the loch; the last one, Urag, closes the row and monitors the actions of the fighters. The Byzantine Anonymous of the 6th century wrote about the tasks of the trailing person:
“Urags should not be inferior in courage and bodily strength to those placed in the second rank. In particular, the Uragas should be superior to others in experience and prudence, since they are designed, firstly, to monitor the soldiers standing inside the ranks and rally them; secondly, in order to push those in front during the battle, so that the phalanx remains dense and insurmountable for the enemies; thirdly, so that in the event of a sudden appearance of enemies in the rear of the phalanx, they, turning towards the enemies, could perform the function of protostats.”
There is also a semi-lohit, the 9th in the row, who stands in the front (“towards the shield”) when the depth of the phalanx is reduced to 8 people. This is precisely the depth of the phalanx at the Battle of Issus.
It is possible to form different units from suckers; In the tactical instructions of the authors of the Roman era, different designs are given, but the most probable seems to be a syntagma of 16 suckers (256 fighters). In O. Stone's film "Alexander" regiments are built from syntagmas, as the most controllable infantry unit. Some evidence suggests that the phalanx regiment was divided into pentacosiarchies (512 fighters each), which facilitated the formation of a phalanx with a depth of 32 people. In this case, the pentacosiarchy was the predecessor of the Roman cohort.
Taxis in a line form a rectangle of a classic phalanx; Alexander the Great once led a phalanx against his enemies in a wedge formation. The tactical manuals also provide other options for constructing a phalanx.
Armament
The main weapon in close formation was the sarissa, the Macedonian name for a long spear, but when storming fortified positions, the phalangites fought with regular-length spears and threw darts. Polybius describes the sarissa as follows: a shaft 14 cubits (6.3 m) long, grasped with both hands so that the tip protrudes 10 cubits (approx. 4.5 m) from the fighter. Aelian Tacticus repeats the information of Polybius, but notes the variable length of the sarissas, the shortest of which are 8 cubits long. Other authors determine the length of the sarissa from 3 to 5.4 m.
Since the sarissa must be held with both hands, a round, slightly convex shield made of copper, or padded with copper, was hung on the left elbow and possibly on the neck belt. The diameter of the shield is approximately 60 cm. The phalangites also, although not necessarily all, had short swords. Plutarch mentions that when the Romans broke up the phalanx: " ... the Macedonians unsuccessfully tried with short daggers to pierce the strong shields of the Romans, which even covered their legs, and with their light shields to defend themselves against their heavy swords, which cut through all the armor.» Elian the Tactician makes no mention of swords. Polyenus lists the following equipment of the phalangite under Philip II: helmet, shield, greaves and spear, that is, perhaps at that time armor and sword were considered a luxury for ordinary infantrymen.
Ancient authors speak of pedzetairs as heavily armed warriors, which implies the presence of a shell. Polyenus reports that Alexander the Great, so that his soldiers would be afraid to expose their backs to the enemy, left only a plate on the chest in the armor. From the Amphipolis inscription about fines (2nd half of the 3rd century BC) for the loss of ammunition it follows that the lohag standing in front had a heavy cuirass, and the rest of the lohag soldiers were protected by linen armor glued together from layers of coarse fabric. According to Arrian's military manual, the armor of the phalangite was a chest armor, either solid plate or iron chain mail.
Combat use
The phalanx is by its nature inactive, its goal is to restrain the enemy’s frontal pressure. On rough terrain, the phalanx broke formation and became vulnerable. When attacked on the flank or rear, the phalanx lost its advantages and turned into a poorly organized crowd. In the battles, Philip II and Alexander the Great delivered the decisive blow with cavalry forces at a time when the main forces of the enemy were stuck in unsuccessful attempts to break the phalanx formation. As one historian noted, the phalanx served as Alexander's anvil, while the cavalry was the sledgehammer. The discordant crowds of Persians were powerless against the correct formation of the Greeks or Macedonians, but the Greek mercenaries of the Persians or Greek troops in the Lamian War inflicted heavy losses on the Pedzeithars, and only the tactical superiority of the Macedonian commanders did not allow the Greeks to win victories.
Along the front, the phalangite occupied approximately 0.9 m (2 cubits) in battle. To contain the enemy’s pressure, the phalanx closed even more closely, literally shoulder to shoulder, so that the phalangite along the front occupied about 0.5 m (1 cubit). In the usual formation, the phalangite occupied 4 elbows along the front.
According to Anonymous, the last 4 soldiers in a row and on the flanks should be armed with the same spears as the first 4 in order to be able to repel an attack from any side. The remaining 8 soldiers in the sucker could use darts and throwing weapons.
« The Macedonians in the first lines managed to plunge the tips of their sarissas into the shields of the Romans and, thus, became inaccessible to their swords... The Romans tried to fight off the sarissas with swords, or bend them to the ground with shields, or push them aside, grabbing them with their bare hands, and the Macedonians, still clenching their spears tighter, they pierced the attackers - neither shields nor shells could protect against the blow of the sarissa.»
The Romans demonstrated the weakness of the phalanx by attacking not a continuous front, but gaps in the ranks and flanks. As Plutarch writes about another battle:
“Truly, the phalanx resembles a mighty beast: it is invulnerable as long as it is a single body, but if it is dismembered, each fighter is deprived of strength, because they are not strong on their own, but by mutual support.”
see also
Notes
Links
- Roman Glory - ancient military affairs: illustrations by modern artists based on the warriors of Alexander the Great.
- Campaigns of Alexander the Great. Materials from the site “Militerra.com - battles of world history”
| Army of Ancient Macedonia | |
|---|---|
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
- Don't swim behind the buoys
- Pabst, Georg Wilhelm
See what "Macedonian phalanx" is in other dictionaries:
Phalanx (formation)- Greek phalanx This term has other meanings, see Phalanx. Phalanx (Greek... Wikipedia
Macedonian army- Battle of Issus Initially, Macedonia was a small state of shepherds and farmers in the north of Greek lands. However, in the 4th century BC. e. Macedonian king Philip II was able, having created a powerful army, to capture all of Greece, and his son Alexander... ... Wikipedia
PHALANX- (Greek phalanx) a tightly closed linear formation of heavy infantry (hoplites), used in the armies of Ancient Greece. The first known battle formation. F. had 8-16 (less often 25) ranks, 800-1000 warriors in each rank. Along the front it occupied up to... ... Legal encyclopedia
Phalanx- (from the Greek phalanx trunk, stump) the battle formation of the Greek army in the form of a tightly closed formation of hoplites of 8 16, sometimes even 25 rows; This order finally took shape in the 4th century. BC. Spartan f. consisted of 8 ranks and numbered 8... ... Ancient world. Dictionary-reference book.
Phalanx- (Greek phalanx) (military), tightly closed linear formation Greek. infantry (hoplites (See Hoplites)) for battle. The f. had 8–16 rows (less often up to 25), along the front it occupied up to 500 m (with a row of 1000 people). F. was known even during the Trojan... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia
The combat formation of the ancient Greek and early Roman infantry, which was a dense formation in several ranks (from 8 to 25) of heavily armed infantrymen - hoplites.
The phalanx consisted of smaller units lined up together: pestilence, suckers, pentecostia, enomotii, led by their military leaders. Cavalry detachments were placed on the wings of the phalanx to prevent enemy attacks from the flanks, which were most vulnerable to the phalanx.
The phalanx apparently appeared in Greece at the turn of the 8th-7th centuries. BC e. or in the first half of the 7th century. BC e. The earliest depictions of the phalanx are attested on two Proto-Corinthian aryballes and a Proto-Corinthian olpa (the so-called Chigi vase), dating from the mid-7th century. BC e. The first literary evidence of the use of phalanx tactics, according to most researchers, is found in the description of the battle by the Spartan poet Tyrtaeus (fr. 8 Diehl³). Some modern historians attribute the introduction of the phalanx to the Argive king Phidon, which, in their opinion, contributed to the success of the ruler of Argos in conquering the border regions of the Peloponnese. Throughout the VI-V centuries. BC e. The hoplite phalanx remained the main combat formation in the Greek armies, but at the end of the 5th-4th centuries. BC e. Along with it, detachments of peltasts began to be widely used. In the middle of the 4th century. BC e. King Philip II created the famous Macedonian phalanx, increasing the number of ranks in the formation, and adopting long spears - sarissas. In Rome, probably borrowed from the Greeks, the phalanx, during the military reform of M. Furius Camillus at the beginning of the 4th century. BC e. was replaced by manipulative construction.
Illustration:
Proto-Corinthian olpa from the Chigi collection ca. 650 BC e.
Literature
- Türk G. Phalanx. 1 //RE. 1 Reihe. Bd. XIX. Hbbd. 38. 1938. Sp. 1624–1625
- Lammert F. Phalanx. 2 // RE. 1 Reihe. Bd. XIX. Hbbd. 38. 1938. Sp. 1625–1646
- Nilsson M.P. Die Hoplitentaktik und das Staatswesen // Klio. Bd. 22. Hf. 3. 1928. S. 240–249
- Lorimer H. L. The Hoplite Phalanx with Special Reference to the Poems of Archilochus and Tyrtaeus // BSA. Vol. 42. 1947. P. 76–138
- Snodgrass A. M. Early Greek Armor and Weapons. Edinburgh, 1964
- Snodgrass A. M. The Hoplite Reform and History // JHS. Vol. 85. 1965. P. 110–122
- Snodgrass A. M. Arms and Armor of the Greeks. London, 1967
- Krentz P. The Nature of Hoplite Battle // Classical Antiquity. Vol. 4. 1985. No. 1. P. 50–61
- Hanson V. D. (ed.) Hoplite: The Classical Greek Battle Experience. London; New York, 1991
- Andreev Yu. V. Who invented the Greek phalanx? // St. Petersburg Archaeological Bulletin. No. 7. 1993. pp. 36–42
- Tumans H. Military organization of the Greeks in the archaic era // Ancient society: problems of political history. St. Petersburg, 1997. pp. 6–19
- Nefedkin A.K. The main stages of the formation of the hoplite phalanx: the military aspect of the problem // VDI. No. 1. 2002. pp. 87–96
As soon as he came to power, the Macedonian ruler Philip II completely reorganized the army (359 BC), resulting in the best fighting force the world had ever seen: a national army that combined the discipline and training of Greek mercenaries with the patriotic devotion of the Greeks. citizen soldier. For the first time in history, scientific thought, based on an exhaustive analysis of the capabilities of people, weapons and equipment of that time, resulted in a clear concept of coordinated tactical actions of the combined branches of the armed forces.
Precise organization and training programs fused the masses of men into a war machine that, under the personal command of Philip (and subsequently Alexander the Great), operated successfully against any other modern army.
The backbone of the army was the infantry. The Macedonian phalanx was based on the Greek model, but in depth it reached 16 people instead of 8 or 12, and the warriors stood in it not shoulder to shoulder, but at some distance from each other. Hoplites were divided into pedzeters and hypaspists.
More numerous pedzeters carried sarissas or spears more than 4 m long (even heavier and longer sarissas were used for training). Some historians believe that the combat sarissa reached a length of 7 m, and the training sarissa even 8 m. This opinion cannot be completely rejected: after all, according to the views of other experts, medieval Swiss spearmen wielded spears of comparable length.
In addition, each carried a shield slung over his shoulder - large enough for a person to kneel behind it, and a short sword on his belt, and was also dressed in a helmet, breastplate and greaves. The sarissa was kept 90-180 cm from the blunt end, so that the spear tips of the first four or five rows protruded in front of the phalanx in battle.
Despite the heavier defensive weapons, constant training made the pedzeter units more maneuverable than the ordinary Greek phalanx. Excellently maintaining formation, they were capable of performing a wide variety of movements and maneuvers.
More adapted to any form of battle were the hypaspists, the cream of the Macedonian infantry. They differed from the pedzetera only in having a shorter spear, perhaps 8 to 10 feet (2.4–3.05 m) long, and possibly lighter defensive weapons. The formation and maneuvers of the phalanx of hypaspists were identical to those of the pedzeters. The hypaspists were, if possible, even better trained, fast and agile.
Since Alexander the Great, as a rule, used an oblique formation in battle, echeloning back from the right-flank cavalry spearhead, the hypaspists were usually located on the right flank of the phalanx, providing a flexible connection between the fast-moving cavalry and the slow-moving pedzeters in comparison.
Although Philip created this formation of heavy infantry as the basis for a maneuver in which the main blow was delivered by the cavalry, the Macedonian phalanx was mobile enough to attack on the run in perfect formation and bring down its power on the enemy, who had not yet recovered from the onslaught of the cavalry.
In order to use this tactic most effectively, Philip and Alexander the Great sought to select the most level field possible for battle; however, the concept was (and was) applicable to cross-country operations as well.
To protect the flanks and rear of the Macedonian phalanx, as well as to maintain contact with the cavalry on the battlefield, Philip and Alexander the Great introduced light infantry into the Macedonian army. Commonly called peltasts, the warriors of these units were lightly or completely unprotected and armed with bows, slings or javelins. The peltasts covered the advance of the phalanx and retreated to the flanks or rear just before the start of hand-to-hand combat. In addition, armed servants and other attendants, called psils, guarded the camp and carts, at times also acting as foragers and scouts.
Like a modern division, a simple Macedonian phalanx was formed from units belonging to different branches of the army: in addition to heavily armed infantry (hypaspists and pedzeters), it included (at theoretical full strength): 2048 peltasts, 1024 psilas and a cavalry regiment (epigipparchy) of 1024 horsemen: only 8192 people. The large phalanx, composed of four simple ones, had a strength of about 32 thousand people and can be likened to a small modern field army.
