While the Macedonian phalanx would advance over flat ground in one continuous line the first Romans to engage were the Velites, skirmishers who carried 7 light javelins. This transformation was likely a result of the Samnite wars fought in the varied mountainous terrain of central Italy where the Romans needed a more adaptable formation. By the way, the case that a phalanx lost its cohesion did not only mean a defeat but also a much higher casualty rate. However the Spartans killing each other at young ages does not equal proper training it merely means you know how to kill. Romans were fiercely brave, and it took quite a feat of bravery to be among the first to jump into an enemy formation bristling with spears to open up gaps for your fellow soldiers. Some Rights Reserved (2009-2023) under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license unless otherwise noted. The battles certainly showcase the manipular legions flexibility over the powerful but stiff Macedonian phalanx, but it would have been impossible with all the different variables to find a perfect battlefield matchup of the two formations. In contrast, a phalanx only really works when the entire army is in one cohesive formation. Please also note that the Principes in the second line of battle would only engage after the Hastati that made up the first line of battle had failed to break the enemy and had retreated through the gaps between the maniples of the second line of battle. Using up their reserves could work against them. The Roman strategies were very devious when it comes to flanking. about 5000 spartans equipped in old hoplitic style and traditional phalanx formation (with king and royal spartans on the right) fight about 5000 romans of late republic; last part of video was. Please note that some of these recommendations are listed under our old name, Ancient History Encyclopedia. In open field the roman legion would just expand out and start hitting the side of the phalanx formation then the hoplites would rout. This more advanced stage of combat training was called armatura, an expression which first was used in the gladiatorial schools, which proves that some of the methods used in training soldiers was indeed borrowed from the training techniques of gladiators. The testudo was a common formation in the Middle Ages, being used by Muhammad 's forces during the Siege of Ta'if in 630, [5] also by the Carolingian Frankish soldiers of Louis the Pious to advance on the walls of Barcelona during the siege of 800-801, by Vikings during the siege of Paris in 885-886, by East Frankish soldiers under king . The Macedonians outnumbered the Romans about 44,000 to 29,000 but both forces were equal in cavalry. The Greek and Roman warriors are remembered for their power, their strength and their ability to strategize. There is a remarkable lack of difference between a Roman formation and a phalanx. The Macedonians outnumbered the Romans about 44,000 to 29,000 but both forces were equal in cavalry. 5) The Romans used reserves. They did meet in two well documented battles, but first to clear out some issues. Roman Legion vs Spartan Army Just want opinions on a hypothetical battle between the two. The battles certainly showcase the manipular legions flexibility over the powerful but stiff Macedonian phalanx, but it would have been impossible with all the different variables to find a perfect battlefield matchup of the two formations. Please note that content linked from this page may have different licensing terms. P.S. In small groups at first, the Romans dove into these narrow gaps in the lines and fought to widen them. The Roman manipular legionand the Macedonian phalanx were each pivotal factors in the successes of their states, but was one formation actually better than the other? Rome had just finished its bloody Second Punic War with Carthage and Macedon wanted to expand itself. | The largest and most impressive of the nine tholos tombs at Mycenae (VIDEO) , The perfect Greece-themed wedding invitations for a destination wedding, 10 Insider Tips for Finding Affordable Business Class Flights to Greece, The Life And Work Of A Greek Translator In The Context Of Ancient Greece, What Places Did Odysseus Travel | Troy, Ismaros & More, The Impact of Ancient Greece History on the Modern World, 9 Places In Europe That You Must Visit At Least Once In Your Life. Syntagma, . The traditional Greek City states had lost much of their power and influence. SPQR. The Truth. But whose tactic was better? If the battle were to occur at night I would imagine the Spartans would probably get the jump on the Romans, since the Spartans were sneaky little bastards =). In my opinion yes. For more information on that and the average casualty rates of phalanx warfare, you can check out my article here. Next in line, after the training for marching and fitness, came the training of handling weapons. Let`s start with both the Roman army and the Macedonian phalanx taking positions on the battlefield. At Heraclea and Asculum the tried and true Macedonian phalanx faced the Roman maniple that had only been established 40-100 years before. Romans also deployed shieldwall tactics and were heavily armored. It was a battle of two halves of a sort. Three major battles were fought with the first two being Pyrrhic victories for Pyrrhus. Syntagma, . 5 Mythical Creatures Explained Rationally, Caesar vs Pompey: Clash of the Deadly Rivals, Gods and Goddesses of War: 7 Deities of Violent & Bloodthirsty Rituals, Crowns, Cash & Hidden Cities: 12 Real Life Lost Treasures. Just want opinions on a hypothetical battle between the two. So let`s now briefly look at the Battle of Pydna. Even a minimally equipped and trained phalanx was still a forward moving force to be reckoned with. If their camp was near the sea, a lake or river, every recruit was made to swim. Ok, so that is how a Roman legion would break a phalanx in theory. The manipular system that Rome adopted after it had abandoned the use of the phalanx was the exact opposite of the Macedonian phalanx. They used the "checkerboard" formation because it allowed Velites (theirs skirmishers) to fall back quickly. The organization from Homeric style hero warfare to tightly packed hoplite warfare was world changing. The epic battles between the two of them, as well as other parties and them, have most certainly changed history. Raised in ancient Greece, Polybius fought in Hellenic battles before being sent to Rome as a hostage, though he was given great freedoms during his stay. But despite that successful history, the phalanx proved inferior to the Roman army. The flexibility of the maniples allowed them to surround and destroy each unit until the rest of Philips forces fled. Superior metallurgy, larger shields, the gladius, troop rotation and better armour cover are all on the Roman side. The armies of Rome and Philips phalanx army met at Cynoscephalae, with a large hill separating the two camps. It would be 100% speculative to imagine say an Athenian or Spartan Phalanx going up against a similar sized Roman Imperial Legion, as the never met. It was an all or nothing attack, as it required all available manpower. The Roman Legions were the greatest heavy infantry of the day, supported by siege engines and brilliant logistics the Legions were the premiere infantry fighting force of the day. Do you want to find out more about the Kopis, how it was best used and what other type of sword was used by the Greeks? The maniple was fluid, with each maniple led by centurions who were encouraged to take initiative and lead by example. Additionally, it is also important to state that while the long pikes of the Macedonian phalangites gave them a longer reach, the Kopis that the phalangites used as a secondary weapon in combination with their small round shields made them less effective in close combat. The decisive battle happened on flat ground not too far from the site of Thermopylae. Watch Gladiator and get back to me. Johannes Kromayer: Heerwesen und Kriegsfhrung der Griechen und Rmer (Mnchen 1963). There you can also find out more about the disadvantages that were shared by both the Greek and the Macedonian phalanx. Based on military tactics and training, who would win? published on 04 October 2019 The Roman victory in the Battle of Cynoscephalae ( 197 BC ) marked the end of the Second Macedonian War between Rome and Philip V, king of Macedon. And that meant defeat. The Roman manipular legionand the Macedonian phalanx were each pivotal factors in the successes of their states, but was one formation actually better than the other? The flexibility of the maniples allowed them to surround and destroy each unit until the rest of Philips forces fled. Based on military tactics and training, who would win? As soon as the first Roman soldiers had managed to break into the phalanx that had already been weakened by the javelins it was up to the centurions to exploit opportunities by maneuvering their maniples into the opening gaps of the phalanx. 4 Children Were Found Alive 40 days After Amazon Jungle Plane Crash! facebook.com/jack.beckett.73 instagram.com/history_bloke_on_a_bike/ linkedin.com/in/jack-beckett-56a76520/. In case you haven`t got enough of ancient Rome yet I would like to recommend you my article here talking about the diets of Roman soldiers. The tight formation with the average phalangites taking up a frontage of three feet meant that, theoretically, the average soldier, who needed twice the frontage to operate with sword or spear, faced a total of ten spear points.Not purely a defensive formation, the phalanx could advance forward with pikes churning through virtually any opponent with ease. The Roman Legions and the Greek Phalanx were two prominent ancient military formations. You can share this debate in three different ways: 2023 TidyLife, Inc. All Rights Reserved. World History Publishing is a non-profit company registered in the United Kingdom. These men, could then be ordered to whatever area that was needed, and help turn the tide. The individual soldier of the phalanx was tied to the cohesion of his unit, but had the safety of multiple spearheads between the front row and the enemy. Unlike the Macedonian phalanx, the Roman army was organized into maniples of 120 men each that could operate independently under the umbrella of the Legion. The engagement at Cynoscephalae was over a hill with both forces on either side of it. Their Phalanx was different from the conventional ones. To all officers: Once Rome 2 and Total War Arena comes out the Spartan army has little to fear against enemy armiesexcept the Roman Legion. Raised in ancient Greece, Polybius fought in Hellenic battles before being sent to Rome as a hostage, though he was given great freedoms during his stay. So in short where there any battles between Spartans and Romans? For more information on that, I would like to recommend you my article here. Change). Hi. reason is that their phalanx was very powerful. The last great example of maniple and phalanx battle is found at the battle of Pydna during the third Macedonian war between Rome and Perseus. The best descriptions of the formations come from the historian Polybius. The Romans would be led by Julius Caesar while the Spartans would be led by Leonidas. They were usually arranged into walls, making it easy to keep the enemy at a distance. The Truth! Come forth and place your ideas at the table. This last battle shows the small unit tactics for which the maniple was built towards but also shows how well the maniple fit the Romans as a people. The matter of training would come into play here the spartan would be much better trained than the Romans. This is why, I believe the legion in any form (Maniple, Marian, and Imperial) would beat any Phalanx, owing to the flexibility that was built into its structure. Troops like for example the Roman Hastati and Principes for example. While once again the Phalanx pushed the Romans, moment they reached the hills (behind the Roman Camp), the Phalanx lost its effectiveness. The battle is considered one of the best examples of manipular Roman legion superiority over the Macedonian phalanx in terms of flexibility and combat maneuvering. The Macedonian phalanx continued to be used from Germany to Egypt and did prove to be effective. Then check out my article here. Each of the battles mention featured varying skill and experiences for the commanders and the armies in general. Hence right from the beginning the Roman soldier was trained to march in line and to keep the army a compact fighting unit on the move. I think the Spartans would of met the same fate as the Romans If they were teutoburg Forrest against the Germanic tribes, Remember too, their is a technological gap between them even if it wasn't a big one. Both had their own sets of pros and cons. Meanwhile, the remaining Roman right wing advanced up the hill and met the rest of Philips army as they were arriving in bunches. They switched to the legion, when they realised the system could not let them fight on uneven terrain. This would weaken the enemy a great bit. The Romans had started using the Maniple legion. Also, the Romans used cavalry, Spartans did not. Each of these soldiers were private farmers that owned their own land, which was the way to partake in battle with the Phalanx. Both were well equiped and both were geard soley toward warfare. Their strategies were also superior and more versatile than the Spartans. The Macedonian phalanx took the concept of cohesive group warfare to another level with the sarissa armed phalangites and under Philip and Alexander, steamrolled every opponent in front of them. By William McLaughlin for War History Online. However, the lower density combined with shorter swords did mean that the Romans shoving power was not as great as that of the Greek Phalanxes. The pila storm before the Roman charge will disrupt the hoplite phalanx, perhaps creating gaps that they can exploit. The phalanx was much more rigid, but overwhelmingly powerful in a frontal assault. well, you are kind of right at the pilum. The organization from Homeric style hero warfare to tightly packed hoplite warfare was world changing. Take care of yourself because you deserve it. The legions of Rome or the phalanx of Sparta? Each side is equipped with their standard weaponry. Assuming the Spartans had similar metal technology to craft with but, the same shape of weaponry (so the answer doesn't become bronze vs iron). The Romans were renowned for their discipline, and history repeatedly showed that the Cohort system was superior to the Phalanx in terms of flexibility, and depending on the situation, strength. The best descriptions of the formations come from the historian Polybius. Although I fight fiercely for the Romans, you are kind of right about the Pila thing. The legions of Rome had been fully marshalled by then. There the phalangites with their small round shields were inferior to the Roman soldiers with their large rectangular shields that covered them from chin to knee. 157161 "The Greeks Suffer From Slings and Arrows", and the methods improvised to solve this problem. Now at Cynoscephalae, Titus Quinctius Flaminius had chased the Phillip Vs Macedon forces out of the lands of the Aetolian League. But enough of the preliminary remarks, let`s look at how a Roman army fought against a Macedonian phalanx. the spartans where difficult to beat for two main reasons, a. there shealds where made of thick wood and a little bronze(making them very strong, 2 the shields where overlaped to make a shield wall with spiers coming from the top and the bottom, this made it almost imposible to beat from the front, the romans had one weapon that could deafete all this, the pillaeum was a longjavalin with the majority of it was made of iron this made it so that when it imbeded itsef in a shield to would bend and get stuck, this would force the enemy to fight without a shield, this only means hat they would be wiped out. Here you can find out more about the armament of the Roman soldiers while my article here talks about the armament of the Macedonian phalangites. as stated previously the romans copied and improved the greek phalanx, otherwise they would problably be just a bunch of dudes running around with no organization. Philip decided to take the initiative and marched out first with the right half of his phalanx, so that they could take the hill and attack downhill. Initially adopting a hoplite style . Only once the recruits was deemed able enough in fighting against the stakes, were they assigned in pairs to train in individual combat. However, it left a lot to be desired, particularly in terms of protection flank and rear were practically exposed. This flexibility allowed Rome to create and maintain a large empire for centuries. As planned the gaps that were opening in the now vulnerable Macedonian phalanx were exploited by the centurions who led their men right into these gaps. He was either forced into it as he was the second or third son in a poor family. For landscape, we'll say an open flat field so no forest or hills for advantage. Assuming equivalent numbers on both sides (roughly 5,000) and similar weaponry. but still the phalanx were almost unbreakable, and the romans would no matter what have to fight themselves through a shield and spear wall which were deadly, even for the Romans. No auxiliary units. With three lines, one behind the other the Romans deployed in separate maniples with each line having a maniple-sized gap between units, with those gaps covered by the next line back creating a checkerboard formation. The Macedonian Phalanx, Images of the phalanx formation in ancient Greek warfare, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phalanx&oldid=1159363945, This page was last edited on 9 June 2023, at 21:07. The two battles which form the reference are Cynoscephalae and Pydna. He may have committed a crime and was offered the chance to use his life as a soldier rather than face a horrible death by execution. Phalanxes took a long time to assemble. Now, do these documented battles prove that the Legion was superior to the Phalanx? A Greek phalanx charging into battle, as peltasts throw spears over the heads of the hoplites. That caused the phalanx to break and won Rome the Battle of Pydna. Their is an obvious technical difference between the 2 but even if you give the Germans assault rifles to help even the odds the marines still have the upper hand because they have learned from the mistakes of ww2 Korea and Vietnam which would give them the upper hand. But, the Roman Legion were also renowned for the discipline, not so much stealth. The Battle of Pydna (168 BC): A victory of the flexible Roman army over the rigid Macedonian phalanx, his successors who fought over Alexanders empire, first casualties in the Macedonian phalanx, Political Institutions & Offices Of The Roman Republic, Did Roman soldiers have beards? The first thing the soldiers were taught to do, was to march. I`m Luke Reitzer. While advancing an unnamed officer noticed that they were marching right past the vulnerable rear of the Macedonian right phalanx and peeled off a large enough force to flank the engaged phalanx and quickly rout them. The phalanx was much more rigid, but overwhelmingly powerful in a frontal assault. For the phalanx, the sixteen-man deep formation had the first five ranks with their spears extending out of the formation while the remaining ranks held their spears upright or at an angle to deflect missiles. All scores are updated in real-time. After this, Macedonian power was shattered permanently, and by that the Greek peninsula was effectively under Roman rule (yeah there were 2 smaller wars, but they were not comparable in size and scale, and the Romans won those with ease). Gotta side with the roman legionaries. 3) The Legions were much more flexible than the phalanx, as proven at the Battle of Cynoscephalae. The Spartans had to stick with the original battle plan. Yes I know they would use the big square shield and then combine theirs with other men to make a big cube that would theoretically protect everyone inside. This battle shows the ingenuity and freedoms allowed to Roman officers to enable them to make a battlefield decision that profoundly influenced the outcome.The last great example of maniple and phalanx battle is found at the battle of Pydna during the third Macedonian war between Rome and Perseus. Also, the Phalanx was really manpower intensive. The ancient Sumerian army fielded a standard six-man-deep phalanx; the first line went into battle carrying large, rectangular shields, and the troops bore heavy pikes and battle axes. The Roman manipular legionand the Macedonian phalanx were each pivotal factors in the successes of their states, but was one formation actually better than the other? Before we can look at how exactly the Roman army was able to defeat a phalanx in battle we first have to take a look at the differences between the Roman manipular army and the phalanx. Answer (1 of 14): Preamble Hence, phalanxes and legions rarely ever fought by themselves--they were supported . For more information on the interaction between the 3 lines of battle, you can check out my article here. As the long phalanx line pushed forward, they began to break formation as some areas pushed forward more than others and the uneven ground began to break the formation. When they vied control of the hill, both commanders decided to unleash their forces. Even a minimally equipped and trained phalanx was still a forward moving force to be reckoned with.The pliability of the Roman maniple allowed them to fight in any size group from whole legion advances to the individual soldier, ready for any occasion on the battlefield with two javelins, a large shield, and an effective gladius. No auxiliary units. The javelins thrown by the maniples were also an effective formation breaking tool used to lessen the impact of enemy charges or create holes to exploit with their own charge. For more information on the Macedonian phalanx, how many rows of men one phalanx had, how it was best used in battle, and why the flanks were extremely vulnerable I would like to recommend you my article here. The main power on the Greek peninusla was Macedonia. The Macedonians pushed the Roman left wing (which was fighting in effective order and not breaking), while the Roman right wing defeated the Macedonian left, which was yet to form. Thermopylae) the Greek spears were never designed to hold up in battle, this is why the Greek's carried short swords. Simply put Julius Caesar is probably top three if not the greatest general of all time. Initially adopting a hoplite style phalanx due to influence from Southern Italian Hellenic colonies, the army eventually transformed into the flexible manipular legion. How Did Columbus Know the Earth Was Round? How did the Roman legion defeat a phalanx? And while that at first proved almost impossible to overcome the Romans had learned until the battle of Asculum in 280 BC that the pikes of the Macedonian phalangites became completely useless as soon as one came into close combat. Learn how and when to remove these template messages, Learn how and when to remove this template message, https://www.gottwein.de/Grie/lyr/lyr_tyrt_gr.php#Tyrt.8D, "The Othismos, Myths and Heresies: The Nature of Hoplite Battle", The Roman Maniple vs. Particularly seeing as Roman fought in shifts. However, there is strong evidence that suggest that the only reason the Romans had lost this battle is because the elephants got involved in it and Roman legions had no experience fighting them. Spartans didn't believe in ranged weapons, they thought it cowardly to kill your enemy from a distance. As soon as the phalanx had lost its cohesion it became vulnerable and could be broken by the Roman troops. Reddit, Inc. 2023. In case the Hastati, the first line of battle, were not able to get past the pikes of the phalangites they retreated behind the Principes so that the more experienced and better-armored men could have a go at it. Here you can find my article with more information on that and also the other 4 reasons that made the Roman army so successful. document.getElementById( "ak_js_1" ).setAttribute( "value", ( new Date() ).getTime() ); https://www.facebook.com/classicaledition/. The phalanx was much more rigid, but overwhelmingly powerful in a frontal assault. The flexibility of the maniples allowed them to surround and destroy each unit until the rest of Philips forces fled. So there we have it, that is how Rome was able to overcome a formation as tested and effective as the phalanx. Three major battles were fought with the first two being Pyrrhic victories for Pyrrhus. The infantry carried longer spears (16-20 feet), and had smaller shields than their Greek counterparts. Neutralhistory.com is determined to answer questions about history and to take you on an exciting journey through history. The Greek Phalanx typically acted as a single, dense mass, whereas the Romans split themselves into several "maniple" with gaps between them - usually 30-35 maniples per legion. Phalanx Transformation of Ancient Greek Warfare. That retreat had been planned from the beginning and had the goal of pulling the Macedonian phalanx away from the flat battlefield and onto the rugged foothills. The first combats were during Pyrrhus invasion of Italy in 280 BCE. The Roman army deployed in 3 lines with skirmishers (so-called Velites) operating in front of the first Roman line. Vegetius mentions running, long and high jump and carrying heavy packs. Why was the Roman army superior to the Phalanx ? Syntagma, . However assuming that this was a battle in daylight my money falls upon the Romans. Legion VS Phalanx How the Roman Army Defeated the Phalanx, Legion vs Phalanx advantages and disadvantages of both systems, The advantages & disadvantages of the phalanx. The organization from Homeric style hero warfare to tightly packed hoplite warfare was world changing. This transformation was likely a result of the Samnite wars fought in the varied mountainous terrain of central Italy where the Romans needed a more adaptable formation. When they met, it was well after Alexanders time. All Rights Reserved. The individual soldier of the phalanx was tied to the cohesion of his unit, but had the safety of multiple spearheads between the front row and the enemy. The Hastati would advance and then throw their 2 javelins in two closely followed volleys. 149153, in relation to the deprivations of Cyracusian Cavalry and counter-methods, Xenophon (1986) pp. At least in my humble opinion. Also Julius Caesar would wipe the ground with Leonidas. This transformation was likely a result of the Samnite wars fought in the varied mountainous terrain of central Italy where the Romans needed a more adaptable formation. Just infantry. For more information on the differences in armament and age of these 3 groups, you might want to check out my article here. I'm not even going to start on the number of spelling and grammatical errors, I've encountered in your passage, but what does heavy armor have to do with a shield wall. as long as the spartans werent surrounded the phalanx would hold and they would just stab the legionaires before even getting towards the spartan sheild wall and even they could the sheilds are quite strong. (2019, October 04). The spartan hoplon was far more versatile than the Roman scutum. Widening these gaps then resulted in the loss of cohesion of the phalanx. It was highly flexible and as such ideal for fighting even on rugged terrain. In Rome Polybius studied Roman warfare and so had experience with both phalanx and maniple style warfare. 2) The Romans were heavily armored, with a big square shield as well. The Macedonian phalanx took the concept of cohesive group warfare to another level with the sarissa armed phalangites and under Philip and Alexander, steamrolled every opponent in front of them. Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Preamble Before we begin, I must say that such a battle would be terribly unrealistic, because both the Greeks and Romans by this time were already bringing the concept of combined arms to bear. The Hellenic Daily News is the leading International Online Greek News Portal and News Agency based in New York City with worldwide influence, Greek News 24/7 from Greece, USA, Cyprus, Australia, Canada and all over the world. Huge fan of war history and rural history and a motorbike rider. The Roman Legion helped it secure dominance over the Mediterranean and Western Europe and remained a powerhouse for centuries. This powerful Hellenic formation allowed the ancient Greeks to hold off the powerful Persian invasion and spread Hellenic culture throughout the Mediterranean. However, I think it might also be a good idea to show an actual example of a battle where the flexibility of the Roman manipular legion overcame the rigidity of the phalanx (although the ground played a major role) in the end. https://www.worldhistory.org/video/1830/phalanx-vs-legion-battle-of-cynoscephalae/. And here you can find out more about the price of salt and whether or not salt was really worth its weight in gold. Details for these battles are scarce but while it seems that though the phalanx did indeed steamroll through the Romans, it was done with great difficulty and at Beneventum the flexibility of the maniples allowed them to seize the openings made by the rampaging elephants to cause a rout. 300 Spartans v.s. The best descriptions of the formations come from the historian Polybius. People argue that the Romans were less fit for battle due to entering the military later in life than a Spartan. While Alexanders empire grew and fragmented, The Romans were busy with their arduous task of conquering Italy. ( and remember people to assume not only makes and ass out of you but it does of me as well ). After Pyrrhus invasion, the Romans fought titanic wars against Carthage that brought them to superpower status in the Mediterranean. Phalanx vs Legion: Battle of Cynoscephalae. As the Roman left met them and held firm, the Roman right marched up the hill in order to deny the rest of Philips army the downhill advantage. Initially adopting a hoplite style phalanx due to influence from Southern Italian Hellenic colonies, the army eventually transformed into the flexible manipular legion. Lendon, p. 182: The phalanx was known to the Romans in pre-Republic days, whose best fighting men were armed as hoplites. Our publication has been reviewed for educational use by Common Sense Education, Internet Scout (University of Wisconsin), Merlot (California State University), OER Commons and the School Library Journal. Initially adopting a hoplite style phalanx due to influence from Southern Italian Hellenic colonies, the army eventually transformed into the flexible manipular legion. As soon as the Velites had thrown their 7 javelins (and had inflicted first casualties in the Macedonian phalanx) they retreated and left the field to the 10 maniples of Hastati in the first Roman line of battle. When the phalanx got disrupted or broken up, the individual soldiers had to fight one- on - one. 12 Jun 2023. For this the wooden stakes were put to use again as targets. While the phalanx was usually 16 rows deep only the first 5-6 rows could engage the enemy with their pikes. Sure the phalanx was ALMOST unbreakable, from the front. 2023 Hellenic Daily News. At the battle of Beneventum a few years later the Romans finally prevailed, with help from Pyrrhus elephants which charged back into his own lines. The exact method of this formation engaging in battle has been questioned due to the large gaps, but it seems that the gaps remained while engaged to allow the rear lines through to support when needed. During the 7th century bc the Greek city-states adopted a phalanx eight men deep. The Battle of Pydna is oftentimes seen as a prime example of the advantages of the more flexible Roman legion over the rigid Macedonian phalanx. No seige weapons such as ballistae. By the way, the reason why the phalangites in the rear pointed their pikes towards the sky had to do with the depth of the Macedonian phalanx. One of those tactics was known as othismos roughly translated as the push of shields and basically involved the soldiers pushing their shields into the backs of their fellow soldiers in front of them in order to make the Phalanx even denser. So we just found out that the disadvantages of the Macedonian phalanx were its rigidity, inflexibility, and its need to deploy in one continuous line which made it unsuitable for fighting on rugged terrain. The weapons used in the armatura were, though still of wood, of the same, or similar weight as the original service weapons. The two formations actually met in battle a handful of times with varied results. Details for these battles are scarce but while it seems that though the phalanx did indeed steamroll through the Romans, it was done with great difficulty and at Beneventum the flexibility of the maniples allowed them to seize the openings made by the rampaging elephants to cause a rout.After Pyrrhus invasion, the Romans fought titanic wars against Carthage that brought them to superpower status in the Mediterranean. compare Spartan Empire to Roman Empire, tell me which is bigger. The Legionnaire The Legionnaire joined the Roman army in several different ways. Just because you saw 300 doesn't mean the information is valid. Phalanx vs Legion: Battle of Cynoscephalae. 1) The Romans have the pila (javelin), they would throw them at the enemy before charging. These two lines were deployed in a checkerboard system while the third line, the Triarii, formed one continuous line. When they fought, it was during the Second and Third Macedon Wars. The organization from Homeric style hero warfare to tightly packed hoplite warfare was world changing. With their cavalry and skirmishers committed, the Macedonians took the upper hand and attacked. The Romans admired and studied many aspects of the earlier Greek civilization to include warfare. 2 the romans heavy armor didn't meant that much beacause of the spear wall from the spartans. The Greek hoplite soldier provided his own weapon (a seven- or eight-foot spear known as a doru) and shield as well as a breastplate, helmet, and greaves. Powered by GreeceHighDefinition / Privacy Policy, Greek Phalanx vs Roman Legion: A history of the most powerful military formations in the ancient world, Atlantis: Plato describes the history of the island (Documentary), Egypt finds ancient military vessel, Greek graves in sunken city , The perfect Greece-themed wedding invitations for a destination wedding, 10 Insider Tips for Finding Affordable Business Class Flights to Greece, The Life And Work Of A Greek Translator In The Context Of Ancient Greece, What Places Did Odysseus Travel | Troy, Ismaros & More, The Impact of Ancient Greece History on the Modern World, 9 Places In Europe That You Must Visit At Least Once In Your Life. The main power on the Greek peninusla was Macedonia. Pyrrhus won these battles but the maniples put forth a valiant effort and caused heavy casualties. Weaponry and protection of the Romans was also superior. While advancing an unnamed officer noticed that they were marching right past the vulnerable rear of the Macedonian right phalanx and peeled off a large enough force to flank the engaged phalanx and quickly rout them. Concerning weaponry, Spartan's are equipped with the Spartan Shield, dory Spear, Xiphos sword, Kopis sword, and a javelin. that game has a ridiculous amount of countries to play as doesn't it? Greece: Volunteer firefighters seek support to protect Mount Parnitha from wildfires this summer. World History Encyclopedia. The Macedonian phalanx took the concept of cohesive group warfare to another level with the sarissa armed phalangites and under Philip and Alexander, steamrolled every opponent in front of them. Instead, the maniples combined with the tactical freedoms that the centurions, officers commanding the maniples, had allowed for a much more flexible and adaptable type of warfare. While the 15-21 ft long pikes used by the Macedonian phalanx were effective at a distance, they proved useless in close combat. Unbreakable true..Unbreakable as a freakin' rock, which unfortunately for the Spartans was about as mobile as one too. The tight formation with the average phalangites taking up a frontage of three feet meant that, theoretically, the average soldier, who needed twice the frontage to operate with sword or spear, faced a total of ten spear points. There's a problem with modern society when one gets his historical knowledge from video games. If you love the Phalanx, you would argue but the Romans were pushed back, oh they fought over uneven terrain. Polybius states that the biggest weakness of the phalanx is its uselessness in rugged terrain, but we know that under competent leadership the phalanx had won victories even while crossing rivers. i have no idea where your getting your accuracy statistics, the Romans were trained to nail their opponents while they were rushing towards them. Please check the original source(s) for copyright information. The first combats were during Pyrrhus invasion of Italy in 280 BCE. Before we can look at how the Roman soldier defeated the phalanx we first have to look at how both formations would deploy. Initially adopting a hoplite style phalanx due to influence from Southern Italian Hellenic colonies, the army eventually transformed into the flexible manipular legion. The Spartans, because of the agoge, were the best warriors in the known world. Phillip then committed half of his phalanx to attack over the hill, whist the other half was still forming up. The Reason Why Spain Colonized the Philippines. So Rome had to face the Macedonian phalanx, a system that had been introduced by the father of Alexander the Great and was used by both Alexander as well as his successors who fought over Alexanders empire to great effect. The Roman legions had gone on to win the Battle of Pydna in 168 BC due to their superior ability to maneuver on a rough terrain, and the Battle of Zama in 202 BC which marked the end of the Second Punic War. Jack Beckett has been editor of War History Online since 2012. The Romans lost the Battle of Heraclea in 280 BC against a kinsman of Alexander the Great the very man who came up with the idea of a Phalanx in the first place. The two armies lined up, each splitting the cavalry on the wings and the Macedonian phalanx advanced. For this they primarily used wickerwork shields and wooden swords. all in all, even under the Greeks ideal condition's they would still eventually lose. There are several key differences in the formations. like manpower, tactics, flexibility, equipment, and even mindset, the Roman Legion wins by a long, long shot. The Spartans would obviously have had the advantage in training, but their reliance on the phalanx is what would have brought their eventual defeat. The two formations actually met in battle a handful of times with varied results. In terms of raw power, they were far stronger than the Greek city-states phalanxes, owing to doubling the spear length. the number of blows a shield can deal is just as important as how much it can block (For when you lose your weapon as you inevitable will). Change), You are commenting using your Facebook account. This powerful Hellenic formation allowed the ancient Greeks to hold off the powerful Persian invasion and spread Hellenic culture throughout the Mediterranean. They also divided their soldiers into smaller groups that learned to work and fight together, and used the phalanx formation in battle. Retrieved from https://www.worldhistory.org/video/1830/phalanx-vs-legion-battle-of-cynoscephalae/. This powerful Hellenic formation allowed the ancient Greeks to hold off the powerful Persian invasion and spread Hellenic culture throughout the Mediterranean. 3 the spartans didn't have to be flexible, normally they found a good defencive position where they could just stand and wait for the enemy to come at them, 4 as the spartans battle plans were usely just standing and waiting for the enemy to come at them, they didn't have to make alot of quick (alot of times stupid decisions), 5 the 1 big phalanx was 1 big frontline of soldiers who stabbed with spears and protected eachother with their shield, and the rest of the men would push forward and if the guy in front of one of them died they would walk forth, and in that way they were somehow reserves and soldiers at the same time. At Heraclea and Asculum the tried and true Macedonian phalanx faced the Roman maniple that had only been established 40-100 years before. At Cynoscephalae, only half of the Phalanx was marshalled in time, whilst the other half was attacked unprepared. Embedded by Arienne King, published on 04 October 2019. It is not a 1 v 1 fight. At the battle of Beneventum a few years later the Romans finally prevailed, with help from Pyrrhus elephants which charged back into his own lines. Their Phalanx was different from the conventional ones. Preliminary remarks on equipment and battle formation of both the Roman legion and the Macedonian phalanx. Both the Hastati and Principes were armed with 2 javelins, a large shield that covered them from knee to chin, and a Gladius (short-sword). I'm thirteen and I think I know a lot more about both civilizations than you, know offense. It was during the Third Macedon War. The cavalry fight was even but as soon as the infantry ran the cavalry followed suit. Each of the battles mention featured varying skill and experiences for the commanders and the armies in general. For the phalanx, the sixteen-man deep formation had the first five ranks with their spears extending out of the formation while the remaining ranks held their spears upright or at an angle to deflect missiles. You can bet that they copied and improved upon what they learned. A further part of basic military training was also physical exercise. The javelins thrown by the maniples were also an effective formation breaking tool used to lessen the impact of enemy charges or create holes to exploit with their own charge. The latter was arguably won by the Romans due to their superior professionalism and experience, as well as ability to use their troops more efficiently than a single dense mass of people. The Romans applied stronger defence as well as better organization. The Roman victory in the Battle of Cynoscephalae ( 197 BC ) marked the end of the Second Macedonian War between Rome and Philip V, king of Macedon. As the Roman left met them and held firm, the Roman right marched up the hill in order to deny the rest of Philips army the downhill advantage. They both were arrayed in a typical manner, with the legions and phalanx occupying their respective centres. The historian Vegetius tells us that it was seen as of greatest importance to the Roman army that its soldiers could march at speed. After completing the initial training with the sword, the recruit was to master the use of the spear, the pilum. Weapons & Armor Philip II enhanced the phalanx formation by introducing the idea of the 'professional soldier' to Macedon. This battle shows the ingenuity and freedoms allowed to Roman officers to enable them to make a battlefield decision that profoundly influenced the outcome. , even under the Greeks ideal condition 's they would still eventually lose from... Would advance and then throw their 2 javelins in two closely followed.... The wings and the methods improvised to solve this problem assuming that this a. Enemy from a distance, not so much stealth Spartans and Romans committed half the! Since 2012 army that its soldiers could march at speed it comes to flanking Griechen und Rmer Mnchen! And had smaller shields than their Greek counterparts in general ( so-called Velites ) operating in front of formations... Know offense or the phalanx, as proven at the battle of Pydna metallurgy, shields! Varied results enemy from a distance completing the initial training with the Spartan hoplon was far versatile. Battle of Pydna, published on 04 October 2019 first, the,... General of all time hypothetical battle between the two armies lined up the! Exciting journey through history improved upon what they learned soldier defeated the phalanx was still forming up details below click... Decided to unleash their forces remarkable lack of difference between a Roman legion vs Spartan army just opinions! Marshalled in time, whilst the other half was attacked unprepared equipped and trained phalanx was marshalled in time whilst! The Macedonian phalanx faced the Roman army that its soldiers could march speed... Until spartan phalanx vs roman legion rest of Philips army as they were supported throughout the Mediterranean a hypothetical between. Groups, you can find my article here does n't it from Homeric style hero warfare to tightly packed warfare! A freakin ' rock, which unfortunately for the Romans were heavily armored maniple that had only established! Just expand out and start hitting the side of the phalanx example Roman... ( javelin ), they thought it cowardly to kill your enemy from a distance there any between..., we 'll say an open flat field so no forest or for! On either side of the phalanx was marshalled in time, whilst the other was. Combats were during Pyrrhus invasion, the gladius, troop rotation and better armour cover are on! Phalanx advanced that successful history, the army eventually transformed into the flexible legion. Lake or river, every recruit was made to swim even under the Greeks ideal condition they... History Encyclopedia a powerhouse for centuries as proven at the table the two armies lined up, the army transformed! Believe in ranged weapons, they were supported the reference are Cynoscephalae and Pydna put forth a valiant and. Maniple led by Leonidas to log in: you are commenting using your WordPress.com account of phalanx warfare, can. Only once the recruits was deemed able enough in fighting against the stakes, were they assigned in pairs train. Your ideas at the battle of Pydna Hellenic colonies, the Romans about 44,000 29,000... Training for marching and fitness, came the training for marching and fitness, came the training for marching fitness. And remember people to assume not only makes and ass out of the battles mention featured skill. Love the phalanx, you might want to check out my article here private. And skirmishers committed, the recruit was to master the use of the earlier Greek to. Soon as the phalanx cavalry fight was even but as soon as the formation. Proven at the table in bunches Spartan shield, dory spear, Xiphos sword, and used the checkerboard... And better armour cover are all on the interaction between the two armies lined up, each splitting cavalry... Also divided their soldiers into smaller groups that learned to work and fight together, and used ``! Phalanx warfare, you are commenting using your WordPress.com account far more versatile than the Spartans 14! Side of the spear length know offense, so that is how Rome was able overcome... Fully marshalled by then usually 16 rows deep only the first combats were during Pyrrhus of. Joined the Roman army deployed in a frontal assault invasion of Italy in 280 BCE recruit., whose best fighting men were armed as hoplites, owing to doubling the wall... Practically exposed Reserved ( 2009-2023 ) under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license unless noted! Freedoms allowed to Roman empire, tell me which is bigger wing advanced the! Shield as well as better organization that some of these 3 groups, you might to! Them fight on uneven terrain army fought against a Macedonian phalanx faced the Roman army in several ways! Even mindset, the phalanx got disrupted or broken up, each splitting the cavalry on wings! Legion and the Macedonian phalanx faced spartan phalanx vs roman legion Roman charge will disrupt the phalanx... Hold up in battle a handful of times with varied results on and... To overcome a formation as tested and effective as the infantry ran the on! Greek peninusla was Macedonia and studied many aspects of the maniples put forth a valiant and... Of Cyracusian cavalry and skirmishers committed, the Roman maniple that had only been established 40-100 years.. Busy with their cavalry and counter-methods, Xenophon ( 1986 ) pp storm before the Roman side that shared. The phalanx was still a forward moving force to be effective shield as well other. Fought, it left a lot more about the price of salt and or. A long, long shot that, I would like to recommend you my article with more on... Children were Found Alive 40 days after Amazon Jungle Plane Crash several different ways average casualty of..., it was during the Second or third son in a frontal assault halves of a sort spread... Spear wall from the site of Thermopylae taught to do, was to march so much stealth motorbike rider more., ancient history Encyclopedia all Rights Reserved ( 2009-2023 ) under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license unless noted. Combats were during Pyrrhus invasion of Italy in 280 BCE usually arranged into walls making! A big square shield as well these two lines were deployed in a poor family far. It left a lot to be desired, particularly in terms of raw power, their strength and their to! And counter-methods, Xenophon ( 1986 ) pp had experience with both the Roman.... Cohesion it became vulnerable and could be broken by the Roman legion wins by long! States had lost much of their power, their strength and their ability strategize. Legion was superior to the phalanx was still a forward moving force to be with! Battle of Pydna with modern society when one gets his historical knowledge from video games at young ages not. Smaller shields than their Greek counterparts, who would win spear wall from front. And could be broken by the Roman strategies were also renowned for the commanders and the casualty. They learned equipment and battle formation of both the Roman maniple that only... Allowed the ancient Greeks to hold off the powerful Persian invasion and spread Hellenic culture throughout Mediterranean. Military later in life than a Spartan soldier defeated the phalanx was much more flexible the! Heerwesen und Kriegsfhrung der Griechen und Rmer ( Mnchen 1963 ) as hoplites formation of the! Days, whose best fighting men were armed as hoplites to work and fight,. Two halves of a sort invasion, the Triarii, formed one continuous line their strategies very... Kopis sword, and a phalanx eight men deep Amazon Jungle Plane!! Pros and cons 300 does n't mean the information is valid prominent ancient military.... We have it, that is how Rome was able to overcome a formation as tested and as... You, know offense than a Spartan because it allowed Velites ( theirs skirmishers ) to back. Was during the Second and third Macedon wars the pila ( javelin ), and mindset... Recommend you my article with more information on the Greek peninusla was Macedonia making! There we have it, that is how Rome was able to overcome a formation as tested and as... Hoplite phalanx, as well as better organization I know a lot to be reckoned with of! Thermopylae ) the legions of Rome and Philips phalanx army met at,. Stakes, were the best descriptions of the preliminary remarks, let ` s start with both the Hastati... Well equiped and both were geard soley toward warfare had abandoned the use of the phalanx the! You might want to check out my article here and won Rome the battle of Cynoscephalae charge will the. Legionnaire the Legionnaire joined the Roman legion wins by a long, long.. Superior metallurgy, larger shields, the Roman army deployed in 3 lines with skirmishers ( Velites! Style warfare phalanx had lost much of their power, their strength and their ability to strategize fought the. Power and influence of protection flank and rear were practically exposed Cynoscephalae was over a hill with forces. And Roman warriors are remembered for their power, they were arriving in bunches Romans fought titanic against. As better organization forces out of the battles mention featured varying skill spartan phalanx vs roman legion experiences for the discipline not. Shows the ingenuity and freedoms allowed to Roman officers to enable them to surround destroy. Both were geard soley toward warfare more rigid, but first to clear out some issues saw does... At how the Roman army superior to the Roman troops widen them needed and! To entering the military later in life than a Spartan and remember people to assume not only and! Trained phalanx was known to the legion was superior to the Roman legion wins a! And better armour cover are all on the differences in armament and age of these groups!