Roman Maniple vs Macedonian Phalanx

**Olimpian** · 03-16-2008, 22:02

So history has proven the legion to be superior to the phalanx.But from what I have read,this was more due to other factors than military ones:lack of native greek population to serve in the army(hence superior numbers for the Romans),mediocre commanders that relied too much solely on the phalanx and didn't support it properly with cavalry(the hammer to the phalanxe's anvil) and flakers,lack of proper military training and drilling,etc.Still,Pyrrhus managed to defeat the Romans in "pyrrhic victories"(although the Romans suffered more casualties than him-from what I've read-but his were not easily replaceable).This leads me to think that the phalanx could defeat the Roman war machine if in the proper hand and supported by enough heavy cavalry to dominate the flanks and other supporting infantry like more mobile hoplites,spearmen or peltasts.Had Alexander fought against the Romans,I think he would have "hammer-and-anvil"ed 'em to their deaths,since the Romans had little cavalry or supporting troops,so their maniples would have been easy-pickings.
So,what do you guys think,in a historical "fair fight",phalanx or maniple?
(PS Sorry for the long post)

**Long lost Caesar** · 03-16-2008, 22:16

Phalanx. As long as the troops were well trained, fresh and supported they could keep almost any enemy at bay, but it's like you said; Greek commanders relied too much on the phalanxes and forgot that they needed support=Roman conquest.

**Torvus** · 03-16-2008, 22:38

Definately the Phalanx. I've always thought that Alexander could have done very well for himself if he went west instead of east.

**Korlon** · 03-16-2008, 22:49

I would think that given enough cavalry support, the Phalanx could've done very well against the Romans. The Phalanx was very susceptible to uneven terrain though, so surely it would depend on whether it was a flat field or some rocky region, as the Romans were very flexible troops. Given the weak cavalry the Romans had, surely the Macedonian ones could rout their counterparts and be able to support the flanks of the Phalanx better than it was in history. This is, however, somewhat wishful thinking, but since we're going all out, I'd say that the Phalanx could definitely defeat the Roman Maniple if they were fighting in their prime.

**General Appo** · 03-16-2008, 22:54

I´d go with the phalanx, but the great thing about history is that there was never ever a "fair fight". The Romans took advantage of the weak state of the Hellenes, and conquered those puny spear-wielders.

**CaesarAugustus** · 03-16-2008, 23:05

Maniples. I am just not comfortable with the idea of slow moving, unmaneuverable blocks of men who are weak on three sides, and need flat, unborken ground to operate efficiently. If I could make one adjustment, however, I would have additional cavalry support for my maniples, which is what i often do in-game when facing a cavalry heavy enemy.