Death and Resurrecton of the Phalanx

[Dan Howard]

There is not much point discussing this without the OP first defining what he means by "phalanx". If the most general definition is used, the phalanx saw continuous use from ancient Sumeria until the Renaissance.

[Renatus]

Back on topic, is there not a 3rd Century AD gravestone that states the Roman soldier was a 'phalangari' (excuse the spelling, I'm doing this from a very fatigued memory at the moment)

Sorry, Adrian. Couldn't find it on Epigraphik-Datenbank Clauss/Slaby. Can you give us any more?

[ValentinianVictrix]

Back on topic, is there not a 3rd Century AD gravestone that states the Roman soldier was a 'phalangari' (excuse the spelling, I'm doing this from a very fatigued memory at the moment)

Sorry, Adrian. Couldn't find it on Epigraphik-Datenbank Clauss/Slaby. Can you give us any more?

Hello Michael, thanks for trying, I actually remembered I made a reply about this gravestone on RAT sometime ago and on checking I found the post I made back in May 2011 which I have cut this from 'a gravestone of a 'discens phalangarii' of Legio II Parthica found at Apamea would seem to suggest that during the 3rd century AD some legionary troops were armed as phalangites i.e with long spears/pikes. Perhaps Caracalla did after all raise some pikemen in his army as claimed in the SHA?'

[Ross Cowan]

An unconfirmed reading of the II Parthica phalangarius inscription (originally posted on RAT about a decade ago - is the thread still out there?) appears in my Battle of Nisibis article (AW 3.5).

I read recently that a full publication of the Apamea material is forthcoming, but I'll believe it when I see it!

[Ross Cowan]

Here's the original thread mentioning the inscription.

The text is given as:

D M
MAGNIN ATTONIS (maybe MAGNINI)
DISCENT PHALANG (maybe DESCENT)
LEG II PARTHI PII PS (...THI P... quite unclear
QVI VIXIT ANN XXXX
MIL ANN XX SOLLEMNI (...OLLE... quite unclear)
VICTORINVS IMAGIN
HERES BENE MERENT
FACIVNDVM CV
RAVIT

Translation and discussion in AW 3.5.

[ValentinianVictrix]

An unconfirmed reading of the II Parthica phalangarius inscription (originally posted on RAT about a decade ago - is the thread still out there?) appears in my Battle of Nisibis article (AW 3.5).

I read recently that a full publication of the Apamea material is forthcoming, but I'll believe it when I see it!

I actually got my information from either one of my books or from a paper, although I cannot remembe which one now.

[Robert Vermaat]

There is not much point discussing this without the OP first defining what he means by "phalanx". If the most general definition is used, the phalanx saw continuous use from ancient Sumeria until the Renaissance.

Agreed! The Greek hoplite formation differed from the Macedonian one, as did the Dominate one differ from a pikeman formation. But all use long lances held horizontally. So let's determine - what's a 'phalanx' and what isn't?

[ValentinianVictrix]

Time to bring this paper up again methinks!-

http://www.duke.edu/web/classics/grbs/FT...Rance2.pdf

[Marja]

It depends on the context. And one-handed spears and two-handed pikes were used in different formations with different spacing. If both formations were called phalanxes, well, a lot of formations are called lines.

[Ross Cowan]

An unconfirmed reading of the II Parthica phalangarius inscription appears in my Battle of Nisibis article (AW 3.5).

A version of my Nisibis article can be read here. I think registration is required to view the file.

For the corrected version, complete with Igor Dzis' splendid colour artwork, the full issue PDF is available here at a bargain price.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I agree that it depends, a "Phalanx" was essentially a Shieldwall, which was a common tactic. It could be compared to the Late Roman Foulkon (Fulcrum), and the Pike squares of the 15th-16th centuries.

[Macedon]

A phalanx has nothing to do with a particular type of formation like a fulcon, a chelone or any other dense formation. All these could be formed by phalanxes. A phalanx would itself array in multiple densities and still remained a phalanx. A phalanx is nothing more than a relatively dense (not dispersed) mass of men of any armament. Not even the use of shields was required to call a formation a phalanx and as I have already stated, even horse formations were called phalanxes by the ancients - when arrayed in line rather than in squadrons. The problem lies in what every modern historian means by the term, which unfortunately varies much...

[Albertomv]

I, like Aetius, understand a phalanx as a packed shield wall and it was a typical formation at the fall of Western Empire and in Dark Ages.

Of course, greek phalanx/macedonian phalanx/renaissance pike formations are totally diferent

[Flavivs Aetivs]

A phalanx is just the Greek version of a shieldwall, basically.

[ValentinianVictrix]

Has anyone got a copy of Wheeler's 'The Legion as Phalanx' and 'The Legion as Phalanx in the Late Empire Pt I & II'?