How did the legion defeat the phalanx? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter MikeNick
- Start date
I have made no study of this question but it would seem that the tactical manuverability and flexibility of the legion would certainly be part of the answer, as the phalanx had neither. -- Al
maddadicus
2nd Lieutenant
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2006
- Messages
- 3,333
From Yahoo answers site..Makes sense to me...Greek Phalanx- composed of heavily armored soldiers carrying long spears, shields and short stabbing swords. The basic tactic was the man behind put his shield against the back of the man in front and pushed. They were tightly packed and unable to move or turn quickly. In order to turn another direction all spears had to be lifted and then the men turn, otherwise they would foul each other up. The Phalanx was one big unit in a fight.
Roman Legion- composed of medium to heavily armored infantry carrying pila (throwing spear with a soft iron shank near the head), full body scutum(shield) and Gladius (shortsword). Each Legion was broken up into maniples and often had auxillaries attached such as field artillery (ballistae) , calvary (ala) or missile units like Baleric slingers or archers.
Roman battle formations were designed to be tactically flexible allowing them to attack,retreat and flank an enemy. Maniples could act independently to flank while other units engaged the front of the line.
The fight-
The Phalanx forms up in standard formation 16 men deep with the front 4 ranks having spears lowered in battle formation the rest at various angles to help deflect incoming missile fire.
The Romans line up in their standard checkerboard pattern.Their Baleric slingers are lined up ahead of the Roman lines as skirmishers.
The Phalanx advances and the slingers close in to fire on the advancing troops. Here and their a stone gets through and a soldier falls. The man behind steps forward to fill the gap.Wounded are trampled by the troops following.
As the phalanx advances the slingers retreat towards the Roman lines and move to the flanks to fire stones into the unprotected flanks of the phalanx(shields are against the back of the man in front), more men fall from the outer files.
The front ranks of the legion began throwing their pila at the advancing phalanx (usually carried two). More men fall from pila that get through, some are stopped by shields and the soft shank of the pila bends after the tip lodges in the shield. This prevents them from removing the pila to throw back and also fouls the shield causing it to be tossed aside.
The front rank of Romans locks their scutum and is pushed back by the phalanx with minor casualties. The reserve maniples peel off to either flank and attack the phalanx in the sides. The soldiers try to turn and defend themselves but are unable to bring their spears to bear. Dropping the spears they draw swords.
This throws the phalanx into chaos, the files on the flanks are no longer being pushed by the troops behind them and it becomes much easier for the Romans directly across from that file to move in for the kill. The interior files keep advancing as the Phalanx is no longer a solid front. This either causes the phalanx to halt forward motion and be slaughtered or to keep going and as each flanking file falls the next one in is attacked from the side.
Roman troops from further back in the line continue to launch pila into the tightly packed ranks causing more casualties and chaos.
Roman close combat tactics begin to show their superiority against the rarely used swords of the phalanx.
If the phalanx doesn't break and run then the skirmishers slip around to the rear and begin launching stones into the undefended rear of the phalanx.
Doesn't matter who the troops manning the phalanx are, it's weakness is in it's inability to change direction quickly and react to attacks from the flanks and the rear.
Currahee Chris
Sergeant Major
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 4,776
You could take East of India Greeks and Blackhawk Zama figures and do some Punic war scenarios. The phalanx did not always loose to the Romans. There were three Punic wars so they must have had some wins in there somewhere to keep the thing going. I've often felt that Greece was on the decline during that time period which contributed to its downfall. The Roman formation, especially then, was a derivative of the phalanx.
Not an era I know a lot about but I agree with Maddaddacus's manifesto that the answer lied in the ability to manuever.
Nice thread!!
Currahee Chris
Sergeant Major
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 4,776
Gazza-
that's freakin awesome!!!
that's freakin awesome!!!
Fusilier
Master Sergeant
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,214
To build on maddadicus said, the legions would ideally flank the phalanx. Once the two forces were engaged, some of the Romans would attempt to strike at the right side of the phalanx, since that would be the unprotected side. The Greeks' phalanx formation was generally less able to respond to such flank attacks.
Noah
Noah
Chris
It is not mine !!! West point museum.
If FL announce the Greeks in 2012 then maybe you'll be able to create it ^&grin^&grin
Gazza
Currahee Chris
Sergeant Major
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 4,776
Not on my wage mate!! {sm3}{sm4}