Friday, July 25, 2008

Hellenistic Armies - Phalangitai

In the Classical period, a rather simple force structure had emerged: a large force of hoplites in a phalanx, supplemented occasionally—and increasingly—with small forces of cavalry and light infantry, such as the javelin-armed peltasts. In the Hellenistic period, force structure became increasingly complex. So in a new series, I'll be taking a look at different elements within the force structure of Hellenistic armies.

Hellenistic armies were built, not upon the hoplite, put upon the pike phalanx. The pike phalanx was a block of men 8-, 16-, or even 32-ranks deep, in which the soldiers carried sarissai, pikes that at times were made more than 20 feet long. These phalangitai (from the word phalanx, meaning “men of the phalanx”), deployed in such a deep and dense formation and protected by rows of spear-points, were a practically impenetrable force on the battlefield. There were several trade-offs to the formation. It was cumbersome and deep, suited for head-on battles on flat plains in narrow valleys. Soldiers carrying 20 ft. pikes in massed formation could not change direction easily, nor could they operate effectively in uneven terrain. So the Hellenistic generals and kings needed various soldiers to protect the phalangitai when moving through mountainous areas, or to handle some or all of the fighting in uneven terrain. But in a pitched battle, the pike phalanx was the primary component in nearly every battle from the late 4th century well into the 2nd century BC. Below is a painted depiction of a Macedonian pikeman from the late 4th century.

The phalangitai had a relatively standard set of equipment. The vast majority, and in many cases all, of them in every army carried a smaller version of the hoplite’s aspis, a helmet, and a sarissa in battle. In many cases, they wore various types of body armor: linen, leather, or bronze for the most part, along with greaves. Most carried swords as side-arms. The shield of the phalanx was, in the Hellenstic period, about 75cm in diameter, an increase from the shields of Alexander’s time, which are thought to have been more in the neighborhood of 60cm. Some soldiers covered their shields with leather and painted them with militaristic or ancestral symbols. Other soldiers, especially those who had their weapons supplied by the state, might carry shields with bronze faces. Armorers hammered various designs onto the bronze shields: stars and arcs, the name of the king, or various devices designed to either emphasize the power and legitimacy of the king, or motivate the soldier and intimidate his enemy by making reference to gods and heroes. The shield mold below comes from Memphis in Egypt, and was used to make bronze phalangite shields for the soldiers of the Ptolemies.

When not in the phalanx, either on guard duty with the army, or serving with local militias in their home towns, phalangitai likely carried one or more of a type of shorter spear, called the “lonche,” which could be used as a spear or javelin. This allowed them to operate in smaller numbers or in rough terrain. But the main use of the phalanx and the soldiers that constituted it was as a nearly impenetrable wall of spears on the battlefield. Plutarch says alarm and amazement struck the great Roman general Aemilius Paulus when he looked upon the thick set hedge of shields and spears at the battle of Pydna in 168 BC. That same battle demonstrated the weaknesses of the phalanx:

1) It was rarely decisive – a good commander needed to follow Alexander’s example, using a hammer and anvil tactic. The phalanx was the anvil, and held an enemy army in place, allowing the hammer—usually heavy cavalry—to deliver devastating strikes against the enemy.

2) It floundered on uneven terrain – the Macedonian phalanx pushed the Roman legions back at the start of the battle of Pydna, but as the phalanx reached the uneven terrain leading up the Roman encampment, it lost cohesion.

3) It suffered in hand-to-hand combat – the phalangitai at Pydna used their sarissai to keep the Roman soldiers at a distance. When, in the course of the battle, the Romans fought their way into the phalanx formation, they slaughtered the closely-packed phalangitai. If a soldier in the phalanx dropped his sarissa to pull his sidearm to defend himself, he contributed further to the loss of cohesion in the phalanx. But even if he drew his sidearm, he was generally outmatched by a Roman legionary, who carried a more effective sword and larger shield, was trained for hand-to-hand combat, and also frequently wore more armor.

1 comment:

Ancient Warrior said...

Great site, what a wealth of info on Hellenistic armies. Something I find hard to find (the info, not the armies ;)and extremely intesting. Thanks!