The Triarii

I was just thinking about this idea. What if a military reformer did this.

First of all, the advatages of the legion and phalanx have been talked about enough here. So what if one was to combine the advantages and have units with a roman scutum shield, a gladius, and a hoplite spear (whatever they were called). Units would be organized into smaller units, similar to cohorts. Men would be in a phalanx formation, and units could link to form a solid line. Then, if flexibility was needed, they could drop their spear, draw their sword, and they are basically like the roman legions without pila.

Also, they could form a testudo with spears sticking out, like a porcipine. It would be great against cavalry.

So, what do you think about this idea? Is it good, or just a pathetic attempt at trying to combine 2 different unit types and would never work?

It could work. Remember people in the ancient world could be very stubborn. Its just that how would they carry that much equipment? The Mediterranian is very hot. The Roman legion and phalanx must have been very heated. Not to mention both would be like fire.

That pretty much is how Alexander's phalangites worked, they could operate both as phalanx or as more open order infantry sans pike. They could clearly 'lock shields' and did so against waggon-rolling opponents. Their basic unit may have been 512 strong as opposed to 480 for the cohort (not a massive difference). In battle of course they stuck to the pike, but that was part of the whole Macedonian tactical system.

How on earth would one manage both scutum and pike sarissa? The whole point of the Macedonian shield was that it did not need to be held in the left hand.

How on earth would one manage both scutum and pike sarissa?

I wondered about this as well.

BTW - how long were the spears of the Triarii ?

Standard hoplite length (c 8') I think. Certainly only one-handed weapons.

Standard hoplite length (c 8') I think. Certainly only one-handed weapons.

So could they not have fought as a kind of phalanxe if they wanted ?

I confess that I always assumed that they did. Or at very least had the option, given that they were almost certainly the 'remnants' of the Roman 'hoplite phalanx'.

But there's a big difference between pike armed phalangite and spear armed hoplite, with the longer weapon having the advantage.

I confess that I always assumed that they did. Or at very least had the option, given that they were almost certainly the 'remnants' of the Roman 'hoplite phalanx'.

 

But there's a big difference between pike armed phalangite and spear armed hoplite, with the longer weapon having the advantage.

But, the spear armed hoplite could carry a larger shield than the phalangites

So in the Triarii we really have an example of your theoretical unit ?

It would appear so.

It is perhaps significant that the triarii were abolished by Marius. Clearly he felt pilum and gladius to be superior to spear.

Did the triarii ever drop their spear and use a gladius?

They had a Gladius as a side arm, so I assume it wasn't just for show.

Also, as they probably fought as Hastati and Principes in their earlier careers, they'd be well versed in it's use.

actually the early romans did use the phalanx. they adopted the phalanx after they clashed with etruscan hoplites. infact it was the roman phalanx that defeated the etruscans. and of course the etruscans most likely adopted the phalanx from the greek colonies in italy. hoplon sheilds, bronze helmets and cuirass's are found scattered through out italy. the accounts of livy and dionysius suggest that the servian reform (578-534 bc) converted the roman army into sort of a hoplite army. im sure you would find alot of this in the history section of this site. then, somewhere in the late 3rd or early 2nd century they adopted they started using the iberian gladius along with the heavy pilum javelin. at this point the hastati and princepes carried two pilum javelins and the gladius as the triarii stuck with the hasta (hoplite spear about 8ft in length). so the romans did use the phalanx for quite some time but converted their weaponry, formations, and armour to become more flexible and efficiant on the battle field. their are many posts on this forum that give precise info on what periods the romans started using certain weapons and armour and why they did. just a couple pages back i think.

ive always thought combining the macedonian phalanx with the legion would make you damn near invincible. it would be impossible to give have the phalangites to carry the scutum and fight effectivly. the sheild and armour of the phalangite was less because it was compensated with the long sarrisa pike. the idea was to keep the enemy at a distance yet run right over them at same time. sort of like "i can get you, but you cant get me ". the legion would work great in either holding the flanks of the phalanx while the calvary swings around the battleline to hit the enemy's rear or use the flanks as a key position to enveloe the enemy while the phalanx smashes through their center. or you can have the legion up front and the phalanx in reserve like the trarii. or vice versa to put the legion in a more flexible position to deliver a decisive blow.

please correct me if i said anything stupid. its way past my bedtime

actually the early romans did use the phalanx.

That's not been in dispute.

All up, I think that the Triarii qualify as that theorietical unit you were talking about Dominus.

So, what were the reasons for Marius doing away with them ?

So, what were the reasons for Marius doing away with them ?

That's an interesting question Germanicus......Anyone have an answer or theory ?