How mobile was the Macedonian phalanx?

[QuintusSertorius]

The cliched notion is that the phalanx was this lumbering block that could only move forwards, barely able to do anything once set on its course.

While that's not quite true, I've seen assertions that one of the tactics was for the phalangites to charge by sprinting. I can believe a jog/double-time is possible to remain in formation, but I'm struggling a little to see how someone holding a very long pole with both hands (even a counter-weighted one) could sprint easily. Moreover that the phalanx would retain any cohesion with men running at different speeds, tripping over each other and so on.

There's also some stuff I was reading about how Philip's military reforms involved a lot of close order drills, changes of formation and the like to allow a much greater degree of flexibility.

So what was the deal?

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

Sprinting? Like a pole vaulter? You must be joking! If you let the point drop too far while sprinting with a sarissa you would BECOME a pole vaulter - I'm not sure that falling down on top of your enemies really helps....lol!

With very well trained phalangites, a slow jog might be feasible without losing formation - or a fast jog with the sarissas in a vertical position - but no more than that IMO.

Changing formation depth or facing rapidly, that's possible with well-drilled and disciplined troops.

[Randal]

Hoplites charged by sprinting, as at Marathon. And hoplites fought in a phalanx.

Perhaps that's where the confusion comes in? Charging phalanx (of hoplites) yes, charging phalangites (with sarissas) no.

Anyway, in antiquity (and the middle ages for that matter) I imagine most infantry was pretty much immobile. Forward fine, retreating sometimes fine, anything more complicated recipe for instant chaos and defeat.

This was because of lack of communication, difficulties of observation, limited number of officers, etc.

For the most part in battle, armies would deploy according to a plan drawn up the previous night or even earlier, and then more or less were stuck to those positions.

It was one of the big strengths of the Romans (especially after they dropped the manipular system) that they were able to perform far more complicated manoeuvres on the field than most of their opponents. What made Hannibal such a great general was that he too had trained his army to the extent it could perform complicated manoeuvres. The Romans did it by having far more petty officers and a far larger chain of command than most other armies. (The Spartans also had a lot of officers, iirc.) I imagine Hannibal did something similar.

In this context, the phalanx' lack of manoeuvrability wouldn't be nearly as big a weakness as it might otherwise seem.

[fomalhaut]

I distinctly remember Alexander using maneuvers that basically scared enemies off just by their complexity. I wouldn't necessarily call the Macedonian Phalanx that lumbering , at least under Alexander's command. They were fighting much more mobile people for a long time

[Randal]

I don't doubt Alexander did that, but were those manoeuvres with his phalanx? Or with his cavalry and light infantry? Or his non-sarissa armed heavy infantry?

Alexander was a great general and quite probably capable of making his army do things that for lesser generals would have resulted in chaos. But also relevant is that his army had a far smaller proportion of pikemen than the successors did. His hypaspistai, Greek hoplites, Agrianians, Thracians, Kretans, etc made for a very flexible combined-arms force.

[QuintusSertorius]

I don't doubt Alexander did that, but were those manoeuvres with his phalanx? Or with his cavalry and light infantry? Or his non-sarissa armed heavy infantry?

Alexander was a great general and quite probably capable of making his army do things that for lesser generals would have resulted in chaos. But also relevant is that his army had a far smaller proportion of pikemen than the successors did. His hypaspistai, Greek hoplites, Agrianians, Thracians, Kretans, etc made for a very flexible combined-arms force.

They were with his phalanx. Well-drilled maneuvers were one of the other things, besides longer spears that Philip learned from his time in Thebes.

[Randal]

Fair enough.

Hm. Thinking in this vein it might actually make sense to claim Alexander's phalanx was more manoeuvrable than earlier hoplite phalanxes, because unlike those militia forces they had been properly drilled. Though of course there were also more professional hoplite forces.

[WinsingtonIII]

Sprinting does seem a bit much, but I do know that in a much later era, the Swedish army employed Carolean tactics, by which they would advance to point blank musket range, fire a volley or two, and then the pikemen would charge, using their pikes as an offensive weapon. They were only charging a short distance, so perhaps they did sprint, and perhaps this means it would be possible to have used a similar tactic in a different era. However, the Swedes were also not wearing much in the way of armor, which would make charging easier.

[fomalhaut]

I don't doubt Alexander did that, but were those manoeuvres with his phalanx? Or with his cavalry and light infantry? Or his non-sarissa armed heavy infantry?

Alexander was a great general and quite probably capable of making his army do things that for lesser generals would have resulted in chaos. But also relevant is that his army had a far smaller proportion of pikemen than the successors did. His hypaspistai, Greek hoplites, Agrianians, Thracians, Kretans, etc made for a very flexible combined-arms force.

I'd go search for the battle right now in Arrian, but im almost positive he had his main battle line, which im assuming were his pikemen, march up the hill against the settlement. He had earlier done something with the Agriannes and Guard so i think the distinction had already been made.

But yeah your right, these were more or less professional soldiers, not militia.

[Tyrfingr]

Sprinting does seem a bit much, but I do know that in a much later era, the Swedish army employed Carolean tactics, by which they would advance to point blank musket range, fire a volley or two, and then the pikemen would charge, using their pikes as an offensive weapon. They were only charging a short distance, so perhaps they did sprint, and perhaps this means it would be possible to have used a similar tactic in a different era. However, the Swedes were also not wearing much in the way of armor, which would make charging easier.

Remind you that the muskets of the 17th and 18th century were not that accurate, which the swedish carolean kings knew. Every third soldier (!) of the swedish carolean army were actually equipped with pikes between 1650-1720, thus favouring a very offensive tactic called "Gå på" translated "Go on", and was basically a cold steel charge as you have described it.

[Alrik]

Heh, funny you'd mention the caroliners, I actually helped Bohus-Älvsborgs Karoliner with one of their gigs. I'm used to running around fighting full contact in full armour, (mine ways roughly 25 kg + sweat) so I figured a day doing drills in minimal armour with a five meter pike, walk in the park. (Just helmet and a harnersk.) Boy was I wrong, the pikes weren't counterbalanced, which I assume would help A LOT. Because the biggest problem with them was the balance, five meter of anything is unwieldy, so a wobble or a bit of wind pulling or pushing on the tip is a real strain to counter on the other end.

As for running, sure, might be possible a short distance, but not a full on "charge", it'd be some sort of controlled jog.
The equipment I carried that day was easily less than half of what I normally wear, but as for manuvering, I'd say I normally walk around relaxed at a pace as fast or faster than we marched.
As for moving into different formations, I'm not sure they apply, most of them were stationary and included the fist two rows actually standing on the ends on their pikes to lead the force of a cavalry charge into the ground. Needless to say, with half of us untrained and the rest of unknown training each fromation change took a couple of minutes, which is a pretty darn long time, though for many of them I really doubt that it could be achieved in less than 30 seconds. (Like the newb-box with protected corners and archers in the middle...yes we did it!)

[WinsingtonIII]

Remind you that the muskets of the 17th and 18th century were not that accurate, which the swedish carolean kings knew. Every third soldier (!) of the swedish carolean army were actually equipped with pikes between 1650-1720, thus favouring a very offensive tactic called "Gå på" translated "Go on", and was basically a cold steel charge as you have described it.

Oh, I'm fully aware why and how they practiced these tactics (The Great Northern War is one of my favorite periods, historically), I was just mentioning that if the accounts are true, they did charge with pikes. But thanks for further explaining, I didn't explain as much as I should have perhaps.

Heh, funny you'd mention the caroliners, I actually helped Bohus-Älvsborgs Karoliner with one of their gigs. I'm used to running around fighting full contact in full armour, (mine ways roughly 25 kg + sweat) so I figured a day doing drills in minimal armour with a five meter pike, walk in the park. (Just helmet and a harnersk.) Boy was I wrong, the pikes weren't counterbalanced, which I assume would help A LOT. Because the biggest problem with them was the balance, five meter of anything is unwieldy, so a wobble or a bit of wind pulling or pushing on the tip is a real strain to counter on the other end.

As for running, sure, might be possible a short distance, but not a full on "charge", it'd be some sort of controlled jog.

That's very interesting, maybe the accounts of the pikes "charging" really meant just jogging forward and lowering it to engage.

[Alrik]

That's very interesting, maybe the accounts of the pikes "charging" really meant just jogging forward and lowering it to engage.

Well "Gå på!", if I'd interpret that by the use of the modern language, (Which hasn't changed that much since the 17-hundreds) I'd take it as a forceful shoving march. "Go on", is really a too weak a translation, sounds more like an encouragement to keep at it rather than "Put your backs into it and don't stop until you've walked right through and over them!"(But it still says walk, so the way I'd see it is a controlled marching spearwall of doom, not a running one. But then I haven't read anything, I'm just saying how I'd interperet the order "Gå på! if it was given to me.)

Oh, and I'm terribly sorry about my spelling, I fixed quite a few errors earlier, but I see I missed a lot as well...

Edit: I mean that I'd interpret it as not stopping once you've engaged, but actually keep on walking, for this to work, you need an orderd spearwall.

[vartan]

The Macedonian phalanx was actually one of the most mobile military units of all time. It traveled thousands of miles in its heyday, under Megas Alexandros. I have yet to march as far and long as these men did.

[QuintusSertorius]

The Macedonian phalanx was actually one of the most mobile military units of all time. It traveled thousands of miles in its heyday, under Megas Alexandros. I have yet to march as far and long as these men did.

I'm talking about tactical, rather than strategic mobility.

[fomalhaut]

yeah definitely. Would the Phalanx have become 'outdated' at a later date if it retained the tactical mobility as it was under Alexander? I don't know much about the Macedonian's wars against the Romans but i'd feel at this point they would not be as well trained, drilled, disciplined as they once were.

[jirisys]

I'm talking about tactical, rather than strategic mobility.

Not to worry. Vartan takes things literally for comedic or de-stabilizing purposes.

~Jirisys ()

[Randal]

The Successors did use much longer pikes than Alexander did, the better to fight other pike-phalanxes with. That can't have helped tactical mobility at all.

But I think the decline of combined arms tactics had more to do with the phalanx getting outdated.

[fomalhaut]

combined arms tactics? what is that?

[Randal]

Uh... sorry, not sure if you're being facetious or not.

But to answer anyway: It's combining several "arms" in a cohesive whole, stronger than the sum of its parts. In Alexander's case it was the combination of his heavy cavalry (Companions, Thessalians) and heavy infantry (Phalangites, hoplites, hypaspistai) and light infantry (Agrianians, Kretans, Macedonians) which together made for a very effective army.

The successors lacked his cavalry strength in particular.

[QuintusSertorius]

combined arms tactics? what is that?

Irrelevant to this particular question about the mobility of one particular element. I'm well aware of the other elements of the army, I'm focusing specifically on the pikemen.

[Cute Wolf]

I recall that sarissa can be separated in 2 parts

maybe they are sprinting using only the one half of sarrissa as normal spears

[fomalhaut]

Uh... sorry, not sure if you're being facetious or not.

But to answer anyway: It's combining several "arms" in a cohesive whole, stronger than the sum of its parts. In Alexander's case it was the combination of his heavy cavalry (Companions, Thessalians) and heavy infantry (Phalangites, hoplites, hypaspistai) and light infantry (Agrianians, Kretans, Macedonians) which together made for a very effective army.

The successors lacked his cavalry strength in particular.

no not at all, thanks for the reply.

That makes sense, i just didn't want to assume on what you meant.

[antisocialmunky]

Every wonder what would happen if you rolled a log into a phalanx formation?

[vartan]

Every wonder what would happen if you rolled a log into a phalanx formation?

The same thing that happens in the beginning of Assassin's Creed.

[Olaf The Great]

I recall it being mentioned long ago on this very forum that the phalanx could march backwards instead of turning around.

[vartan]

I recall it being mentioned long ago on this very forum that the phalanx could march backwards instead of turning around.

Ah, the wonder that is the phalanx bug. When one of the soldiers is isolated, it can be referred to as the moonwalk.

[Alrik]

I recall it being mentioned long ago on this very forum that the phalanx could march backwards instead of turning around.

Yes this would be almost as easy as walking forwards. (possibly easier than for other units as the pikes both keep the unit together as well as offer visible aid to where the rest of your friends are without taking eyes off the enemy, in contrary a shieldwall-unit can easily leave the first line behind and even that can easily lose its solidity as they back up, a wavy snake thingie look with gaps forming between the shields is something we suffer a lot.) Straifing or sideways movements is a no-no with the weapons in lowered position, what differ pikes from other utits is that you involve yourself with several rows of your own unit. the pikes/sarissas litterally from fences within the unit, so ging back and forth is fine to some extent but sideways is blocked with a pike locked in place by the people around it, turning, thus forcing the pike on to the diagonal, doesn't work very well either unless you loosen the formation, which you normally don't want, ecpecially for pikes. There's also the offset weight to take into accont, perhaps the pikes we used (Which were supposedly Swedish army replicas) were heavier than the Greek sarissas, but you really needed a solid stance to keep the tip up and mine was just five meters, I know the Greeks had longer pikes than that.
That also have me wondering how agressive you can actually be with the weapon (we never forght or simulated any fighting, other than where we pikemen acted as a mobile fort for the musketeers and bowmen.) It just felt that you couldn't thrust the weapon forward much asit had sucha a massive impact on your balance and center of gravity, you'd be forced to drop the pike to the ground and pull it backif you over reached (which wouldn't be that far.) On the contrary a unit with 3 meter spears I know is horribly aggressive, those spears are flying everywhere. And I think that might be because they weigh almost half as much and don't have the same unbalancing leaver effect on the wielder.

[Ludens]

I recall that sarissa can be separated in 2 parts

maybe they are sprinting using only the one half of sarrissa as normal spears

I doubt the enemy would be so obliging as to wait while the pikemen were reassembling their sarrisa after the charge. So any charging pikeman would have to fight with a normal spear during combat. In which case, why didn't they simply front the phalanx with hoplites, who have a spear and a proper shield as well?

[QuintusSertorius]

I doubt the enemy would be so obliging as to wait while the pikemen were reassembling their sarrisa after the charge. So any charging pikeman would have to fight with a normal spear during combat. In which case, why didn't they simply front the phalanx with hoplites, who have a spear and a proper shield as well?

I'm sure I read somewhere that the promachoi/front rank might be armed in the hoplite fashion. Can't for the life of me remember where I saw it, though.