Did Late Imperial Romans really experimenting with Phalangitai Troops?

[Cute Wolf]

http://tabulaenovaeexercituum.pbwork...perial%20Roman

No, not to mention the Macedonian levies or Mercenary Hellenic Phalangites that they used in republican period. But about the experimentation of Phalangarii soldiers in Imperial time.

I just read it and somewhat confused... if the Romans really try to reuse the Phalanx tactics? I Know that if properly used, and supported, Phalanx type was a somewhat invicible troops up to the Swiss pikemen's era, but why the Romans try to use them (looks like they try to refine them), but abandon their experimental projects afterwards?

Thanks...

[alexanderthegreater]

Reading the text, the ancient sources seem to imply that caracalla recruited a phalanx not so much for military effectiveness but simply to emulate alexander, it not even being certain that those troops he called "the phalanx" werent just armed in the Roman manner.
The phalanx might have been a useable formation though, considering the cavalry-reliant parthians. (spearwall works better against catatanks?)

[Ludens]

The phalanx might have been a useable formation though, considering the cavalry-reliant parthians. (spearwall works better against catatanks?)

Not at all, unless the Parthians were commanded by R:TW's A.I. Your average cavalry-commander would simply bypass the slow-moving infantry formation.

My guess it was simply a nostalgia project. The phalanx is excellent for pitched battles, but at this point the Roman army mostly had to deal with more mobile foes, and the phalanx didn't do very well at that.

[seienchin]

Not at all, unless the Parthians were commanded by R:TW's A.I. Your average cavalry-commander would simply bypass the slow-moving infantry formation.

My guess it was simply a nostalgia project. The phalanx is excellent for pitched battles, but at this point the Roman army mostly had to deal with more mobile foes, and the phalanx didn't do very well at that.

Hey, we are 100% the same opinion this time^^.

[Cute Wolf]

Not at all, unless the Parthians were commanded by R:TW's A.I. Your average cavalry-commander would simply bypass the slow-moving infantry formation.

My guess it was simply a nostalgia project. The phalanx is excellent for pitched battles, but at this point the Roman army mostly had to deal with more mobile foes, and the phalanx didn't do very well at that.

Quite interesting.... but why did they approve that projects anyway? Arming and training troops with Phalangitai fashions are quite exspensive.....

[alexanderthegreater]

Quite interesting.... but why did they approve that projects anyway? Arming and training troops with Phalangitai fashions are quite exspensive.....

Nobody had to approve of the Emperor. Remember when caligula started a military expedition against the sea? He emptied the spoils of war in the senate. (a box of seashells)

[Ludens]

Quite interesting.... but why did they approve that projects anyway? Arming and training troops with Phalangitai fashions are quite exspensive.....

Out of nostalgia? The idea that things were better in the past, and this included fighting style? Anyway, it's not as if they re-equiped the entire army. And most armed forces today still enjoy a bit of outdated drill in strange uniforms.

Hey, we are 100% the same opinion this time^^.

The apocalypse must be near.

[Julianus]

I remember reading in The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Warfare Vol II that the legionaries in the later empire were primarily armed with a thrusting spear of about 2.0-2.5 meter long, while spatha as secondary weapon, so I guess legions of late empire might look like an improved phalanx, hoplite type, not Macedonian type, of course. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Uticensis]

http://tabulaenovaeexercituum.pbwork...perial%20Roman

No, not to mention the Macedonian levies or Mercenary Hellenic Phalangites that they used in republican period. But about the experimentation of Phalangarii soldiers in Imperial time.

I just read it and somewhat confused... if the Romans really try to reuse the Phalanx tactics? I Know that if properly used, and supported, Phalanx type was a somewhat invicible troops up to the Swiss pikemen's era, but why the Romans try to use them (looks like they try to refine them), but abandon their experimental projects afterwards?

Thanks...

Here is the relevant passage from the Cassius Dio (78.7):

He [Caracalla] was so enthusiastic about Alexander that he used certain weapons and cups which he believed had once been his, and he also set up many likenesses of him both in the camps and in Rome itself. He organized a phalanx, composed entirely of Macedonians, sixteen thousand strong, named it "Alexander's phalanx," and equipped it with the arms that warriors had used in his day; these consisted of a helmet of raw ox-hide, a three-ply linen breastplate, a bronze shield, long pike, short spear, high boots, and sword. Not even this, however, satisfied him, but he must call his hero "the Augustus of the East"; and once he actually wrote to the senate that Alexander had come to life again in the person of the Augustus, that he might live on once more in him, having had such a short life before.

There is no mention of these troops being used in battle, though I guess they may have been. Caracalla had mainly done created this unit because he was obsessed with emulating Alexander. Throughout the chapter Cassius Dio describes the various ways Caracalla tries to emulate Alexander, Achilles, ect. while in the East, and his obsession with Macedonians. I'm sure we can assume that after Caracalla died the Roman generals, and his successor (who had been Prefect of the Praetorian Guard, so I assume a militarily practical man), realized the silliness of this project and reequipped these troops in more modern gear.


As for late Roman soldiers looking like a Greek phalanx because they used a spear (lancea) as their primary weapon, I guess that's true, kind of sort of. Here's some pictures of soldiers created in the late fourth, early fifth century:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...lFolio188v.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...janCouncil.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...r_early_6c.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ave_Mosaic.jpg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient..._gallery_6.jpg


And some reenactors:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ro...n_province.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ro...n_province.jpg

I guess they have some things in common with the soldiers of the Greek city states, especially as after the reforms of Iphikrates.

[bobbin]

I think the first of those reenactors is holding pila not a spear.

[Rahwana]

I think it was impossible someone who had better troops change to an outdated one for the sake of nostalgia.... maybe that was only a hoax wolf?

[Ca Putt]

Traditonalism only works if you used the unit yourself and contunued to use it like Spartans who contiuned to use the same panoply for some time. for Romans useing a pike phalanx would be more of a CHANGE(Traditionalists hate Change ;) ) to a forgein(Traditionalists don't like foreigners) outdated tactic.

so it would be more like the US army useing Panzer IVs ^^

[Uticensis]

why did the roman army evolve in that direction?

A few reasons. The enemies of the empire had changed. The biggest threat was the Parthians (and later the reborn Persian Empire) and so the Romans adopted a lot of tactics that worked well against primarily mounted enemies. Also, the pilum had been slowly evolving in two directions: smaller and larger. The larger version became the lancea, which could be used as a spear in battle, but then also thrown like a javelin (the move toward smaller size led to darts that were carried in the shield of special units). Also, influence from foreign peoples in the military, especially Germans, led to the changes. Thus, the gladius was replaced with the spatha, which was a slashing, not stabbing, weapon. I imagine for closer quarter fighting, in tight formation, a spear would work a lot better than a slashing sword, thus the spear became more popular.

Traditonalism only works if you used the unit yourself and contunued to use it like Spartans who contiuned to use the same panoply for some time. for Romans useing a pike phalanx would be more of a CHANGE(Traditionalists hate Change ;) ) to a forgein(Traditionalists don't like foreigners) outdated tactic.

so it would be more like the US army useing Panzer IVs ^^

Except the Romans identified themselves closely with the Macedonians. We tend to assume that all Romans knew Roman history, but I would venture to guess that the average Roman did not know any more about their history than the average US citizen knows about US history (that is to say, very little). Even though the early Romans had fought the phalanx when they were at war with Pyrrhus, I doubt that the average third century Roman remembered that. By this time, Alexander, and things associated with Alexander, had become thoroughly Romanized. One example of this is that according to popular novelizations of Alexander's life written in the Later Roman Empire, after the death of Phillip of Macedon, Alexander's mother married the king of Byzantion and they had a daughter, and this daughter married Romulus, making the Romans ancestors of Alexander (this story is from later than Caracalla-probably around the time of Constantine since Byzantion is emphasized- but it had clearly evolved over a long period and shows how the Romans like to co-opt the legacy of other people; the Trojans come to mind in this regard). And even if most educated Romans knew that such connections were silly, Caracalla saw himself as Alexander reborn, so the links with Alexander and Macedonian were very close. Indeed, those Romans living in the Eastern, Greek speaking parts of the Empire would have very thoroughly considered themselves simultaneously the heirs of Roman and of Greco-Macedonian culture, and as I said, over time these two cultures fused into one.

Instead of comparing it to the US army using Panzers, I would compare it to US army units associating themselves with Native American warrior culture (which they do sometimes). Even though the the US was often at wars with the native peoples, their legacy has sort of been co-opted. This obviously isn't an exact match for what the Romans did with Alexander, but its the closest I can think of.

[antisocialmunky]

so it would be more like the US army useing Panzer IVs ^^

How about a VI?

If it works, you might as well use it until it blows up.

[KARTLOS]

Here is the relevant passage from the Cassius Dio (78.7):

He [Caracalla] was so enthusiastic about Alexander that he used certain weapons and cups which he believed had once been his, and he also set up many likenesses of him both in the camps and in Rome itself. He organized a phalanx, composed entirely of Macedonians, sixteen thousand strong, named it "Alexander's phalanx," and equipped it with the arms that warriors had used in his day; these consisted of a helmet of raw ox-hide, a three-ply linen breastplate, a bronze shield, long pike, short spear, high boots, and sword. Not even this, however, satisfied him, but he must call his hero "the Augustus of the East"; and once he actually wrote to the senate that Alexander had come to life again in the person of the Augustus, that he might live on once more in him, having had such a short life before.

There is no mention of these troops being used in battle, though I guess they may have been. Caracalla had mainly done created this unit because he was obsessed with emulating Alexander. Throughout the chapter Cassius Dio describes the various ways Caracalla tries to emulate Alexander, Achilles, ect. while in the East, and his obsession with Macedonians. I'm sure we can assume that after Caracalla died the Roman generals, and his successor (who had been Prefect of the Praetorian Guard, so I assume a militarily practical man), realized the silliness of this project and reequipped these troops in more modern gear.


As for late Roman soldiers looking like a Greek phalanx because they used a spear (lancea) as their primary weapon, I guess that's true, kind of sort of. Here's some pictures of soldiers created in the late fourth, early fifth century:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...lFolio188v.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...janCouncil.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...r_early_6c.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ave_Mosaic.jpg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient..._gallery_6.jpg


And some reenactors:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ro...n_province.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ro...n_province.jpg

I guess they have some things in common with the soldiers of the Greek city states, especially as after the reforms of Iphikrates.

why did the roman army evolve in that direction?

[ARCHIPPOS]

Here is the relevant passage from the Cassius Dio (78.7):

He [Caracalla] was so enthusiastic about Alexander that he used certain weapons and cups which he believed had once been his, and he also set up many likenesses of him both in the camps and in Rome itself. He organized a phalanx, composed entirely of Macedonians, sixteen thousand strong, named it "Alexander's phalanx," and equipped it with the arms that warriors had used in his day; these consisted of a helmet of raw ox-hide, a three-ply linen breastplate, a bronze shield, long pike, short spear, high boots, and sword. Not even this, however, satisfied him, but he must call his hero "the Augustus of the East"; and once he actually wrote to the senate that Alexander had come to life again in the person of the Augustus, that he might live on once more in him, having had such a short life before.

Caracalla had mainly done created this unit because he was obsessed with emulating Alexander. Throughout the chapter Cassius Dio describes the various ways Caracalla tries to emulate Alexander, Achilles etc...

you are referring to what is known amongst historians as IMITATIO ALEXANDRIS - Pompei, Marcus Antonius, Octavianus August had employed similar policies as means for presenting their rule over the Hellenised East as legitimate etc... similar examples are very common all throughout history.Alexander himself seeked to imitate and surpass the exploits of great mythical figures such as Achiles , Dionysus etc... in modern history similar examples would be Napoleon III or Margaret Thatcher who cleverly adopted stylistic tendencies of Elisabeth the first...