05-23-2013, 08:08 PM
Mark Hygate wrote:
There are far too many references to the Roman formation being described as a phalanx, let alone simple common sense and a dash of logic to suggest that they didn't. I know what was written having fully read it myself just now - and, to my pleasant surprise the last sentence of Poly Bk 18 Ch30 says:
"The consequence will be that one Roman must stand opposite two men in the first rank of the phalanx, so that he has to face and encounter ten pikes, and it is both impossible for a single man to cut through them all in time once they are at close quarters and by no means easy to force their points away, as the rear ranks can be of no help to the front rank either in thus forcing the pikes away or in the use of the sword. 11 So it is easy to see that, as I said at the beginning, nothing can withstand the charge of the phalanx as long as it preserves its characteristic formation and force."
Which is exactly what I am arguing. I really don't think you're reading those passages correctly - and I've only looked at it once.
And now the next sentence reads:
"What then is the reason of the Roman success, and what is it that defeats the purpose of those who use the phalanx? 2 It is because in war the time and place of action is uncertain and the phalanx has only one time and one place in which it can perform its peculiar service." Polybius 18:31.1
I recommend you continue reading. Polybius wasn't a fan of the Macedonian phalanx and discuses why in the proceeding paragraph.
Okay - so that's just the totals - not that there's evidence of the maniples being actually 'bigger'?
Sorry, been busy as hell with work. Here are some Polybius sources. Have to go digging for Livy some other time.
Polybius 3:107.9-12 (increased size of individual legions)
Polybius 3:113 (increased size of maniples)
In that case, and given the tone of the rest, then I'm uncomfortable with attemtping to continue until, as I saw the other day in a different post, that your full name is shown in a signature block as your internet handle doesn't show it like mine does.
You need my full name? Why? Is that now forum policy? PM if you want to know more about me, I don't feel comfortable discussing sensitive personal info on an open forum.
If my tone is too aggressive, my apologies. ad: I will tone it down. I spent a decade among barbarians and am still learning to be civilized.
There are far too many references to the Roman formation being described as a phalanx, let alone simple common sense and a dash of logic to suggest that they didn't. I know what was written having fully read it myself just now - and, to my pleasant surprise the last sentence of Poly Bk 18 Ch30 says:
"The consequence will be that one Roman must stand opposite two men in the first rank of the phalanx, so that he has to face and encounter ten pikes, and it is both impossible for a single man to cut through them all in time once they are at close quarters and by no means easy to force their points away, as the rear ranks can be of no help to the front rank either in thus forcing the pikes away or in the use of the sword. 11 So it is easy to see that, as I said at the beginning, nothing can withstand the charge of the phalanx as long as it preserves its characteristic formation and force."
Which is exactly what I am arguing. I really don't think you're reading those passages correctly - and I've only looked at it once.
And now the next sentence reads:
"What then is the reason of the Roman success, and what is it that defeats the purpose of those who use the phalanx? 2 It is because in war the time and place of action is uncertain and the phalanx has only one time and one place in which it can perform its peculiar service." Polybius 18:31.1
I recommend you continue reading. Polybius wasn't a fan of the Macedonian phalanx and discuses why in the proceeding paragraph.
Okay - so that's just the totals - not that there's evidence of the maniples being actually 'bigger'?
Sorry, been busy as hell with work. Here are some Polybius sources. Have to go digging for Livy some other time.
Polybius 3:107.9-12 (increased size of individual legions)
Polybius 3:113 (increased size of maniples)
In that case, and given the tone of the rest, then I'm uncomfortable with attemtping to continue until, as I saw the other day in a different post, that your full name is shown in a signature block as your internet handle doesn't show it like mine does.
You need my full name? Why? Is that now forum policy? PM if you want to know more about me, I don't feel comfortable discussing sensitive personal info on an open forum.
If my tone is too aggressive, my apologies. ad: I will tone it down. I spent a decade among barbarians and am still learning to be civilized.