Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 October 2013
A. J. Holladay has effectively reasserted the traditional view of the hoplite phalanx—that it was a dense mass of men, relying on the weight and cohesion of the whole rather than on the prowess of individuals in order to break the enemy's line.
Further evidence in his support is provided by Plato's Laches, where Nicias is made to praise the art of fighting (that is, single combat) in hoplite armour, as a fitting part of a liberal education. But when it comes to its utility in warfare he is less enthusiastic. ‘This science will help somewhat even on the actual battlefield, whenever one has to fight ranged in order with many others. But its chief benefit will be when the ranks are broken, and one has to fight singlehanded against a single adversary, and either, in pursuit, attack someone who is defending himself, or else, in retreat, protect oneself from the attack of another.’ Nicias clearly has in mind a situation like that from which Socrates extracted himself so handsomely at the Battle of Delium, as the speakers in the dialogue have just recalled; though Socrates of course made his retreat without benefit of the newfangled art of fencing.
1 Holladay, A. J., ‘Hoplites and heresies’, JHS cii (1982) 94–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 Pl. Lach. 181 d–182b.
3 Pl. Lach. 181 b.
4 Thuc. v 71. 1; Holladay (n. 1) 94.
5 X. Cyr. ii 2.6–9, 3.21; Lac. Pol. 11.4–6; Anderson, J. K., Military Theory and Practice in the Age of Xenophon (Berkeley 1970) 94–110 (with further references)Google Scholar.
6 Thuc. vi 70.3; Holladay (n. 1) 96.
7 Thuc. iv 127; X. Hell. iii 4.13–15; iv 4.15–17 and elsewhere; Anderson (n. 5) 117–26.
8 Holladay (n. 1) 94 n. 4.