Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Testing: Phalanx vs. Roman Infantry

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Alienated Senior Member Member Red Harvest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Searching for the ORG's lost honor
    Posts
    4,657

    Default Re: Testing: Phalanx vs. Roman Infantry

    Yep, I've been doing some more reading in the old Great Battles of Hannibal, Alexander and Julius Caesar series. I just came across the following in Hannibal. It was set up so that when units approached a phalanx and initiated combat the attacker was handicapped for the initial combat. On subsequent turns of combat after they were faced up, they did not incur a penalty.

    Quoting from the game's help:

    "In any shock resolution in which a non-phalanx unit moves and shock attacks a phalanx (PH) frontally, the unit going against a PH will have its effectiveness drastically reduced. This applies only to moving attacks, not to attacks in which the attacking unit started adjacent to the phalanx unit and stayed in that hex to shock. It does not apply to flank/rear attacks, nor to when all of the attacking units are also PH's.

    Design Note: This reflects the remarkable defensive capabilities that this wall of sarissa (16 to 18 foot long spears) had, especially against the initial charge by the enemy. Once inside the sarissa, the attackers stood a better chance of cracking the phalanx. The reduced effect for HI reflects the fact that they were spear-armed, too."

    This is the effect I think we are lacking in RTW demo. I was also reading through the battle descriptions (history of what happened.) In most cases the phalanx was clearly more powerful and turned or drove back facing units, but in the losses it was outflanked. It was flanking that was beating them, not the face-to-face combat.

    I also remember reading about various weak phalanx formed by rebelling slaves, and weak powers in the past--not necessarily facing Romans. They performed very poorly, but that is not much of a surprise and hardly a reflection of the basic strength or weakness of any unit.
    Rome Total War, it's not a game, it's a do-it-yourself project.

  2. #2
    Ashes to ashes. Funk to funky. Member Angadil's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    2,242

    Default Re: Testing: Phalanx vs. Roman Infantry

    Hmmm.... Actually, what I recall is that several of those "poor man" phalanxes did not perform that badly. Mithradates of Pontus formed a phalanx of ex-slaves and the comments in the sources is rather that they performed quite better than expected. Mind you, the Pontic army was still defeated and mostly slaughtered, but it seems it was not because of the slave phalanx. Similarly, the Egyptian Ptolemies formed a phalanx of some 20.000 native Egyptians (a rare occassion) for the campaign that would eventually lead to the battle of Raphia. Here, the Egyptian phalangites gave a very good account of themselves.

    Caveats: 1) those slaves of the Pontic phalanx, might have come from Macedonian/Greek settlers in Asia Minor recently reduced to slavery by the abusive Roman taxes that spread poverty in the region and built much resentment towards Rome and support for Mithradates. Therefore, they might have had more military experience/training than one usually associates with "slaves". 2) The native Egyptians at Raphia probably fought "in the Macedonian manner", but this is not 100 % certain (Polybius, the main source, is not explicit) and they *might* have been more similar to late Hellenistic hoplites or thureophoroi. Also, it seems they had time for some serious training, so it may be questioned to what extent their performance can be considered representative of the "imitation phalanxes".

    Cheers
    A.
    Europa Barbarorum. Giving history a chance.

  3. #3
    |LGA.3rd|General Clausewitz Member Kaiser of Arabia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Munich...I wish...
    Posts
    4,788

    Default Re: Testing: Phalanx vs. Roman Infantry

    16 units of Cretan archers and Velites with fire arrows will kill off any phalanx (I've done me own testing on the matter)
    -Capo

    Why do you hate Freedom?
    The US is marching backward to the values of Michael Stivic.

  4. #4
    Member Member Oleander Ardens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    1,007

    Arrow Egyptian Phalangites at Raphia

    Good points Angadil

    Point two is interesting indeed, given that according to Herodotos (7.89.3) at least some of them were used to long spears: "They wore woven helmets and carried convex shields with broad rims, and spears for sea-fighting (dorata te naumacha), and great poleaxes. Most of them wore corselets and carried long swords (machairas de megalas)". [Taken from Ueda-Sarsons Essay]

    Greeks settled IIRC since the Lybian domination in the Nil Delta and may also have influenced "Egypt" Regional Warfare, intermixing with the "Egyptian" way of war.

    In any case it is a possibility, although I still think that they were trained in "Macedonian" manner..

    Cheers

    OA
    "Silent enim leges inter arma - For among arms, the laws fall mute"
    Cicero, Pro Milone

  5. #5
    Ashes to ashes. Funk to funky. Member Angadil's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    2,242

    Default Re: Testing: Phalanx vs. Roman Infantry

    Oh yes, I agree OA, the more likely option for the native Egyptian contingent at Raphia is pezhetairoi-style phalangites. I just wanted to point out, that the evidence for this is not clear cut.

    Cheers
    A.
    Europa Barbarorum. Giving history a chance.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO