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 by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (nations and regions): Italian military history task force (c. 500–present) Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC–c. 500 AD)

The following user(s) are actively contributing to this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources: Serviam (talk · contribs) This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.

Contents 1 Thanks 2 Directly behind the velites? 3 Bad grammar 4 Image not 'Fair Use'? 5 Revisions 6 Longswords

[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)

[edit] Revisions

This article is in need of some significant revision. The text is somewhat confusing and repetative and in several places outright innaccurate. For instance, there were not 15 Maniples of Hastati in the Roman Legion of Polybius' time, but 10, the same number as there were Maniples of Triarii and Principes. Unless there is any counter evidence or objections, I intend to revise this article in the near future. --M.J.Stanham 19:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I am working on it. Should be ready by tonight --Jamesjiao 05:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Update - It's done.. Please be mindful about the article format when inserting info in the future --Jamesjiao 06:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Longswords

The gauls attacked the romans with longswords? As far as I know longswords are not introduced into warfare before early middle-ages. Iron-working only then had advanced enough to allow for longer blades. Can it be that the gauls attacked the romans at that time with - relatively seen - "longer swords" rather than longswords? --91.97.47.201 17:14, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

The ones the gauls used were called longswords, but they weren't as long as the longswords of the middle ages, nor were they designed the same. They were fatter and heavier so they could be used as cudgels against enemy sheilds.--Serviam (talk) 20:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)