bristle of spikes, the Romans used a planned retreat over the rough Is there any scientific way a ship could fall off the edge of the world? The Greek Hoplite Phalanxes used Spears too, they used the doru, or dory(spear) as well as the Hoplite sword. It was introduced by Philip II of Macedon and … 488 People Used More Information ›› Against such foes the Hellenistic-era phalanx proved vulnerable. The Macedonian army was a professional army, highly organised particularly in the Alexandrian age. Getting different total magnetic moment in 'scf' and 'vc-relax' calculations in Quantum ESPRESSO. Is the Afghan hat related to the Macedonian hat? The longer spears were better at defending the phalanx and holding the enemy setting them up for the other units. Is there a way to separate geometry that shares verts/edges? It seems more like Romans outsmarted phalanx. short sword (little more than a dagger) and lighter armor of the These longer spears improved the strength of the phalanx by extending the rows of overlapping weapons projecting towards the enemy, and the word remained in use throughout the Byzantine years to sometimes describe the long spears of their own inf… The Romans were able to beat it (at the battle of Pidna, for example) because their manipular legion was more flexible while enjoying a strong cohesion just as the phalanx did. It's a small factor, but do not discount it. Mass distribution of the Macedonian Sarissa pike. Discipline is one the main strength of armies, more than the actual tactics. There was a military genius named Bertrand du Guesclin (1320 – 1380) who was famous for using massed pikemen. In fact there are numerous battles that shown when an unsopported phalangite phalanx meet a hoplite phalanx hoplite would chew their lines ranging from battles that Philip had with the Greeks, to the Persians employing Greek hoplite mercenaries, to the Romans having Greek hoplite allies. and integer comparisons. Alexander liked how the pikemen worked and expanded their use. ... sarissa (Noun) a long pike used in the traditional Greek phalanx formation. The Macedonians mixed units could better exploit these difficulties and counter with light infantry, horse archers or heavy calvery. Any infantryman or rival phalanx attempting to battle such a formation would be out ranged and outnumbered by the spear tips of the Macedonian formation. Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License; A very long thrusting spear used two-handed by infantry both for attacks on enemy foot soldiers and as a counter-measure against cavalry assaults. The sarissa or sarisa was a 4 to 7 metre long spear used in the ancient Greek and Hellenistic warfare. Alexander, mostly won his war against Persia, because he was able to protect his phalanxes weak spots, and then striking at the ennemy weak spots. Both types showed well versus Persians, from Xenophon and his long retreat to Alexander and his long advance. They annihilate cavalry in this formation and the enemy has to throw ungodly amounts of lower reach troops to break a pike block with a frontal attack. The Macedonians under Philip and then Alexander utilized an army of mixed components where few others did and fewer still had developed the tactics which made these mixed component armies so lethal. We will be on the road again during 2019 visiting as many shows as we can. Although very long spears had been used since the dawn of organized warfare (notably illustrated in art showing Sumerian and Minoan warriors and hunters), the earliest recorded use of a pike-like weapon in the tactical method described above involved the Macedonian sarissa, used by the troops of Alexander the Great's father, Philip II of Macedon, and successive dynasties, which dominated warfare for several centuries in many countries. When the Macedonians fought Rome however, Rome did have a mixed formation army which is ultimately how they won. Have issues surrounding the Northern Ireland border been resolved? At close quarters … The Macedonian phalanx unlike the traditional Greek Hoplite phalanx was not engineered to defeat its enemy all by itself. They again grew overly dependent upon the phalanx. By the end of the period Rome was thumping successor armies with almost no losses. Did the Allies try to "bribe" Franco to join them in World War II? The longer spear remained in use for the phalanx in subsequent wars, so there's no sign that any disadvantage versus the hopite phalanx was ever found. The sarisa or sarissa (Greek: σάρισα) was a long spear or pike about 4–6 metres (13–20 ft) in length. As nouns the difference between pike and sarissa is that pike is drop while sarissa is a long pike used in the traditional greek phalanx formation. Macedonians. I'm not sure why you don't credit the phalanx when fighting the Persians. If the enemy has greater or equal cavalry the phalanx is weaker. All pikemen were essentially Hoplites trained and equipped as pikemen. The Romans seemed to outfight the Macedonian phalanx pretty easily. The assumption that Philip of Macedon made radical changes seems questionable. Greek pikemen vs. Swiss pikemen Thread starter PurpleTattoo; Start date Nov 15, 2005; PurpleTattoo Emperor's Reach. The Macedonian army was one of the first military forces to use 'combined arms tactics', using a variety of specialised troops to fulfill specific battlefield roles in order to form a greater whole. The timeline doesn't support that, nor do the events which lead to the fall of Macedonia. After reading some of the responses hear I have to say that everyone who stated that a phalanx equipped with sarissas is superior to a classical hoplite phalanx is categorically wrong. Why can't people on the back of the phalanx “reorient” their shield? This is exactly what happened at Pydna. It was twice as long as a normal hoplite spear(Dori). succeeded in routing the Macedonian left. Your contention that "Romans seemed to outfight Macedonian phalanx pretty easily" is not really true. Paullus claimed Should I give her aspirin? Make your purchase as normal here on our website and use the individual code for the show in question shown below to … The sarissa was a long spear or pike about 4–6 metres in length. Eventually Paulus won by waiting for the phalanx to move into hilly terrain and attack in the spaces in between their ranks. Couldn't an army of archers easily defeat Macedonian style phalanxes? The phalanx finally met its end in the Ancient world when the more flexible Roman manipular tactics contributed to the defeat and partition of Macedon in the 3rd and 2nd centuries B.C. Semi-feral cat broke a tooth. A tightly formed phalanx of sarissa-armed infantry presented an almost impenetrable wall of spear points, especially to cavalry. The Macedonian sarissa was longer than the hoplite version, which would give it an advantage over a phalanx with shorter weapons. It had a sharp iron head shaped like a leaf and a bronze butt-spike that would allow it to be anchored to the ground to stop charges by enemy soldiers.The butt-spike served to balance out the spear, making it easier for soldiers to wield. Fiducial marks: Do they need to be a pad or is it okay if I use the top silk layer? [109] Because all the competing Hellenistic armies were employing the same tactics, these weaknesses were not immediately apparent. All free men (citizens) were by law trained and own Hoplite equipment. The. Namely 4 separate Wars with Rome spanning five decades, 5 wars if you count the Seleucid War all accusing centuries after Alexander's death. Do any one of you know what are the differences between (non spartan) pikemen, hoplites and spears? The Wikipedia article downplays this, but at the time it was a serious setback. Rome suffered defeats against Pyrrhus and, in spite of what the Roman accounts said, had considerable trouble dealing with the Phalanx. The phalanx was much better working on defense than offense. See Wiktionary Terms of Use for details. Osprey: T-34-85 vs M26 Pershing July 5, 2019 RichC Korea 1950 View in Store DUEL 32 Author: Steven J. Zaloga Illustrator: Richard Chasemore Number of Pages: 80 A hotly-debated topic amongst tank buffs is of the relative merits… They would occupy the center to hold and pin the enemy in place. @Anixx It did not. hoplites also fought as a unit. It was introduced by Philip II of Macedon and was used in his Macedonian phalanxes as a replacement for the earlier dory, which was considerably shorter. The Romans legions were superior because they were disciplined and could attack weak spot of the phallanx. In field battle the sarissa and the smaller shield could effectively pin down normal Hoplites. later that the sight of the phalanx filled him with alarm and How is length contraction on rigid bodies possible in special relativity since definition of rigid body states they are not deformable? The Romans had developed a very elaborate system of signals that allowed them to do complex maneuvers. He also employed judiciously and to great effect light infantry and archers. Where the Greeks used the phalanx to destroy enemy armies, the Macedonians would ask their phalanxes to hold the enemy in front of them, as other units could pelt them with arrows, or flank them with horses archers or heavy calvary could smash into them. In a typical phalanx any foe approaching the phalanx would be faced with layers of spear tips to contend with. Is it normal for good PhD advisors to micromanage early PhD students? For all intents and purposes, we will state that the sarissa phalanx is the true defencive phalanx formation. The sarissa itself was a two-handed spear or pike, between four and seven metres long, and was adopted by the armies of Philip II, Alexander the … Hoplites were to heavily armored in comparison. Ask Question Asked 2 years, 1 month ago. rev 2020.12.18.38240, The best answers are voted up and rise to the top, History Stack Exchange works best with JavaScript enabled, Start here for a quick overview of the site, Detailed answers to any questions you might have, Discuss the workings and policies of this site, Learn more about Stack Overflow the company, Learn more about hiring developers or posting ads with us. The sarissa, made of tough and resilient cornel wood, was very heavy for a spear, weighing approximately 12 pounds (5.4 kg) for a 15-foot (4.6 m) sarissa and approximately 14.5 pounds (6.6 kg) for an 18-foot (5.5 m) sarissa. a long pike used in the traditional Greek phalanx formation. With the superior tactics the Macedonians employed their phalanx was an integrated component of their army. [44] Polybius (18.31.5), emphasises that the phalanx required flat open places for its effective deployment, as broken country would hinder and break up its formation. What do men in the middle of a phalanx contribute? +1 for a very good answer, except for (1). When Paulus conquered Macedonia, he took immense riches and booty. Welcome to Hist SE. A sarissa equipped phalanx could not defeat a hoplite phalanx. The sarissa itself was a two-handed spear or pike, between four and seven metres long, and was adopted by the armies of Philip II, Alexander the … By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy. The key invention was to put hooks and wide, forged blades on the pikes to fight horses. Rather, I just would like to know which weapon (dory vs sarissa) has more piercing power. Philip of Macedon, who built and trained Alexander's army, primary innovations were: All of these innovations Alexander the Great inherited from his father Philip. The Macedonians had ruled the whole Middle East since the time of Alexander and had grown rich and fat. In 28mm games I play the maps are different -- smaller (2'x2' to 4'x4' vs the 4'x8' that my 15mm games are) and generally have one main focus such as a single building or group of buildings. Each phalangite carried as his primary weapon a sarissa, a double-pointed pike over 6 m (18 ft) in length, weighing about 6.6kg (14.5 pounds). Pikemen cost more than hoplites but hoplites have better stat. Should'nt the cost be the other way around? The critical source for you to read here is Plutarch's life of Paulus Aemilius, the Roman general who conquered Macedonia and was the victor at the key battle of Pydna (168 BC). They were essentially a mobile fortification which could roll up on any battlefield and become the fulcrum for the numerous other Macedonian unites to leverage. A tightly formed phalanx of sarissa-armed infantry presented an almost impenetrable wall of spear points, especially to cavalry. What did George Orr have in his coffee in the novel The Lathe of Heaven? 'flying wedge') formation of the Scythians. Now, you may ask, why could not hoplites do the same? Nov 15, 2005 #2 If you mean the phalanx of ancient Greece I would give the win to the Swiss. It had engineers, doctors and scientists enrolled in it. It only takes a minute to sign up. The Macedonian success was not due to their phalanx's superiority (with the sarissa pike). Heckell, Hammond,Green just a few notables! However, the Hellenistic armies were eventually faced by forces from outside the successor kingdoms, such as the Roman and Parthian armies, composed of differing troop types using novel tactics. All the Greek phalanxes used Spears or pikemen all the phalanx men had swords as secondary weapons. Welcome to History: SE. What was the incentive for Philip II to radically change the way infantry fought back in those days? I know Alexander the Great conquered the known world with the phalanx, but I think to give the credit to the phalanx would be false here. Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience. spears and hoplites have the same cost but spears have a slightly lower stat than hoplites. Alexander did not use the phalanx as the decisive arm in his battles, but instead used it to pin and demoralize the enemy while his heavy cavalry would charge selected opponents or exposed enemy unit flanks, most usually after driving the enemy horse from the field. Since the Persians did not have good heavy infantry, the superiority was vital when fighting large forces. …II of Macedon introduced the sarissa, a pike 13 to 21 feet (4 to 6.5 m) long that gave the Macedonian infantry an extra reach before the pike blades of the opposing Greeks could reach them. Did the more experienced hoplites fight in the front or the back of the phalanx? It was also weak on the flanks, especially on the right. Philip added the pikemen first as a specialist addition to the heavy infantry. Content is available under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted. Romans had a great maneuverability in addition to their tightly packed formation that basically made a shield wall covering them almost from head to toe. Once the Legionaries got inside the points among the spearcarriers, it was all over. Larger base formations meant slower overall units, which were less flexible, more susceptible to difficulties with terrain, but they were also heavier, better protected, and better able to smash smaller enemy units matched against them on even terrain, if they could close, which was challenging. Of course, the fact that Macedon was larger than each Greek state might also give them an advantage when taking each city in isolation. The pilum could inflict losses and cause gaps in the phalanx. Why did Sparta turn on its ally Elis during the First Macedonian War? The Phalanx properly supported by its Cavalry and light forces with an Alexander or Phillip II would probably overwhelm the Legions who at the time were more akin to the Greek Hoplites. (3) Erosion of the Macedonian Cavalry Advantage. Any carnivorous freshwater fish of the genus. It's like blaming Napoleon's defeat on King Louis XIV's wealth. Is there any good source to read about the reasons the Macedonians used the phalanx instead of the classic hoplites way of fighting? The one battle Macedon should have won was Cynoscephalae where Phillip V mismanaged his army after initial successes. over the rough terrain. If the pikemen could take down horses easily, they became very powerful, just like the old phalanx. He deserted the high ground...Nutter! Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers. Sarissa vs. Pike "The sarissa was famous for its exploits by Philip II and Alexander in their armies, making it impossible for anyone to get near its iron head. In spear. Active 2 years, 1 month ago. @FelixGoldberg Regardless of its "empire" status, Macedonia was fantastically rich at the time of the Battle of Pydna. [104] This offered cavalry far greater manoeuvrability and an edge in battle that previously did not exist in the Classical Greek world.[104]. Also it's not like Macedonia was entirely outclassed by Rome, Macedonia actually came away with a draw in the first war. He used massed artillery to fire across a river at a Scythian army, causing it to vacate the opposite river bank, thus allowing the Macedonian troops to cross and form a bridgehead. Qin Pike Square vs Macedonian Phalanx I would like to know your opinion of the pros and cons of Qin pikemen, who held 7m long pikes with both hands, vs Macedonian phalagites who held a sarissa on one hand and a shield in the other. At its heyday the phalanx was the most advanced heavy infantry formation of its time. How can mage guilds compete in an industry which allows others to resell their products? If it is relevant, the picture likely depicts a pikemen donning lamellar amour and rhino leather cap. The innovation which made the Macedonians so formidable wasn't their Phalanx, most of their Greek antagonists fought with phalanxes. Macedon, by the time of Phillip II's death, was a world power whether Athens and all the city states liked it or not. I am playing as the Sparta faction. How to handle business change within an agile development environment? Their Cavalry was easily the most effective mounted force in the Ancient World. Viewed 1k times 16. Malaskor Knight Querist. Some very long (60cm) spear-heads have been found recently in south-western Bulgaria - these may be pike blades. Was Alexander the Great Greek or Macedonian? So while the Macedonian Phalanx was more defended unless the enemy infantry was willing to throw themselves upon the spear tips of the Macedonians it was not really capable of closing with the enemy consistently to make it a reliable offensive threat. At close range such large weapons were of little use, but an intact phalanx could easily keep its enemies at a distance. Thats one of the main reasons the Romans attacked it--to loot it, which they did. the longer Roman sword and heavier shield easily prevailed over the This weakness wasn't well understood when it was occurring because all the greeks uses single formations armies and thus could not well exploit the weakness of the post Alexander Macedonians. DE75 7EE. Pike square explained. This was what let them find and exploit the weak spots in the phalanx. The Legion could work in rough terrain, and outflank the phalanxes. Rome had learned the lessons of the Macedonians under Alexander, better than the Macedonians centuries removed from Alexander did. Liddell Hart has all the details. **Why Macedonia Lost to Rome ** There were three key factors that aided Paulus: (1) Plain old soldier strength. Qin Pike Square vs Macedonian Phalanx 23 Apr 18,, 11:04. I don't think the premise that the "Macedonians had grown soft due to all the booty sent back by Alexander" is a reasonable answer. Yes they were, their unification of Greece, and invasion of Persia is one proof. But this isn't of any relevance to your question. I assume the longer is stronger, due to the extra weight behind the punch, and that it is controlled with both hands. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License; additional terms may apply. The phalanx on its own would not have been as effective, as Cyrus the Younger had learnt the hard way. That was the Macedonians under Philip and Alexanders great innovation. It … In addition to sources, this answer would benefit from examples. They could also bog down and become very slow moving as the phalanx struggled to stay together. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, and our Terms of Service. site design / logo © 2020 Stack Exchange Inc; user contributions licensed under cc by-sa. Was the Macedonian phalanx, with their long spears and small shields, really more effective than the hoplites? The Minoan enkhos…a pretty pike-ish spear…predates the sarissa by whole meaty chunks of historical time, yet traces for a Knossos-based tyranny reaching from the Atlas mountains to Crete to Balkh are strangely absent. This page was last edited on 24 June 2020, at 04:18. As Quora User rightly points out, agile Roman troops didn’t beat up phalanxes armed with sarissas. History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. Following the fragmentation of the empire of Alexander, Macedon became an independent kingdom once again. Freebase (0.00 / 0 votes) Rate this definition: Sarissa. Question: Paulus lost a large number of men for no losses to the enemy at all and was in great danger. Certainly with these, and the Macedonian Cavalry, Philip managed to subdue all of Greece aside from Sparta, who also gave him little trouble. The Hoplite was a standard infantryman of all Greek nations, also the in Macedonia under Philip and Alexander. But this required their be a fifth row of spearmen. They also had engineers with siege weapons and artillery which was used against enemy formations and not just during seiges. (diving) A dive position with knees straight and a tight bend at the hips. Philip of Macedon unlike most of the Greeks whom he would conquer, had an army of mixed units. If you read Plutarch, you will find that at the beginning of the battle the Roman army was shattered on the phalanx. A full time professional army which nobody else had except for perhaps Sparta. Comparing the Roman Legions in the Macedonian wars to those Legions which served Rome against Pyrrhus is chalk and cheese. Etymology: From σάρισσα. All this happened 130 years after Alexander died and ended about 200 years after Alexander. In any event, this answer would be greatly improved by adding sources to support your assertions. Total War: ATTILA> Workshop > bigsur's Workshop > A Farewell to Sarissa! The cavalry is also required to chase the enemy and deliver the crushing blow. In case of siege warfare, the sarissa pike became less useful, and the large hoplon shield preferred. What they excelled at was eating up space, controlling the battlefield. The Macedonian empire was very old and rich, and its soldiers weakened by luxury. They used both trumpets and flags to direct men around. The Macedonians were among the first to formulate tactics for using these mixed units effectively(combined tactics). To attack, prod, or injure someone with a pike. Where as most Greek Armies were made of only one type of Unit, like the Spartans of the time only used the Phalanx, The Macedonians had many types of units. This is not a hoplite vs pikeman question. An example is the Battle of Falkirk in 1298. Sarissa - The sarisa or sarissa (Greek: σάρισα) was a long spear or pike about 4–6 metres (13–20 ft) in length. A pointy extrusion at the toe of a shoe, found in old-fashioned footwear. For example, regarding the battle of Gaugamela, Alexanders heavy infantry numbers 31,000 - but this number again doesn't mean 31,000 men armed with sarissas. How do you measure "more effective"? how can sarissa spears protect from archers? When Macedonia fought Rome 130-200 years after Alexander died, the Macedonian spear was even longer than in Alexander’s time. their points, but with little success. The larger unites with heavier spears were also slower than normal phalanxes. They were soon joined by the Roman right, which had But the formations would be far more rigid and slow, thus dependent on other units to cover their flanks and rear. Without this capability Paulus would not have had the control he needed at Pydna. If it was wooded or rocky terrain, phalanx were dangerous to use because they would be forced apart and thus become vulnerable. The reason why the Sarissa Pike requires larger formations was because of it's length. Was homosexuality rarer in ancient Sparta than in any other Greek state? I mean in term of how to use them properly. Equipment. To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers. Rome never had such a high class cavalry... ever. As for the origins of Philip's reforms, I'm not an expert but at least I can point out that he probably took the idea from the reforms of Epaminondas at Thebes, where young Philip had been a hostage. Applications of equivariant homotopy theory in chromatic homotopy theory. The Macedonians typically had several versions of each specialized type of unit and this gave them options which few armies in antiquity could counter. The military forces of this successor state, the Antigonid Macedonian army, retained many features of the armies of Philip and Alexander. Because after Alexander died, the Macedonians returned to fighting like all the other greeks did. Do you mind if I open a separate question about this ("how rich was Macedonia" or something like that) to clarify the matter? Safe Navigation Operator (?.) Alexander the Great appears to have been one of the first generals to employ artillery on the open field of battle, rather than in a siege. Finally, the Legion beat the phalanx fairly handily, and it got easier with practice. The problem Macedon had when facing Rome was manpower - Rome was a world power and could put many men in the field - up to 500,000.