Ancient History

[Atgxtg]

I've read that the battle is not considered a good example of legion vs. phalanx combat because of how poorly managed the phalanx was, so Badcat may be onto something. Some soruces I've read claim that the main failing wasing with the Phalanx per say, but with the lack of Calvary.

Then again, this was a pre-Marius Legion, too.



As for the "cutting distance" maneuvering room, there were several reasons for the Romans to spread out like that. Cutting is one option, but Polybius considered the weapon a cut & thrust weapon, so thrusting wounds were probably just as common at the battle. Another reason for the spread out formation has to do with a particularly nasty tactic the Romans used against Phalanxes- the front rank to lock weapons and shields, and the second rank to dart in and wreak havoc on the Phalanx, who couldn't move their weapons. I suspect the cuts inflicted at the battle including a lot of hamstringing.

Overall, I think the reason was that it allowed them the ability to excercise all these options, plus more.

[Kloster]

I agree that the english text shown is different from the french one I've found.
I've also found an article about Livy describing the shock of the macedonians seeing the mutilated corpses of their comrades, but as I can't find the original article, it does not count (yet).

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

Found it:
"Philip's men had been accustomed to fighting with Greeks and Illyrians and had only seen wounds inflicted by javelins and arrows and in rare instances by lances. But when they saw bodies dismembered with the Spanish sword [gladius hispaniensis], arms cut off from the shoulder, heads struck off from the trunk, bowels exposed and other horrible wounds, they recognised the style of weapon and the kind of man against whom they had to fight, and a shudder of horror ran through the ranks." [Livy 31.34].

I knew I had it. I focused on Polybius, and it was Livy. For me, clearly, it is wounds caused by slashing, and not thrusting strikes.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Atgxtg]

History is written by the victors, and they don't often agree with each other.

I think the story you get depends on which historian you are reading, as well as which translation of his account.

When I was in High School, I was sick and missed ssome classes (I was sick a lot). When I got back, I had to catch up, and needed to cover the material in my history class. Fortunately for me, my study peroid was goverened by the head of the histroy department who was more than happy to bring me up to speed, as inqusitive stundents interested in the subject matter were rare. Then I went to my class and got the worst grade ever in that class.

My history teach held to a different intpretation of the events covered. When I asked why I did so bad, it ended up turning into a argument between the two teachers over which interpretation was correct.

Good news was that the teacher upped my grade as I had impressed him with my effort to make up the work, he just didn't care for my source (), but agreed that my reasoning for using it was sound.


So, unless you were there, it all depends on what version you are reading.


I've read and seen some stuff recently that claims that the early Roman emperors weren't quite the crazed lunatics that they have been accused on being, pointing out that the accusations of excess came from political rivals, with their own agenda.

[Kloster]

Originally Posted by badcat

I think they might not have if the pilums had not begun the process of breaking up the phalanx pretty good. I wonder how the battle would have turned out if Alexander or his father had been in command, as I have read somewhere that Philip V did not have nearly as good a grasp of tactics and strategy, although his army was very similar in structure and organization to the army Alexander led into Persia...

If I remember (Again Polybius), the gladius hispaniensis was a new weapon introduced during the 2nd punic war to replace the greek sword (kopi or hoplite sword?) and the pilum has not yet been introduced, although it was used at Pydna.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

History is written by the victors, and they don't often agree with each other.

I think the story you get depends on which historian you are reading, as well as which translation of his account.
...

I completely agree here.

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

..
When I was in High School, I was sick and missed ssome classes (I was sick a lot). When I got back, I had to catch up, and needed to cover the material in my history class. Fortunately for me, my study peroid was goverened by the head of the histroy department who was more than happy to bring me up to speed, as inqusitive stundents interested in the subject matter were rare. Then I went to my class and got the worst grade ever in that class.

My history teach held to a different intpretation of the events covered. When I asked why I did so bad, it ended up turning into a argument between the two teachers over which interpretation was correct.

Good news was that the teacher upped my grade as I had impressed him with my effort to make up the work, he just didn't care for my source (), but agreed that my reasoning for using it was sound.


So, unless you were there, it all depends on what version you are reading.
...

You're lucky to have learned that from school, even if the conditions were not so lucky. I had to learn that the hard way, by myself, and against most of my history teachers.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[badcat]

Hey, Kloster, sounds familiar. My ancient history professor in college AVOIDED military aspects like the plague. What I know I had to dig up on my own...I might as well have saved my money for the bookstore, instead of wasting it on tuition, to some extent.

[Kloster]

Originally Posted by badcat

Hey, Kloster, sounds familiar. My ancient history professor in college AVOIDED military aspects like the plague. What I know I had to dig up on my own...I might as well have saved my money for the bookstore, instead of wasting it on tuition, to some extent.

I didn't had the monetary problem, because here in France, schooling is mostly free, but, although I had 2 fantastic history teachers, the others were oscillating from awful to very bad.
The worst one tried to explain 1st world war through official comunications.
I showed her "Paths of Glory" from Kubrick, as another point of view (even If I know it is a romance), and got a 0 (on 20) when I gave her the number of airplanes engaged in France (over 5000 for France, as much for Germany, several thousands for US and England) as she told us that some planes were used for spying and observations. The names of Guynemer, Rickenbacker or Von Richthoffen were unknown to her. That episode teached me the lesson to never, ever, contradict a teacher.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Kloster

Found it:
"Philip's men had been accustomed to fighting with Greeks and Illyrians and had only seen wounds inflicted by javelins and arrows and in rare instances by lances. But when they saw bodies dismembered with the Spanish sword [gladius hispaniensis], arms cut off from the shoulder, heads struck off from the trunk, bowels exposed and other horrible wounds, they recognised the style of weapon and the kind of man against whom they had to fight, and a shudder of horror ran through the ranks." [Livy 31.34].

I knew I had it. I focused on Polybius, and it was Livy. For me, clearly, it is wounds caused by slashing, and not thrusting strikes.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

Except for the bowels exposed bit. That could be thrusting strikes. IMO probably a mix was used. If someone is open to a slash, you slash, if they are open to a thrust you thrust.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Kloster

You're lucky to have learned that from school, even if the conditions were not so lucky. I had to learn that the hard way, by myself, and against most of my history teachers.

I double lucky then, as I learned that in school twice. Our History teach got sick, and we had a replacement. When he came back, he was so upset by the classes answers to certain questions on the test that he basically went back and retaught us all the answers that he wanted to hear.

In a nutshell he was a big Alexander Hamilton fan, she wasn't and we were taught two different views on the Hamilton-Burr duel.


From what I hear the Japanese history classes gloss over Manchuku, the rape of Nanking and other stuff that doesn"t show their ancestors in the best light.


I think that a lot of the political tensions in the world are due to just how much people's "facts" have been selected for them by the schools they went to.

Most people in the US are never told that the majority of Americans were against breaking away from Britain during the colonial era, and just how big a factor money played a part in it.