how to beat phalangites head on?

[Anna_Gein]

nope, Horse archers were mostly a nuisance, and Cataphract charges lead to practically nothing. Only battle success was elimination of Gallic light cavalry lead by Crassus son, but they didnt managed to break Roman positions. Major problem for Romans was lack of supplies (water) and a lot of wounded that needed attention. but that was thanks to Crassus being idiot to walk into desert with limited supplies.. Overall, Carhae is a monument to Crassus stupidity that cost him his life in the end.

Haaa. The so useful last resort "the commander was an idiot".

[JaM]

Haaa. The so useful last resort "the commander was an idiot".

Sorry, but from objective perspective, Crassus made so many mistakes during his campaign against Parthia, that no matter how legion fought, they were doomed to lose since beginning..

First, Crassus was so overconfident, that he declined suggestions to take route to Parthian capital, via northern route, through hilly terrain, which didnt suited cavalry force that well. He didnt considered as important to supply his force with water and food for longer than 3 days, as he didnt expected that march would take longer, and he was confident Parthians would not present any obstacles to his plans. Later, when engagement started, despite having numerical advantage of 4-5:1, he ignored suggestions of his Legates to spread out the force into double line with cavalry at flanks, so it would cover entire plain. Instead he made his forces to form large square, which allowed Parthians to surround his force. He allowed his son to charge out with all cavalry against Horse archers, but didnt supported that attack with infantry, so whole cavalry force was destroyed by countercharge of Parthian Cataphracts..

[HuangCaesar]

My main point is the arrow fire of the Parthians definetley did delpete Roman morale to cause them to make a tactical retreat, just like the Roman pila fire at Magnesia caused the Phalanx to retreat tactically. It was not a complete route, but "retreating in well order" means the command knows the formation can't take it anymore.

[HuangCaesar]

Ho but I certainly agree with you that the Seleucid pikemen were screwed in this situation and could only hope the intervention of a different type of troops to turn the tide. .

Different troops? What different troops? They left completely routed, the elephant routed, Antichos stuck on the right, and the right infantry routed. Although all these factors caused a retreat, the quote clearly says the javelins and the mass causalties caused the decisive blow for a Selucid retreat.

Maybe because the Romans were refusing the close combat engagement ? .

And pelting them with javelins.

Would you consider any infantry force inferior to distance cavalry because they can not engage the cavalry but only retreat ?
.

It means they can't stand up to the Romans. Think about it, the Phalanx got mauled by the Legion, and lost its elephant support, they formd square, the Romans threw their javelins, then the Phalanx retreated. It clearly implies that the Javelins did the psychological damage.

A chojepoint also means that the enemy can concentrate his fire on a single point.

Because it was a siege ? Because the only hope for the Macedonian was to stand their ground at the breach ? The Romans were in position to delay their assault until they used all their projectiles.

A narrow chokepoint means more concentrated phalanax, with a more denser phalanx. A battlefield has a different result. Read the text again, the Roman withdrew due to winter. Again I am not saying the Phalanx is somehow a broken system when it comes to deflecting missles, I am just saying it is not a missle delector. The Missles don't break the Phalanx but do demoralize it, after all even melee engagments and sieges can last for hours and hours as fresh men are replaced.

[Dunadd]

It is not as if the legionaries had all the day to throw their javelins. Ho wait ...

Well from some things i've read it seems like legionaries had to run or charge to throw pila. Caesar for instance mentions an ambush by Gauls in forest in which the legionaries didn't have time to throw their pila before the Gauls were on them. So probably pila should only be able to be thrown at full effect when charging. Roman legionaries shouldn't be able to throw them all through a combat.

[HuangCaesar]

It simple, possible intervention of spearmen in support, peltast and who knows what else. Intervention of an hypothetical force. Indeed it did not happened. Did you really expected me to completely riwrite the Battle of Megnesia ?
.

READ Magnesia before commenting.
No the Pealtasts and the infantry guarding the flanks ROUTED. THEN the Phalanx formed squares to avoid being outflanked. THEN the Legions threw Pila, THEN the Phalanx retreats due to the missle fire.

I have to explain this to you.

"The chariots were driven off the field, and now that this silly show was got rid of the signal was given, and both sides closed in a regular battle.
[37.42]These useless shams, however, were soon to prove the cause of a real disaster. The auxiliary troops who were posted in reserve next to them were so demoralised by the panic and confusion of the chariots that they took to flight and exposed the whole line as far as the cataphracti. Now that the reserves were broken the Roman horse made a charge against these, and many of them did not await even the first shock, some were routed, others owing to the weight of their mail armour were caught and killed. Then the remainder of the left wing entirely gave way, and when the auxiliaries who were stationed between the cavalry and the phalanx were thrown into disorder the demoralisation reached the centre. Here the ranks were broken and they were prevented from using their extraordinarily long spears-the Macedonians call them "sarisae" - by their own comrades who ran back for shelter amongst them. Whilst they were in this disorder the Romans advanced against them and discharged their javelins Even the elephants posted between the divisions of the phalanx did not deter them"
Livy.


That means the support troops routed already or wer in no shape of fighting. Now it was just Legion vs Phalanx. The Phalanx formed squares from a flanking attack. So the Legions decided not to enage and threw Pila again.

Again this is Appian's description:

"Eumenes, having succeeded admirably in his first attempt and cleared the ground held by the dromedaries and chariots, led his own horse and those of the Romans and Italians in his division against the Galatians, the Cappadocians, and the other collection of mercenaries opposed to him, cheering loudly and exhorting them to have no fear of these inexperienced men who had been deprived of their advance supports."

That means the support troops guarding the Phalanx(mostly mercenaries, Galatians and Greek pealtasts) were already defeated.

"They obeyed him and made so heavy a charge that they put to flight not only those, but the adjoining squadrons and the mail-clad horse, who were already thrown into disorder by the chariots. The greater part of these, unable to turn and fly quickly, on account of the weight of their armor, were captured or killed. "

Now it was just Legion vs Phalanx. Note: the Skirmishers already routed or were inside the Phalanx and incapable of battle.

"The Macedonian phalanx, which had been stationed between the two bodies of horse in a narrow space in the form of a square, when denuded of cavalry on either side, had opened to receive the light-armed troops, who had been skirmishing in front, and closed again

The Romans did not come to close quarters nor approach them because they feared the discipline, the solidity, and the desperation of this veteran corps; but circled around them and assailed them with javelins and arrows, none of which missed their mark in the dense mass, who could neither turn the missiles aside nor dodge them."

It is clear, the light infantry got routed by the Roman cavalry and the Phalanx retreated due to the Legion.

[JaM]

It simple, possible intervention of spearmen in support, peltast and who knows what else. Intervention of an hypothetical force. Indeed it did not happened. Did you really expected me to completely riwrite the Battle of Megnesia ?

and what exactly would Spearmen do what Legionary couldn't? last i checked thrusting spear was a lot shorter than pike, so it would be useless for any attempts to attack phalanx head on.. and Peltats? those used light wooden javelins, they were nowhere as effective as Pila with 60cm precursor.. i find it strange, that so many people have problems with Legion being more effective, while we all have plenty of examples where Legions defeated Hellenistic armies, while taking relatively low casualties..

[Anna_Gein]

READ Magnesia before commenting.
No the Pealtasts and the infantry guarding the flanks ROUTED. THEN the Phalanx formed squares to avoid being outflanked. THEN the Legions threw Pila, THEN the Phalanx retreats due to the missle fire.

I have to explain this to you.

You don't have to explain anything but you should learn to listen to what someone says (or write).
As said "could" in an hypothetical situation where the Seleucid had reserve force available. Force that were not present in the battle. You may as well accuse me to present Magnesia as a Seleucid victory. Triple curse !

Damnation ! You acknowledge the phalanx was in a situation where it could not achieve anything yet they still find a pretext to disagree and carry the "automatic argument reply" !

and what exactly would Spearmen do what Legionary couldn't? last i checked thrusting spear was a lot shorter than pike, so it would be useless for any attempts to attack phalanx head on.. and Peltats? those used light wooden javelins, they were nowhere as effective as Pila with 60cm precursor.. i find it strange, that so many people have problems with Legion being more effective, while we all have plenty of examples where Legions defeated Hellenistic armies, while taking relatively low casualties..

Personally, what I find strange is this uncontrollable urge to claim legion superiority on anything at every occasion , no matter off-topic or vague it could be.

Like legionaries and spearmen able to achieve the same task. Actually I would not propose the intervention of spearmen in this hypothetical situation if the two were not able to perform the same task. Task I acknowledge the pikemen were unable to do (engage an enemy who refuse the close combat engagement).

[HuangCaesar]

Again there were no support troops adquete to match the Legions by the time the Phalanx formed squares, they already got mauled by their own chariots and Roman and Pergamese cavalry plus the Legions. By the time the Phalanx "retreated in well order" the Romans already won the battle.

[JaM]

here is how dangerous were pilum hits that penetrated shield.. mind you, scutum is a bit farther from body than aspis would, as it is held in the guard,not strapped to the arm..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCtSxWaN6Wo


here is how they made that hole:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG0hLNXr9M

[HuangCaesar]

Missiles does damage on the Phalanx, if not a lot. That's all I have to say.

[War lord]

The Phalanx stood there, got pelted with Pila and ran away, such an effective force. (At using outdated tactics and running away)

[Biggus Splenus]

The Phalanx stood there, got pelted with Pila and ran away, such an effective force. (At using outdated tactics and running away)

..... wat?
The phalanx was only 100-150 years old, and very revolutionary. 3,000 Makedonians fighting the Romans at Pydna actually fought to the death, so they certainly weren't cowardly.

[JaM]

Phalanx was not outdated tactics. Just not very flexible. They were great in certain situations, but were not that useful in others. Main advantage of Legionaries was their universality, and adaptability. Personally i think if Phalanx was superior to Legions, then i really doubt Hannibal would rearm his African Infantry to Roman weapons.. and Battle of Zama proved that if Romans were lead by competent leader, they could defeat even the best general of all.

[Biggus Splenus]

Personally i think if Phalanx was superior to Legions, then i really doubt Hannibal would rearm his African Infantry to Roman weapons..

It hasn't been proven that Hannibal even had a Makedonian style phalanx, and there's no reference in the histories to it either. I think the concept started in Duncan Head's book (amazing work, might I say), but I just don't believe that it's true.

[JaM]

It hasn't been proven that Hannibal even had a Makedonian style phalanx, and there's no reference in the histories to it either. I think the concept started in Duncan Head's book (amazing work, might I say), but I just don't believe that it's true.

While Livy is not very reliable source, he mentioned African Infantry lovering their pikes and charging into Roman flanks during battle of Cannae..

[Sar1n]

While Livy is not very reliable source, he mentioned African Infantry lovering their pikes and charging into Roman flanks during battle of Cannae..

Pikes =/= phalanx formation. They could have operated in looser formation, perhaps similar to medieval pike formations. Macedonian phalanx is unique in packing soldiers so tight that the pikes are almost impenetrable, but they are too tightly packed to keep formation in charge.

[JaM]

Pikes =/= phalanx formation. They could have operated in looser formation, perhaps similar to medieval pike formations. Macedonian phalanx is unique in packing soldiers so tight that the pikes are almost impenetrable, but they are too tightly packed to keep formation in charge.

i really doubt they would use anything different from what other Hellenic nations used.. in the end, they were well aware of Pike Phalanx for some time, Carthagians employed a lot of Greek/Macedonian/Epirote mercenaries, and they fought against Syracuse for quite some time before facing Romans..

[Anna_Gein]

Deleted

[JaM]

It hasn't been proven that Hannibal even had a Makedonian style phalanx, and there's no reference in the histories to it either. I think the concept started in Duncan Head's book (amazing work, might I say), but I just don't believe that it's true.

No, but we know that Hannibal did rearm and reequip his African troops with Roman weapons and armor. I doubt he would do it, if he thought Pike Phalanx would be better, more effective option. He knew what is out there..