Close order formation

Last updated
Close order formation: The Stele of Vultures represents a Sumerian phalanx of spearmen with large shields (c. 2450 BC). Stele of Vultures detail 01-transparent.png
Close order formation: The Stele of Vultures represents a Sumerian phalanx of spearmen with large shields (c. 2450 BC).

A close order formation is a military tactical formation in which soldiers are close together and regularly arranged for the tactical concentration of force. It was used by heavy infantry in ancient warfare, as the basis for shield wall and phalanx tactics, to multiply their effective weight of arms by their weight of numbers. In the Late Middle Ages, Swiss pikemen and German Landsknechts used close order formations that were similar to ancient phalanxes.

Contents

Around the American Civil War (1861–1865), such organizations of soldiers became uncommon since improvements in firearms and artillery had made any such dense formation increasingly hazardous and less effective. The technological concentration of increased firepower to fewer soldiers had rendered the close order formation obsolete by the end of the 19th century. Modern infantry now use skirmish order, which is effectively the opposite of close order.

Antiquity

Close order formation: Greek hoplites marching in phalanx formation. Greek Phalanx.jpg
Close order formation: Greek hoplites marching in phalanx formation.

Images from the Sumerian kingdom from the 3rd millennium BC clearly show men with spears in close order formation. That tradition continued in the ancient world with the phalanx formation of the Greeks and later the Ancient Macedonians. The Greek phalanx fought with the aspis, a large round bronze faced shield and a large spear. The frontage per man was the width of the shield (about 3 ft), and the normal formation depth was four to eight men. [1]

The later Macedonian phalanx used a smaller shield but replaced the spear with a sarissa, a long pike used in two hands. The normal frontage per man remained the same, but the normal depth grew to 16 ranks. An innovation was the introduction of a "locked shield order" (synaspismos), with a frontage of only about 18 in. [2] The Roman legions also fought in close order by using the pilum and the gladius on a similar frontage per man to the phalanx.

Middle Ages

In close formation, Swiss pikemen confront Holy Roman imperial cavalry at the Battle of Dornach, 1499. Dornach 1499.jpg
In close formation, Swiss pikemen confront Holy Roman imperial cavalry at the Battle of Dornach, 1499.

In the early Middle Ages, infantry used the shieldwall, a formation in which shields were held edge-to-edge or overlapped. [3] Close order was routinely used by infantry in the later Middle Ages, the intention being to avoid the enemy penetrating and disrupting their formation. A common literary image was that an apple should not be able to pass between their lances. [4] In the 15th century, the Swiss developed pike tactics that used closely packed deep columns. A reconstruction of the deployment of Zürich forces in 1443 gives a formation 56 men wide by 20 deep, the formation having a width of 168 ft and a depth of 140 ft. [5] The Swiss main formation at the Battle of Morat consisted of 10,000 men, and experiments have estimated its area of as little as 60 m by 60 m. [6] The knightly cavalry of the Middle Ages could also fight in close order, stirrup to stirrup. [7]

Growth in firepower

16th century

From 1490 to 1520 saw the emergence of a consensus in military thinking that armies should be increasingly ordered on the battlefield and that neat, rectilinear formations were the key. [8] The uniform bodies of pikes would be ordered based on an area occupied by a soldier of three paces frontage and seven paces depth, the soldier being positioned at the centre of the rectangle. [9] Pikes did not stand alone on the battlefield, however, and new formations of horns or sleeves of shot were developed to support the pike blocks with firearms. In the late 16th century, a system called countermarching was developed to enable an exchange of ranks of shooters. That led to the development of thinner formations and set tacticians on the road to developing the linear fire tactics of the 18th century. [10]

On horseback, the old knightly tactics slowly gave way to new tactics involving firearms, which led to the development of pistol-armed cavalry known as reiters, who specialised in manoeuvring in deep, close formations and practiced a tactic known as the caracole in which successive ranks of men rode forward, shot and retired to reload. [11]

Prussian infantry in close order linear formation attack at the Battle of Hohenfriedberg, 1745. Hohenfriedeberg - Attack of Prussian Infantry - 1745.jpg
Prussian infantry in close order linear formation attack at the Battle of Hohenfriedberg, 1745.

17th and 18th centuries

In the 17th century, European armies expanded their use of firearms, which were at first matchlock weapons like arquebuses. They were later supplanted by unrifled muskets fired by a flintlock mechanism, which became the weapon of choice because it could be fired relatively rapidly (six shots per minute). Because of their poor accuracy, such weapons were typically used in line formations in which a commanding officer would order volley fire to increase the chances of inflicting casualties on the enemy. Such tactics were used throughout the 18th century. Line formations were, however, not without risks. Line commanders and other field officers were often highly visible targets and became the target of sniper attacks as rifling technology, which significantly increased the range and accuracy of firearms at the expense of a substantially reduced rate of fire, began to see increased use in the late 18th century. Fortifications were designed to break up formations by reducing the effectiveness of volley fire or to expose them to enfilading fire. In the latter, an enemy that could fire down the length of a line with an inaccurate weapon or cannons loaded with anti-personnel grapeshot greatly increased their chances of hitting something.

Another formation that saw use was the infantry square. Designed to defend against cavalry charges, an infantry battalion would form a square with the unit's standard in the center, along with reserve forces. That formation enabled the defenders to fire on cavalry on all sides of the formation although there was some risk that fire from one square might reach other squares formed nearby. The effectiveness of a square depended on the ability of the infantry to hold their ground against cavalry charges.

Eclipse

In the 19th century, advances in firearms technology rendered the use of close formations obsolete. The widespread use of rifled artillery and the advent of reliable breech-loading weapons altered the tactical landscape. These weapons had a significantly increased fire rate compared to muzzleloaders, and technological improvements also simplified the targeting of large, mobile bodies of enemy forces. This, coupled with improved infantry weapons and automatic weapons such as the Gatling gun and the Maxim Gun, made close formations incredibly costly. A major exception was in the Anglo-Zulu War after the Battle of Isandlwana. After that humiliating defeat, the British army found that close-order infantry formations were necessary to concentrate firepower to break the Zulu warriors' formidable massed charges.[ original research? ]

One of the last occasions involving the deployment in the face of the enemy of substantial numbers of British troops in close order occurred at the Battle of Magersfontein during the, South African War. The Scottish Brigade, consisting of 3,500 men shoulder to shoulder in 90 lines with a front of only 45 yards, moved forward in pre-dawn darkness to attack the entrenched Boer positions. Two of the four Highland regiments kept their tight formation with long ropes carried by the left hand man of each file. The result was a rout of the brigade after nine hours fighting, with nearly a quarter of the Scottish soldiers killed or wounded. [12]

In peace-time the major European armies persisted in training their infantry in close-order tactics that were to ensure very heavy casualties in August 1914. During the Battle of the Frontiers and the Battle of the Sambre the French attacked in shoulder to shoulder masses while at the Battle of Mons the German regiments went forward "as if advancing on a parade ground". [13]

Military parades

Though of no military value under modern conditions, military parades still feature soldiers standing and marching in close order formations for ceremonial purposes. Many armies maintain special ceremonial units, whose soldiers hold rigorous training in holding such formations, including armies established in the 20th century, which themselves have no experience of using such formations on the battlefield.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Infantry</span> Military personnel who engage in ground combat on foot

Infantry is a specialization of military personnel who engage in ground combat on foot. Infantry generally consists of light infantry, irregular infantry, heavy infantry, mountain infantry, motorized infantry, mechanized infantry, airborne infantry, air assault infantry, and naval infantry. Other types of infantry, such as line infantry and mounted infantry, were once commonplace but fell out of favor in the 1800s with the invention of more accurate and powerful weapons.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pike (weapon)</span> Long spear used by infantry

A pike is a long thrusting spear formerly used in European warfare from the Late Middle Ages and most of the early modern period, and wielded by foot soldiers deployed in pike square formation, until it was largely replaced by bayonet-equipped muskets. The pike was particularly well known as the primary weapon of Swiss mercenary, German Landsknecht units and French sans-culottes. A similar weapon, the sarissa, had been used in antiquity by Alexander the Great's Macedonian phalanx infantry.

A schiltron is a compact body of troops forming a battle array, shield wall or phalanx. The term is most often associated with Scottish pike formations during the Wars of Scottish Independence in the late 13th and early 14th centuries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sarissa</span> Long spear used by Macedonian army

The sarissa or sarisa was a long spear or pike about 5 to 7 meters in length. It was introduced by Philip II of Macedon and was used in his Macedonian phalanxes as a replacement for the earlier dory, which was considerably shorter. These longer spears improved the strength of the phalanx by extending the rows of overlapping weapons projecting towards the enemy. After the conquests of Alexander the Great, the sarissa was a mainstay during the Hellenistic era by the Hellenistic armies of the diadochi Greek successor states of Alexander's empire, as well as some of their rivals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Phalanx</span> Infantry formation

The phalanx was a rectangular mass military formation, usually composed entirely of heavy infantry armed with spears, pikes, sarissas, or similar pole weapons tightly packed together. The term is particularly used to describe the use of this formation in ancient Greek warfare, although the ancient Greek writers used it to also describe any massed infantry formation, regardless of its equipment. Arrian uses the term in his Array against the Alans when he refers to his legions. In Greek texts, the phalanx may be deployed for battle, on the march, or even camped, thus describing the mass of infantry or cavalry that would deploy in line during battle. They marched forward as one entity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pike square</span>

The pike square was a military tactical formation in which 10 rows of men in 10 columns wielded pikes. It was developed by the Swiss Confederacy during the 14th century for use by its infantry.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shield wall</span> Defensive infantry formation

A shield wall is a military formation that was common in ancient and medieval warfare. There were many slight variations of this formation, but the common factor was soldiers standing shoulder to shoulder and holding their shields so that they would abut or overlap. Each soldier thus benefited from the protection of the shields of his neighbors and his own.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Line infantry</span> Type of light infantry arranged in lines

Line infantry was the type of infantry that formed the bulk of most European land armies from the mid-17th century to the mid-19th century. Maurice of Nassau and Gustavus Adolphus are generally regarded as its pioneers, while Turenne and Montecuccoli are closely associated with the post-1648 development of linear infantry tactics. For both battle and parade drill, it consisted of two to four ranks of foot soldiers drawn up side by side in rigid alignment, and thereby maximizing the effect of their firepower. By extension, the term came to be applied to the regular regiments "of the line" as opposed to light infantry, skirmishers, militia, support personnel, plus some other special categories of infantry not focused on heavy front line combat.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ancient Macedonian army</span> Army of the ancient Greek kingdom of Macedonia

The army of the Kingdom of Macedon was among the greatest military forces of the ancient world. It was created and made formidable by King Philip II of Macedon; previously the army of Macedon had been of little account in the politics of the Greek world, and Macedonia had been regarded as a second-rate power.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pitched battle</span> Where both sides commit to fight at a location

A pitched battle or set-piece battle is a battle in which opposing forces each anticipate the setting of the battle, and each chooses to commit to it. Either side may have the option to disengage before the battle starts or shortly thereafter. A pitched battle is not a chance encounter such as a meeting engagement, or where one side is forced to fight at a time not of its choosing such as happens in a siege or an ambush. Pitched battles are usually carefully planned to maximize one's strengths against an opponent's weaknesses and use a full range of deceptions, feints, and other manoeuvres. They are also planned to take advantage of terrain favourable to one's force. Forces strong in cavalry, for example, will not select swamp, forest, or mountain terrain for the planned struggle. For example, Carthaginian General Hannibal selected relatively flat ground near the village of Cannae for his great confrontation with the Romans, not the rocky terrain of the high Apennines. Likewise, Zulu Commander Shaka avoided forested areas or swamps, in favour of rolling grassland, where the encircling horns of the Zulu Impi could manoeuvre to effect. Pitched battles continued to evolve throughout history as armies implemented new technology and tactics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Infantry tactics</span> Foot-soldier combat methods

Infantry tactics are the combination of military concepts and methods used by infantry to achieve tactical objectives during combat. The role of the infantry on the battlefield is, typically, to close with and engage the enemy, and hold territorial objectives; infantry tactics are the means by which this is achieved. Infantry commonly makes up the largest proportion of an army's fighting strength, and consequently often suffers the heaviest casualties. Throughout history, infantrymen have sought to minimise their losses in both attack and defence through effective tactics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Line (formation)</span> Tactical formation of soldiers

The line formation is a standard tactical formation which was used in early modern warfare. It continued the phalanx formation or shield wall of infantry armed with polearms in use during antiquity and the Middle Ages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pike and shot</span> Infantry formation

Pike and shot was a historical infantry tactical formation that first appeared during the late 15th and early 16th centuries, and was used until the development of the bayonet in the late 17th century. This type of formation combined soldiers armed with pikes and soldiers armed with arquebuses and/or muskets. Other weapons such as swords, halberds, and crossbows were also sometimes implemented. The formation was initially developed by the Holy Roman Imperial (Landsknechte) and Spanish (Tercios) infantries, and later by the Dutch and Swedish armies in the 17th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Heavy infantry</span> Heavily armed and armoured soldiers

Heavy infantry consisted of heavily armed and armoured infantrymen who were trained to mount frontal assaults and/or anchor the defensive center of a battle line. This differentiated them from light infantry who are relatively mobile and lightly armoured skirmisher troops intended for screening, scouting, and other tactical roles unsuited to soldiers carrying heavier loads. Heavy infantry typically made use of dense battlefield formations, such as shield wall or phalanx, multiplying their effective weight of arms with force concentration.

The Hellenistic armies is a term which refers to the various armies of the successor kingdoms to the Hellenistic period, emerging soon after the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BCE, when the Macedonian empire was split between his successors, known as the Diadochi.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Infantry in the Middle Ages</span> Overview about the infantry in the Middle Ages

Despite the rise of knightly cavalry in the 11th century, infantry played an important role throughout the Middle Ages on both the battlefield and in sieges. From the 14th century onwards, it has been argued that there was a rise in the prominence of infantry forces, sometimes referred to as an "infantry revolution", but this view is strongly contested by some military historians.

The ordre serré and the ordre profond were two ways of grouping soldiers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of infantry</span>

Although the term infantry dates from the 15th century, the foot troops of the previous eras in history who fought with a variety of weapons before the introduction of the firearms are also referred to as infantry. During the Ancient and Middle Ages infantry were often categorized by the types of weapons and armour they used, such as heavy infantry and light infantry. Generally, light infantry acted as skirmishers, scouts, and as a screening force for the more heavily armed and armored heavy infantry, the latter of which often made up the bulk of many historic armies.

Roman infantry tactics are the theoretical and historical deployment, formation, and manoeuvres of the Roman infantry from the start of the Roman Republic to the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The focus below is primarily on Roman tactics: the "how" of their approach to battle, and how it stacked up against a variety of opponents over time. It does not attempt detailed coverage of things like army structure or equipment. Various battles are summarized to illustrate Roman methods with links to detailed articles on individual encounters.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Macedonian phalanx</span> Ancient infantry formation

The Macedonian phalanx was an infantry formation developed by Philip II from the classical Greek phalanx, of which the main innovation was the use of the sarissa, a 6-metre pike. It was famously commanded by Philip's son Alexander the Great during his conquest of the Achaemenid Empire between 334 and 323 BC. The Macedonian phalanx model then spread throughout the Hellenistic world, where it became the standard battle formation for pitched battles. During the Macedonian Wars against the Roman Republic, the phalanx appeared obsolete against the more manoeuvrable Roman legions.

References

  1. Warry, John (1980). Warfare in the Classical World. London: Salamander. pp. 34–7. ISBN   0-86101-034-5.
  2. Warry (1980), pp. 72-3
  3. Pollington, Stephen (1996). The English Warrior from earliest times to 1066. Hockwold-cum-Wilton, Norfolk: Anglo-Saxon Books. pp. 182–5. ISBN   1-898281-10-6.
  4. Rogers, Clifford (2007). Soldiers' Lives Through History: The Middle Ages. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. pp. 162–3. ISBN   978-0-313-33350-7.
  5. Miller, Douglas (1979). The Swiss at War 1300–1500. Osprey. p. 17. ISBN   0-85045-334-8.
  6. Contamine, Philippe (1984). War in the Middle Ages. Oxford: Blackwell. p. 231. ISBN   0-631-13142-6.
  7. Rogers (2007), p. 191
  8. Arnold, Thomas (2001). The Renaissance at War. London: Cassel. pp. 65–72. ISBN   0-304-35270-5.
  9. Arnold (2001), p.71
  10. Arnold (2001), pp.78-81
  11. Arnold (2001), pp. 98-100
  12. Pakenham, Thomas (1991). The Boer War. London: Macdonald & Co (Publishers) Ltd. pp. 203–6. ISBN   0-7474-0976-5.
  13. Keegan, John (1998). The First World War. Hutchinson. p. 109. ISBN   0-09-180178-8.