Historically (in)accurate hoplites

[Mediolanicus]

We've got a guy on the twcenter forum who wants to speak the EB team about the hoplites.

I want to know what the EB team has to say about his sources and his claims.

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=281532
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=281006

[option]

The reason hoplites don't have a sword is because they would always end up switching to it. Each unit switches to its secondary after being knocked down, which doesn't help either.

[Krusader]

Hasn't JMRC answered him?

He ignored that. And from what I saw earlier he has read one book and that is all the evidence he needs apparently. No use fighting a mule.

We have done a lot of testing and trial & error within EB regarding spear & sword units, but we unfortunately had to remove the swords to make the hoplites as "hoplitey" as they can be.

[satalexton]

I don't know. I have only read half a dozen posts, and the impression I got is as thus:

-He's got two 'sources', and one of them's a webpage.
-The sources he holds, apparently, are the holygrail to all answers.
-The EB team are infidels and heretics for doubting the holy truth.
-He is the prophet to the holy truth of how hoplites fought.
-He is the said prophet because he read the holygrail.

oh ye, his tone reminds me of a 12-15 year old that thinks he know it all cuz he's a little nerdier than his peers =P
I've been thru that stage, I know =]

[abou]

It is taking all my willpower not to destroy him and unleash a blackest night of horrors so painful that he cries blood tears. I just can't respond to a person like that politely.

[satalexton]

trollish =/

[Skullheadhq]

trollish =/

Look who says :laugh4:

[Mediolanicus]

I gave him the benefit of the doubt he was half serious (but too enthousiastic), but since he is now bragging about how he lent the book in question from "the adult non-fiction section" of his library...

[Skullheadhq]

I gave him the benefit of the doubt he was half serious (but too enthousiastic), but since he is now bragging about how he lent the book in question from "the adult non-fiction section" of his library...

Lol probably a 10 year old who thinks he's smarter then us..

[Watchman]

He's stupid and I hate him. He also whines. However more importantly his posting style is horrible enough I'm not going to even try dealing with it, which is the main reason I don't bother even trying to talk sense to him.

[Mediolanicus]

That said, this thread may now be left alone or be closed, because I wanted to know about hoplites, not bash the guy.

[antisocialmunky]

Don't waste your time, make EBII out a day earlier.

[Watchman]

...because I wanted to know about hoplites...Had a big round shield, long pokey stick and sword for backup, fought in shieldwall, liked to charge at each other hard enough that chroniclers speak of said shields buckling and splitting in the collision IIRC. Level of armour varied as usual, quite heavily over time. May have had a thing for some kind of collective mantrain pushing match, which was totally Not Gay (http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/Not_gay).

I think that about covers it. :yes:

[glouch]

what a sorry excuse for a supposedly 'educated' person (Pelopidas_Of_Thebes, i mean).

know-it-all attitude, and more than that, i-can't-be-wrong-you're-the-wrong-one attitude. douches like this would never dare act like this in the real world; they hide behind the anonymity of the internet to conceal what they truly are: attention-seeking, selfish dogs who think the world owes them everything.

these kinds of people should be locked up, just because they waste the time and effort of everyone around them (heck, we aren't even around him, technically, and he still wants to ruin our lives [or our break times at least]).

[EDIT]
god i wish we could meet guys like this in person, and then SHUT THEM UP the way dan henderson shut up michael bisping.
(btw, anyone here who watched UFC100? that was just too much for me. i almost sobbed because of so much joy. best knock out - no - best KTFO ever.)

[Skullheadhq]

what a sorry excuse for a supposedly 'educated' person (Pelopidas_Of_Thebes, i mean).

know-it-all attitude, and more than that, i-can't-be-wrong-you're-the-wrong-one attitude. douches like this would never dare act like this in the real world; they hide behind the anonymity of the internet to conceal what they truly are: attention-seeking, selfish dogs who think the world owes them everything.

these kinds of people should be locked up, just because they waste the time and effort of everyone around them (heck, we aren't even around him, technically, and he still wants to ruin our lives [or our break times at least]).

[EDIT]
god i wish we could meet guys like this in person, and then SHUT THEM UP the way dan henderson shut up michael bisping.
(btw, anyone here who watched UFC100? that was just too much for me. i almost sobbed because of so much joy. best knock out - no - best KTFO ever.)

*flameflameblablalockupstfublablabla*

[Ibrahim]

well, looking at his methodology, I am reminded of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TkY7HrJOhc&feature=channel_page

Aronra has a good answer to any methodology but the right one (in science, and by extension, history)

[TruePraetorian]

I rarely post at the TWC (3 posts) but felt inclined to do so (and so I did). Disrespect of the hardworking EB team is illogical. If you don't like something about the mod, change it..you can make a minimod out of it and ask people to download it out of free will.

[strategos roma]

From I know, hoplites do carry swords, but they rarely used it. Anyway, if u include them, they'll turn into damm hypastists who switch to swords in 15 seconds. Urgh!

[Watchman]

All spearmen carried sidearms for backup (spear-shafts tended to break sooner or later) and close combat where the spear was useless. Doesn't mean there's much point in putting them in the game, not in the least given the aforementioned annoyances with the weapon switching.
Plus it'd mesh kinda poorly and inconsistently with other spearmen that also have for example precursor javelins (eg. the Thureophoroi) and blatantly obviously carry swords on their hips too...

[satalexton]

OT question, how does one throw javalins when one hand's clutching the bundle, and the other holding the spear?

[Watchman]

One holds the spear in the same hand as the rest of the javelin, methinks. (People can actually hold an awful lot of stuff in their shield hand with a little practice, from what I've read of firsthand experiments with it.)

[antisocialmunky]

It would probably be enough if you just made it so they didn't suffer from the -4 to defense from light spear since they do infact have a side arm. That by itself would make them better as a spearman. That -4 defense really makes hoplites melt vs anything with AP or high lethality or fast attack animation. You could also stick like a +1 to attack or defense or something to differentiate them from spearmen who don't have a secondary(and therefore would suffer in CQB).

[vartan]

I rarely post at the TWC (3 posts) but felt inclined to do so (and so I did). Disrespect of the hardworking EB team is illogical. If you don't like something about the mod, change it..you can make a minimod out of it and ask people to download it out of free will.

I rarely post there too! Is it just me or are majority of EB threads here on the Guild?

[Megas Methuselah]

He's a teenager. You know them; they think they know everything. :rolleyes:

[Skullheadhq]

He's a teenager. You know them; they think they know everything. :rolleyes:

Pre-teen even, probably

One more thing: :dancinglock:

[a completely inoffensive name]

that guy is a troll, I know because I have seen many trolls in my day.
oh and In b4 the lock.

[Chris1959]

I wish I was that young again so I knew everything:laugh4:

[mountaingoat]

https://img133.imageshack.us/img133/6493/inbeforethelock3zd.jpg

[Moros]

In before the lock posts are lame.

[satalexton]

i loled when i read that he's gloating about borrowing books from the adult non-fiction section of the library xD

[a completely inoffensive name]

The best part is when he says this:
I hate people who post crap and think they know more, so childish.
I mean come on. He has to be a very intelligent troll.

[Watchman]

...to differentiate them from spearmen who don't have a secondary(and therefore would suffer in CQB).No such thing. Didn't I very specifically explain this already above ? Noone was so dumb as to assume his spear would last forever or remain useful all the time, and carried at minimum a big knife to have something besides his bare hands in a pinch.

[Cute Wolf]

BTW, Massalian hoplitai is still a good unit, when they knocked down, they'll change to spears.... that's no problem... but if Hoplitai Haploi wield a sword....... they had no different role than Kluddolon then...

[Skullheadhq]

Here's a quote from Khelvan, dated 2007. After this :dancinglock:
This is everything that needs to be said here.


Europa Barbarorum, as a mod team, has existed for over two years, running on three now. The team members have put a lot into this mod - their time, sweat...battled through illness (at least three members were diagnosed with one form of cancer or another, including myself), and tragic loss of loved ones. A lot of stress and emotions were poured out as positive energy into this labor of love. We don't get paid for it, and we don't have any expectations that this would ever happen. We do it because we want to see the best representation of this ancient time period available to all, including but not exclusively ourselves.

We're human. We are emotionally invested in our mod. We have always welcomed scholarly debate, but we have always rejected aggressive tones or criticism which is not constructive, regardless of the merit of the argument. As we have put more of ourselves in our mod and had less time in our personal lives to devote to it, we have become less patient with those people who would take issue with us in a manner that is not constructive.

So my request is: If you have an issue with our mod, present it nicely. Don't take the attitude that "you're absolutely wrong" or "there is not a shred of evidence to support your position" or any such demonstrative statements. Approach the discussion openly, sources in hand, but willing to listen. If you present sources and ask for open debate, you will get it. If you present your position in the light that there is absolutely nothing to support the opposite position, you will be presented with a mirror of that argument, with additional rancor for having presented yourself that way. If you don't like our skins, suggest how to improve them rather than simply say they're ugly. If you simply call our skins ugly, you will get an ugly response.

In very basic communications classes they will teach you to always consider your audience. If you present an historical argument with sources to the EB team with the goal of helping us change our minds, by beginning your discussion with the attitude that you are absolutely right and we are absolutely wrong is completely counterproductive to your goal. We don't squelch dissentors, we get pissed off at arrogance. There is a very real difference there, and perhaps if we were being paid for this we could afford to be completely aloof and detached and "turn the other cheek." But we're not - we're emotional volunteers who ask only one thing of the people who enjoy playing this mod: To present whatever information, argument, or criticism you have with respect. You don't have to agree, but if you want to have your argument evaluated objectively, you will need to present it objectively.

Finally, we have always encouraged people to disagree with us, given the caveat above. Spouting long diatribes about how bad we are because we don't listen to people is, first of all, completely baseless because we love to be presented with evidence, and second, completely useless because we won't bother to listen; the person making the argument simply doesn't understand us, so why would we bother to attempt to reason with them?

So, please remember the following in your communication to us:

- Present your arguments as presenting evidence, not truth
- Keep in mind that we are completely open to opposing views, but closed to arrogance in presenting said views
- Separate in your mind us shutting off arrogance as opposed to opposing views
- Keep in mind that we are a mod team and our focus is on completing work, not debating; where evidence is open to interpretation, and we interpret it one way, we will likely not change our minds unless brand new evidence is presented
- We're human, we don't get paid for this, and we react badly to both the attitudes I discuss above and people who seem to enjoy nothing more than finding reasons to criticize us

I, for one, wish I were a better person and could simply ignore the attitudes and attacks that are sometimes made here. It would be great to be completely professional in all things (striving to be more like I am in my "real" job), but the truth is that I come here to avoid the stress of daily life, to put my limited time and energy into something I enjoy, and I can't stand attitudes I perceive as arrogant or as a sense of entitlement when all I have ever wanted was to provide something fun to everyone at absolutely no cost.

Honestly, I don't think that requiring someone to suppress their ego before making a critical argument is too much to ask, given what we're doing for free here, no matter how unjust that may seem to people.

As an aside, any and all posts that contain Hitler or Nazi references when evaluating our actions, or anyone else's for that matter, will be deleted immediately, beginning this minute, including recent ones. Unless you survived the Holocaust, you have absolutely no right to make such a comparison.

Thank you.

[antisocialmunky]

No such thing. Didn't I very specifically explain this already above ? Noone was so dumb as to assume his spear would last forever or remain useful all the time, and carried at minimum a big knife to have something besides his bare hands in a pinch.

Well obviously, I'm not arguing with that.

I'm talking about various levy spearmen and the like vs hoplites. I don't think everyone carried secondary swords, maybe a dagger or soemthing but not everyone had a decent sword. Units with side arms that can't be represented should get some sort of bonus since hte side arm can't be represented as a weapon vs a spear unit that doesn't have any decent secondary.

Its a compromise between engine limitations and representing a secondary on a melee unit.

[Watchman]

The kind of big knife every peasant everywhere had for assorted everyday purposes is quite dangerous in close quarters, you know. And daggers may well have killed more heavily armoured elite warriors throughtout history than almost any other weapon.

[antisocialmunky]

The dagger is one trick horse. At any rate, all I was trying to say was that if you REALLY wanted to depict a secondary, just give a bonus to stats since adding a secondary screws up melee units.

[mcantu]

the XGM team gave him some not-so-tough love over at TWC and it seems to have put him in check...

[satalexton]

Plus, they are constantly annoying me, greatly, since they make silly assumptions, And they also keep on repeating themselves, that pikemen are not similar to hoplites (I already know that, infact I provided and evaluated more information about pikemen and hoplites than they do, they seem to have limited knowledge and evaluation skills :/).

I loled

[Skullheadhq]

I loled

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The dagger is one trick horse. At any rate, all I was trying to say was that if you REALLY wanted to depict a secondary, just give a bonus to stats since adding a secondary screws up melee units.

Not really, a decent dagger will still be about 10 inches long in the blade, that's more than enough to disembowel a guy with. In addition, many who couldn't afford swords would carry woodsman's axes, or hardwood clubs.

[Apázlinemjó]

Not really, a decent dagger will still be about 10 inches long in the blade, that's more than enough to disembowel a guy with. In addition, many who couldn't afford swords would carry woodsman's axes, or hardwood clubs.

And those could be quite deadly in experienced hands.

[antisocialmunky]

Not really, a decent dagger will still be about 10 inches long in the blade, that's more than enough to disembowel a guy with. In addition, many who couldn't afford swords would carry woodsman's axes, or hardwood clubs.

What sort of dagger are we talking about here? Very many varieties mostly meant for stabbing or maybe slashing though if its that big and slashy/stabby then its getting into generic blade territory.

How do you classify blades anyways? Cutting surfaces, shape, balance etc? When is a big knife a short sword and what is the difference between a bladed long dagger and a knife or sword?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

What sort of dagger are we talking about here? Very many varieties mostly meant for stabbing or maybe slashing though if its that big and slashy/stabby then its getting into generic blade territory.

How do you classify blades anyways? Cutting surfaces, shape, balance etc? When is a big knife a short sword and what is the difference between a bladed long dagger and a knife or sword?

"Decent" in this instance would be "good for killing".

[Watchman]

What sort of dagger are we talking about here? Very many varieties mostly meant for stabbing or maybe slashing though if its that big and slashy/stabby then its getting into generic blade territory.

How do you classify blades anyways? Cutting surfaces, shape, balance etc? When is a big knife a short sword and what is the difference between a bladed long dagger and a knife or sword?Shorter blades are generally better at stabbing than slashing, on account of lacking leverage. This is particularly true for the shorter, "knife-sized" end thereof - at "shortsword" lenghts they start having enough weight and leverage that there can be practical merit in designing them for the cut.
Anyways, the line between a large dagger and a short sword is notoriously fuzzy (not that the one between "long" and "short" swords was all that clear either), and when you get down to it somewhat arbitrary - typically, a question of end-user perception and which exactly the thing is "worn as" so to speak.

[Skullheadhq]

Hoplitai Kluddolon is not THAT a good idea, so NO

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Shorter blades are generally better at stabbing than slashing, on account of lacking leverage. This is particularly true for the shorter, "knife-sized" end thereof - at "shortsword" lenghts they start having enough weight and leverage that there can be practical merit in designing them for the cut.
Anyways, the line between a large dagger and a short sword is notoriously fuzzy (not that the one between "long" and "short" swords was all that clear either), and when you get down to it somewhat arbitrary - typically, a question of end-user perception and which exactly the thing is "worn as" so to speak.

I remember an armsman once telling me that, "longsword" simply meant longer than "sword", therefore a spatha was a longsword to a Roman, and a bastardsword was a "longsword" to a medieval armsman.

[dragoon47]

That guy has already spammed so many threads, EB, XGM, etc...

I like to think of him as one of the more annoying people there, and he always uses those same two sources, the internet link and that Peter Colony book of his, yet he doesn't quote anything from the book at all, which almost makes me wonder if he may have even misunderstood the words of his own source.

I'm checking the internet for a copy of that book of his :beam:.

Also, I keep wondering this, but don't the Syracusan hoplites fight with an underhand formation? Wondering 'cuz it says so in the description yet they always fight overhand.

[Zarax]

the XGM team gave him some not-so-tough love over at TWC and it seems to have put him in check...

In XGM forums we force the trolls to use their brains.
Somehow, as soon as this happens they stop trolling and sometimes become decent posters.

[dragoon47]

"The hoplite formation I described is correct, if those 2 proffessors disagree, then they are disagreeing with most high schools which teach history."

I loled so hard at this. First the spelling errors, then the fact that he mentioned that he was in high school I think?

"disagreeing with most high schools that teach history"

This was the best part, my high school teacher tried to tell me that Triarii didn't exist in the Roman army, Alexander made the plan to conquer Persia and not his father, and that the Huns sacked Rome :laugh4:! he also came up with sources too, one of which being a website, do you guys think he went to the same public school as me :beam:?

I'm gonna stop trying to talk sense into him, his bs spans so many different forums now, I bet he's even hit the Diadochi forums by now. I hope he becomes a perfectly good poster now that Zarax and the rest of the XGM forums talked some sense into him. I saw the thread too, what a troll to post stuff about another mod in someone elses forum and argue about it there trying to gain support and getting slapped in the face :sweatdrop:.

EDIT: He's trolling the Rome 2 petition thread now as well as others, I have to admit, he's almost as good of a troll as I was when I was younger and had no balls to speak of.

EDIT 2: Nevermind the Syracusan hoplite thing, I'll use the search button and check if it's been answered before.

[Chris1959]

I have a copy of the Peter Connolly book, and it is a very good general source of information on Greek and Roman warfare (Nice illustrations too). It, actually, spends most of it's time concentrating on Rome and her wars with Carthage, and was obviously well re-searched at the time.

It was first published in 1981 and I believe Mr Connelly is a well respected historian. I would say it is the kind of work that gives you a good initial grounding in a subject before moving on to more extensive research, not something one treats as the only source!

[dragoon47]

Do you know if they have it on Google Books or something? I've been planning on going on a shopping spree for all the books used in the discussion as well, but I don't want to lay down money if I can get a .pdf for free(yes, I'm pretty cheap). Apparently, about 90% of his posts have been about inaccurate hoplites, so that's his existance apparently. I couldn't find what I needed on the syracusans so I'm going to start a new thread instead of talking about this guy, I don't want to be known as a troll either soo...:oops:.

[Chris1959]

Ouch just did a quick search!

I'm going to have to look after this book:book: On amazon UK it ranges from £91 to £183 !!!

And mine's a mint condition first edition!

I've seen the new edition on play.com for £22.99

[dragoon47]

Well, I guess I'm not going to get the old edition then :laugh4:, not only would I have to transfer that to American dollars, I'd have to pay for the shipping.

23 Euros on play.com though, I'll have to check it out.

[lobf]

what a sorry excuse for a supposedly 'educated' person
[EDIT]
god i wish we could meet guys like this in person, and then SHUT THEM UP the way dan henderson shut up michael bisping.
(btw, anyone here who watched UFC100? that was just too much for me. i almost sobbed because of so much joy. best knock out - no - best KTFO ever.)

Ugh, I thought that was so brutal and excessive. Totally unnecessary and unsportsmanlike in my opinion.

Please don't tell me you approved of Lesnar's performance, too...

[Ibrahim]

I have a copy of the Peter Connolly book, and it is a very good general source of information on Greek and Roman warfare (Nice illustrations too). It, actually, spends most of it's time concentrating on Rome and her wars with Carthage, and was obviously well re-searched at the time.

It was first published in 1981 and I believe Mr Connelly is a well respected historian. I would say it is the kind of work that gives you a good initial grounding in a subject before moving on to more extensive research, not something one treats as the only source!

you are correct-he is indeed well respected. I read his greeks and romans book, and I was very much impressed: thurough, concise, and in an easily digestable manner. my rating::2thumbsup:

[Azathoth]

Jesus Christ, this guy thinks Thebans fought two-handed with pikes and that hoplites didn't exist after 300 BC. :wall: And he's so frakking arrogant!

Could we, like, collectively destroy him (on the Rome Surectum NEA SPARTA thread)? I spent two hours on a post but the damn site logged me out and I lost it.

[Macilrille]

Jesus Christ, this guy thinks Thebans fought two-handed with pikes and that hoplites didn't exist after 300 BC. :wall: And he's so frakking arrogant!

Could we, like, collectively destroy him (on the Rome Surectum NEA SPARTA thread)? I spent two hours on a post but the damn site logged me out and I lost it.

Why waste time, here or there, on a Troll?

I have news for you...

They are delusional...

They will not learn even presented with first-hand sources. Even here we have some of that kind.


Why continue wasting time on an ignorant? Especially time here amongst mostly educated people?


Edited to add, let it lie. It will give you more peace of mind than letting some fool frustrate you. That way he controls your mood, not you, and he will make it bad...

It is your choice.

[cmacq]

Hoplites...

that’s sort of shield and spear light to medium foot, with a short sword back-up, used only after their giggers went the way of the dodos, right? Now, what is the actual source for how they fought? I’m a bit interested because the problem with over-hand fighting in close-order is akin to using the circular spiked boss, but in reverse. Fore or aft, a good number of ill-fated friendlys, in the wrong place, were bound to get severally stuck.

So again what is the ancient textual source that described how this type of unit fought? If such a source is not forthcoming please, and I stress, don’t bother.


CmacQ

[Azathoth]

Why waste time, here or there, on a Troll?

I have news for you...

They are delusional...

They will not learn even presented with first-hand sources. Even here we have some of that kind.


Why continue wasting time on an ignorant? Especially time here amongst mostly educated people?


Edited to add, let it lie. It will give you more peace of mind than letting some fool frustrate you. That way he controls your mood, not you, and he will make it bad...

It is your choice.

You're right. I was upset and tired when I posted, and I'm sorry for bringing this up.

[Watchman]

Hoplites...

that’s sort of shield and spear light to medium foot, with a short sword back-up, used only after their giggers went the way of the dodos, right? Now, what is the actual source for how they fought? I’m a bit interested because the problem with over-hand fighting in close-order is akin to using the circular spiked boss, but in reverse. Fore or aft, a good number of ill-fated friendlys, in the wrong place, were bound to get severally stuck.Uh, you *do* remember that with the overhand the pointy butt of the spear aims somewhere in the coulds well above your mates' heads, while with the underhand it's beelining straight at their face, throat, belly or wossnames depending on the height you're holding it in ?

So again what is the ancient textual source that described how this type of unit fought? If such a source is not forthcoming please, and I stress, don’t bother.Do ample pictorial sources count ?

[cmacq]

I'm just wondering if there wasn't some kind of spacing between the fore most ranks and those that followed on.

Didn't someone once say something about one pictorial source being worth 1000 words?


CmacQ

[Loghova]

I like the way they are depicted. CA would have been required to develop the game with a perfect, historical depiction in mind in order for them to be...well...perfect. The EB team did a fine job with what they had to work with.

[Watchman]

I'm just wondering if there wasn't some kind of spacing between the fore most ranks and those that followed on.Kinda hard to mesh that with the whole man-train pushing thingy.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'm just wondering if there wasn't some kind of spacing between the fore most ranks and those that followed on.

Didn't someone once say something about one pictorial source being worth 1000 words?


CmacQ

Debateable. On the one hand, two locked ranks are quite tough, as anyone facing Spartiates would tell you. On the other hand, the Thebans and Macedonians used weight of numbers to shattewr their enemies. The point is especially true of the Thebans, but also of the Macedonians, where we know the spacing from Polybius.

[cmacq]

Kinda hard to mesh that with the whole man-train pushing thingy.

Indeed, but is that not seen in the shift from light-medium to heavy foot? Because I think this thread was about light to medium foot (hoplites), and not heavy foot, no? With the heavy foot and close order formation, the use and design of weapons changed, as well? At this point weren't the light to medium foot completely redesigned and given the role of protecting the flanks of the heavy foot?

CmacQ

[antisocialmunky]

Kinda hard to mesh that with the whole man-train pushing thingy.

WATCH OUTS FOR MY MAN TRAINS!

Seriously, best descriptor for hoplite combat I've yet seen.

[cmacq]

Polybius is a bit late for hoplites, no? Or, by hoplite do you only mean someone in the state's levy that has a shield and a spear? Otherwise, I recall Polybius on heavy foot, which do have shields, but are not hoplites as it applies to EB?


CmacQ

[Watchman]

Indeed, but is that not seen in the shift from light-medium to heavy foot? Because I think this thread was about light to medium foot (hoplites), and not heavy foot, no? With the heavy foot and close order formation, the use and design of weapons changed, as well? At this point weren't the light to medium foot completely redesigned and given the role of protecting the flanks of the heavy foot?...what ?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Indeed, but is that not seen in the shift from light-medium to heavy foot? Because I think this thread was about light to medium foot (hoplites), and not heavy foot, no? With the heavy foot and close order formation, the use and design of weapons changed, as well? At this point weren't the light to medium foot completely redesigned and given the role of protecting the flanks of the heavy foot?

CmacQ

Hoplites are heavy foot, analogous to the English Fyrdman, for example. That means helm, shield, sword, spear, and some form of body armour. In point of fact, the hoplite was an enduringly heavy infantryman, the Hoplite dash at the Olympics was, irrc, always done in full broze armour, sans spear.

I think it's fair to say the Hoplite epitomises the heavy closed-order spearman pretty much more than any other soldier in history. The Theban and Macedonian versions are really cheap knock-offs with longer spears to offset less armour.

[keravnos]

Over hand in locked shields phallanx formation. (NOT the pike phallanx of Maks. Your phallangitai is pike phallangitai actually).

Underhand when finishing off enemies running away, once the phalanx would dissolve to chase the enemies. What the vases showing hoplites fighting underhand are INDIVIDUAL DUELS OF ILIAD OR OTHER MYTHOLOGICAL HEROES not how an actual phallanx with interlocking aspis shields fought. (no hoplon, please do not repeat the roman mistake.)

Underhand and crouching when facing cavalry, with the shield covering most of the body.

That's what I have seen in most of the statues of antiquity.

[satalexton]

I swore I've seen hoplitai reenactment drills somewhere before, they're just as Kev described.
Hoplitai are actually surprisingly mobile units, they don't always have to pack themselves into tight blocks...

[cmacq]

Now, I’m confused. I thought after the 4th century hoplite (levy) armament was down-graded, to increase speed and maneuver, while that of the foot that formed the piked-phalanx was up-graded, to become slower and less flexible?


CmacQ

[satalexton]

not exactly, the pikemen has little to no armour to begin with. Only the front ranks and officers had any decent armour. It was somewhere around the Siege of Tyre that Alexandros ordered 10k sets of Linothorax and etc to be sent from hellas for his troops.

I'm rambling from the top of my head, so correct me if i'm wrong...

[antisocialmunky]

I swore I've seen hoplitai reenactment drills somewhere before, they're just as Kev described.
Hoplitai are actually surprisingly mobile units, they don't always have to pack themselves into tight blocks...

Are you refering to the Melbourne Hoplitikon?

https://www.youtube.com/user/ANCIENTHOPLITIKON1st

Every time I see one of their videos, I wish that they had enough people to do a phalanx vs phalanx but no :(.

@satalexton - Do you know the context of that? He could have been wanting to armor up some of his skirmishers to take a part in the siege battle or for his workers on the mole and the mole#2 that were getting shot at. Its not obvious that he was ordering them for his pikemen.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Now, I’m confused. I thought after the 4th century hoplite (levy) armament was down-graded, to increase speed and maneuver, while that of the foot that formed the piked-phalanx was up-graded, to become slower and less flexible?


CmacQ

Hoplites are close-order infantry by definition. the "downgrading" happened during the Peloponesian war due to increasing poverty on both sides. It got to such absurd lengths that the Spartans went down to a felt cap and shield. Nonetheless, the principle of the Hoplite as "heavy" infantry remained the same.

The idea that the Hoplites formed a "levy" is somewhat dissingenuous as well. Hoplite warfare was a distinctly middle-class thing. Hoplites are traditionally drawn from the same, or higher, classes as pike phalangites. The basic concept of the latter was a peltast (psiloi) given a really long spear in order to keep the nasty heavy-armed Hoplites back. I don't believe there was ever really a time when the pikeman was more heavily armed than the Hoplite.

Having said all this, there were a proliferation of Hoplite, or near-Hoplite class types of infantry with a different mission profile. Then there's the whole issue of how the Theban Sacred Band and the Ithikritean Hoplites were axactly equipped. Even then, however, the principle of operation was the same

A really big rugby scrum with shields and spears.

[cmacq]

I'm sorry; my usage of 'levy' was not in the modern sense, as in a common-levy or draft. Rather, given the topic and context, I used that term to indicate landowners only. However, maybe my usage of light, medium, and heavy foot is not the same as yours?


CmacQ

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'm sorry; my usage of 'levy' was not in the modern sense, as in a common-levy or draft. Rather, given the topic and context, I used that term to indicate landowners only. However, maybe my usage of light, medium, and heavy foot is not the same as yours?


CmacQ

OK, let me explain.

Light Infantry: Genuine Skirmishers and fast-movers. not ranged-only units like archers. Examples would be peltasts, velites etc., but also Hastati-type units and Agrianans intended to harrass and engage. Not expected to hold the line.

Heavy Infantry: Close-order line infantry intended to attack in force, assault, defend etc. Hoplites, Princeps, Triarii, phalangites, Hypaspists in heavy gear, Sacred Bands, Spartans, but also some lower-end units.

Medium Infantry: Generally expected to fill both roles fairly well, but not expected to excell at either, fast enough to keep the light infantry away but heavy enough to hold until the heavy infantry arrive. Good examples would be Theuros carriers, Thracians, the Extraordinarii infantry etc.

In this scheme Hoplites must be heavy because they are intended to be high-endurance, close-order infantry. In fact, this becomes more true, even as their body-armour has to be downgraded.

[Azathoth]

Wouldn't Hastati be medium and Extraordinarii heavy?

[antisocialmunky]

In this scheme Hoplites must be heavy because they are intended to be high-endurance, close-order infantry. In fact, this becomes more true, even as their body-armour has to be downgraded.

I don't think that's the proper word for it since it suited the type of combat better. Whatever works better is the upgrade...

And Extraordinarii are assault infantry to beat their way through the rest of the rank and file but not meant to stand in the line. Not really sure how either of our classifications match up with the EB unit that has hoplite density and an ability to chew their way through non-AP heavy infantry.

[Azathoth]

Then I'll have to disagree with your system.

[Watchman]

AFAIK the main light/heavy distinction is that of missile/skirmisher and close combat as the primary tactical function. The distinctions are however vague at best and should *never* be tossed around without being first defined in the context.

Also, pretty sure that except for the mercenary ones hoplites would most definitely be "levies" - that is, socially and legally obliged to go out and fight for their community, as different from salaried volunteers. A citizen militia.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Wouldn't Hastati be medium and Extraordinarii heavy?

No, because Hastati harass, and Extraordinarii are a mobile elite reserves. It's a matter of function, not weight of gear.


I don't think that's the proper word for it since it suited the type of combat better. Whatever works better is the upgrade...

Not really, Hoplites down-graded because of cost, this reduced their endurance, which required a further downgrade as they were no longer able to withstand javalins and arrow storms as well, so they needed to be faster.


And Extraordinarii are assault infantry to beat their way through the rest of the rank and file but not meant to stand in the line. Not really sure how either of our classifications match up with the EB unit that has hoplite density and an ability to chew their way through non-AP heavy infantry.

Extraordinarii are picked reserves, not necessarily dedicated assault infantry. Granted, EB's version fills that role handily.

[Azathoth]

No, because Hastati harass, and Extraordinarii are a mobile elite reserves. It's a matter of function, not weight of gear.

But Hastati were line infantry.

[Ibrahim]

But Hastati were line infantry.

so were british light companies in the seven years war:clown:


as long as the role is to disrupt and dull the enemy's cutting edge, then they are harrassers, and thus L.Infantry.

[Azathoth]

Alright, fine - but they aren't harassers, since they're meant to engage the enemy in close combat.

[Watchman]

The Hastati sure as Hell weren't "harassers" - that was the various actual skirmshers from the income classes below them. The H's were simply the lightest of the Roman heavy infantry, though I'd guess that would also have made them the ones most readily employed as scratch light infantry on account of relative lightness of kit.

so were british light companies in the seven years war:clown:AFAIK in that context "light infantry" means troops trained for combat in difficult terrain where the normal line-infantry tactics didn't work properly; in practice, in looser two-rank lines which were much easier to move through woods etc. Not quite the same thing in general.

[Ibrahim]

AFAIK in that context "light infantry" means troops trained for combat in difficult terrain where the normal line-infantry tactics didn't work properly; in practice, in looser two-rank lines which were much easier to move through woods etc. Not quite the same thing in general.

well, that was the theory anyhow. in practice, they usually just fought in a line on the battlefield, only doing light infantry stuff in the woods or in special ops. these units mind you were temproray, and only for special assignements (one regiment, the 81th foot, was meant to be all light infantry; they ended up being sent to assaul ft.Carillon in 1758, where they were shredded). with the end of the war in 1763, the end of the light infantry companies came, at least until 1770-71, when they were reconstituted at 1 per battalion.

[Watchman]

IIRC the tactics the Finnish light infantry used in 1809, the "open double line" was their standard open-field formation too. Though that may also have had something to do with the fact the Finnish War saw only minimal cavalry participation on both sides (mainly in a reconnaissance role) - overabundance of forests doesn't encourage anyone to bring lots of it along, after all.