Talk:Hellenistic armies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can someone correct an error on this page. In the section on elephants it states that the Asian elephant was much smaller than the African. This is true nowadays but wasn't in ancient times. The modern (large) African elephant cannot be tamed easily and has very rarely been used as a work beast or for war. In ancient time a subspecies of the forest elephant was used. This subspecies is now extinct but was smaller than the Asian elephant. There are quite a few sources for this, both modern and ancient.

	Greece Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece.
If you would like to participate, you can improve Hellenistic armies, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
???	This article has not yet been prioritized.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

	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.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-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: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC–c. 500 AD)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. To participate, improve this article or visit the project page for more information.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
???	This article is on a subject of -importance within classical antiquity.

[edit] Where are you planning to go with this article?

I'm imagining it will end up being very very long once it is all filled out. Mathmo ^Talk 10:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mathmo. I planned the article but still didn't have any spare time to write it. I intend to write it down in the next few days. And it will be quite long. I'll be glad to get some help along the way. Nik Sage ^Talk 06:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Generalizations/inaccuracies?

A few things I noticed...

I would change the description of the phalangite's shield to what the archaeological evidence has provided us with: a 2ft-diameter shield, much flatter than the hoplite's aspis, with a wooden core and a (typically) bronze face. Adjectives aside, such a shield can cover a 5'8" man of average build from shoulder-tip to shoulder-tip and from chin to groin standing up, and probably more so when in the 3/4 profile/leaning stance of the phalangite with his sarissa at the ready.

I don't know of any "bucklers" used by phalangites, except where some historians have chosen to refer to the phalangite shield as such. It is, in my humble opinion, an inaccurate and not-useful term that denotes something much smaller. Same for terms like "knife" or "dagger" when describing the phalangite's sword. Whether a kopis, falcatta, or xiphos, we're talking about a roughly 2ft-long weapon only slightly smaller than the gladius the Romans used.

Also, I'm not sure the description of the phalanx being defenseless from the rear is very accurate, the basic building block of the phalanx--the 256-man syntagma or spheira--would suffer from such weaknesses, but the full formation? Not necessarily. Appian, in his description of the Syrian Wars, specifically points to Antiochus' phalanx as forming a square and resisting all attacks by the Romans while retreating in good order. It was only wrecked when the Romans directed their missiles at the elephants within the square itself.

Anyways, do these merit an edit by the original drafter, or should I input them?

Phoebus Americanos (talk) 14:14, 20 December 2007 (UTC)