What were some differences with the Macedonian phalanx compared to the traditional Hoplite phalanx?

Phalanx front and depth Hoplite phalanxes usually deployed in ranks of eight men or more deep; the Macedonian phalanxes were usually 16 men deep, sometimes reported to have been arrayed 32 men deep.

What was different about the Macedonian phalanx?

The Macedonian phalanx used much longer spears, the sarissa at up to ~20-22 feet (6-7m) in length. They were more lightly armored, using a linothorax and a smaller shield strapped to their left arm, not carried separately.

Did the Spartans fight in a phalanx?

The phalanx was the primary infantry battle formation in classical Greece. The Spartans achieved a level of mastery of the phalanx and its associated tactics which for two centuries was unparalleled by contemporary powers.

Why was the phalanx the most powerful?

The extreme length of the sarissa meant that up to five layers of pikes protruded ahead of the front man – allowing the phalanx to steamroll any opponent. So long as its rear and flank were protected, the formation was extremely powerful both as a defensive and an offensive weapon.

What is the weakness of the Greek phalanx?

The major weakness of the phalanx is that it had little to no protection on its sides and rear. Since men were marching forward, and everyone’s spears were pointed in the same forward direction, hoplites were pretty much defenseless on the flanks and rear.

Which of the following was a major difference between the Macedonian phalanx and the Greek phalanx?

The Macedonian phalanx unlike the traditional Greek Hoplite phalanx was not engineered to defeat its enemy all by itself. The Macedonian success was not due to their phalanx’s superiority (with the sarissa pike). The Macedonian phalanx advantage was protection, but it had disadvantages.

How were hoplites different from earlier Greek soldiers?

Hoplites (/ˈhɒplaɪts/ HOP-lytes) (Ancient Greek: ὁπλίτης : hoplítēs) were citizen-soldiers of Ancient Greek city-states who were primarily armed with spears and shields. Hoplite soldiers used the phalanx formation to be effective in war with fewer soldiers.

Was Alexander the Great a hoplite?

Greek hoplites The army led by Alexander the Great into the Persian Empire included Greek heavy infantry in the form of allied contingents provided by the League of Corinth and hired mercenaries.

Why is the Roman legion better than the phalanx?

The author’s main points in favor of the Roman legion was agility, flexibility and adaptability; whereas, the phalanx had only one-dimensional movement. [i] A one trick horse if you will. Further examination of these main points concerning ancient military unit tactical formations will clarify Cole’s argument.

What fighting style did the Spartans use?

Hoplite Fighting The Spartans fought in the hoplite style which was the hallmark of ancient Greek warfare. Their massed ranks of men wore body armor and helmets. They carried round shields fixed by a pair of straps to their left arms.

What made the Macedonian phalanx more effective than the Greek?

The Macedonians asked different things of their phalanx(heavy infantry) than did the Hoplite greeks, and so the longer spears helped the phalanx achieve their particular role in the Macedonian battle tactics.

What is a phalanx in Ancient Greece?

phalanx, in military science, tactical formation consisting of a block of heavily armed infantry standing shoulder to shoulder in files several ranks deep. Fully developed by the ancient Greeks, it survived in modified form into the gunpowder era and is viewed today as the beginning of European military development.

Why was Alexander’s army so strong?

Ultimately, Alexander’s army represented a truly professional force, with an organised logistical corps, uniform equipment and frequent drill. Alexander’s men could form many different formations very quickly and were well trained.

Did Alexander use the phalanx?

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.

How was a Roman legion different from a Greek phalanx?

The Greeks used armies of massed infantry standing very close together, all joined as one giant unit. The Romans, however, pioneered small-unit tactics, and organized their armies into smaller formations capable of acting independently of the rest of the army.