Week 7 Lab Summary: Tactics

Claire Saunders, Cole Kniep, Luke Pegram

Introduction

This week, we moved away from shepherds and food-making into ancient Greek and Roman military tactics, which we recreated on the Mini Bald Spot on campus. Before the lab, we read about how these different military models operated and how successful they were against each other. In a hoplite formation, soldiers stood extremely close together with their shields interlocked, creating a wall of bodies in which you were responsible for covering the exposed section of the person to the left of you. Using seven-foot spears, they would push against each other until one army faltered. The next method we used was the phalanx created by Philip II of Macedon. We traded in our seven-foot spears and shields for seventeen-foot sarissas and lined up three feet apart in five rows to create an interlocking system of spear tips that were very difficult to penetrate. This formation, however, was very vulnerable to attacks from the rear and to uneven ground, which led to it being beaten by the Roman maniple. Our final formation, which was the maniple, consisted of many individuals as part of a collective instead of one mass of people, like the last two formations. The use of the curved shield and a three-foot sword made the men mobile, and soldiers could even rotate while fighting. We also learned how to create a successful testudo, which was used to defend against enemy projectiles. 

During the lab, we used plastic garbage cans sawed in half as our Roman shields and garbage can lids for our hoplite shields. We also used three, seven, and seventeen-foot lengths of PVC pipe as our weapons to simulate the different lengths of weapons that would be used. The overall purpose of the lab was to answer these research questions:

• What was the learning curve?
• What was the ceiling of this formation?
• What makes you feel safe or in danger?
• How much training would you want?

Preparation & Tools

Our procedure for this lab began the day before, where we spent our class time carefully creating replica Roman shields by sawing plastic trash bins in half. Each of the six groups was in charge of one bin and could therefore create two shields. How groups approached this could vary depending on which way groups cut the bin and how high the handle was placed, but the general design was relatively similar. People preferred different handle heights for different activities, with a higher handle height being better for the maniple but a more central handle being better for the testudo. We also cut a semicircle into the bottom to make space for the person holding the shield, which almost every group said was better than leaving the bottom fully intact. We needed to leave some of the base for structural stability, making the trash bin shields not quite a perfect match, but very usable. All other materials used were pre-made. 

On the day of the lab, we carried all the different materials down to the Mini Bald Spot to begin our lab. We were given the above research questions, which would be answered by each group in short breaks between each formation. We began in the hoplite formation with 4 rows of six people, the first two rows having both shields and seven-foot spears, while the back had only the spears. We slowly learned how to maneuver and run in this formation before reenacting some battle scenarios, like the time the two armies missed each other entirely due to the structure of the formation. We then attached an extra ten-foot pipe to our spears to create seventeen-foot sarissas of the phalanx formation. We didn’t hold shields in our full group version, but later we tried with the hoplite shields to not much success. For this formation, we stood in five rows of five people to imitate the five spear points that enemies would have to get through. We also introduced obstacles to show the weaknesses of the formation. Finally, we gathered our trash can shields and three-foot pipes to work on the Roman maniple, in which we stood six across and four deep with six feet between each line. In this formation, we learned how to rotate the lines on command. We also learned how to create the testudo used by the Romans as cover against projectiles during siege warfare, by turning our trash cans into a massive shield under which we all took cover.

The Hoplite Formation

Across all lab groups, there were strikingly consistent opinions and experiences in regards to the hoplite formation. Most felt that this formation was quite easy to get the hang of, since all it required was standing in a grid formation and producing a good seal between the circular shields of those in the front row. In regards to the ceiling of competence this formation would allow, most thought that it would have a pretty high ceiling. This was due mainly to two issues. Firstly, holding the shields in a tight formation was quite taxing, and especially if these shields were genuine (and made out of wood and metal instead of plastic), the success of the formation would greatly depend on upper body strength. Similarly, multiple groups identified running speed in formation to be something that could improve greatly with training, so lower body strength and cardio would be of particular importance. As for the location in the formation that felt the safest, everyone involved more or less unanimously responded this was the middle or back middle, since those in front were the most exposed. Ultimately, all groups generally concluded that further training would be beneficial in and of that it would improve physical endurance (also necessary for colliding with other formations), since the hoplite is a rather brute and simple formation technically speaking.

The Macedonian Phalanx

There was vehement agreement between all groups that the phalanx had the most difficult learning curve of all the formations we learned. There was through concurrence as to the fact that this formation had the most intricate layout, since it relies on all sarissas being delicately interwoven with one another and staggered, something that did not easily come to fruition (in part because we have greatly varying heights, so perhaps this would not have been as much of a problem in the ancient world). Additionally, many complained about how the wind made holding our wobbly plastic mock sarissas quite annoying. However, while wooden poles would not flex in the wind, they would certainly require much more exertion to wield, so this difference would still present its own host of difficulties. Similarly to hoplite warfare, the phalanx was generally thought to have a high ceiling, which could be achieved by better organization, especially while turning. Accordingly, many thought that much more training would be needed to optimally utilize this formation. In contrast to the hoplite, however, while this training would still hopefully increase physical endurance (since the sarissas are long and heavy), it would need to principally focus on familiarity with navigating the long spears amongst one’s compatriots. Interestingly, again diverging from reactions to hoplite warfare, there were widely differing conclusions from one group to another concerning where participants felt the safest. Some said the front was safest, as it allowed one to be reassured by seeing the wall of spears protecting the group, while others said the middle or even the far back. Interestingly, one lab group noted that they did not think it mattered where one was positioned in this formation safety-wise, perhaps since everyone in the formation was armed and dangerous.

The Roman Maniple

All seemed to think that the maniple was quite obviously the easiest to get the hang of out of all of the formations that we tried. This ease was thought to be due to the individual freedom of movement the formation allowed compared to others. Additionally, many were overwhelmed by the perceivedly claustrophobic nature of all of the other formations, so the maniple was in this sense a welcome and greatly appreciated respite. However, this was probably heavily contingent on the modern post-enlightenment individualistic sensibilities that have been socialized into our group, so this reaction may have greatly differed from the experience of ancient soldiers, who would perhaps even have preferred more closely organized formations that provided strength in union. It was also pretty much unanimously thought that the maniple would have a high ceiling in terms of the timing of the circulating waves of soldiers, something that could be further streamlined. Furthermore, since this formation relies greatly on individual swordsmanship, its success would rest heavily on the cultivation and mastery of this skill. This notwithstanding, the maniple was generally thought to require little training, as it was more obvious what role individual soldiers would play. The most fear in this formation was felt either when one was in the front, or anxiously moving up to the front.

The Testudo

Somewhat surprisingly, while the testudo is arguably the most striking and particular of all of the formations that we learned, it was described consistently as having a decidedly low learning curve. This was in fact due to the nature of the shields that we used, which were found to simply lock into place when everyone in the group was properly organized. In this vein, the testudo was thought to also have a low ceiling, as, to paraphrase one group, “it either works or it doesn’t.” In practice, while the sides of the testudo would be closest to any incoming blades or projectiles, many thought that the middle actually felt the scariest, as anyone in the middle was totally blind to where the group was going or what was happening around them. Stemming from a similar place as reactions to the maniple formation, many commented that their reservations (if any) about the testudo were centrally how unnerving it was to be forced to selflessly walk with the group if one was on the inside, with no ultimate say in any collective fate. Some actually thought of the testudo as in theory being the safest out of all of the formations we learned, albeit only if those bearing shields were well trained and could be relied on. Thus, it was generally thought that the testudo would benefit from rigorous training, especially in terms of maneuvering.

Conclusion

Between the Greek hoplite formation, the Macedonian phalanx, and the Roman maniple, we found that while each formation has their own strengths and weaknesses, people often felt safest in the positions that were the most physically protected by weapons or other bodies, and the tactics had the steepest learning curve when they required the most amount of both group coordination and difficult individual maneuvers. The Macedonian phalanx required us to both coordinate as a group and maneuver large unwieldy spears, making the learning curve much harder, whereas the hoplite and maniple formations were easier to learn and involved much more straightforward individual motions. Many people felt understandably safest in the testudo, where they were surrounded by shields and other people on all sides. The phalanx also felt safer for similar reasons, being surrounded by other people and weapons. 

In this lab, we were able to get meaningful experiential data about ancient warfare tactics just by simulating them with a small group of students using tools made from PVC pipe and plastic garbage bins. Even though the real formations would have been in much larger groups, we are able to get some sense of how the real formation might feel by imagining and extrapolating from the experience in a smaller group with plastic weapons and shields. Certainly, there are limitations to this kind of experiential research, particularly when it comes to our data about feelings of safety, since we were not in any actual danger. Regardless, though, practicing these formations in this lab helped us understand more about ancient warfare, and further training and practice would only lead to more of this understanding.