Talk:Hastati

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hastati article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Related task forces... Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC–c. 500 AD)

Contents 1 Thanks 2 Directly behind the velites? 3 Bad grammar 4 Image not 'Fair Use'?

[edit] Thanks

Thanks to whosoever edited this page for me. It was about a year since I had read the information when I wrote about it, went back to check it, and somebody had changed it for me. So thanks.

hey. no problem.

One day this week I'll break out my Livy books and see if I can find some citable material for the page. Rushyo 15:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Directly behind the velites?

According to this writeup, the hastati were positioned directly behind the velites. The velites writeup suggests otherwise, saying that the velites had no line of their own.

Velites did form a line, acting as skirmishers so were not as regimented as the main infantry, and were expected to pull back before the enemey closed in.

Velites were irregulars. That said, in most engagements they would move ahead of the main force as skirmishers as described above before then taking part in flanking manuevers in support of their host maniple. Some Consuls also used them for diversionary tactics, decoys and other irregular purposes. They were also used (with limited success) as line units when required to help rally elephants but I'm not going to look for citation of such as I'm too busy. Rushyo 15:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bad grammar

Someone probably needs to fix this article. I'm rather tired to do it myself, but I can see several mistakes... runon sentences, incomplete sentences, using were in the place of where, etc.. --Melissia 20:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image not 'Fair Use'?

According to the Wikipedia interpretation of the Fair Use clause, the image should only "presents ideas that cannot be exhibited otherwise". Wouldn't a creative commons depiction of a Legionary such as this be more appropriate? (The image in question is from this site). Rushyo 15:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

absolutely. as i understand it, the only context in which use of illustrations from Rome: Total War would be fair is a discussion of the depiction of the hastati within the game—and that's a discussion which is best kept to the article on the game or some spinoff thereof. (Rome: Total War is a fantastic game, but material on its internal reality shouldn't be mixed willy-nilly into articles on real history.)

the articles on the principes and triarii have the same problem. i'm going to remove the illustrations from all three. 65.95.38.209 19:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)