Hoplitai too weak ?

[Zarax]

To concentrate a wall of spears it requires that only so many men can be deployed in width, making the lines shorter than many equivalent formations.

Also it doesn't help the phalanx that the roman army started reforming around that period towards even more flexibility (what I like to call the "scipionic reforms"), meaning that the tactical usage differences between hastati, principes and triarii started to soften.

Another important factor is that we're talking about veteran legions, meaning more skilled and better equipped than your average roman force.

[Maion Maroneios]

Exactly. There are many factors one should take in mind except simply weapon technology and equipment. Rome emerged from a war victorious and learned many things from it, not to mention those "Reforms" which made the army even more flexible than it was. Also, everyone with at least a decent knowledge of what the landscape of Hellas looks like would know it's all mountainous and uneven terrain. Difficult to maneuver a phalanx there, hence the Hellenes usually chose an open plain to fight once decisive battle.

Maion

[Mikhail Mengsk]

I was only saying that in melee fights pezhetarioi (sp?) got beaten by the romans when they broke formation, and this is because legionnaires' melee training and equipment was better. Romans' "scipiones" reform made the entire Legion more flexible and more mobile, BUT also improves single legionnaires' melee skills (expecially after fighting iberian warriors in the Iberian Campaign).

That's why IMHO single Legionnaire was better in a melee "1vs1" than a Pez(ecc): focused training and equipment.

HOW the romans menaged to broke phalanx' formation doesn't really matter in this debate, also because there are many many ways to do it (using reserves and terrain as Maion said, for example).

[Phalanx300]

Also, in those battles where the Macedonians faced of the Romans the biggest part of their Phalangites weren't their profesional soldiers, the biggest part were the Phalangitai Deuteroi, levies(comparable with the ordinary Hoplite in training etc.).

Just look at the Historical Romani vs Makedonia battle. Makedonia in later times lacked the units to support their troops. And in one occasion their cavalry ran off before ever getting into an fight.

And those Peltastai Makedonikoi use the Phalangite shield, and they were the elite assault troops of the Macedonians so you shouldn't count of a Phalangite in an fight with a Roman, even though the Roman has the advantage in such a fight ofcourse with their large shield and stabbing attacks.

[Watchman]

I feel necessary to remind you here that Roman armies of the period were, for all intents and purposes, 100% levies. That's what "legion" means you know.

Also, the PMs (as well as the Hypaspistai) carry the aspis rather than the rather smaller, though similar, shield the phalangites use (so their hand is left clear to hold the pike).

[satalexton]

Oh joy Maion, it seems out little group's certain new classification, finally gets it's first members.......

[Dutchhoplite]

It didn't get inflexible and the Makedonian Syntagma didn't change. Were did you hear/read something like that? Please get your facts right dude. The only thing that probably happened, is that the pikes were further lengthened about a meter. The formation remained the same: 256 (16x16) man blocks typically, with 5 rows in front having their pikes lowered parallel to the ground and the rest in an angle that rose the further back you went.

The only thing that changed, is that more and more pikemen were used and less and less cavalry. Alexandros used approsimately 9,000 Pezhetairoi IIRC, while later Basileis like Perseus fielded from 16,000 to even 22,000 I believe.

Maion

So, they started to (a). rely on even more cumbersome pikes/ equipment and (b). the macedonian army as a whole started to rely on the phalanx as a battle winner because their supporting units were lacking.

If this doesn't call for inflexibility nothing does, dude.

[Phalanx300]

I feel necessary to remind you here that Roman armies of the period were, for all intents and purposes, 100% levies. That's what "legion" means you know.

Also, the PMs (as well as the Hypaspistai) carry the aspis rather than the rather smaller, though similar, shield the phalangites use (so their hand is left clear to hold the pike).

They were levies yes but their units were put into experience class, I doubt you could class Triarii as levies.

And they did use the Phalangite shield, in EBI they use the Aspis but look at their preview in EB2, they use the Phalangite shield.

So, they started to (a). rely on even more cumbersome pikes/ equipment and (b). the macedonian army as a whole started to rely on the phalanx as a battle winner because their supporting units were lacking.

If this doesn't call for inflexibility nothing does, dude.

As Maion said before, you can't compare the Legion and the Phalanx, the point is that just comparing the Phalanx alone is like comparing a Legion without its reserves. A Macedonian Phalanx without its support will fall eventually, as the Romans showed.

Oh and Dutch, I read somewhere you wanted to start a Greek Reenactment group? Is that right?

[Foot]

And they did use the Phalangite shield, in EBI they use the Aspis but look at their preview in EB2, they use the Phalangite shield.

Actually, in EBII, the Phalangitai hold the aspis, but this is a placeholder until correct skins can be created for the small shield of the phalangitai.

Foot

[Watchman]

They were levies yes but their units were put into experience class, I doubt you could class Triarii as levies.

Income classes, AFAIK; the difference was by the "weight" of war gear, ie. armour, and a man's ability to furnish himself with the more complete harnesses was pretty darn obviously chiefly dependent on his finances.

Though, given, older fellows *would* have been more likely to have gotten themselves suitably financially established to graduate into the "senior" classes than youths, and of course richer people were better able to spare time for additional weapons practice if they were so inclined. (Doesn't mean they necessarily did of course. Lazy gits.)
Nobody said those older fellows' year had been called to war anyway, of course... the Romans *did* fight a lot, but they also had a LOT of staggering in the levy call-up.

[Dutchhoplite]

As Maion said before, you can't compare the Legion and the Phalanx, the point is that just comparing the Phalanx alone is like comparing a Legion without its reserves. A Macedonian Phalanx without its support will fall eventually, as the Romans showed.

Oh and Dutch, I read somewhere you wanted to start a Greek Reenactment group? Is that right?

I'm not comparing those two at all. I'm only replying to his rather contradictory statements :)

And no, i'm not starting an reenactment group. Where did you hear that? I've got barely time to squeeze in a couple of hours of EB ;)

[Maion Maroneios]

If this doesn't call for inflexibility nothing does, dude.

When did I say the Makedones were flexible? On the contrary, if you even bothered to read my posts you'd see I made my oppinions on this matter very clear.

Maion

[Cute Wolf]

Phalangitai in EB 1 = just group them, and order alt + walk.... and they'll slaughter everyone in contact with those spiky points, right? That was because "RTW phalanx" formation always lower the first rows of spears...

Phalangitai in reality... much harder to move without breakin their formation... that's why...

[Phalanx300]

Actually, in EBII, the Phalangitai hold the aspis, but this is a placeholder until correct skins can be created for the small shield of the phalangitai.

Foot

I wasn't talking ingame, the Peltastai Makedonikoi do use the correct shields right?

Income classes, AFAIK; the difference was by the "weight" of war gear, ie. armour, and a man's ability to furnish himself with the more complete harnesses was pretty darn obviously chiefly dependent on his finances.

I think that you can hardly cal the triarii levies, I see it more in the way of quality and not how much money they make. A lot of the Spartans could then be classed as levies as well if money is the isue (around EB time).

And no, i'm not starting an reenactment group. Where did you hear that? I've got barely time to squeeze in a couple of hours of EB ;)

I think in Roman army talk, not sure.

[Watchman]

I think that you can hardly cal the triarii levies, I see it more in the way of quality and not how much money they make. A lot of the Spartans could then be classed as levies as well if money is the isue (around EB time).

Your thinking and seeing is irrelevant, we're talking about what "levy" actually means in military terms. And actual Roman military history rather than opinions thereupon.

[Phalanx300]

Your thinking and seeing is irrelevant, we're talking about what "levy" actually means in military terms. And actual Roman military history rather than opinions thereupon.

Yet those military terms are in fact just the thinking and seeings if others, how retarded they may be which are generally accepted.

Every seeing counts.

Its just rediculous to call battle veterans mere levies, its just downgrading to the veterans.

[Watchman]

Says Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: 1levy
Pronunciation: \ˈle-vē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural lev·ies
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French levé, literally, raising, from lever to raise — more at lever
Date: 13th century
1 a: the imposition or collection of an assessment b: an amount levied
2 a: the enlistment or conscription of men for military service b: troops raised by levy

Bite me and keep your misplaced value-additions away from technical terminology.

[Macilrille]

What a bias to think its a bias. I had this name long before that movie was even announced, in honour of the Spartans who died at Thermopylae. .

Who said anything about the film? Phalanx in itself in your name tells me as a professional historian with a firm base on source criticism that we Danes are almost obsessive about (it is the only thing distinguishing history science from fiction) that you are biased to like Greeks and Macedonians with spears. IE you are biased.

Edited to add, on what source do you build your 10- 20 cm statement? Unless you have sources, which you have continuously refrained from backing your claims with, I cannot take you seriously, sorry.

I have nowhere come across a historical source saying that. And my actual experience with re-enactment fighting tells me that to get your mobility hindered like that is suicide. Show me Thycidid saying it and I believe you, but not before.

[Dutchhoplite]

So i’m also a biased lover of Hellenes wielding pointy sticks

[Macilrille]

What you say about Legionaries being much harder trained is false and innacurate. Pezhetairoi, for once, were trained in phalanx warfare as well as hand-to-hand combat. They were even taught Pankration, and anyone with some knowledge of this will know that a Pankratistes is lethal in close combat. I think the secret to the Romaioi's victories was not so much the fact that they were exceptionally better in hand-to-hand combat (even though they probably recieved more rigorous training in that field due to the fact that sword combat was their primary funtion in the battlefield), but because they had reserves. Ever tried fighting after wielding a pike and shoving it back and foth after an hour?

Maion

Ever tried fighting for hours with a sword? It is no less exhaustive in my experience and as you know I have experience with long spears as well as swords- in fact sword is if anything more exhausting.
There is probably little difference in the rigour of the phalangite or legionaire training. In fact I imagine it to be very similar as they were both elite levies. But the emphasis I would think is different, the legionaire would train mostly with Pilae and Gladius Hispanensis with some unarmed probably added whereas the Phalangite would train Sarrisae (sp?) mostly and some sword and pancration. However, the Phalangite sword was not as effective as the GH and the legionaire would be better at it cause his emphasis was on it, while Phalangite was on sarrisae. Just like an artellerist or tanker today has had basic infantry training, but are no match for a trained infantry soldier and the latter cannot really drive a tank. The comparison is not totally analogous, but I think you know what I mean.

Thus when the character of an engagement would change from the Phalangite's terms to the legionaire's, the latter would of course mostly prevail. So when the Phalanx lost cohesion and it went to sword distance instead, the Romans had an advantage.

[Macilrille]

So i’m also a biased lover of Hellenes wielding pointy sticks

If you wish to interpret it like that yes your opinions are suspected to be so biased. Just as ThePersianCataphract is with Persians and is indeed also an expert on it. In contrast to at least one other biased person here TPC tries for objectivity and backs up his claims with sources as well as has a lot of knowledge on the subject matter.

[Maion Maroneios]

Ever tried fighting for hours with a sword? It is no less exhaustive in my experience and as you know I have experience with long spears as well as swords- in fact sword is if anything more exhausting.

You're missing the point. The Romaioi had reserves. You cannot call upon reserves when you have an engaged phalanx line, you know.

Maion

[antisocialmunky]

Well phalanxes had gap plugging reserves, not relieving reserves.

[Macilrille]

You're missing the point. The Romaioi had reserves. You cannot call upon reserves when you have an engaged phalanx line, you know.

Maion

Who then had the superior concept? *Winks at maion*

[Maion Maroneios]

Who then had the superior concept? *Winks at maion*

Eh?

Maion

[Maion Maroneios]

Well phalanxes had gap plugging reserves, not relieving reserves.

Try doing that when you are engaged, especially with an enemy like the Romaioi. It's like begging them to use those gaps to take you down.

Maion

[Macilrille]

Eh?

Maion

A system that actively uses and allows you to deploy reserves is superior to one that does not IMO.

But mostly I am poking fun at you, for it is a question we will never agree on and that I do not actually want to discuss as it is moot.

[antisocialmunky]

What are you talking about? Phalanxes needs infantry reserve forces to plug gaps that form in the phalanx line since each unit is an independent man box.

[Macilrille]

I think Maion is rightly pointing out that against Romans you definately do not want such gaps in your phalanx formation for they will be at your throat like terriers.

[Maion Maroneios]

A system that actively uses and allows you to deploy reserves is superior to one that does not IMO.

But mostly I am poking fun at you, for it is a question we will never agree on and that I do not actually want to discuss as it is moot.

I never disagreed with that, you know.

Maion