View Full Version : 300
delablake
10-23-2007, 18:02
Loved that movie!
A few questions remain:
1)Could anyone as efficiently duck away from arrows behind shields as did the Spartans fighting in the shade?
2)Did anyone actually use that clever Push-n-Pull tactic used by the Spartan phalanx? (to the cliffs!) Or that wedge against cavalry?
(seems pretty effective, anyway only possible under the pretext of confined spaces)
3)Could partner-fighting (hetaireia!) work like that?
4)Can anyone give me the number of their personal trainer?
Hooahguy
10-23-2007, 18:12
could anyone ask questions in the wrong place any better than you?
seriously, wrong forum.
well as this mod is one of the more historically accurate mods on the .org i would think this isnt a terrible place to ask that question.(i dont know the answer btw)
Watchman
10-23-2007, 19:33
...and that makes it the right place to ask about a dumb movie that spends around its whole lenght kicking historical accuracy, realism and good taste in the teeth why exactly ? :thinking:
Anyway, yes, people with shields tended to take cover under them when iron-tipped stuff rained from the sky. Sort of one of the central reasons the things were carried.
And wedge formations are Bad Idea for infantry. The around closest you get is "stepped" sub-unit formations and shallow chevrons, the latter often being the natural result of an officer or other leader going first and those closest to him following right behind, the sides of the unit lagging already due to the delay in information transfer and reaction time.
Not to mention that the movie is set over 200 years before the EB period. Might as well ask some questions about the War of Austrian Succession in a WWII-game forum.
blacksnail
10-23-2007, 21:27
1)Could anyone as efficiently duck away from arrows behind shields as did the Spartans fighting in the shade?
Chuck Norris could duck as fast as a roundhouse kick, but never would, because ducking would imply he was afraid of 100,000 arrows.
2)Did anyone actually use that clever Push-n-Pull tactic used by the Spartan phalanx? (to the cliffs!) Or that wedge against cavalry?
(seems pretty effective, anyway only possible under the pretext of confined spaces)
Chuck Norris once used the Spartan phalanx Push-n-Pull (to the cliffs), as well as the cavalry wedge, all by himself. He did so to show that Chuck Norris is the only true phalanx formation.
3)Could partner-fighting (hetaireia!) work like that?
Chuck Norris wouldn't need a partner to fight in that manner. He would simply grow another pair of legs at will to triple the effectiveness of his roundhouse kicks.
4)Can anyone give me the number of their personal trainer?
Chuck Norris has the number of a personal trainer...2 fists, 2 feet, and 1 face.
Yours.
Watchman
10-23-2007, 21:50
"Wearing armour into combat is pointless. The most naked man wins."
- Everything Else I Need To Know I Learned From The Mummy Returns
Horst Nordfink
10-23-2007, 21:55
Chill out guys! Even if the film isn't set in the same time-frame as EB, surely the questions he asked are still a little bit relavent? It's not as if he's asking questions about machine guns.
Watchman
10-23-2007, 22:03
Well it is a rather stupid movie that really has jack all to do with anything historical... even the comic got the actual fighting down more credibly AFAIK, and at least lacked the mutants galore (what now the Foot Clan Immortals never fail to amuse me). :rtwno:
Plus I seem to recall having answered the valid questions.
different_13
10-23-2007, 22:10
Chuck Norris could duck as fast as a roundhouse kick, but never would, because ducking would imply he was afraid of 100,000 arrows.
Chuck Norris once used the Spartan phalanx Push-n-Pull (to the cliffs), as well as the cavalry wedge, all by himself. He did so to show that Chuck Norris is the only true phalanx formation.
Chuck Norris wouldn't need a partner to fight in that manner. He would simply grow another pair of legs at will to triple the effectiveness of his roundhouse kicks.
Chuck Norris has the number of a personal trainer...2 fists, 2 feet, and 1 face.
Yours.
Your forgot the third fist hidden under the beard :laugh4:
I still need to see 300. Sure, it's not historical, but it sounds like it could be fun.
well as this mod is one of the more historically accurate mods on the .org i would think this isnt a terrible place to ask that question.(i dont know the answer btw)
1. https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=80913&page
2. https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=84474&highlight
Cause, maybe, there was no point in opening a new tread about it ;-)
ah lol so heated
you guys better all wach out cause chuck norris just gave his vote to mike huckabee, better watch yourself when you go to vote or you might get a roundhouse kick to the face...
johhny-turbo
10-23-2007, 23:01
Can anyone give me the number of their personal trainer?
I actually sorta know this.
It's Gym Jones, an invitation only gym in Utah.
In their own words
Gym Jones is not a cozy place. There's no AC, no comfortable spot to sit and there are no mirrors. Stressors are intentionally designed to cause discomfort and apprehension. Effort and pain may not be avoided. Physical and psychological breakdowns occur. The support of a like-minded group, dedicated to The Art of Suffering, provides a safety net. An individual will push harder and risk more in the company of trustworthy peers and that's one reason the gym is not open to the public. Gym Jones is a private, invitation-only facility located in Utah.
Something I found funny is that the actors all did a ceremonial workout where they did 300 reps and the only one to finish it was the Thespian.
Teleklos Archelaou
10-23-2007, 23:10
1776
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaB6gMj4wQw
Hell yeah!!
300, it aint accurate, but it will blow your fking mind. :beam:
keravnos
10-23-2007, 23:34
Loved that movie!
A few questions remain:
1)Could anyone as efficiently duck away from arrows behind shields as did the Spartans fighting in the shade?
Seems so. Anyways, the Hoplites didn't much care for archers or archery. Maybe the archers the Achaimenids were using weren't as good.
2)Did anyone actually use that clever Push-n-Pull tactic used by the Spartan phalanx? (to the cliffs!) Or that wedge against cavalry?
(seems pretty effective, anyway only possible under the pretext of confined spaces)
Believe it or not (and I am not Rippley) it was. It was called "Othismos" or "joint push" and it did pretty much what you saw at the film. It could only work on close spaces though.
3)Could partner-fighting (hetaireia!) work like that?
Considering the fact that Varangoi themselves fought in Hetairiai, I honestly think that it can be resolved.
4)Can anyone give me the number of their personal trainer?[/QUOTE]
QwertyMIDX
10-23-2007, 23:58
1776
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaB6gMj4wQw
Hell yeah!!
This is one of my favorite Robot Chicken sketches ever.
NeoSpartan
10-24-2007, 00:47
Loved that movie!
A few questions remain:
...
4)Can anyone give me the number of their personal trainer?
Delablake... this is the MOST important question yes really. :yes:
All other questions... well the posts speak for themselves :smash:
Now the Trainer's name is Mark Twight, he is a famous mountain climber and an all-around badass. He heads GYM JONES where he and a bunch of the guys and gals train (some climbers, some fighters, some military, some coaches too, etc)
Check out the website
http://www.gymjones.com/
and look at some of the videos PLZ do not ask them any stupid questions. :no: Read some the articles they have, there is a lot of info although some can get pretty technical (like fat metabolism and stuff), they include articles about the 300 movie.
MarcusAureliusAntoninus
10-24-2007, 03:05
1776
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaB6gMj4wQw
Hell yeah!!
I saw that.
That was great!
Hooahguy
10-24-2007, 03:34
johhny-turbo-
"Gym Jones is not a cozy place. There's no AC, no comfortable spot to sit and there are no mirrors. Stressors are intentionally designed to cause discomfort and apprehension. Effort and pain may not be avoided. Physical and psychological breakdowns occur. The support of a like-minded group, dedicated to The Art of Suffering, provides a safety net. An individual will push harder and risk more in the company of trustworthy peers and that's one reason the gym is not open to the public. Gym Jones is a private, invitation-only facility located in Utah."
sounds alot like wrestling- at least my wrestling practice-
...and that makes it the right place to ask about a dumb movie that spends around its whole lenght kicking historical accuracy, realism and good taste in the teeth why exactly ?
Haven't seen the movie, but I imagine that for a movie that isn't about historical accuracy, it fills it's purpose quite nicely.
delablake
10-24-2007, 06:28
Thank you serious guys all for the expedient answers
:book:
and the advice that I am posting in the wrong place
:shame:
as for the senselessly aggressive rest :furious3: of you,
well I'm still glad for the freedom of expression...
:yes:
NeoSpartan
10-24-2007, 06:32
Haven't seen the movie...........
WHAT!!!!~:eek:
Listen 300 is a TESTOSTERONE MOVIE!!! IF u got it in ur system you HAVE GOT to see this movie!!!!! :whip:
Centurion Crastinus
10-24-2007, 07:01
No reason to butcher this guy. He is interested in history and has a legitamate question, I see no need to repeatedly kick this guy in the balls over his question.
Artorius Maximus
10-24-2007, 07:04
1776
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaB6gMj4wQw
Hell yeah!!
Lol, that was hilarious! :laugh4:
PershsNhpios
10-24-2007, 07:21
I think that the writers or directors of this movie had this idea;
They wanted to make a big epic movie like, "Troy".
They didn't really want to put the effort into it, so they thought of what would attract the most active, young audiences.
For the men, shiny plates, excessive violence, mutants, and an epic feel.
For the women, big broad men with long hair and huge sticks.
For both, alot of thrusting.
But, hell, that's all they really think of for most movies in modern days anyway, so in comparison it probably would be a good movie.
However, my family rented it one night, I saw the first few minutes and walked outside to go for a ride instead.
Beefy187
10-24-2007, 11:00
Dont forget the wierd comcubines...
At the end credit it says "Comcubine 1 (Forgot her name) and Comcubine 2 (Also forgot her name)"
Hilarious really
different_13
10-24-2007, 12:11
I think that the writers or directors of this movie had this idea;
They wanted to make a big epic movie like, "Troy".
They didn't really want to put the effort into it, so they thought of what would attract the most active, young audiences.
For the men, shiny plates, excessive violence, mutants, and an epic feel.
For the women, big broad men with long hair and huge sticks.
For both, alot of thrusting.
But, hell, that's all they really think of for most movies in modern days anyway, so in comparison it probably would be a good movie.
However, my family rented it one night, I saw the first few minutes and walked outside to go for a ride instead.
I haven't read the comics, but I'd always assumed the mutant Immortals etc were present there too?
I'm imagining the appearance of most characters/warriors to be similar to the comics as well.
After all, that's what it is - a movie based on a comic. Like Fantastic 4. Do we complain the ability to spontaneously self-combust wouldn't work like it did in the film?
The only problem is people (ie kids, hopefully) not realising hollywood isn't the place to go for a history lesson..
Watchman
10-24-2007, 12:33
The only mutant around in the comic was that hunchbacked guy who ended up signing up with Xerxes. Otherwise the Persians were, insofar as I'm aware of, in fact depicted by and large with a passable degree of historical accuracy, and in any case Miller has to be given brownie points for diligently rendering all those near-hypnotic geometric patterns in their clothes. He manages some pretty good screen compositions I'll give him that.
Well, the Immortals looked like they'd stolen their duds from the Foot Clan or the Hand, but at least they didn't sprout claws or IIRC go Ninja Fighting...
The comic at least is the product of a skilled artistic craftsmanship whatever one might think of the message of the end product. The movie, however, is pretty much an MTV CG-fest. Bleh.
That said, I destest the comic and movie for the exact same reasons I hate Braveheart and The Patriot and their ilk, plus the fascist-fanboy suspicions on top of that...
Horst Nordfink
10-24-2007, 13:59
It was a god awful film.
Still, there was no reason to round on the poor fella.
dominique
10-24-2007, 16:46
4)Can anyone give me the number of their personal trainer?
The movie was done in Montreal and they hired all the re-enactors, martial arts specialists and stunts artists they could find on the persian side, and some beefcake from the local gyms on the greek side. A couple of my friends played in the movie (on the persian side :beam: ) and they explain the spartian work-out in one word.
airbrush
:laugh4:
delablake
10-24-2007, 23:47
The movie was done in Montreal and they hired all the re-enactors, martial arts specialists and stunts artists they could find on the persian side, and some beefcake from the local gyms on the greek side. A couple of my friends played in the movie (on the persian side :beam: ) and they explain the spartian work-out in one word.
airbrush
:laugh4:
lol
Intranetusa
10-25-2007, 03:14
1000-1800 Spartans defeated by 300 gay pansies from Thebes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tegyra
Spartans are overrated
Watchman
10-25-2007, 03:26
Eh, the Sacred Band were the Thebans' crack shock unit. Honi soit qui mal y pense.
...although by what I've read of it, the Spartans also made a pretty serious tactical misjudgement there. They apparently thought the approaching Theban cavalry was intending to flee and opened a corridor through their ranks for them to pass through (since compared to the Sacred Band the horsemen were small fry, and no point fighting them to the death if they were going to leave) - but the Thebans had no such plans and instead cheerfully started savaging the insides and rear of the Spartan phalanx, while the Sacred Band charged right into the still-open corridor.
:whip:
Endgame, Spartan kebab.
A Terribly Harmful Name
10-25-2007, 11:22
1000-1800 Spartans defeated by 300 gay pansies from Thebes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tegyra
Spartans are overrated
Indeed. Spartans only managed to kill so many people in the Thermopylae because it was an elite unit vs. a lot of low quality Persian troops, mind you. And they got their ass kicked when they faced other serious greek elites like the Theban band. Even the Athenians gave them a challenge on the field.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-25-2007, 11:35
The Thebans charged 50 ranks deep, or their abouts, the Spartan line was apparently 12 ranks. In any case the Spartans only suffered against the Athenians when they stopped wearing armour and took to silly felt caps instead. In 470 though they were still some of the best soldiers in the world.
different_13
10-25-2007, 11:49
When did the Spartans start wearing felt caps?
They wore helmet the same shape as those caps, but I wasn't aware of them abandoning helmets completely..
Speaking of Leuctra - how many of the Spartan troops were actually Spartan?
They had a roughly ten thousand strong phalanx, but less than half of that would have been actual Spartans. (they still lost, obviously - I'd say by this point the Sacred Band would have been on a similar level to Spartans, combat-wise).
The Internet
10-25-2007, 11:56
The only mutant around in the comic was that hunchbacked guy who ended up signing up with Xerxes. Otherwise the Persians were, insofar as I'm aware of, in fact depicted by and large with a passable degree of historical accuracy, and in any case Miller has to be given brownie points for diligently rendering all those near-hypnotic geometric patterns in their clothes. He manages some pretty good screen compositions I'll give him that.
Well, the Immortals looked like they'd stolen their duds from the Foot Clan or the Hand, but at least they didn't sprout claws or IIRC go Ninja Fighting...
The comic at least is the product of a skilled artistic craftsmanship whatever one might think of the message of the end product. The movie, however, is pretty much an MTV CG-fest. Bleh.
That said, I destest the comic and movie for the exact same reasons I hate Braveheart and The Patriot and their ilk, plus the fascist-fanboy suspicions on top of that...
You took the whole film WAY too literally. The movie is about how the Spartans would tell thier story of the battle and to be honest when you look at it that way, it was a great movie. Yes there were no monsters or mutants IRL and Xerxes wasn't a giant shaven gay guy covered in gold like that but it is how the Greeks would of seen the Persians, the Emortals were meant to look scary because thats how the Greeks thought of them, they were completely covered in cloth with a thin black veil across their faces with covered heads which made it look like they had no faces, when one died another came up out of nowhere and to the superstitious Greeks they were like demons. I could go on forever like this but the simple fact is that it never pretended to be historically accurate, it is a movie based on a comic book which also never claims to be historical, the only thing they claim it to be is how the Spartans would of told their story and to me the movie does a fantastic job of that. This movie is not in the same league as Braveheart, The Patriot or Gladiator because they actually attemtped to be accurate and therefore that is what they should be judged on.
Long story short, you don't play a racing game and get upset because there aren't any planes in it.
The Thebans charged 50 ranks deep, or their abouts, the Spartan line was apparently 12 ranks. In any case the Spartans only suffered against the Athenians when they stopped wearing armour and took to silly felt caps instead. In 470 though they were still some of the best soldiers in the world.
Spartans should have stuck to the Corinthian helmet; at least it looked cool, but they wanted some ridiculous cone-shaped, no-cheekguard weirdness instead :wall:
They were not very fashionable i guess :egypt:
This movie is not in the same league as Braveheart, The Patriot or Gladiator because they actually attemtped to be accurate and therefore that is what they should be judged on.
Braveheart attempting to be accurate?
What? C'mon it was medival scotland not roman era pictland. I makes the scots look like barbarians.
The Internet
10-25-2007, 12:54
Braveheart attempting to be accurate?
What? C'mon it was medival scotland not roman era pictland. I makes the scots look like barbarians.
Attempted to be accurate, i didn't say they actually managed to pull it off. :laugh4: That is my point though, they tried to make it accurate and messed it up royally and therefore should be judged on what they tried to do but 300 didn't attempt or even claim to be accurate, it is the battle of thermopylae as told by the Spartans and in that respect i think they did a great job. It also looked great and personally i thought it was a fantastic film.
Edit: I hated Braveheart too, i fell asleep 3/4 the way through it to be honest and the same goes with the other movies i mentioned. :laugh4:
Rodion Romanovich
10-25-2007, 13:11
And wedge formations are Bad Idea for infantry.
Nevertheless, it's claimed that a lot of pre-viking age Scandinavians used a wedge-like formation for their infantry in battle...
Rodion Romanovich
10-25-2007, 13:18
shiny plates, excessive violence, mutants, and an epic feel.
I haven't seen it, so I wonder what is this repeated reference to mutants about?
Sadly, I couldn't find the mutant in this video, but I'll post it anyway.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pi2t58CRmbU
The Internet
10-25-2007, 13:40
I haven't seen it, so I wonder what is this repeated reference to mutants about?
There are some weird creatures and mutated-liked humans in the Persian army, some people take them way too literally/seriously.
Nevertheless, it's claimed that a lot of pre-viking age Scandinavians used a wedge-like formation for their infantry in battle...
Indeed it was used by quite a few people, the Romans called it the pigs/boars head i think. It was dangerous for the blokes up front but if used by a well trained army it can be deadly and very effective. There were calls for it to be put into EB/RTR but the wedge formation itself in RTW is bugged and when used by the infantry it seemed to be even worse (in the game engine) but it was an effective tactic IRL.
Rodion Romanovich
10-25-2007, 14:28
Sadly, I couldn't find the mutant in this video, but I'll post it anyway.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pi2t58CRmbU
lol! I watched the trailer too now. After seeing both, I'm glad I never rented this thing :yes:
NeoSpartan
10-25-2007, 15:12
man wtf is going on with u fellas :dizzy2: ???????????????
300 is NOT a history movie its a TESTOSTERONE MOVIE :2thumbsup: (like the 1776 clip)
And news flash: EVERYONE KNOWS THIS!
....and u know what else: This movie inspired INTEREST in Greece and Sparta among a LOT of my friends. Now all of them know what really happened. :yes:
Intranetusa
10-25-2007, 15:25
Spartans gets pwned some more: ~12,000 Spartans + Spartan allies gets owned by the numerically inferior (8500) Thebans...again
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leuctra
different_13
10-25-2007, 15:50
And once again, I'll bring up the matters of the actual numbers of Spartans (actually, I don't know the numbers, but I do know it'll have been less than half their force).
And Leuctra is famous for a reason. Not just the Spartans getting beaten, but also the oblique advance with the phalanx, as well as the super-deep phalanx.
There were only about 5000 Spartans at Plataea, for god's sake.
In the late 5th and early 4th centuries BC, the Spartiate class gradually declined, along with Spartan military prowess. There were several reasons for this decline. First was attrition through the increasingly frequent wars that Sparta found itself embroiled in from the mid 5th century on. Since Spartiates were required to marry late, birth rates were low, and it was difficult to replace losses from the class. To exacerbate this problem, it was possible to be demoted from Spartiate status for a number of reasons; cowardice in battle was a common one, as was inability to pay for membership in the common mess. Inability to pay became an increasingly severe problem as commercial activity began to develop in Sparta, since some Spartiates would sell the land from which they were supposed to draw their earnings. Since the constitution included no provisions for promotion to Spartiate status, the number of Spartiates gradually dwindled as the classical period wore on.
By the mid 4th century BC, the number of Spartiates had been critically reduced, although Sparta continued to hold sway over much of Greece. Finally, at Leuctra in 371 BC, a Theban army decisively defeated a Spartan force, killing 400 Spartiates and breaking the back of Spartan military power. In 370 BC, Messenia was liberated by a Theban army, destroying the basis of the Spartan social system. The Spartan state never recovered its former power, and the Spartan army, by the later 3rd century, was not particularly superior to other hoplite armies in Greece.
Not to take anything away from Epominondas or Pelopidas of course, Leuctra is still an excellent achievement.
The Internet
10-25-2007, 15:58
Spartans gets pwned some more: ~12,000 Spartans + Spartan allies gets owned by the numerically inferior (8500) Thebans...again
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leuctra
If you are going to trump the Spartans losing atleast post the real numbers. Yes they lost but with the declining numbers in actual Spartans in general and the fact that most of their numbers were made up with allies also helped in their defeat, as soon as the Spartans got smashed out of the way the rest of the line broke without so much as a wimper. Also as posted already they were facing a stronger Theban force on their flank, it wasn't that they were beaten by skill as much as it was by sheer weight of numbers.
I'm not taking away from their victory at all but if you don't give all the facts then you aren't being faithful to history.
Watchman
10-25-2007, 17:31
Apologists. The Spartans were declining in numbers because their whole quasi-fascist system was based on nasty asshattery that wasn't really sustainable on the long term and in the face of accumulating casualties.
Moreover, the deep Theban assault column actually had relatively little effect by itself - too deep formations are notorious for basically wasting fighting manpower, since most of the guys will never even see the enemy and that many ranks simply cannot "push" to any effect. Its main benefit would have been psychological, although given the oblique advance tactice the Thebans were using there may also have been involved an idea of using the rear ranks to start rolling up the flank of the remaining Spartan line while the front ranks chased after the defeated segment.
And as the Theban column was aiming right at the most elite part of the Spartan force - where the King, and duly most of the best troops, were - it's more or less a safe bet the Spartans facing them weren't excessively overawed by mere depth of ranks.
The really decisive thing was that the Theban horse easily saw off their Spartan colleagues (a rather uneven match, as the Thebans were among the best cavalrymen in Greece after the Thessalians - and the Spartans the worst) and drove them directly into the Spartan infantry phalanx; having to make room for the fleeing horsemen, with the pursuing Theban cavalry only adding to the mayhem (they apparently chased the Spartan horse right through the surprised phalanx), their lines were naturally thrown to chaos. And while the Lacedaimonians were still trying to get their rank and file back into combat order, the Theban infantry assault column spearheaded by the crack Sacred Band rolled right into their stricken phalanx...
Pretty much a done deal at that point, given the dynamics of heavy-infantry combat in general and hoplite warfare in particular. And with the destruction of the best part of the Spartan force there and then (to add insult to injury some of the Theban horse returned to inflict further mayhem...) and the fall of their king, the rest of the army was duly grossly demoralized.
Indeed it was used by quite a few people, the Romans called it the pigs/boars head i think. It was dangerous for the blokes up front but if used by a well trained army it can be deadly and very effective. There were calls for it to be put into EB/RTR but the wedge formation itself in RTW is bugged and when used by the infantry it seemed to be even worse (in the game engine) but it was an effective tactic IRL.The cuneus was normally in fact an assault column by what I've read of it. Although they were sometimes formed up side-by-side in a "stepped" pattern, creating a large-scale "blunt wedge" assault formation.
There was also apparently a genuine blunt-wedge formation, with a few guys in the front row and successively wider ranks behind them. Useful enough for exploiting a weak spot in enemy line, focusing missile fire and attacking through narrow spaces. The Vikings used a similar formation thay called Svinfylkning, "Swine Array", apparently usually with two men in the front rank, three behind them etc. - but then they tended to have rather smaller armies than the Romans as well...
An actualy sharp-tipped triangle, however, isn't a good idea for infantry; more likely than not it'll just get the somewhat isolated point man killed, as he'll be subjected to the attentions of some two-three foemen... It works for cavalry mind you, but horse plays with different rules than foot anyway.
For hoplites, whose whole fighting technique and equipement kit is oriented for combat as a solid line where the large shield also protects the next guy, such formations would appear quite pointless however. The hoplite was optimized for combat in solid massed successive lines and mutual support, and a wedge formation would seem to toss away most of the central points of the whole technique.
the tokai
10-25-2007, 17:36
Only 750 Spartiates were present at Leuctra, 440 of wich got killed.
man wtf is going on with u fellas :dizzy2: ???????????????
300 is NOT a history movie its a TESTOSTERONE MOVIE :2thumbsup: (like the 1776 clip)
Yup (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pi2t58CRmbU). You can put a bucket under that and have a homemade chemical factory.
Spartans should have stuck to the Corinthian helmet; at least it looked cool, but they wanted some ridiculous cone-shaped, no-cheekguard weirdness instead :wall:
They were not very fashionable i guess :egypt:
I'm currently reading Soldiers and Ghosts and in it, Lendon states that the reason for the switch was that the Spartans were aspiring to Homeric ideals of honor and bravery. The Corinthian helmet covered too much of the face and was seen to them as hiding if the soldier was scared. The Pylos helmet let everyone see that the Spartan had no fear on his face...
The Internet
10-25-2007, 18:38
The cuneus was normally in fact an assault column by what I've read of it. Although they were sometimes formed up side-by-side in a "stepped" pattern, creating a large-scale "blunt wedge" assault formation.
There was also apparently a genuine blunt-wedge formation, with a few guys in the front row and successively wider ranks behind them. Useful enough for exploiting a weak spot in enemy line, focusing missile fire and attacking through narrow spaces. The Vikings used a similar formation thay called Svinfylkning, "Swine Array", apparently usually with two men in the front rank, three behind them etc. - but then they tended to have rather smaller armies than the Romans as well...
An actualy sharp-tipped triangle, however, isn't a good idea for infantry; more likely than not it'll just get the somewhat isolated point man killed, as he'll be subjected to the attentions of some two-three foemen... It works for cavalry mind you, but horse plays with different rules than foot anyway.
For hoplites, whose whole fighting technique and equipement kit is oriented for combat as a solid line where the large shield also protects the next guy, such formations would appear quite pointless however. The hoplite was optimized for combat in solid massed successive lines and mutual support, and a wedge formation would seem to toss away most of the central points of the whole technique.
To be honest i doubt we'll really know if it was effective or not for hoplites to use such a formation (i'd like to see some reinactors have a go actually) but i agree that it probably wasn't an effective tactic for a group of hoplites. I also agree with the wedge description too, i guess i should of made it more clear what i thought the wedge would look like instead of just saying the blokes up front. :laugh4:
In all seriousness though, it is a great film for getting people intrested in ancient Greece but no one should ever use it to teach a class. :beam:
different_13
10-25-2007, 19:31
I'm currently reading Soldiers and Ghosts and in it, Lendon states that the reason for the switch was that the Spartans were aspiring to Homeric ideals of honor and bravery. The Corinthian helmet covered too much of the face and was seen to them as hiding if the soldier was scared. The Pylos helmet let everyone see that the Spartan had no fear on his face...
Or they were simply following the national trend in lightening equipment..
going from bronze muscle cuirass to simply robes, from the corinthian helmet to the Pilos helmet, etc.
Watchman - I should have made clear I wasn't supporting the fanboy "Spartans are t3h r0><0r" arguement.
I'm fully aware their decline was almost entirely due to the fundamental flaws in their government and society (the rest of it was due to the quality of their opponents :smash: ). I was simply pointing out it wasn't a case of 8000 Thebans beat 12000 Spartans.
The fact is, anyone could have seen Sparta's downfall coming. First of all, it's obvious achieving a lasting hegemony wasn't possible under the way Greece was run - it took a foreign invader (Philip) to achieve that, and even then there were still revolts (in fact, it was still more a coalition of cities rather than a unified nation).
The other city-states could never tolerate Sparta's supremacy (nor could the Persian kings).
Secondly, as mentioned, Sparta's strength was also her weakness - their system was so focused on producing soldiers that it didn't produce anything else. The whole class of Spartiate was based on being able to afford the schooling and training (not to mention the equipment). The fact is Spartans could only own land, not work it.
Also, their 'code' (I can't think of another word..) only made provisions for demotion from Spartiate status, not promotion to it.
It is therefore logical the numbers of Spartans would go down as time progressed (unlike Athens, or even more tellingly, Rome - where citizen requirements became looser, leading to a larger, stronger military force).
The rise of cavalry is similar to the lightening of equipment - tactics, manouvres and mobility were becoming more important in Greek warfare. This culminated (in my opinion) in Alexandrian warfare (yes, I know his father was instrumental, but Philipian doesn't sound as good).
In all seriousness though, it is a great film for getting people intrested in ancient Greece but no one should ever use it to teach a class.
Except when discussing propaganda, political correctness, and testosterone movies :laugh4:
Rodion Romanovich
10-26-2007, 09:57
man wtf is going on with u fellas :dizzy2: ???????????????
300 is NOT a history movie its a TESTOSTERONE MOVIE :2thumbsup: (like the 1776 clip)
And news flash: EVERYONE KNOWS THIS!
....and u know what else: This movie inspired INTEREST in Greece and Sparta among a LOT of my friends. Now all of them know what really happened. :yes:
Testosterone movie for me is to see a historically accurate clash between two gigantic armies marching in correct formation with correct equipment without breaking ranks to go for individual combat, then a few well done cavalry charges, and nice, epic music in the background!
PershsNhpios
10-26-2007, 11:54
If Hollywood and their non-literal take on history and the current state of politics and our world has teenagers sniggering and talking about how the Athenians, Thebians, Spartans and Persians got 'owned', or 'pwned' and how the hoplites look so much more awesome in the more classical helmets - then I don't applaud it at all, and I think it defaces history and it's finest wars.
As for a comment I can't help but make;
I have every right to play a racing game and get upset there were no planes in it, if it was a race around the world in 80 days.
Watchman
10-26-2007, 12:41
And if a movie that purports to portray a famous incident of hoplite warfare doesn't, and instead goes "totally awesome dude" wire-fu with Martians, I think discerning customers have the right to be slightly irritated.
Personally, I hate stupid audience-pandering crap on general principles anyway.
It's not meant to be a historical movie any more than Lord of the Rings was. Despite the events portrayed in the movie, it's fantasy, myth, and doesn't pretend to be anything else. It doesn't 'deface' history, because it doesn't attempt to portray history with any accuracy. Any ignorance from the audience is no fault of the author.
On another note, do you hate, say, The Iliad as you hate 300? It, too, was based on a (supposedly) true event, and it, too was riddled with myth. And yet it is considered a classic. Or perhaps it's the emphasis on violence, sex, and other nasty things that assaults your superior intellect? Personally, I like portrayals of gratuitous violence. mutants r cool2.
You might not like 300. May just not be your thing. But there is certainly no reason to get all indignant about it.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-27-2007, 00:16
Pah, It purports to the be the battle of the Hot Gates, it makes a claim to a historical basis.
I feel sorry for the poor Helot Leonides actually killed.
Intranetusa
10-27-2007, 00:21
If you are going to trump the Spartans losing atleast post the real numbers. Yes they lost but with the declining numbers in actual Spartans in general and the fact that most of their numbers were made up with allies also helped in their defeat...
Read my post dude, I said "Spartan+Spartan allies" combined = 12,000
Testosterone movie for me is to see a historically accurate clash between two gigantic armies marching in correct formation with correct equipment without breaking ranks to go for individual combat, then a few well done cavalry charges, and nice, epic music in the background!
the old spartacus might spark your testosterone.
PershsNhpios
10-27-2007, 03:29
Spartacus was a fine movie for me.
It led me, long before I started studying the classical era, to find out who Spartacus really was.
Unfortunately I was told by several university encyclopaedias that he was a probably a Thracian auxiliary in the Roman army who deserted, and when he was caught and imprisoned he started a rebellion.
Cut out the beginning - and you have a terrific story!
I think the rebellion is briefly mentioned in the Gallic Wars.
In the movie however, I enjoyed the acting and the sheer size of the cohorts that were shown.
Though I always detest Ameri.... Hollywood portrayal of the Roman Empire, though they can at times show historical faith - whiny Am.. Hollywood accents and the largest macho men the studios can possibly cast prevent me from being immersed in such movies.
It is the same as the Shakespeare play I love, (the only one), Julius Caesar.
Brilliant dialogue and marvelled speeches, however the old English, and the especially British actors detract from the work.
This cannot be helped, I know, but their pronounciations of some things can be terrible.
"Oh you hard hearts, you cruel men of Rome......"
Yes, Australian accents are so much better. :smash: :clown:
PershsNhpios
10-27-2007, 07:15
Australia is such a half-way house of the global village now that true Australian accents are as rare as true Australian intellect.
I myself am of an New-Zealander British decent, and though this is more relevant in the EB Tavern, my ancestral grandmother was the mistress of the Botanist Joseph Banks.
He refused her constant proposals of marriage, and deserted her to serve on the first fleet of Captain James Cook.
So she damned him and took his name - that's why my mother's maiden name is Banks!!
This is the most interesting part of my family history, or the only part I really know well - I am a late child and not one that holds blood in dearer sight than my love of the arts.
But, this was all said to disarm your comment - For rarely if ever do Australians attempt to play dress-ups and act like rulers of ancient civilisations, and I have an accent that is partly New-Zealander and partly Irish!
Now.. I saw that smiley here somewhere... ah!
:smash: !!
Rodion Romanovich
10-27-2007, 11:19
the old spartacus might spark your testosterone.
Yes, it did ~:)
I prefer attempts at being historical accuracy such as Spartacus, even if not perfect down to every detail, over the movies that don't attempt at all, such as 300. In fact, ordering the movies after how much I liked them I get almost the same order as when I order them by degree of historical accuracy.
The main weaknesses of Spartacus are probably: 1. they didn't have the modern technology for recording battle scenes, cavalry charges and the like (these are actually pretty decent, albeit often exaggerating the powerfulness of the cavalry, in some of the modern [a]historical movies), so only a small part of manouvering could actually be recorded, 2. they had to appeal to the masses (read: female watchers) by making Spartacus a heroic, charming figure fighting for liberty and justice without any selfish ideas at all so they could add a love story, rather than making him a possibly more disillusioned and cynic person who out of desperation used tactics more similar to what we would call terrorism these days (by pillaging and terrorizing the roman civilians as a way of both feeding his army, and pressuring the civilians to, by their fear and suffering, turn on their own leaders, or: more often, is due to a pure feeling of hopelessness at in the end defeating such a militarily strong opponent).
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.