The Greek Phalanx Vs the Roman Legion
The Greek Phalanx and the Roman Legion were two of the most revolutionary war tactics created in the ancient warfare era. The Greek Phalanx and the Roman Legion both brought new and more efficient ways of defeating ones enemy by incorporating genius tactical formations. They both changed the way war would be fought during their time of existence. As deadly and effective both of these war tactics were, they have various things in common, as well as a number of differences. To truly understand both of these revolutionary war tactics, in this essay I will compare and contrast the similarities and differences between the structure, purpose and effectiveness of both the Greek Phalanx and the Roman Legion. The basic structure of both the Greek Phalanx and the Roman Legion were quite different from one another. The Greek Phalanx was a rectangular mass military formation, which consisted of infantry soldiers known as Hoplite soldiers[1]. Each of these soldiers were private farmers that owned their own land, which was the way to partake in battle with the Phalanx. In its early stages the Phalanx was 8 to 16 men in depth. They would range from a few hundred yards in length, to more than a mile in length in its later stage2]. The hoplite soldiers would lock their shields together, and the first few ranks of soldiers would project their spears out over the first rank of shields. The phalanx therefore presented a shield wall and a mass of spear points to the enemy, making frontal assaults much more difficult and also making their front line near impossible to penetrate[3]. The hoplite soldiers weapons consisted of a long heavy spear called the hoplon, a short sword, a shield made of wood and bronze and armour that was also made of bronze[4] The fascinating thing about the Phalanx was how disciplined and dedicated these hoplite soldiers were. Their main focus was to hold their lines and they did all they could to do so, even if it meant dying while trying. They were so