h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: The Phalanx - its history and its users. - A2559981
Author: Asmodai dark (Jedi Knight Ma'rol Mannan, Knight of Ni)(Ringbearer - join the fellowship! A2111365) - U239698

Well i thought it was about time i submitted part of my knowledge to the guide entery.

I've basically written this in about an hour, so if there are mistakes please point them out and ill hasten to correct them.

This is going to be part of several detailing Anicent Greece, focusing mainly on Sparta.

Enjoy.

Hello?

Hi Asmodai

shield not sheild throughout. The first paragraph says the phalanx was used until 400 BC then that it was used until 1700AD - I know what you mean, but it could do with being re-worded. This also clashes with the Conclusion.

I would relegate the pike to a footnote (phalanx still used nadanada) to avoid conflict with the development of the pike and halberd in the Swiss Army. Effectively the phalanx was still used in favourable terrain until the development of the rifled bullet. One could argue the line formation used so successfully by Wellingon was a configuration of the phalanx, particularly when used defensively as a square.

Just some ideas - look forward to the others.

Hi A

Interesting topic, considering Ancient Greece and Sparta are becoming increasingly popular at the moment. (no thanks to Brad Pitt and Colin Farrel in the upcoming movies "Troy" and "Alexander"...)

Just a few things...
In Introdution -
"anicent"...ancient
"It remained a dominant and favored"...favoured

In The Basic Phalanx -
"The Phalanx is a large formation of tightly packed men" What type of
men? Bakers? Butchers? Candlestick-makers? and were they always men? Spartan women were on occasion known to weild a spear or two.
"equiped with sheilds"...equipped...shields
"memebers"...members
"the unit carried them in there left arm, holding there" and "there more powerful"...should be the possessive 'their'.

In the origins of the Phalanx
"first Phalanges have been seen dipicted"...depicted
"the Sumerian Phalanx adopted a eleven"...adopted an eleven

In The Greek Phalanx -
"equiped"..equipped
"ocassionaly"...occassionally
"They also trained there troopers" and "conquer there neigbours" ...wrong there, should be possessive 'their'

In The End of the Phalanx -
"when its creator came to the throne of Macedonia. Its creator was Phillip II, father of Alexander III5."...perhaps try, 'when its creator, Phillip II, father of Alexander III, came to the throne of Macedonia.'
Neither Phillip of (or) his son relied on these formations to win them battles, instead employing the Phalanx to hold opponents in position allowing liught (light) cavalry to sweep into the vulnerable flanks. The Macedonian Phalanx was so succesful, that Alexander was able to extend his realm right upto India. (right upto India sounds a little clumsy, perhaps something else like 'extend his realm to include much of the Middle East.'?)

In The Conclusion -
"usuless"...useless
"preferances"...preferences

All in all loved it . Easy to read and informative. Perhaps some BBCi History links to Rome, Sparta and the Sumerians. Even to Alexander the Great and Macedonia. For the lay-reader who knows little of Ancient cultures some of the terms and peoples might need clearing up. Like where is Macedonia? You know, I know, but does everyone else? Agree with McKay...the phalanx never really died out, it's still used, but only if it is deemed appropriate by
a military leader on the field of battle. Even modern conflicts have seen the use of phalanx type assaults by troops to win ground and battles.

Look forward to the further entries...
PGHF

The Phalanx was never a square - it was always a rectangle with the largest side facing the enemy (this will be ammended).
The Phalanx formation died out properly with the advent of the square roman legions.

The spellings will be adjusted shortly

Okay im going to have to quote here:
"What type of
men? Bakers? Butchers? Candlestick-makers? and were they always men?"
Yes to all. The Phalanx was drawn from the populace (depending on the era as stated).

"Spartan women were on occasion known to weild a spear or two."
Nope not in the Phalanx. In the Spartan entery, ill mention Spartan women which whilst given a hell of a lot of freedom - were never given over for fighting.

"that Alexander was able to extend his realm right upto India. (right upto India sounds a little clumsy, perhaps something else like 'extend his realm to include much of the Middle East.'?)"

Im not entirely sure. He basically stopped at india realising he couldnt go any further and keep his empire/army together.


"All in all loved it . Easy to read and informative. Perhaps some BBCi History links to Rome, Sparta and the Sumerians."
I knew there was a rome one (although i wouldnt want a link to it on the end for the simple fact that the entery didnt discuse the roman formation apart from saying it was different- although a guide entery would be happily linked). If theres a Sparta and/or Sumerian one id be happy for the links.

Ill dig up guide enteries and insert footnotes regarding general terminology.

"Agree with McKay...the phalanx never really died out, it's still used, but only if it is deemed appropriate by
a military leader on the field of battle. Even modern conflicts have seen the use of phalanx type assaults by troops to win ground and battles."
I totally disagree on this. The Phalanx in the traditional sense did die out. The Phalanges formed the mainstay of armies, with cavalry (if any were present at all) used to protect the flanks of the phalanges.
As warfare progressed, the actually viability of pike armed troops went down the drain (mainly due to the event of the fire arm).
The Phalanx was a tight mass of men. Each man around the soldier to the front, sides, and rear were responsable for the safety of another soldier. The Phalanx faught and died together. The more modern formations were used as a deterent against cavalry and not as infantry bodies. Therefore i class the Phalanx, and a regiment of pikemen, as two totally different bodies of troops.
I understand your point dont get me wrong. But the early Phalanges were used in infantry against infantry battles. The formations of modern periods tried to mimic the Phalanx by fighting in close formation and with long thrusting weapons, but were never used again in the same way

As for the other enteries well thermopylae is on its way, and ill do an entery on the Spartan warrior class before i tackle Spartan culture and then history.

Okay ive made the spelling changes, and ive added a bit about the location of Macedonia.

Anything else

(Inspired, i have started my entery on the Homoioi, the spartan warrior class)

I don't mind dis-agreeing, and its your article at the end of the day, so its your opinion.

Looking a lot clearer now.

Id be happy to co-write a seperate entery regarding the other pike armed formations, but id rather leave them out of this one.

Mucho gusto! Look forward to your new entires indeedy!
PGHF

thanks for your comments?

So what happens now chaps (and chappettes if you are, cause i dont know.. ill be quiet now..)?

thanks for your comments*

Looking good Mr Dark!

'what happens next?'
Now you wait for one of those nice Scouts to pick it! I'll just check it over again for any spellings/grammar for you, save whichever Sub gets it a bit of a job.

Okay now here comes the writters request.

Due to the amount of problems ive had with psycorp603, and him being a sub editor, i dont want him editing.

Thats my one and only request

Para 1: 'military formation use by ancient armies from roughly 2500BC till the downfall of anicent Greece'

use - used
anicent - ancient

P2: 'fight over the person in front of him depening on the the length of the weapon.'

depening - depending

'If equiped with shields, the unit carried them in their left arm, holding there thrusting weapon in the favoured right hand.'

equiped - equipped
there - their

'with there more powerful'

there - their

Subheaders - the punctuation needs taking out, but if you don't do it a Sub will.

Also, there's a possibility of confusion with the change between you saying Phalanxe/Phalange. This may well be singular/plural, but if not a footnote might be advisable to stop any confusion.

Apart from that, a scout should pick this fairly soon!

Psyc.

A note regarding my last post: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F135946?thread=413156&show=20&skip=0&lpcr=0 Psycorp is not happy with my comments (his opinion of which can be found above) so heres my reply. The comments were not an attack on his ability as a sub, im sure hes very good. Because of the various problems ive had with the user i dont want him editing my entery.

Hi Asmodai,
Firstly, let me start by saying that this is a smashing entry that really does the subject justice.

With regards to the sub-editing, whatever problems you might have with Psycorp, the point of Peer Review is for all members of h2g2 who wish to chip in and help out. Whether or not you choose to incorporate Psycorp's suggestions is your own decision, but as a matter of etiquette, please don't dismiss his suggestions out of hand, as they do actually make sense.

When it comes to allocating a sub-editor, this is done purely on who is available and what is next in the queue, rather than personal request. So the odds are against Psycorp being the sub-editor anyway.

Very interesting entry As someone who knows little or nothing about the subject, perhaps I could point out a few things which would improve it by making it even more clear and easy to read. And as a Scout let me also point out any typos, grammaticals, and other Scout-related stuff.

"The Phalanx was a military formation use by ancient armies"
A missing 'd' on the end of 'use'. I don't think that word 'ancient' is necessary there since the dates which follow give us a good idea of its antiquity, as does saying 'ancient Greece' (ancient spelled 'anicent' btw).

"Regiments of Pikemen saw continued use after this period"
That's rather a non-sequitur. What have pikemen to do with anything we've been told in the first sentence? It may be explained further down in the entry, but until the reader reaches that part, 'Regiments of Pikemen' means very little. Is there a way you could reword that to make it more obvious to someone who knows nothing about phalanxes or pikemen, why you've mentioined them there? Or could 'pikemen' be removed altogether?

"The Phalanx is a large formation of tightly packed men"
How about 'tightly packed soldiers'?

What's a sarissa? (And you should answer that in the entry, not here). If it happens that it's explained further down the entry, this would be the place to have the explanation. It looks as if it should also be in italics. If you'd rather keep the explanation in the later part of the entry, you may as well remove the word from this paragraph since it doesn't really add anything to it.

equiped - equipped

depening - depending

The words 'phalanx' and 'phalanges' are nouns, not proper names, so they don't need capitals throughout the entry.

"holding there thrusting weapon"
'their'

"other with there more powerful side"
'their'

"The Greeks trained thier soldiers"
'their'

"Hoplites" "Hopilites"
Which one is correct?

"military campaigns were usually restricted to summer, so that the farmers could sustain themselves at other times of the year"
I don't know much about the Greek farming year, but if it's anything like farming methods further north, that would be the other way around wouldn't it? Summer is the farmer's busiest time of year because of the harvest, whereas winter is when little is happening in the fields.

hieght - height

"This class, known as Homoioi."
That looks like a sentence fragment. Did you cut something out in editing?

"for most of thier lives"
'their'

"used to great affect"
'effect'

"the fledgling nation of Rome..."
No need for an ellipsis there.

"when its creator came to the throne of Macedonia. Its creator was Phillip II"
How about 'when its creator came to the throne of Macedonia. He was Phillip II'?

"Phalangites"
Haven't seen that word before - is it another mutliple of 'phalanx'?

"due to the fact that"
'because' will probably do.

inflexability - inflexibility

manuverable - manoeuverable

"Phalangities" "Phalangites"
Which one is correct?

"close preferances of the Roman legionnaire"
'close fighting preferences'?

In answer to your question 'What happens now"', the entry has to sit here for at least a week before it becomes eligible for recommendation by a Scout, and Scouts will only recommend entries which they believe meet the necessary guidelines for them to become part of the Edited Guide. As far as I (as a Scout) am concerned, this one has the potential to make it, but don't take that to mean that it *will* make it. There are plenty of knowledgeable folks in PR, and in the past it's happened that an entry has looked just fine and dandy until an expert in the subject matter has pointed out enough flaws to make the entry not suitable for recommendation.

As long as you can back up and argue the facts and assertions in whatever entry you write, then it should be fine

I'm not sure whether there's an about Sparta in the Edited Guide, but if not, and you know something about the Spartans, would you consider researching an entry about that fascinating culture?


Scout

Wow big posts. Give me a second:

Jim -
I understand the point of peer reveiw, and the spellings have been corrected. I haven't dismissed his suggestions and the spellings he has pointed to me have been modified accrodingly (ill run the lot through a speel check now to be sure).
As for the sub-editor, as long as hes too busy to do it then ill be quite happy to have my name on it in the guide. Due to the problems (which have been reported to moderation) id rather have someone else name on it if he edits it.
If that sounds offensive etc, then i appologise, but at the end of the day it is a peice i have written, and its one small detail.

Gosho -
The spellings have been sorted, but ill check again.

The regiments of pikemen was for the first two posters here, who mention wellington using the phalanx-esque formation (although whether it was a phalanx is like trying to prove the existance of god)
Ill slide something in and put the relevant section here for you all to nosey at.

men against soldiers - hmmm the thing is, soldiers makes it sound like proffessional military personel, and many simply werent (as i mention later). What does everyone else think? Ill put soldiers if necessary, but it has the wrong connotations in this.

I thought i explained the sarissa later on (it was used by the macedonians, so i put the explaination there). Ill whack the italics on shortly. The sarissa in the basic phalanx paragrapgh is a referance to the type of thrusting weapon used. Perhaps a foot note would be better?

"This class, known as Homoioi."
That looks like a sentence fragment. Did you cut something out in editing?
Most certainly did

I put the elipsis on the rome bit because most people will know that rome had an empire, and because its used later on. Ill remove it though.

"when its creator came to the throne of Macedonia. Its creator was Phillip II"
How about 'when its creator came to the throne of Macedonia. He was Phillip II'?
Agreed. Will change.

"Phalangites"
Haven't seen that word before - is it another mutliple of 'phalanx'?
- ahh no i should have explained that more clearly. The Phalangites were macedonia soldiers. Its basically a hopilite (the exact spelling of which i need to check)



As i said, ill check the spellings more throughrily now. The bad spelling is blamed on the lateness it was written and the guinness involved in its writting...

*rolls eyes*

Good luck with the entry.

I take your point about them not being professional soldiers. Let's see if we can get some more views on that one.