Greek Phalanx: The Rise Of The Greek Army

626 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Ancient greek vs roman military

Whenever someone says the word Phalanx what does it mean, a lot my not know but when someone mentions it by saying Greek Phalanx then some people may recognize that this was the famous Greek army formation that helps them conquer so much territory in the west and become the powerful empire that they were. They stood in a rectangle sort of speak and they would march to the other enemy without breaking formation. What the men of the army needed to do in order for such a formation to work was cover each other with their shields. The person to your side had to cover you and you had to cover the person next to you. Now this developed trust within the army because your life was in the hand of the person next to you which even sometimes could possibly be your relative. …show more content…

If you could afford armor then you could defend your city so you had a say in what laws were passed or not. These men, because women didn’t go to war, were called hoplites and the way the setup in the Phalanx was with rank as well. Usually the highest ranks where located in the front row of the formation and the lowest at the back. Like I mentioned before this affected these men psychology because they really needed to put their lives in the hands of someone else. If the person to your left decided to run away the formation would break leading to the death of everyone. Even if the person that ran survived he would be treated like a stray dog or even be killed. So all in all if you wanted a say in the laws being made where you live then you needed to fight for your city and you needed to trust the people around you or else everything would have

Show More
Related

  • The Heroism, Divine Support, and Greek Unity Displayed in the Persian Wars

    2236 Words  | 5 Pages

    In early fifth century BC Greece, the Greeks consistently suffered from the threat of being conquered by the Persian Empire. Between the years 500-479 BC, the Greeks and the Persians fought two wars. Although the Persian power vastly surpassed the Greeks, the Greeks unexpectedly triumphed. In this Goliath versus David scenario, the Greeks as the underdog, defeated the Persians due to their heroic action, divine support, and Greek unity. The threat of the Persian Empire's expansion into Greece and the imminent possibility that they would lose their freedom and become subservient to the Persians, so horrified the Greeks that they united together and risked their lives in order to preserve the one thing they all shared in common, their "Greekness".

    Read More

  • Why Did Machiavelli's Use Of Cavalry

    4021 Words  | 9 Pages

    Without the right ecosystem for horses, the ancient Greeks were forced to trade for horses, which were highly expensive. The ancient Greeks were then forced to come up with a way to counter the Persians’ use of cavalry, which they solved with the creation of the phalanx. A phalanx was a group of soldiers armed with 7- to 8-foot-long spears, short swords, and round shields that were able to interlock with other shields. The soldiers wore a helmet, breastplate, and usually greaves. A phalanx is made up of lines of men extending their spears towards the enemy's direction. If a soldier is killed, the soldier from behind is to take his place, and this continues until all of the soldiers are killed. Machiavelli wrote, “The injuries which the first rank suffered, depleted the last, and the first rank always remained complete; and thus the Phalanxes, because of their arrangement, were able rather to become depleted than broken, since the large (size of its) body made it more immobile.” Machiavelli greatly admired the phalanx and considered it to be a useful formation if used correctly. Eventually Phillip the II of Macedonia improved the phalanx by doubling the spear length and reducing the shield size, which greatly increased a phalanx’s mobility. The Greeks would line up their phalanxes, and when the Persian

    Read More

  • Women In The Civil War Research Paper

    1788 Words  | 4 Pages

    Some women enlisted in the army to fight on the battlefield. Their reasons varied as some fought for money and

    Read More

  • Sparta: Infrastructure, Social Structure, and Superstructure

    1515 Words  | 4 Pages

    Spartan culture is a great example of how a society’s infrastructure will directly affect both, its social structure and superstructure. It also serves as a warning that any society that becomes too rigid in its structure and too static in its values will not last long when confronted with more agile and adaptable cultures. This paper will explore why Sparta became the Hellenic army par excellence, how this worked to create a very specific social structure founded on martial values, and, finally, how that social structure would ultimately be the undoing of the culture.

    Read More

  • Religion In The Military Of Ancient Greece

    4067 Words  | 9 Pages

    The Ancient Greeks held their religion to be a personal experience, to be practiced by the common man on a daily basis. Thus, it comes as no surprise to read in the historical works of the period that the people also relied on religion to aid them in military matters. This paper will give historical examples of the people's reliance on

    Read More

  • Sparta: The Militarized City-State of Ancient Greece

    1332 Words  | 3 Pages

    Sparta was a key city state which was located on the Peloponnesian Peninsula in southern Greek, which today is referred to as Laconia. Sparta is historically known for their strong military training, warfare tactics, and numerous victories. This city state included full citizens known as the Spartans, the helots, and the Perioeci. The men of Sparta had a main obligation to become strong warriors, fight with their brothers, and protect against any invasions or attacks. The helots where owned by city state of Sparta. They came from Messenia and were forced into slavery after being invaded by the Spartans in c.735. The helot’s responsibilities included farming, being of help if needed during battles, used as nurses, and for any other task that need to be accomplished. Unlike many traditional slaves, the Messenia’s were given certain leeway. They had

    Read More

  • The Hellenized Rome

    1910 Words  | 4 Pages

    Mark, Joshua J. "The Greek Phalanx." Ancient Encyclopedia of History. Last modified January 18, 2014. Accessed January 15, 2014. http://www.ancient.eu.com/article/110/.

    Read More

  • The Roman Military

    463 Words  | 1 Pages

    The strength of the Roman military was the string that held the Roman Empire together for as long as it lasted. The military was made up of strictly disciplined men whom were ready and willing to serve their emperor.

    Read More

  • The Roman Military System

    1674 Words  | 4 Pages

    The ancient Roman Empire began when Romulus founded the city of Rome in approximately 753 B.C. and lasted until about 1453 A.D. when the German invasion occurred. Throughout this era, specifically 250 BC until 200 AD, historians including Theodor Mommsen and Sara Phang have debated and interpreted several aspects of how and why the Roman military evolved and the military system itself. These authors used several ancient Roman historians, including Livy and Publius, public records, war accounts and many other sources to investigate and theorize different conclusions about why the Roman military was so powerful and how they were able to conquer the vast majority of the European Continent and the known world.

    Read More

  • Spartan Society to the Battle of Leuctra

    1806 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...litary end even the women in Sparta would have been affected by the military ways of life almost as much as the young men. From childhood they were being primed to raise a family, they were taught in the ways of mid wifery, learning the correct manner in teaching the future young men of Sparta and keeping themselves fit to produce fit children.

    Read More

  • Comparing The Spartan Army And The Macedonian Army

    1730 Words  | 4 Pages

    Every Spartan male was trained to become a soldier from birth. While this was true for Sparta, the Macedonian hoplites had little to no training before war. Even with no training, they became experienced through the many battles they fought and through Alexander’s directive. Many Macedonian soldiers instead were normal citizens who were recruited to join the army and in return for their service, they would become citizens and have the right to vote and etc. To start off, the Spartan’s armor and weapons were exceptional. They had bronze helmets and armor. The armor was decently heavy but when you are made of pure muscle, bronze becomes very light on the body. Along with their armor, the famous Spartan shield was also bronze. Their weapons consisted of one long spear and a steel sword sheathed on their side for close combat. However, it was not their weapons and armor that won them limitless battles and war, in fact, it was their strategy that is known as the “phalanx” formation. Alexander and the Macedonians used a similar formation for their army, but the Spartans used this formation in a simple but very effective way for its troops. The “phalanx formation,” in general, is when soldiers form a square, standing shoulder to shoulder and protecting the soldier next to them instead of themselves. It requires soldiers to move and fight as one unit instead of breaking formation and fighting uncoordinatedly. As a result, staying in formation allowed Spartans to look after their fellow brothers more easily on the battlefield. This Spartan system had such a reputation that even King Philip did not want to go to battle with Sparta. Philip even sent Sparta a message while he was on his way to claim Athens. The message told Sparta to “submit immediately” because if he (Philip) were to win the war with Athens, Sparta would be the next Macedonian target and he would “destroy the people of Sparta and all they have.”

    Read More

  • The Peloponnesian War and the Decline of Leadership in Athens

    3378 Words  | 7 Pages

    The Peloponnesian War and the Decline of Leadership in Athens Thucydides set out to narrate the events of what he believed would be a great war—one requiring great power amassed on both sides and great states to carry out. Greatness, for Thucydides, was measured most fundamentally in capital and military strength, but his history delves into almost every aspect of the war, including, quite prominently, its leaders. In Athens especially, leadership was vital to the war effort because the city’s leaders were chosen by its people and thus, both shaped Athens and reflected its character during their lifetimes. The leaders themselves, however, are vastly different in their abilities and their effects on the city. Thucydides featured both Pericles and Alcibiades prominently in his history, and each had a distinct place in the evolution of Athenian empire and the war it sparked between Athens and Sparta.

    Read More

  • Tacitus Germania Analysis

    1796 Words  | 4 Pages

    They show tremendous courage for their tribes, with only being satisfied to demolish the warriors that they face, and protect the ones of their own. When they are not involved in warfare the warriors are lazy and do not show any interest in anything as they leave all the caretaking of their home and fields to the women and the weak (15). As weaponry was made of iron, many warriors only carried spears for the reasons that iron was scarce and they only used a minute amount of metal (6). Spears were easy to maneuver and they could be used for combat fighting up close and from a distance (6). In wars the Germans would try and instill fear into their opponents’ hearts. Barritus was a chant that was used to distract the other army and create panic (3). They would also cover their mouths with their shields to enact a murmur to make their voices sound more distinct (3). The warriors were not intrigued with wearing armor because they had the utmost confidence when going into battle. And as they used their horses to be a strength in battle. The warriors ride them into battle, charging the opposing army in a straight line while keeping balanced and stern (6). The Germans were known for their infantry being supreme. Never did they retreat or cowardly run from the field of battle (6.) They were strong and the bravest of men.

    Read More

  • Exploring the Notoriety of the Roman Army

    1608 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Roman army was known for its discipline, organization, and innovation, which allowed Rome to build an empire that would dominate the Mediterranean world. Also known for its longevity of survival, the Roman army was one of the most effective fighting forces in military history. Greek biographer Plutarch credits the founder of Rome, Romulus, with creating legionary forces that fought in a form of a militia, with recruitment dependent on a citizen’s social standing. Rome had six classes of wealth upon Rome’s citizens; the lowest group had no land and were excluded from the military, while the highest group, the equites, formed the cavalry.

    Read More

  • Difference Between Greek and Roman Warfare

    410 Words  | 1 Pages

    The main difference between Greek and Roman warfare was the formations that they fought in. The Grecian armies all used the phalanx as a fighting formation while the Romans used the maniple. The phalanx was one mass formation that consisted of infantry eight deep. The maniple formation was actually a group of formations in a checkerboard pattern. Each maniple consisted of about 120 men and when employed in Italy, the Romans used thirty maniples. The maniple proved to be a better formation, because the phalanx left no room for maneuvering after engagement.

    Read More

More about Greek Phalanx: The Rise Of The Greek Army

Open Document