Legion vs Phalanx - Battle at Dog's Head

[@IamZeus1100]

The amount of channels and content this man gets out is unreal . I respect the grind and the passion

[@chiapets2594]

Ummmmmmmmmm NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[@georgezachos7322]

Greek here, i live in Larissa which is a few km north of the battle site. It's nice to be able to visit such historic locations, especially if you read how the battle progressed. You can replay in in your mind's eye, on location.

[@Hillbilly001]

Dude! I would give a left nut to be able to walk that field. Have studied Greco Roman art of war for over 30 years. If my geography isn't too bad, Larissa is fairly close to a few others too? Cheers from Tennessee

[@georgezachos7322]

@@Hillbilly001 Wish i could show you around, mate! Yes, Larissa is within half an hour to a number of ancient battlefields, but the 2 major ones were Cynoscephalae, which is explained here and the battle of Pharsalus between Julius Caesar and Pompey Magnus which took place about 45 km south of Larissa(modern Pharsala). I understand how you feel, i love being close by. :)

[@donaldmackerer9032]

Wow, I envy you both. That would be an awesome opportunity to go visit those battlefields. Little hard to do though when you're from the east coast of the United States. However I did get the view site of the Battle of Thermopylae once and the Battle of Salamis once. I love the history of ancient Greece. I got that from my mother.

[@benjamindouglas862]

@georgezachos7322 I live in the Shenandoah Valley in Virginia, US the location of Stonewall Jackson's Valley Campaigns in 1862 and 1863. It's so nice to read about battles where you know the geography. There is a pass in the Massanutten Mountain Range, that Jackson used to attack Union forces from the rear and I've been through it dozens and dozens of times, everytime I think glad I'm not a butternut infantryman in 1863.

[@donaldmackerer9032]

@@benjamindouglas862 do you live anywhere near Lexington Virginia? I too get to visit battle sites around Atlanta. Have visited the Battle of Kennesaw Mountain the most and then Pigeon Hill. At Kennesaw Mountain National Park they still have the Civil War cannons there.

[@Oscar_SanJuan]

Simon, you are an absolute unit. The first channel that drew me into your content was Biographics, but I’ve thoroughly enjoyed your other channels as well. The most admirable part is how much content you pump out for all your channels. I just wanted to express my appreciation because my love for technological marvels and world history has grown exponentially due to you and your production crew. Keep going and I’ll keep tuning in!

[@cookedewok8675]

He's just the narrator lmao there's a whole team that's why they can make so much videos

[@hellakon-3381]

Top tens is where it started for me. Simon beardless with a map on the wall as background. Great then great now. Part of my daily routine now ❤.

[@DidTheSwansWin]

@@cookedewok8675 of course there is, but the whole network of channels is Simon's. Why would you be so dismissive?

[@sarcasmo57]

@@DidTheSwansWin Meh

[@michaelstone5298]

So 🐘 are not completely useless in battle of some analysts say

[@jameshiler7830]

I think there's a quote by the roman commander who faced the pikes and he pretty much said, it was the most terrifying thing he ever witnessed.

[@JohnSandercock]

No, that was Paullus at the battle of Pydna in the third Macedonian war

[@dgrmn12345]

You dont need someone to quote how terrifying a pike or phalanx is. Especially when you are a regular footman on the front lines. Its like watching a forest come to life. One whose march quakes the earth with a single uniformed step. And as they approach, you see their pikes lowered towards you. Inching closer and closer like a terrifying pendelum. And all that is before they yell their war cries and you find yourself pierced in 5 different places by one row of men. And by just that one row of men.

[@MrBubblecake]

Okay but with a more mobile army, you could simply run straight around the formation and encircle them, immediately putting the pikes at a disadvantage. Also the Pikes are made of wood. If an enemy soldier cuts the metal tip off your pike, you now have a wooden stick lol The problem with a 16 foot wooden pike, is it becomes rather flimsy on the end and would create great fatigue for the person wielding it, and would be rather easy to deflect with a heavy shield.

[@Aemilius46]

Indeed! That was, Lucius Aemilius Paulus Macedonicus, the victorious Roman general of the Third Macedonian War! He said he was seized with amazement and alarm, nothing he had ever seen before had been equal to it. But he still dissembled and rode through his army with a serene and cheerful countenance, encouraging his legions!

[@Aemilius46]

​​@@JohnSandercockYou are correct!! Lucius Aemilius Paulus Macedonicus, the victor of the Third Macedonian War, and one of my favorite generals!!

[@abid5087]

Excellent job balancing the narration of the battle with the context and impact of the battle. The analysis at the end was on point. The writer not only did their research, but did a good job not making it confusing. Great video

[@ignitionfrn2223]

1:05 - Chapter 1 - The antigonid antagonist 4:45 - Chapter 2 - The 1st clash 6:35 - Chapter 3 - Looking for a fight 9:40 - Chapter 4 - The two armies 13:35 - Chapter 5 - Chance encounter at dog's head 18:50 - Chapter 6 - Unnamed hero

[@saint-miscreant]

@warographics you should really start pinning these kinds of comments!

[@Leo_Pard_A4]

Thanks

[@davidg6810]

you a g for this thanks brother

[@bulletproofpepper2]

Super explanations and I could almost see the battlefield unfolding as you spoke.

[@Zman44444]

Y’all remember Top10’sNet or whatever Simons first channel was? It was literally a top 10 channel or somethin. Look at him now. Simon you mad man. Love all the channels. You never cease to impress!

[@broslicetim]

I owe these channels a lot. They have given me a lot of entertainment and more specifically ( Biographics) got me interested in and taught me everything I know about Ancient Rome

[@memofromessex]

The Battle of Flodden is a good shout - the last medieval battle/first early modern battle. The Scots lost the majority of it's leading potentates (James IV, bishops, dukes, etc.) because of stupid charge down a hill losing them an easily defensible position. The Scots had greater numbers and better cannon, but used them extremely poorly. Also, the last major battle between England and Scotland.

[@Altaree1]

I love your videos and delivery. Could you please add more maps for the more visual learners among us?

[@donaldmackerer9032]

Yes great idea.

[@jamesdreads7828]

I saw the first 5 minutes of this a few weeks ago! At long last...thanks, Simon ..

[@kbtaylor_]

I think a deep dive video into some of the Napoleonic wars, greatest battles one by one would be a great series

[@johnniemiec3286]

A series of videos on the evolution of various combat and support arms would be interesting. The histories of infantry, cavalry, artillery, battlefield medicine, naval warfare, supply and support could all be looked at with prime examples from famous battles used to highlight particular high and low points.

[@ZMCFERON]

War is logistics #1. The sheer amount of baggage and supply trains could probably absorb two or three videos worth, especially in ancient times without reliable air or sea transport. 😂

[@johnniemiec3286]

@@ZMCFERON absolutely. And a ton of people are unaware of what it takes. I would love to see a series on each of those things through the eras... ancient, medieval, Napoleonic, early modern, WW2, into modern day.

[@danielsass1826]

The main reason the Roman's were so powerful was just because they simply would not be stopped regardless of casualties. You should do the first punic war. The Roman's would loose their entire navy to storms 4 times and would lose 100s of thousand to millions of soldiers just in these sinkings not to mention rebuilding their navy each time and just would not give up

[@Aemilius46]

💯💯 One of their biggest Gifts!!!! No matter the losses, they kept coming and coming No matter what!! It's how they dominated the entire Mediterranean!! ✨

[@creamertaco2956]

Best way to start a Saturday

[@andyyang3029]

By the way, if anyone wants more ancient Hellenic content, this channel has another video on Alexander the Great against the Persian empire🤔 🇬🇷

[@marka4891]

I think the phalanx, by that time, was on its way out as a viable military tactic. It was too limited, as noted, by its relative lack of maneuverability and required certain terrain features to truly be effective. That's not to say that the manipular legion was perfect, but it's flexibility was too useful to not implement in the place of the phalanx.

[@gazmj1400]

It never went out of military doctrine, pike formations where still being used in the 17th century and only died out when muskets became the back bone of European army's,

[@marka4891]

@@gazmj1400 Never went out, or came back in an updated form?

[@Lycurgus1982]

@@gazmj1400 when cavalry became a big enough factor, the pike had a resurgence. However the 17th century pike block was implemented a little differently then the Macedonian line.

[@Lycurgus1982]

It didn't have anything to do with how effective the formations were on the field. The Romans had a hell of a time with the sarissa phalanx. The reason it was somewhat phased out was for political reasons and the fact the Romans did not have the same social and political structure.

[@marka4891]

@@Lycurgus1982 17th century pike formations were some 12(?) centuries after the fall of the Western Roman empire. That's quite a pause. I find it very difficult to swallow the idea that combat effectiveness was not a factor. Major or otherwise.

[@mt7able]

Simon speaks so smoothly when he shares these anecdotes. It’s almost like he’s a storytelling Whistler.

[@patton3338]

The bloodrush those legionnaire's must have felt when the Greek phalanx got flanked and turned the tide. The past was crazy.

[@lordalexandermalcolmguy6971]

Great stuff chum

[@viciousstarfish]

Simon is a large but only partly honest and correct corporation telling history.

[@joeyk4810]

Keep it up Simon love it all

[@waynesworldofsci-tech]

You replaced Carthage with Macedon at one point in the first 3 minutes. Fantastic presentation Simon. Fantastic presentation.

[@Nickelback8469]

It sounds like the Phalanx at its best in prime conditions was still more powerful than a Legion could be, but the battlefield never promises the best case scenario. The ability to move and adapt to battlefield situations will win out in the long run and even if this particular battle was a loss for Rome, there would have been another time where the Phalanx's rigidity would've been exploited.

[@Lycurgus1982]

There is much more to it than a formations mechanical function on the battle field.

[@Aemilius46]

The Manipular legion was far superior than the Phalanx!! The legion defeated the Gauls, Carthage, Numidians, The Greeks and Macedonians, Mithridates and Tigranes, the Numantines, among others!!

[@alexhydell3608]

I've been waiting for this

[@Sardarkhan69]

Superb video! Analysing the age ole argument of which of the two will win in battle 👏

[@redfishnotbluefish9459]

I just loved this! I appreciate the detail and his presentation. If only my professors were half as interesting back... decades ago.

[@johnirby8847]

Roman manipole and cohort system was a better infantry system but I'm a firm believer that the phalanx system was nothing without cavalry...which Rome was severely lacking. Add Alexander and the Companions and you have something truly frightening...in every instance they were able to misdirect, outflank, and encircle. In every single battle. The true greatness was not the system used...it was the person leading the army...and the methods Alexander used were extremely effective.

[@Russo-Delenda-Est]

Round 2? Sure, I'll watch again, I'm always down for another warographics.

[@usonumabeach300]

Would like at least a video, but preferably a series on Guadalcanal

[@ThaStargazer]

Woooo!! New episode!!!

[@kevinmahecha9969]

A detailed description of the battle of Stalingrad would be great 🙏

[@derekmadson7477]

Absolutely superb content!

[@jccmuir]

I'm definitely here for these "Future Ancient Battles" you speak of Simon. New Sci-Fi genre?

[@thatterenceguy95]

I saw this video drop a few weeks ago, then it disappeared a couple hours later. I'm guessing it was accidentally posted then

[@TheWhaller]

I’m not crazy! I swear I saw it before but then couldn’t find it again 😂

[@andyyang3029]

Who else saw this episode when it was accidentally posted early 😏😏😏

[@davidalanward4261]

I totally did

[@jamesdreads7828]

I got cut off 5 mins into it when Simon realised..

[@mohamadnuriman4815]

Me

[@noahlogue3807]

Pissed me off

[@elwick_photo]

Well now this would explain why I thought I'd seen this before but couldn't find it

[@shawndown3944]

Just a FYI, but your description should read looser not loser. lol Everything else is amazing as usual.

[@Im-just-Stardust]

Thx Simon, discovered your channels lately (ALL OF THEM!) and really like them. Cheers.

[@alexholl654]

You should cover the skirmish at bender with carolus rex

[@michaellewis7959]

Simon...do you sleep? Lol you're the hardest working person on youtube I think

[@dogloversrule8476]

Can you please do a video on the time the US Marines invaded Korea in 1871? There’s almost nothing on this topic and what little I have found makes it seem like a cool story. Thanks

[@Big_Tex]

Simon once again blathering about his very favorite subject, Ancient Rome 🤣

[@user-ne1vx7mj1b]

Most armies are defeated by flanking maneuvers especially the Romans and this one was won by the elephants on the flank. Comparing phalanx battles the Romans were defeated frontally proving the superiority of the phalanx over Roman legions. Eventually the Greeks adopted a similar copy to manipulate but STILL used the Phalanx and most Greek armies could always win the flanks with superior cavalry and peltasts or Hypaspists

[@Aemilius46]

That must be why the Romans conquered Greece and Macedonia and the Phalanx!

[@user-ne1vx7mj1b]

@@Aemilius46 post meaningful arguments and keep your uneducated guesses to yourself. Victory for Rome came at a high cost and in almost all cases was by sheer numbers, even then Hannibal and the Gauls and many others annihilated many Roman armies

[@robertwood9532]

Simon how do you find the time? Have you cloned yourself? Your channels are all excellent and im a big fan

[@trevorslinkard31]

Funny I just watched a three year old video about this from Metatron. Timing is precise

[@georgezachos7322]

Remember, a major part of the phalanx warfare, was the pinning of the enemy, while the cavalry hit the flanks of the opposing forces. That's how Alexander did it. Philip, on the other hand, did not.

[@NickSteffen]

He might have, if he didn’t get caught with his pants down. I think a big advantage of the Manipular Legion is that it’s easier to execute and simpler. So when you add a whole bunch of factors like surprise, fog and a hill you don’t waste a whole bunch of energy just trying to execute the basics of the formation and trying to ensure all your necessary flanking protection and cavalry is in place. You can focus more on what’s important in the moment. I’m not sure if this is true but from this video it also seemed like the Roman divisions were more autonomous where the Macedonians were reacting too slowly to out of date information from the front lines in several places.

[@georgezachos7322]

@@NickSteffen The Hellenistic phalanx was a mere shadow of it's former self. No combined weapons assault. No hypaspists guarding the phalanx. No light cavalry and skirmishers to cover the hypaspists. None of it done right. They messed up big time.

[@Farron6]

@@georgezachos7322 you’re spot on with that. The successors of Alexander thought the Phalanx was the reason for his success not the combined armed tactics

[@adrianbundy3249]

@@Farron6 Here's then the rock paper scissors problem then. In order for the phalanx to become superior it requires the secondary units to win the day, and it is slow moving. The strength of the legion was the fact it was fast moving, and can fall back quickly taking minimum casualties (even when they were pressing here, the roman casualties were limited for instance for these reasons and tactics). It's rife of examples of romans being more able to simply not pick the fight where the phalanx would have the upper hand, but not so on the legion. The combined arms approach would REQUIRE cavalry and everything to be able to force the fight when the phalanx and combined arms would be favored, something that was simply harder to do. And you mention you need a very powerful cavalry to win, like what alexander often had. Here's the puncher. What happens when you simply have the legion, and then also then put a bunch of points in to similar or superior cavalry? You're taking home the wrong lessons of war. Simplicity and flexibility will usually be more useful over a broader sense of tactically changing circumstances (the king of war), more often then not. You can make a really good force that is unbeatable in a specific circumstance that requires other things to be working out for you. The problem is, that will only work, combined arms or not, until you run into something that can both hold the point of attack without completely dying (the legion), simply long enough, and being flexible enough for a better combined arms victory themselves. You think if they brought a whole bunch more cavalry, that there might not have also then been tit for tat? Think about it: Do you think the romans were stupid, and did not realize the weakness of a phalanx was that it could be hit head on, and that smart greeks would want an army that would make it harder for them to be hit from the side? That's the kind of narrow minded thinking I feel many are participating in these arguments are doing. The strength of the roman system was it's ability to adapt, and change tactics and even the composition somewhat of the armies they brought vs a foe they now understand would simply have more cavalry to cover up a weakness. And perhaps even pulling out more soldiers into the auxiliary, making less dense and dangerous pike formations (plenty dangerous). The romans can fight wars and win them even when one component of their military broke down, due to this more flexible approach to infantry. That. Is. KEY. The fact that the phalanx usually broke down instead, shows to me a glaring flaw in this sort of methodology.

[@Lycurgus1982]

@@NickSteffen what the Romans had at their disposal was a more developed command structure, but there was a fine line in how you conducted yourself as a roman soldier as you could be severely punished for doing too much or not enough. Whomever gave the command to peel away from the main body took a risk.

[@rashkavar]

Excellent summary of a battle of titans of tactical units. One wonders how formidable an army could be if they could field a phalanx at its core combined with Roman legionnaires to fill gaps, guard the flanks, etc. I know it's effective in Rome: Total War, but I definitely don't use my Roman units in a historically accurate manner, so that's not really a fair test even if the battle simulations were 100% realistic.

[@wolf99000]

Romans themselves used to fight in the Greek style early in the cities life before the reforms that would set them on to the legions we know of pre marian this battle shows they were right a Phalanx was done at this point the main way to use it was to move foward use the Phalanx to pin and enemy and use your cav to guard the wings then hit the enemy in the exposed sides

[@Lycurgus1982]

The Romans had a different political and social structure than the Hellenistic kingdoms.

[@Lycurgus1982]

@@wolf99000 the phalanx wasn't done. The Hellenistic kingdoms were eroding politically and this effected everything.

[@drejade7119]

Then you will basically have half of Alexanders army composition

[@wolf99000]

@@Lycurgus1982 it was done in terms of going vs Roman legions in wars

[@Aemilius46]

FINALLY!!!!!!!! I've been dying for Titus Quinctius Flamininus to get the spotlight!! 🛡️🗡️ He is so underrated it's unfortunate, because he was a seriously gifted (And arguably the Greatest) Politician EVER!! And a fantastic, One of the greatest Generals (Who also played a role in The Battle of Thermopylae, War against Nabis and Sparta ending Sparta independence and power, literally went All over Greece making a Name for himself and a Difference)! Lucius Aemilius Paullus Macedonicus, Marcus Valerius Laevinus, Manius Acilius Glabrio, and the rest of the brilliant under and overlooked Romans who played roles in the Roman Conquest of Greece deserve attention and credit also!! 🛡️⚔️🗡️ If you can't tell, This Time period, the Second and Third Century BC are My absolute Most Favorite and Beloved time period EVER!!!! So much Skill, Talent, Diplomacy, Nobility, Loyalty, Humility, Virtue, Respect, Honor, and More coming from the Roman Republic and Greece!! #GloryToRome #GloryToTheNobleRepublic

[@gomahklawm4446]

You left out that they both committed genocides and enslaved entire cities of people. They were monsters. Noble my ***

[@Aemilius46]

@@gomahklawm4446 How was Titus Quinctius Flamininus a "monster"?? He gave the Greeks their Freedom, and saved them from annihilation multiple times!! Glabrio wanted to destroy the Aetolian League, Flamininus protected the Aetolian League, he didn't destroy Sparta or Macedon Even though he could have, and he left Greece in peace.. As for Lucius Aemilius Paullus Macedonicus he did what he was Ordered to from the Senate. What do you think would happen if he didn't listen?? He had a family to think about.

[@simonw1252]

Greece were and are Rome's masters for always and ever.

[@Aemilius46]

​@@simonw1252Yeah, no! The Greeks and Macedonians we're completely crushed by Rome!

[@tinkerman-q]

I don't think it's a fair comparison to make. Both types of units are strong in their own merits. It comes down to whether their commanders are able to leverage their strategic advantage. It's like trying to compare an archery unit with a cavalry unit without placing them in the context of the battlefield

[@capnstewy55]

Consult Lindybeige's spear vs sword videos and schola's pilla videos. Watched just to imagine Simon squirming about having to read anything about the Romans.

[@danstvguy]

One of the best voices on the Internet.

[@anthrobug]

Simon rules the Battlefield.

[@iDeathMaximuMII]

That unamed Tribune was the Hero of the Battle. Unfortunate that his name was preserved for History

[@SteefPip]

Romans had the best names. Titus Manlius Torquatus is still my favorite.

[@Aemilius46]

Ahh yes, Titus Manlius Imperiosus Torquatus!! One of the early heroes of the Roman Republic!! 🛡️🗡️

[@Giveme1goodreason]

I suggest the battle of hamel the first modern battle. Or the charge of Beersheba.

[@donaldmackerer9032]

This was a great video because for the first time I got greater detail on how the Romans won the battle and defeated the Macedonian phalanx. On paper it seemed like the macedonians should have won but they did not. The Roman general was a better General.

[@esoxlucius6884]

13:17 Legionaries, not legionnaires. That's the French Foreign Legion.

[@johnirby8847]

The phalanx was nothing without excellent cavalry. Take cavalry out and all you have is a slow moving, rigid formation. Add Alexander and the Companions and you have something remarkable. The success of the phalanx had more to do with the success of Alexander as an expert cavalry commander.

[@erostheelder6831]

Time to form up properly yes, but what about dem elephants yo!

[@jameswright4420]

Have you done the battle of Hastings or Stamford bridge yet? Well worth covering for us Harald Godwinsen fans.

[@vonkug]

Have you covered the italian front in WWI?

[@insecureninja]

Can't wait for the "Battle of Pydna".

[@monkeyeagle1921]

This needs graphics! Maps specifically! Particularly given the channel name

[@stuka80]

The momentum and force of the downhill charge of the phalanx mustve been tremendous, the fact that the legion took that charge headon without breaking is amazing. The legions at this time were very high quality and the best that Republican Rome ever produced, all were hardened veterans in their war against Hannibal.

[@b.thomas8926]

The 300 is a good example. Alexander is another great example. Got a mountain on one side and a beach on the other, then your ok. Some good cavalry to support your flanks, and and good leadership and your ok. In fact your more than ok. You can do some serious damage with minimal casualties. But if someone gets behind you, your screwed. It's about position and timing and the Macedonians were pretty good at training their leaders to know when and were to fight. But take that away, and your left with nothing but bad choices. The Romans were taught some hard lessons by Hannibal that you don't always get to choose when and where. So the Romans adapted a new approach and chose to take on a more flexible formation at the cost of shock value and protection. They felt it was better to lose some solders rather than lose all, so long as they could be flexible enough to adapt to any situation and win in the end. That philosophy worked well for them for a long time.

[@leighpowell1062]

The Welsh revolt led by Owen Glyndwr would be good, IMHO. Thank you

[@jamesfermor425]

Great video as always. Really appreciate the amount of research you guys do for your content; I had no idea that the placed was named so because Of the shape of the hills. I myself would like more videos on some of the less well known battles/wars. I understand that would probably mean relatively more research though.

[@vampiro4236]

Another channel!!!!! Whoot!

[@GoatTheGoat]

More of the headache inducing wave effect on stock photos. Why?!

[@justin_0924]

Love your channels. You should do a video on the Border Reivers.

[@raywhitehead730]

There is a pretty good, cartoon video of this battle. So it is illustrated, so easier to understand.

[@MalikF15]

I’m just hoping you can finish the epic battles from the 100 years war

[@MC-gj8fg]

As anyone would know who has fought with spears/polearms vs those with sword and shield, the relatively greater skill a sword and shield user needs to defeat an opponent with a long stick with a pointy end is significant. I'd put my money on an average spearman over a highly skill sword and shield user all day long. I suspect the pilum was the difference maker for the Roman legions.

[@Aemilius46]

Spears break, Swords don't!! Also Rome conquered All of Greece, so.... I'll just say that as an argument!! I would take a Sword of steel, over a long WOODEN stick any day!! #GloryToRome also you know the Romans threw the Pilum the Majority of the time right??

[@markangelagirard9944]

I think the presence of Elephants skews the conclusion. Perhaps a better analysis might be when either type fights a third type --maybe Thracians or Chariots Archers.

[@saintenciel]

@Warographics I'm a History teacher from Indonesia🇮🇩 is it possible to have Indonesian translation for the subtitle, I like to watch your videos with my students but a lot of them didn't understand English so I need to pause here and there to explain what are the video is about Edit :ohh Nvm it's available for auto translate

[@jamesstaggs4160]

Yeah if you've got an upcoming attack on your rear the only prudent thing to do is disengage. Even if you've made sure your rear is tight there's always a chance someone can slip through the cracks .

[@KhaoticPhoenix]

Lindybeige youtuber (an excellent watch for history videos) has done some scientific research (I.e. trials by actual combat) and concluded that spear on spear action leads incredibly long winded and less deadly engagements until one side is broken through. Sword wielding infantry are much better at dueling against spearmen but it requires you to get stuck in. If you can find any way round the wall of spears, that formation will crack like an egg.

[@ex-navyspook]

In the war in Ukraine, today, and in every conflict going back to the First World War, tanks are at a severe disadvantage without mobile infantry and lighter units keeping their flanks clear. The phalanx was the ancient world's equivalent of a tank. Macedonian and Greek phalanx was a juggernaut, but only if it was able to keep cohesion, and only if it was supported by more mobile troops. It was extremely effective in straight lines, devastating against cavalry and, employed on favorable ground where the flanks were protected by terrain (Thermypolae comes to mind), was almost unbreakable. It was used, in one form or another, for almost 2200 years for a reason, and was even used by Medieval and Renaissance armies all the way to the mass introduction of firearms, although not as a recognizable phalanx, per se. At Cynoscephalus in 197BCE, and later at Magnesia in 190BCE, the phalanx initially did well but, in both cases, the flanks were unprotected and Roman close-combat skill proved disastrous to the Macedonians. Case in point: At the Battle of Lechaeum in 391BCE, during the Corinthian War, the Spartans were marching a mora, a regiment of 600 hoplites (one block to make up a phalanx) without any supporting units near the city of Corinth. Deciding to take advantage of this, the Athenians sent peltasts (javelin throwers) and archers out to harass the hoplites. Whenever the Spartan commander would sent his troops in pursuit of the lighter troops, there was NO way they could catch them, so they'd hightail it back to the group. By the time the Spartans had made it back to their boats, they'd allegedly lost 250 of the 600 troops...in this battle, it was Spartans 0 - Athenians 1. In the end, though, Sparta "won," with Persian backing (!?!) in 387BCE, but peace was pretty short-lived, as the Greek States all now had to worry about a resurgent Persia. Cue the rise of Alexander fifty years later.

[@michaelsinger4638]

The Legions were more maneuverable and tactically flexible.

[@AnvilMAn603]

to answer the question as to why a century of soldiers was 80: a century was 10 units of 10: 8 soldiers called contubernium that shared a tent with 2 servants/slaves.

[@theartisticdrive6133]

Always enjoy your talking, but would appreciate some military maps showing where troops where. Seemed like a lazy fix. Enjoy your vids immensely

[@lathenhertel8564]

Would love to see a video on Thermoplyea

[@homelessjesse9453]

Not even fair. The successors of Alexander didn't even realize that the pike formation was always supposed to be the anvil, with the superior cavalry being the hammer. It was never supposed to decisively defeat the enemy alone by itself!

[@johnelcatsha6895]

please do a vid on the battle of Thermopylae

[@shavedape2102]

Phalanx at the front, legions on the flanks, Elephants at the rear to stop a mounted attack

[@EAWanderer]

I played Rome Total War on PC a few years ago, Spectacular game! The Romans won of course outwitting and more importantly - out manouvering them - 👌 This historical battle is playable - Try and pronounce this Greek place where the battle Was, I dare You! 😁 - Cynocephaelae Ridge - Northern Greece 🇬🇷 -

[@Stathube]

It is actually central Greece.

[@divicospower9112]

Cynocephalai

[@EAWanderer]

@@Stathube Is it? Hmm 🤔 Play the battle and the intro says - Northern -

[@EAWanderer]

@@divicospower9112 01:12 Confusing spelling usage, though if you are Greek we'll stick with your correction

[@divicospower9112]

@@EAWanderer not confusing, it's Greek. If you are an English named Steven, would you like that I call you Istvan? No, so why do you do that with Greek names?

[@rafalganowicz1939]

Something on the Polish Winger Hussars.

[@mundowc9170]

What does Cicero Denounces Catiline painting, has to do with any of this?

[@matiasmosquella1830]

Which is one is better can be summed up in which one conquered the world. The Roman's fought the Greeks, Carthaginians, Seleucids, and many more right up to the time of Caesar. All those enemies used the phalanx formations of Alexander. And each were defeated in turn through hundreds of years of war.

[@michaelroloson2389]

Hey Simon, could you maybe do something on the Cheyenne Dog Soldier?

[@paulmarshall492]

Flexible formations especially when you do not know battle conditions before the critical time usually either win or allow you to withdraw and fight another day.

[@Lycurgus1982]

True, but in ancient times withdrawing would have been disgraceful in the eyes of the gods.

[@rangerrick2246]

Great historical comparison however...... it really lacks graphics examples. No battle movements, too many names with no arrows and logistical movements. It could have been great....

[@jeromecummings3609]

The legions. It’s obvious no but there is a reason why Rome beat Macedonian/Greece and the phalanx got left behind (similar to chariots)

[@Guinness65ify]

I would suggest that mobility always wins the day. The maniple being the more mobile formation is therefore superior. The legions learned this the hard way in the deserts against the highly mobile horseman much latter in history.

[@drankin_barry6005]

Simon, you don’t do enough. Break time is over! You need to focus more on creating more content because you could be doing so much better. I know you’re true potential and I just don’t wanna see you waste it and leave us all hanging. We need more education! Facts! Knowledge! Maybe wisdom! Cmon let’s have it Simon! Good vid btw

[@paulherman5822]

Phalanx vs legion? To paraphrase archaeologist and HEMA (Historical European Martial Arts) instructor Matt Easton, "Context."

[@multiyapples]

Rest In Peace to those that passed away.

[@manricobianchini5276]

Roman's were awesome, period.