> Interstingly Greek hoplites rarely (if ever) formed a stationary
> square like Napoleonic infantry. A general lack of missile weapons
> and a requirement therefore to close with the enemy meant that
> forming a square was a prelude to disaster. Greek hoplites could
> repulse Persian cavalry who were foolish enough to come to contact
> pretty easily (e.g. Plataea, Agesilaus in Asia Minor). Persian
> cavalry weren't lancers. They were horse archers or mounted
> javalinmen and weren't used in a shock role against ordered foot.
> The cavalry in Xenephon's account are described as shooting with
> bows rather than closing to drive in the Greek light infantry.
Had the skirmishers stayed out in front of the phalanx, the cavalry probably *would* have charged them. That's one of the functions of cavalry - it doesn't take lancers to drive off skirmishers. (Lancers are of most use against other cavalry, not infantry, especially formed infantry with spears).
And I wasn't clear in my description - I didn't mean that the hoplites formed square (any ranked infantry can usually see off cavalry), but that forming up and withdrawing skirmishers was the normal defense to cavalry. Without a screen of skirmishers in front, the phalanx was vulnerable to the persian missiles, and the greek missile troops were masked by the hoplites (besides having the depth of the phalanx to shoot over, thus the rang comment). Indirect fire wasn't an practiced art in ancient armies.
RR
C'est par mon ordre et pour le bien de l'Etat que le porteur du pr�sent a
fait ce qu'il a fait.
- Richelieu
Powered by hypermail