Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
YusakuJon3
Shogun
Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 223
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Which is the best between legion and phalanx Posted: 23-Nov-2004 at 05:51 |
I'd go with the Legion due to its versatility. A phalanx is
primarily a defensive organization most useful within the limited
spaces available within the mountain valleys of Greece. To
counter this, the Romans used the pilium, a sort of javelin with a
point designed to bend upon impact with the opponents' shields.
Then, while the opponent was encumbered by the damaged shields and
dangling shafts, the legions would charge in with their gladii drawn,
protected from the spears by their own curved shields.
|
"There you go again!"
-- President Ronald W. Reagan (directed towards reporters at a White House press conference, mid-1980s)
|
|
Spartakus
Tsar
terörist
Joined: 22-Nov-2004
Location: Greece/Hellas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4489
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Nov-2004 at 11:41 |
|
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
|
|
Lannes
Baron
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 439
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Nov-2004 at 15:47 |
Originally posted by Yiannis
I'm not sure that all Greeks switched to the Macedonian style phalanx. Some adopted but others continued to fight in the traditional style phalanx. |
True. It is interesting to note that later on, people using the Macedonian phalanx began to armor their phalangites much as the hoplites had been armed(save for that they kept and lengthened the sarissa), and thusy, they took away the greatest arm of the Macedonian phalanx.
The wide, heavy shield and armor provided southern Greek hoplites protection against the sarisas. I'd say that when faced the two phalanxes would be equal... |
The majority of the time, the engagements between the two were mainly just pushing contest.
|
τρέφεται δέ, ὤ Σώκρατης, ψυχὴ τίνι;
|
|
Yiannis
Sultan
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2329
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Nov-2004 at 01:41 |
Originally posted by Lannes
, the engagements between the two were mainly just pushing contest.
|
Yes, the famous "othismos"...
So the Hoplites come into "Parataxis" (formation), then they march, then they run towards the opponent ("dromos") and then they hit with their spears ("doratismos") and puch ("othismos") until the opponent phalanx line breaks.
As the poet Tyrtaios once said: "No, No, let him take a wide stance and stand up strongly against them, digging both heels in the ground, biting his lip with his teeth, covering thighs and legs beneath, his chest and his shoulders under the hollowed-out protection of his broad shield, while in his right hand he brandishes his powerful war-spear and shakes terribly the crest high above his helm."
Once this is done the winning side set's up a "Tropaion" (trophy) and the Hoplites have a party before returning to their fields.
Suprisingly there were relativelly few deaths in this kind of battle. Thigs got ugly, after the Persian wars and especially during the Pelopo nnesian war...
Edited by Yiannis
|
The basis of a democratic state is liberty. Aristotle, Politics
Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
|
|
dman
Immortal Guard
Joined: 29-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Dec-2004 at 18:57 |
1500 years later the Spanish would return to the Roman legionaire to defeat
the Swiss pike blocks which were very similar to Macedonian phalanx. The
Spanish used what were call "sword and buckler men" equipped with a
sword, steel body armour similar to that worn by the legionaire and a small
round steel shield (buckler) . TheS&B men would literally dove under the
leveled pikes and slash at the pikemen to create gaps. The swordsman
knowm as rodelaros played an important part in the conquest of Mexico
by Cortes. Swordsman composed about 20 % of the Spanish formations
or colannas of about 1000-1500 men from the end of the 15th to the mid 16th
cent when it was replaced by the tercio . The tercio was 3 x the colanna (4000
4500 men) and composed of equal parts musket and pikemen.
|
|
okamido
Consul
suspended, tit for tat
Joined: 15-Apr-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 302
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-Oct-2012 at 13:10 |
I don't think there is a single instance of a phalanx having defeated a legion outside of the phalanx formations that took place at the Battle of Tunis, but that incorporated much more complex formations and units outside of the phalanx. Pydna could have quite possibly eked out a victory, had Perseus not panicked and fled with the cavalry rather than engaging.
|
|
Toltec
Arch Duke
Shape Shifter
Joined: 12-May-2011
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1748
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-Oct-2012 at 17:14 |
Hannibal's Phalanx did rather well against the legions.
|
|
|
byzanto
Immortal Guard
Joined: 07-Mar-2013
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Mar-2013 at 17:19 |
I agree Alexander also had the abilty to arrange his army so that all its components complimented each other. During battle Alexander himself had the tactical instincts to maneuver his troops to strike at the most opportune time in the most opportune spot and take advantage at his opponents weakness . Alexander had the battle sense similar to Tze Tzu and his "Art of war"concepts. This was far more superior than Ceasar and his army and his strategies he would have defeated him easily with the least amount of causulties . And as far as actually conquering Rome the city Alexander was also an expert in seige tactics look at what he did to Tyre which was better fortified and harder to seige that city since it was off the shore of the mediterean sea.
|
|
TITAN_
Baron
Joined: 21-Jun-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 480
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2013 at 04:16 |
Originally posted by okamido
I don't think there is a single instance of a phalanx having defeated a legion outside of the phalanx formations that took place at the Battle of Tunis, but that incorporated much more complex formations and units outside of the phalanx. Pydna could have quite possibly eked out a victory, had Perseus not panicked and fled with the cavalry rather than engaging. |
The Phalanx, when supported by cavalry, is invincible: Pyrrhus of Epirus gave the Romans a couple of lessons too!
The only reason the Romans conquered Greece was this: There was no Greek alliance of hoplites and phalanxes from Macedonia, Athens, Sparta and the other great powers.
|
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Een aristevin
“Ever to Excel“
From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC).
Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others.
|
|
Caracalla
Janissary
Joined: 17-Feb-2013
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 14
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Mar-2013 at 07:17 |
I voted legions. They were more maneuverable than the phalanx. The Phalanx strength came in it's need to stick together. The legion's strength came from it's ability to be taken apart and spread around the battlefield as and when needed. Besides, the legions were an evolution of the Phalanx system, so they were designed to be an improvement.
|
|