Hoplite Phalanx Mechanics:

Investigation of Footwork, Spacing and

Shield Coverage

Karl Randall
(Kyungsung Universtiy)

I. Introduction

Although many aspects of the hoplite phalanx have been studied in great
detail, the actual mechanics of exactly how hoplite combat, on an individual
level, actually functioned, has not. The many details as to how individual
combatants stood, how they held their weapons, and how much spacing was
maintained between ranks and files has largely been ignored, in part due to
the relative lack of period source material from which to draw from.
Contemporary literary sources are maddeningly silent on all of the above
issues, most likely because they were deemed to be too trivial to bother
committing to written form. Polybius (Πολύβιος) provides a number of
important details in his Histories but again the accuracy of his statements
can be called into question, as they date to the Hellenistic, rather than the
Classical period. Examples of hoplites in artwork are fairly well represented,
but examples of massed combat are rare, and cannot provide irrefutable
evidence as both artistic license and stylistic conventions can both be called
into question, even in cases that otherwise appear to be accurate.1 Even

1
The Chigi vase, shows perhaps the first most famous example of massed hoplite
warfare, but it too can be called into question, as it both pre-dates the Classical
period and is more properly attributed as Etruscan, rather than of Greek origin as
per Oswyn Murray, Early Greece, 2nd ed. (Boston, MA: Harvard University Press,
1993), 130.
112 Hiroshi Maeno

details which do date to the Classical period have been the subject of multiple
interpretations and some, such as the occurrence and purpose of massed
shoving (othismos), remain hotly debated among classicists to this day
While both period and near period sources remain open to differing
interpretations, the relative simplicity of the phalanx formation and equipment
involved lend themselves to direct examination by means of reenactment.
With the exception of Sparta, all hoplite combatants were essentially citizen-
soldiers. Indeed, it can in part be claimed that the entire system of phalanx
fighting evolved so that a level of combat effectiveness could be achieved
with minimal training. In the case of modern volunteer participants, training
would be condensed into a period of a few short hours. In some cases,
particularly with regards to such issues as the benefits and drawbacks to
various styles of footwork or the physical restrictions resulting from close
formation spacing in regard to an overhand or underhand thrust, remain
largely identical regardless of the level of individual training. In other cases,
this very lack of training actually works to the researcher's advantage, so
long as they are understood to be a baseline from which the capabilities of
period hoplite formations could be drawn, such as the minimal spacing
required to execute a countermarch maneuver.
For the purposes of this investigation, a one-time event was organized. A
little-used, somewhat roughly-graveled parking lot was reserved as a site.
Flyers were posted advertising the opportunity to participate in a “unique
battle experience,” along with the promise of free refreshments both during
and after the event. Interested respondents were told that much of the day
would be spent drilling basic commands and marching in formation, but
encouraged to bring head and protection if they wished to participate in the
"combat" portion of the event. With both a date and a site chosen, the
question of equipment design and selection remained.
 Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 113

II. Design and Construction of Equipment

1. Classical Hoplite Equipment
First and foremost, any reenactment requires fair approximations with
regard to equipment used. Of primary importance for hoplite combat was the
shield, or aspis.2 Composed of a wood core, the aspis was a large, dished,
round shield that was originally backed by linen, faced with ox hide and
finished with bronze trim along the flat rim. 3 Surviving examples were
faced with a thin sheet of hammered bronze and could be highly decorated.4
Interestingly, the aspis is perhaps best recognized not by its face, but rather
by its use of a bronze arm brace (porpax) through which the user would slip
one's left arm before grasping a leather hand strap (antilabe) affixed close to
the inside edge of the rim.5 Surviving period examples are rare, but show
variation in size ranging from some 80cm to over one meter in diameter.6
There is some evidence that the exact size of an aspis, assuming it was made
for a particular user as opposed to being issued by the state, may have been a
function of the length of one's forearm as measured from the elbow to the
fingertips.7 The resulting fit, if done properly, would allow the porpax to be

2
Also known as a hoplon, as per the Historical Dictionary of Ancient Greek Warfare,
s.v. “shield,” by Iain G. Spence, 295.
3
Also known as a hoplon, as per the Historical Dictionary of Ancient Greek Warfare,
s.v. “shield,” by Iain G. Spence, 295.
4
Nicholas Sekunda and Adam Hook, Greek Hoplite: 480-323 BC (Oxford: Osprey
Publishing, Ltd., 2000), 10. This bronze facing, often only half a millimeter in
thickness, is often the only remains that have not deteriorated over time. It remains
unknown if the use of bronze as a facing material came to be typical over time, or
if it remained exclusively for use of religious offerings and or by the elite.
5
Snodgrass, 53.
6
Minor M. Markle III, “The Macedonian Sarissa, Spear, and Related Armor,”
American Journal of Archaeology, 81, no. 3 (Summer, 1977): 326. Again these
remains are only represented by surviving bronze facings and fixtures, to wood
core having long since deteriorated. The majority of surviving artifacts have a
diameter ranging around 90cm. One example is quite large however, and measures
slightly less than 122cm in diameter, as discussed in Snodgrass, 53.
7
H. M. Lorimer, “The Hoplite Phalanx with Special Reference to the Poems of
Archilochus and Tyrtaeus,” The Annual of the British School at Athens, 42, (1947): 76.
114 Hiroshi Maeno

centrally located. A user would then find that the porpax comes up to the
upper end of one’s forearm while gripping the hand strap. This central
placement of a porpax was not always used, however.8 Exceptionally large
shields of over one meter in diameter would naturally mandate an exception
to this rule of thumb. The user of such a large shield either must be
abnormally tall even by modern standards, the porpax be moved off center
to the right (and perhaps upwards, allowing the shield to “hang,” providing
an additional degree of stability), or the antilabe be moved inward to the left
(which would have left less room for a user’s knuckles due to decreased
shield curvature, potentially necessitating some kind of hand wrap lest the
user suffer from bruised knuckles), or some combination of the latter two.9
Additional support can be found for off center porpax placement in rare
surviving examples of actual artifacts and occasional artistic reference in the
form of period sculpture.10
Offensively, the hoplon's primary weapon was a one-handed thrusting
spear, or doru.11 Between 220 and 270 cm in overall length, the doru
consisted of a slightly barreled ash or cornel wood shaft, socketed iron head
and bronze butt spike.12 The spear head was generally leaf-shaped and
ranged from 20-30cm in length, giving the entire weapon a finished weight
of approximately one kilogram.13 In contrast to the spear head, butt spikes
tended to be triangular or pyramidal in cross-section, and served a variety of
functions: the preference of bronze, over iron, allowed the doru to be thrust
butt end first into the ground without needing to worry about corrosion.14

8
Also known as a hoplon, as per the Historical Dictionary of Ancient Greek Warfare,
s.v. “shield,” by Iain G. Spence, 295.
9
Also known as a hoplon, as per the Historical Dictionary of Ancient Greek Warfare,
s.v. “shield,” by Iain G. Spence, 295.
10
Ibid, 34.
11
Sekunda and Hook, 12.
12
Schwartz, 82. Ash and cornel, while certainly preferred due to their relative
strength to weight ratio, where not the only woods used. Schwartz also mentions
samples taken from the remains of wood taken from the socket of a period butt
spike that upon examination turned out to be pine.
13
Markle, 325.
14
Sekunda and Hook, 14.
 Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 115

The additional weight at the butt helped also served to counterbalance the
weight of the spearhead, and could (theoretically) be used perform a coup de
grace on a trampled enemy by the back ranks.15 Finally, having a pointed
butt spike potentially allowed a user to reverse ends and continue fighting in
case of spear breakage, although there are no period accounts of it actually
being used in this manner. Being sharp at both ends also would potentially
have influenced how the doru was wielded in formation, a point that will be
discussed in more detail later.
In addition to spear and shield, hoplite soldiers also typically carried a
sword as a secondary weapon and wore a bronze or composite corselet, full
helm, and greaves.16 As the provision of reproduction hoplite equipment
beyond a spear and shield would have been prohibitively expensive, the use
and properties of this latter equipment was not examined in detail.

2. Reenactment Equipment
For mock spears, key properties for modern testing included proper length,
balance and most importantly, safety. In this case, lengths of 2x2 lumber
240cm long were chosen for their cheapness and expediency. Somewhat
thicker than actual doru, the increased weight of the shafts compensated for
the complete absence of a spearhead or butt spike. To reduce the chance of
injury, the upper end of these mock spears were kept flat and capped by
tennis balls held in place by wide-headed screws.17 The end result was a

15
Victor Davis Hanson, The Western Way of War (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 2009), 84-85. Hanson even goes so far as to suggest that the butt spike was
used for a backwards thrust in case of rearward attack, a proposition that while
possible, stretches credibility more than a bit thin. Criticisms against the likelihood
of such an occurrence generally stem from the fact that the typical hoplite helmet
impairs peripheral vision a fair amount, and hearing even more so, meaning that
an individual hoplite likely would not even notice a surprise attack from behind
until it was too late. For reference to the portrayal of butt spikes for the delivering
of a coup de grace, see Victor David Hanson, “Hoplite Technology in the Phalanx
Battle,” in Hoplites: The Classical Greek Battle Experience, ed. Victor Davis Hanson
(New York: Routledge, 2005), 73.
16
Snodgrass, 55-58.
17
Screws were mounted along the sides of the shaft, rather to the end, ensuring that
116 Hiroshi Maeno

simple shaft of the proper length and approximate weight, with a point of
balance lying one centimeter forward of middle. While still able to potentially
inflict bruising or break a nose, they provided a relatively safe substitute
with almost no potential to inflict any type of serious injury.
The creation of shields required a number of trade-offs between cost,
construction time and historic accuracy. The first sacrifice of accuracy was
the decision to use flat, rather than dished shield bodies as the single greatest
factor of keeping costs down. Similarly, the addition of facings, backings
and the use of historically accurate materials were also discarded for the sake
of expediency. Size, position of arm bracings and handles, and balance
however were kept. The finished product thus handled in a near identical
manner to shields but could still be built both quickly and relatively
inexpensively.
For shield bodies, flat blanks 90cm in diameter were cut out of 12mm
medium density fiberboard. Fiberboard was chosen for its low cost, the
relative ease in which it will accept curved cuts and its lack of inclination to
splinter, while the 90cm diameter was chosen for its historically “average”
size for period aspides.18
To each of these flat blanks, a porpax was centrally mounted, made of
0.5mm thick soft ductwork steel. Unlike period porpax, which formed a
band which stretched from almost rim to rim, the reproductions were made
from a rectangular piece of metal 10cm wide and 70 cm long. The edges of
each were then rolled (outwards) so that no sharp corners or edges were
formed to prevent the possibility of cuts and lacerations. Each rectangle was
then bent into an omega shape such that the interior diameter of the omega
was 10 cm. After initial testing it was found that a conical cross-section,
such that diameter of the omega of the side of the completed arm brace
closest to the handle was smaller than the side farthest from the handle was

the “tip” of each spear provided the maximum amount of cushioning possible.
18
While medium density fiberboard is easy to cut, has no grain and does not splinter,
it also lacks the structural strength of regular plywood, both with regard to
breakage as well as screw retention. As such, participants were strictly warned
against shield-clashing to prevent both breakage as well as reduce the potential for
personal injury.
 Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 117

more comfortable. The complete arm braces were then attached to shield
bodies, again using wide-headed screws.19
For handles, two 6.5mm holes were drilled through the shield body 12cm
apart and 15cm in from the edge directly in-line with right side of the porpax.
Through this, a 40cm length of 5mm nylon rope was threaded. With the
nylon rope knotted at both ends (knots facing outward), people with different
lengths of forearm were able to adjust the knot placement and find a
comfortable grip.
The finished product of the appropriate size, of between one half and two
thirds the weight of a period shield. The flat, rather than the traditional
dished shape likely resulted in a slightly different balance point when in use,
but such differences in handling were offset by the reduced weight.
Similarly, the use of fiberboard for the shield body likely made for a finished
product that was potentially quite a bit weaker than that of a period shield, a
trait magnified by the lack of facing and backing.
During a preliminary trial, the screws holding the porpax to the body of
one shield were actually ripped out from the stress caused by a shield bash.
This design flaw could have been corrected by using bolts and washers
instead of screws, but as an examination of othismos, or massed shoving of
shields, would have greatly increased the potential for injury among
participants in general, combined with the fact that the use of flat rather than
dished shields would have called any results into question regardless of how
the porpax was attached, the torn porpax was reattached with screws and the
investigation of othismos was avoided altogether. It was also noted almost
immediately that even a properly sized porpax will result in some degree of
bruising. This likely would have been worse if using shields of full weight.
Finally, the back of one's left hand tended to become bruised as it rubbed
and banged repeatedly into the back side of the shield body, although this
potentially could have been avoided had the shields been dished.

19
The other half of each porpax was attached on-site such that it provided a custom
fit for each participant's left forearm.
118 Hiroshi Maeno

III. Phalanx Reenactment

1. Marching Drill
A total of 40 sets of shields and spears were made. On the actual day of
the reenactment, turnout was exceptionally low; no more than twenty people,
some of whom where dedicated to photography, video or elected to be a
skirmisher, leaving 14 people willing to participate in the phalanx proper.20
The small turnout made the study of some forms of interaction, such as an
examination of what happens when two separate phalanxes meet with offset
lines, logistically impossible. Other observations, such as the space required
between files to perform a countermarch, were also affected but not to the
point of being rendered useless.
Volunteers participating in the phalanx were given a very rudimentary set
of marching commands: forward, halt, left face, right face, about face double
time march and dress ranks. This last command was carried out, starting
from the extreme left of the formation, by extending one's right arm out to
the side until one touched the shoulder of the person to the immediate right
with one's outstretched fingers.21 This produced spacing of almost exactly
one meter between files. Identical distancing of one meter was maintained
between ranks as well. Such spacing not only was easy to execute and
maintain, but also matches the spacing between individual soldiers as
reported by Polybius with regard to Alexander's sarissa-wielding Macedonian
phalanx.22

20
Those participants who elected to be skirmishers were armed with tennis balls as
to safely simulate incoming javelins or arrows.
21
The same effect could also be achieved (albeit measuring to the left instead of the
right) by means raising one's shield to the side while keeping the elbow bent at
90°. This latter method was extraordinarily fast, as it did not require the shifting of
equipment.
22
Polybius, “Histories” (undated) http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plb.
+18.29&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0234 (accessed 7 May 2010).
Polybius reports space of two cubits (three feet or approximately one meter)
between files. While this spacing admittedly does not refer directly to the earlier
hoplite phalanx, it is suggestive and worked well for the reenactment despite the
large shield size. Individuals had enough space between ranks to use their spears
 Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 119

Once able to execute basic marching commands while maintaining cohesive

lines, equipment was issued and the process repeated. It should be noted that,
like Greek city-states of the period save Sparta, which typically kept time
with flutes, no means of maintaining a marching rhythm was used.23 That
being said, the small size of the formation made keeping order among the
ranks significantly easier, a point perhaps aided by the fact that the volunteers
naturally expected to maintain a steady rhythm and line of march in a military
formation, a expectation which very well may not have been instinctively
shared by people of ancient Greece during the fourth century BCE.
Once equipment was issued to the volunteers, a number of additional
commands also became necessary. The command “rest spears” was performed
by holding one's spear vertically in their right hand, with the butt resting on
the ground. The command “ground spears,” whereby the butt end of one's
spear is driven into the ground such that it can support itself was however
impossible given the rocky ground and lack of butt spikes. “Slope spears,”
was the command whereby a grounded or an at rest spear could be hoisted
onto a hoplite's shoulder in preparation for a march and was executed by
bending at the knees and grasping the spear shaft at bottom quarter of its
length, followed by straitening of the legs and a resting of the shaft against
one's right shoulder such that it sloped backwards some 30 degrees. 24
Additional commands for the taking up of shields or loosing them to rest on
the ground, leaning upon one's knees, and to raise and lower shields, to bring
up one's shield into a defensive position in front of one's body or to have it
hang at one's side were also used.
The command to “ready spears” however presented some difficulties.

freely (if using an overhand grip) without leaving much in the way of gaps that
could be exploited within a given rank.
23
Paul Cartledge, “Hoplites and Heroes: Sparta’s Contribution to the Technique of
Ancient Warfare,” The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 97 (1977): 16.
24
“Relief Sculpture, South Western Asia Minor circa 400 BCE,” photograph, in
Philip de Souza et al., The Greeks at War (Oxford: Osprey Publishing, Ltd., 2004),
145. It should be noted that this same maneuver has been executed throughout
history in much the same way by flag-bearers, users of pole arms, and later,
firearms.
120 Hiroshi Maeno

Uncertainty remains whether hoplites wielded their spears in an underhand

or overhand position, or even if spear usage was uniform within a given
formation. Shifting from a “sloped spear” position to an underhand position
was certainly easier as it required no shifting of one's grip. Underhand use
also revealed a surprising degree of flexibility with regard to thrust height, as
one could choose to engage in a “low” underhand thrust, wherein the spear
shaft passes below the median of one's shield or a "high" underhand with the
spear shaft passing above the median of one's shield.
The use of an underhand thrust was not without problems, however. Even
without crowding in the front ranks, the lateral flexibility of the underhand
thrust (both high and low) was limited, as the back part of the shaft also
passed along, rubbed, or occasionally banged against the edge of the shield
in the following rank, making it difficult, if not impossible to angle a thrust
either left or right.25 If the second rank crowds forward to engage the enemy
this effect became even more pronounced, and the formation is faced with
the additional problem of spear shafts crowding one another, although this
problem was eliminated when ranks alternated using low and high underhand
thrusts. Interestingly, this very restriction of lateral movement likely would
have prevented the butt spike of period doru from lodging into the shield of
the person in the following rank or otherwise causing injury unless an
individual stepped out of file.26
The use of an overhand thrust on the other hand was less problematic in
execution, as an overhand thrust was executed with a raised arm, the spear

25
It should be noted that such restrictions assume that rearward ranks maintained
their shields in a ready position. If such a position were to be dropped, then lateral
movement would improve, but also reintroduce the possibility of butt spike
injuries.
26
Goldworthy disagrees with this premise, in A. K. Goldsworthy, “The Othismos,
Myths and Heresies: The Nature of Hoplite Battle,” War In History, 4, no. 1
(1997): 17. The two sides are not necessarily in conflict however, as Goldworthy
expressly mentions the possibility of a backward thrust with a butt spike during an
initial charge conducted at a full run, in which case it is possible that individual
hoplites would not be holding their shields cross-body in an effort to build up
greater speed. For more information regarding charging at a full run, see Nicholas
Sekunda, Marathon: 490BC (Oxford: Osprey Publishing, Ltd., 2002), 64-65.
 Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 121

shaft naturally tended to be angled downward.27 This angle has the dual
benefit of reducing the possibility that one's butt spike could accidentally
injure the following ranks and, naturally being clear of the shields in the
following ranks as well, can be maneuvered laterally to a much greater
extent and thereby allowing a hoplite not only to target the hoplite to the
immediate front, but also those on either side, presenting a choice of three
targets rather than one.28 When second or third ranks crowded forward, the
successive lines of spears became more horizontal, but the butt spikes still
easily cleared the rearward ranks.
There remained the problem of precisely how a formation reversed the
grips on their spears when changing from a “slope spears” to a “ready
spears” position, however. Other authors have suggested that a formation
proceeded from “slope spears” to “rest spears,” reversed their grip, and
brought their spears up into an overhand position. This pattern of execution
has been countered by the argument that such an execution would have
required a formation to come to a full stop to be effective.29 A few practice
attempts found this counterargument to be false, although it did result in
some amount of disorder and was impossible, at least during the limited time
of the reenactment, to accomplish when marching double time.
When posed with the question of finding an alternative solution, one was
quickly forthcoming from the reenactment participants. Starting from the
“slope spears” position, one's grip is shifted upward on their spear shaft,

27
This natural downward slope was a combination of both the natural angle formed
by the wrist and arm during an overhand thrust, and the tendency to hold the doru
somewhat behind the balance point in an attempt to achieve a greater reach.
28
If held at the proper angle, the threat to the rearward ranks from a butt spike by
those in front would be almost completely eliminated. The fact that period sources
claim that injuries occasionally occurred serves not only to emphasize the
likelihood that an overhand thrust was used, but also that in the heat of battle,
individual spears were not always held at the proper slope. For a summary of
period sources with regard to butt spike injury, see Hanson, Western, 86-87.
29
For a discussion covering both sides of this argument, see J. K. Anderson, “Hoplite
Weapons and Offensive Arms,” in Hoplites: The Classical Greek Battle Experience,
ed. Victor Davis Hanson (New York: Routledge, 2005), 30-32.
122 Hiroshi Maeno

moving it closer to the balance point.30 The arm is then pulled back as if
pulling a lever, causing the individual’s shoulder then acts as a natural
fulcrum and rotating the spear shaft forward.31 The wielder's wrist reaches
maximum extension as the spear shaft approaches level.32 The wielder then
quickly reverses their grip, allowing the shaft to continue its' rotation.33
With grip now reversed, the spear can now be wielded in an overhand
manner with the point, rather than butt end forward, allowing it to be raised
into a “ready” position with one's hand between the lower third and halfway
point along the spear shaft; perfectly positioned to strike.34 The ease with
which this maneuver can be carried out was remarkable. Not only was the
entire formation able to perfect it in just a few minutes; it could be performed
in formation even when marching double time without interference between
either ranks or files.35
Period art is of limited little help in determining the veracity of either of
these options, for while there certainly are numerous depictions of hoplite
combat, there are no extant works showing massed fighting that can be dated
to the fourth or fifth centuries BCE. 36 The distinction is in this case
important: in a hunt or even more so, an individual duel, a wide variety of
strikes and defenses can be employed that would otherwise be impossible or
at the very least, tactically foolish in a closed-order formation. Earlier
works exist, including the Chigi vase, as do numerous period scenes of
individual battle, indicating that the overhand thrust seemed to be preferred,
but this may not accurately represent the state of phalanx warfare during the

30
“Spear Transition 1,” drawing by Suh Bo-Min (2011).
31
“Spear Transition 2,” drawing by Suh Bo-Min (2011).
32
“Spear Transition 3,” drawing by Suh Bo-Min (2011).
33
“Spear Transition 4,” drawing by Suh Bo-Min (2011).
34
“Spear Transition 5 and Spear Transition 6,” drawings by Suh Bo-Min (2011).
35
Anderson describes the changing of grips by tossing the spear into the air and
catching it again, which is also another reasonable possibility in, Anderson, 32.
The downside to such a maneuver is the increased chance that a spear could be
dropped while closing with the enemy, as it requires that the spear leave contact of
one's hand completely, albeit for a fraction of a second.
36
Also known as a hoplon, as per the Historical Dictionary of Ancient Greek
Warfare, s.v. “shield,” by Iain G. Spence, 295.
 Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 123

fifth and fourth centuries BCE. Again, on the Chigi vase, warriors are shown
carrying not one but two spears each, showing that there was at least some
degree of evolution in hoplite warfare between early hoplite combat and the
time of the Peloponnesian War, so while examples of both out of period
group combat and period individual battle scenes portrayed in artwork
actually supports the argument that an overhand thrust was preferred, such
evidence cannot be considered conclusive.37
Regardless of which style of hand grip was used, it can be said that the
switching of grips during combat would have been problematic, if not
downright impossible. Particularly if the second of third rank crowd forward
to engage the enemy line, there simply is no room to easily maneuver a
change in grip save for perhaps the reversal of a broken spear so that the butt
spike could be used. Even here however, it would still be easier to drop the
spear entirely and draw one's sword.
Once participants were able to ready spears using either an underhand or
overhand grip, both while stationary and while marching, the question of
footwork was examined. There is no reason to doubt that hoplites proceeded
normally while marching. Even when advancing under missile fire, the
volunteers found it simple to advance at a double time march with shields
raised and still maintain good order.38

37
“Plate 27,” photograph, in Egypt, Greece and Rome, 2d ed., by Charles Freeman
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), between p. 238 and 239. While many
scholars interpret the hoplites on the Chigi vase as holding two spears each, some
continue to press for the alternative explanation that the upright spear points are
“ghost spears” meant to represent a second rank of troops, as described in
Anderson, 19. Anderson himself however expresses doubts about this alternative
explanation.
38
In this case “missile fire” meant volleys of tennis balls, a safer alternative to the
alternative of padded javelins and blunted arrows. It should be noted that this
endeavor was aided by the fact that they were not burdened by the full hoplite
panoply, which is estimated to weigh 60 pounds or more. Finally, a double time
march, equivalent to a fast jog, does not necessarily equate to a "full charge" as
executed by the Athenians at the battle of Marathon.
124 Hiroshi Maeno

2. Shield Coverage and Footwork

When approaching an enemy phalanx the phenomenon of “rightward
drift” comes into question. First and foremost individual hoplites would
want to ensure sufficient protection for themselves and would not willingly
adapt a stance that would expose more of their body than necessary. To that
end, many authors, both period and contemporary have mentioned the inherent
vulnerability of the phalanx's right side, causing a rightward shift as
individuals collectively sought the protection of the shield of the person to
their immediate right. It should be noted that an “average” sized aspis with a
diameter of 90cm will reach from the shoulder to below mid-thigh on a
person six feet two inches tall, or 189cm, tall even by most modern
standards. The relative coverage would only have been larger on the average
ancient Greek who was, on average, almost 30cm shorter.39 Simply put, so
long as an ally was stationed in formation to your right, individual hoplites
would be more than adequately covered by the breadth of their own shield,
and would have had little use for the shield of the person to their right, save
that their presence prevented them from being immediately flanked. Some
degree of clustering should perhaps be expected however, even though
individuals would gain little in the way of direct protection, if only on a
purely psychological basis.40
On the other hand, those in the extreme right file indeed did face the
possibility of being flanked, which brings up the question of whether
rightward drift is caused by a “pushing” effect or a “pulling” effect. When
looked at in this way, pulling makes eminently more sense. Files to the left
would not allow their own right flanks to be exposed through excessively
wide gaps between files, causing each in turn to drift rightward as they

39
Nicola Koepke and Joerg Baten, “The Biological Standard of Living in Europe
During the Last Two Millennia” (paper presented at the fifth European Historical
Economics Society Conference, Madrid, Spain, July 2003).
40
Goldsworthy, 15. Goldsworthy notes that such behavior continues in modern
military drills when such clustering would be counterproductive and even occurs
under practice conditions when intellectually, individuals know that they are no
real danger.
 Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 125

sought to maintain proper spacing. Sadly, the small number of volunteers

did not allow the testing of this theory, which is perhaps worthy of further
investigation.
The above mentioned degree of coverage however represents a case where
a shield being held “at rest” hanging straight at one's side, providing no
frontal coverage whatsoever. Raising one's shield such that it is held cross-
body (such a rise is natural given that the porpax and antilabe system means
that to hold an aspis cross-body, one has to bend their elbow and turn their
arm inward) would then tend to expose an individual's thighs. It would also
tend to shift the breadth of coverage such that the center of the shield is held
just to the right of the left edge of a person's torso, in which case the left
third of the aspis would indeed project outward toward the file on the left.
The question then becomes: would a hoplite stand full front forward in the
face of combat? Both period artwork and common sense would dictate that
such was not the case. If a shield is held such that it protects frontally, while
simultaneously protecting one's lower thighs an individual hoplite would
need to stand with legs together, knees somewhat bent, somewhat akin to
getting ready to hop. This is a remarkably uncomfortable position to maintain
for any length of time, unless one also straddles their legs to a certain extent,
thereby removing some of the cover provided by one's shield. It also lacks
much in the way of stability if a person is pushed either forward or backward,
such as being jostled from behind or if being pushed from the front by the
opposing line. In short, standing facing forward once engaged with the
enemy would be both uncomfortable and tactically unsound.
A natural form of compensation for this instability is to stand in an
oblique stance with feet planted about approximately a 45 degree angle,
causing one's torso to face some 30 degrees to the right, rather than full
forward. Doing so has a number of advantages: by taking a half step back
with one's right foot, the discomfort caused by standing with knees slightly
bent, legs together disappears. Additionally, should a formation choose to
close ranks and lock shields (halving the approximately one meter spacing
between files used thus far), standing at an oblique angle provides the
maximum amount of space between files, an important consideration given
126 Hiroshi Maeno

that even a man with excessively narrow shoulders today (more accurately
corresponding to the average person of the ancient world) is 44cm.41 It also
moves a greater portion of one's body (slightly) farther away from enemy
weapons while at the same time providing a smaller profile of one's torso.
Finally, this same shifting of stance largely negates the possibility of
providing direct coverage provided to the file of soldiers to on one's left,
maximizing individual coverage but taking away from possibility of
providing cover in that direction.42 Not coincidentally, an almost identical
stance (minus the bent arm needed to maintain shield coverage) is used for
almost every combat sport in existence in the modern day, including rifle
shooting, archery, boxing, and most martial arts.43 Although a comparison
of footwork between hoplite combat and modern sports is far from
conclusive, it is highly suggestive, providing a stance that is both comfortable
and effective. While not conducive to covering long distances, this oblique
stance allows a fair amount of mobility, a trait unnecessary in a phalanx
formation, but useful for a duel.
Again, period artwork supports the adoption of an oblique stance. Thus far
the only efforts to examine footwork in classical Greece have focused on
swordsmanship, but a survey of period and near-period art involving both
spear and shield yields similar results: scenes showing actual combat, both
individual and group, invariably show hoplites with feet separated from a

41
“Anthropometrics Notes” (31 May 2010) http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_
Tables/Human/Human_sizes.html (accessed 14 July, 2010). This represents the
5% statistical mark for British males between the ages of 19 and 65. Even
allowing for the subtraction of a few more cm, this represents a space that is very
confined laterally.
42
Protection against being flanked however, remains unchanged, a key point in
understanding that individual hoplite needed no additional form of frontal
coverage, but instead sought to ensure that their right flank remained protected
and intact.
43
The starting position for sumo wrestling is an exception in that it mandates a
starting position facing full forward while squatting with feet spaced shoulder
length apart. Conversely, Olympic style fencing uses a relatively extreme oblique
stance with knees bent to a much greater extent than most martial arts, with feet
held somewhat wider apart and the back foot at a 90 degree angle to the front foot,
which faces straight forward, and angling one's torso some 45 degrees.
 Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 127

side view.44 Reasons for this are twofold: not only is an oblique stance an
excellent position for fighting, from an artistic perspective is also allows the
artist to show an increased amount of detail. While artistic license could
potentially be dismissed if examined in isolation, period poetry also lends
support, as recorded by Tyrtaeus (Τυρταῖος) as he addresses a group of
Spartan soldiers “Come, let everyone stand fast, with legs set well apart and
both feet fixed firmly on the ground...”45 Such exhortations would make no
sense if individuals were to stand "with legs set well apart" whilst facing full
forward. Indeed, it would be quite easy for a push from either in front or
behind to unbalance an individual standing in such a position, not to mention
that standing in such a position would also expose the lower portion of one's
thighs to attack.46

3. Rank and File Spacing Effects on Combat Effectiveness

With a likely stance was settled upon, the volunteers were split into two
groups for mock engagements. Given the small number of people available,
these groups were of unequal size, with the “opposition” group consisting of
a single rank, allowing a greater amount of realism for the larger main
phalanx. It was immediately noticeable that upon engagement, the front two
ranks naturally tended to crowd forward in an attempt to engage the line of
opposition. With spears 240cm long, the second rank could begin to engage

44
For information on footwork as it applies to swordsmanship in ancient Greece, see
Brian F. Cook, “Footwork in Ancient Greek Swordsmanship,” Metropolitan
Museum Journal, 24, (1989): throughout. For a summary of a survey of evidence
for footwork and drills, see J. K. Anderson, Military Theory and Practice in the
Age of Xenophon (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1970), 87-89.
45
Michael M. Sage, Warfare in Ancient Greece: A Sourcebook (New York:
Routledge, 2008), 28.
46
While Snodgrass mentions the possibility of the oblique stance, he maintains that
it would have been more common for the various files of hoplites to cluster
together while keeping a full frontal stance, in Snodgrass, 54. Psychologically,
such crowding makes sense but in no way inherently suggests that an oblique
stance could not or was not used. Indeed, particularly when files are crowded
together the adoption of an oblique stance makes more, rather than less sense, a
point which Snodgrass appears to have overlooked.
128 Hiroshi Maeno

the front of the enemy line somewhat ineffectively. The third rank could
only reach the shields in the front rank of the opposing force with difficulty,
although such efforts could potentially provide some measure of
distraction.47 With longer spears of 270cm, the third rank could perhaps
have begun to be somewhat more effective.48 To do so however, the person
in the second rank would need to step forward such that their shield lightly
pressed into the person in front. The degree of crowding may have been
affected by the use of flat, rather than dished shields. It appears that the use
of a dished shield may have potentially allowed for ranks to be fractionally
closer together, as the curve of the shield of a person in back could
conceivably fit into the natural curvature of the spine of the person in front.
Such speculation requires a closer comparison with both flat and dished
shields to be gauged with any degree of accuracy however. In a “real” battle,
this slight pressure may have erupted into some degree of pushing, providing
a possible explanation to period sources detailing “pushing from behind.”49
From the fourth rank on, however, participants had little to do and
maintained their initial spacing. In the case of missile fire, these rear ranks
could have maintained a secondary defense by keeping their spears in the "at
rest" position, with the resulting rows of upright shafts causing some portion
of incoming arrows to be deflected.50
This certainly is not the only explanation; rather than eagerness of those in

47
Opposing lines in this case were not quite pressing shield to shield, but were 20-
30cm apart.
48
The length of 270cm represents the estimated maximum length of a period doru,
as per Schwartz, 82.
49
Hanson, Western, 157-9. See also Goldsworthy, 20. Such quotes may or may not
have applied to the practice of othismos, or massed shoving, during a hoplite battle.
Details on what exactly the othismos entailed, how long it lasted, when it was used
and its ultimate purpose remain a subject of considerable debate. For the purposes
of this investigation, the limited pushing outlined herein appeared to be a normal
and integral process of the hoplite battle itself, both from the opposition and from
the second and third ranks in the process of attempting to engage the opposing line.
50
Theodore Ayrault Dodge, Alexander (Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press, 2004), 146.
Dodge describes the deflection of incoming missiles as it applied to the sarissa-
wielding phalanx of Alexander's infantry but a similar, lesser affect could also be
applied to the rear ranks of a hoplite phalanx as well.
 Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 129

the second and third ranks pushing those in the front, veterans in the back
row could have actively prevented the escape of those ranks in front,
prodding them forward lest they turn and flee.51 In a formation that was on
the verge of breaking or when facing a superior force this indeed could have
happened, but it is beyond the scope of this paper to gauge the likelihood of
voluntary crowding by those in the front ranks as opposed to involuntary
shoving from behind to prevent desertion.
Finally, the relatively advanced maneuver of a countermarch, whereby
members of a given file starting in the front rank perform a double turn to
the left and proceed between their own file and the file to their immediate
left was attempted. Sources imply that Sparta, with its professional troops, was
the only force of the period that was capable of implementing a countermarch
correctly.52 The maneuver is simple enough if given enough space, but
becomes exponentially more difficult as files are posted closer together.
To begin files were broadened to double arm-length, or approximately
two meters between individuals. After a few moments of confusion, the
maneuver could be executed with minimal error, even with shields held at
the ready. Spacing between files was then narrowed to approximately one
and half meters. The maneuver was again performed without error, but with
some clashing of equipment and only when shields were held “at rest” at
one's side.53 There was also a definite tendency for the files to widen as the
maneuver progressed and several times the end spacing of files had widened

51
Goldsworthy, 24.
52
G. L. Cawkwell, “Orthodoxy and Hoplites,” The Classical Quarterly, New Series,
39, no. 2 (1989): 380. Period sources in this case do not directly say that other city
states could not or did not execute a countermarch maneuver, but rather that the
execution of a countermarch is only mentioned in conjunction with Sparta. A
simple about face would have been much easier, but as the most capable leaders
and warriors were stationed in the front rank, executing a countermarch would
have ensured that forces attempting to close with the rear of a phalanx would have
encountered the most capable troops, rather than those of potentially lesser quality.
53
It should be noted that despite instructions, some of the volunteers continued to
hold their elbow bent, rather than allow their arm to hang at their side, a point
which incrementally increased the amount of space inherently required and
contributed to the amount of equipment clashing that occurred.
130 Hiroshi Maeno

from the intended one and half meters back to the broader two meter spacing
that the formation had started with. Sadly, this natural tendency to spread out
was only possible due to the relatively small number of volunteers. In a
larger formation, the central ranks would have been held to the original
spacing, even if ranks on either end maintained a tendency to widen. To test
the possibility of executing a countermarch with one meter spacing between
files, additional volunteers and practice than were available would be needed:
the results of further investigations along these lines may help future efforts
with regard to questions of file spacing.

IV. Conclusions

The observations and conclusions attained herein will likely not end any
part of the numerous scholarly debates that encompass the phalanx formation.
It can however add some degree of insight as to what was both likely and
possible with regard to its nuts and bolts workings. While the small number
of participants prevented the investigation of some aspects of hoplite combat,
such as the occurrence of rightward drift while marching and the recreation
of a phalanx encounter with offset lines, the reenactment as a whole
provides a number of reasonable baselines from which the minimum
capabilities of a Classical phalanx can be drawn. The use of an oblique
stance of individual hoplites for example not only makes practical and
psychological sense, but is supported in both artwork and literature of the
period. The distance of 1.5 meters similarly provides a good approximation
of the distance needed between files in order to execute a countermarch.
Finally, exactly how a hoplite formation shifted from “slope spears” to
“ready spears” will retain a degree of speculation, the transition outlined
herein was both simple and easy to accomplish, providing an additional
alternative to either tossing their spears in the air or grounding them and
reversing their grip.54 How individual hoplites stood, how they gripped their

54
Anderson, 30-32. Anderson deals with the question of spear transitioning in a
surprisingly casual manner. While the means of transitioning from “slope spears”
 Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 131

spear, how many ranks of a phalanx saw action at a given time, all are
questions that have been largely overlooked by the majority of scholars, in
part because such details tend to leave no written record. Rather than claim
that such gaps are forever lost, this paper has taken pains to start with what is
known, and proceeded to fill in some of that which is missing through
firsthand experience and testing.

V. Drawings

Spear Transition 1 Spear Transition 2

to “ready spears” as outlined in this paper is speculative, it is the first physical

examination of the issue to be detailed in written form.
132 Hiroshi Maeno

Spear Transition 3 Spear Transition 4

Spear Transition 5 Spear Transition 6

Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 133

VI. Copyright Release

134 Hiroshi Maeno

Works Cited

“Anthropometrics Notes.” 31 May 2010. http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/

Human/Human_sizes.html. Accessed 14 July, 2010.
Anderson, J. K. “Hoplite Weapons and Offensive Arms.” In Hoplites: The Classical
Greek Battle Experience, ed. Victor Davis Hanson, 15-37. New York: Routledge, 2005.
----------. Military Theory and Practice in the Age of Xenophon. Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1970.
Anglim, Simon, Phyllis G. Jestice, Rob S. Price, Scott M. Rusch, and John Serrati.
Fighting Techniques of the Ancient World. New York: St. Martin's Press, 2002.
Cartledge, Paul. “Hoplites and Heroes: Sparta's Contribution to the Technique of
Ancient Warfare.” The Journal of Hellenic Studies 97 (1977): 11-27.
Cawkwell, G. L. “Orthodoxy and Hoplites.” The Classical Quarterly, New Series 39,
no. 2 (1989): 375-389.
Cook, Brian F. “Footwork in Ancient Greek Swordsmanship.” Metropolitan Museum
Journal, 24, (1989): 57-64.
de Souza, Philip, Waldemar Heckel, and Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones. The Greeks at War.
Oxford: Osprey Publishing, Ltd., 2004.
Dodge, Theodore Ayrault. Alexander. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press, 2004.
Freeman, Charles. Egypt, Greece and Rome, 2d ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2004.
Goldsworthy, A. K. “The Othismos, Myths and Heresies: The Nature of Hoplite
Battle.” War in History 4, no. 1 (1997): 1-26.
Hanson, Victor David. “Hoplite Technology in the Phalanx Battle.” In Hoplites: The
Classical Greek Battle Experience, ed. Victor Davis Hanson 63-84. New York:
Routledge, 2005.
--------. The Western Way of War. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2009.
Koepke, Nicola and Joerg Baten. “The Biological Standard of Living in Europe
During the Last Two Millennia.” Paper presented at the fifth European Historical
Economics Society Conference, Madrid, Spain, July 2003.
Lorimer, H. M. “The Hoplite Phalanx with Special Reference to the Poems of
Archilochus and Tyrtaeus.” The Annual of the British School at Athens 42, (1947):
76-138.
 Historiography and Inscription in Ancient Greece
- How were Inscriptions Narrated? - 135

Markle, Minor M. III. “The Macedonian Sarissa, Spear, and Related Armor.”
American Journal of Archaeology 81, no. 3 (Summer, 1977): 323-339.
Murray, Oswyn. Early Greece, 2d ed. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993.
Polybius. “Histories.” Undated. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plb.+
18.29&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0234. (Accessed 7 May 2010).
Sage, Michael M. Warfare in Ancient Greece: A Sourcebook. New York: Routledge,
2008.
Schwartz, Adam. Reinstating the Hoplite. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 2009.
Sekunda, Nicholas. Marathon: 490BC. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, Ltd., 2002.
Sekunda, Nicholas and Adam Hook. Greek Hoplite: 480-323 BC. Oxford: Osprey
Publishing, Ltd., 2000.
Snodgrass, A. M. Arms and Armor of the Greeks. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1999.
Spence, Iain G. Historical Dictionary of Ancient Greek Warfare. London: The
Scarecrow Press, Inc., 2002.

Received May 12, 2011

Submitted June 10, 2011
[Abstract]

Hoplite Phalanx Mechanics:

Investigation of Footwork, Spacing and Shield Coverage

Karl Randall
(Kyungsung Universtiy)

The Greek phalanx has been a subject of study for generations of both
historians and military tacticians alike. Almost every conceivable detail of
its organization, supply, evolution and social effects has been covered many
times over. Yet despite this, there is a relatively poor understanding of how
a phalanx actually worked. The stance which individuals took and how far
apart they stood from their compatriots, the position in which the held their
weapons, could the second or third ranks engage the enemy and if the hoplite
shield provided physical cover to the soldier on one's immediate left are
details that have remained largely unexplored. Passages penned by a number
of period (or near period) authors that potentially shed light on such these
points remain under debate to this day. It is hoped that the current investigation
will provide fresh insight into such details by combining a survey of existing
sources with hands on experience, in this case by actually going out and
arming a volunteer phalanx on a small scale to see what is both possible and
practical. As with any modern recreation, a certain amount of guesswork is
involved; the current effort, however, will have the advantage of providing
firsthand observations that supply simple and rational explanations of
practical phalanx mechanics as a means to shed light on preexisting sources.

[Key Words] Greece, Hoplite, Phalanx, Shield, Footwork, Spacing, History,

Military, Warfare
 Hoplite Phalanx Mechanics 137

[국문요약]

그리스 장갑보병 방진의 기술:

군사들의 발놀림과 간격과 방패 보호의 조사

랜달

고대 그리스의 방진(方方 )은 역사학자들과 군사 전략가들에게 수

세기 동안 연구 과제로 진행되고 있습니다. 방진의 조직, 공급, 평
가와 사회적 영향 등 거의 대부분의 생각할 수 있는 세부사항은
되풀이해서 거론되고 있습니다. 그럼에도 불구하고, 방진이 어떻게
실제로 이루어졌는지에 대한 이해는 상대적으로 부족한 편입니다.
각 군사들이 취했던 발 모양과 그들이 무기를 잡고 있는 위치에서
동료들과 얼마나 떨어져서 서있었는지, 두 번째 또는 세 번째 횡렬
에서 적과의 교전할수 있었는지, 장갑 보병의 방패가 군사의 바로
왼쪽 부분에 물리적 방어을 제공했는지등의 세부사항은 거의 밝혀
지지 않고있습니다. 가능성있게 이러한 점들을 밝히고 있는 많은
시대(또는 최근)의 작가들에 의해 쓰여진 구절들은 오늘날까지 여
전히 논쟁으로 남아 있습니다. 최근의 조사는 실제로 무엇이 가능
하고 실용적인지를 확인하기 위해서, 직접 야외로 나가 작은 규모
로 방진 배열을 만들어 얻어진 결과와 현존하는 자료들을 조합하
는 등의 세부사항을 제시함으로써, 새로운 견해를 제공할 것이라고
믿습니다. 어느 정도의 추측과 여러 가지의 노력으로, 이를 현대식
으로 재현함으로써, 이전에 존재하는 자료를 명백히 하기 위해, 실
용적인 방진의 기술을 간단하고 논리적인 설명을 제공하는 직접적
이고 실질적인 조사 내용을 제공하는 이점을 가질 것입니다.

[주제어] 그리스, 방진, 방패, 장갑 보병, 발 놀림, 간격, 역사, 군대,

전쟁