Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

cortzanza

no avatar Level -27 Content: Sort of disliked
Offline
Send mail to cortzanza Block cortzanza Invite cortzanza to be your friend
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:8/23/2013
Last Login:3/17/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Thumbs: 25 total,  15 ,  40
Content Level Progress: 6.77% (4/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 0% (0/1)
Level -127 Comment: others can't stand you → Level -126 Comment: others can't stand you
Subscribers:0
Total Comments Made:24
FJ Points:-27

latest user's comments

#1 - Fantastic visualisation of the battle, and a powerful delivery… 02/14/2014 on The Origins of History 0
#11 - When the moon hits your eye Like a big-a pizza pie Th… 02/11/2014 on How to writing 0
#44 - No, hes american. Hes from Karl Pilkington's "The Moaning… 01/30/2014 on PS2 Guy -1
#44 - The Romans didn't use phalanxes as far as I know, that was the…  [+] (22 new replies) 01/27/2014 on alright Ukraine, now you're... +3
User avatar #47 - charagrin (01/27/2014) [-]
Yes, the Romans did use phalanx formations. However they evolved the phalanx into a modified idea of a unit moving cohesively into the Legion's tactic's, specifically because they were unable to counter cavalry or long ranged attacks without training and formations pre-arranged to counter that specific threat. A good example of Roman Phalanx tactics would be their use in Latium.

A spear-wall was only one of many phalanx based formation. A "phalanx" is just a term for group tactics utilizing dense concentrations of soldiers in pre-planned arrangements. A phalanx is generally thought of as involving shields and spears, but they are not required.
User avatar #207 - durkadurka (01/28/2014) [-]
Dude that's like saying the US military employs British military tactics because many years ago they adapted British military doctrine.
What the Romans did was a seperate (albeit similar) beast.
#93 - traelos (01/27/2014) [-]
That ain't a phalanx nigga.

It ain't a phalanx unless they got spears, and I don't see no muthafuckin spears.

Pleb.
User avatar #140 - jacksipian (01/28/2014) [-]
Yeah, the Phalanx was what made Alexander the Great so successful, and it worked well against ranged attacks, cavalry charges (unless they got flanked hard), and regular infantry attacks, and they usually didn't stop moving, they all had butt-spikes on their spears so that if they were walking over a live enemy soldier they could just slam the spear down and kill them without having to draw another weapon, but if someone got too close or got past the first couple of layers somehow, they could do an insane amount of damage because the people on the inside didn't have enough room to draw a blade and fight.
User avatar #101 - charagrin (01/27/2014) [-]
I would have preferred to have a conversation, but considering you don't know the definition of "phalanx".....It would be fruitless.
#131 - comradewinter (01/28/2014) [-]
"The phalanx (Ancient Greek: φάλαγξ, Modern Greek: φάλαγγα, phālanga; plural phalanxes or phalanges; Ancient and Modern Greek: φάλαγγες, phālanges) is a rectangular mass military formation, usually composed entirely of heavy infantry armed with spears, pikes, sarissas, or similar weapons."

A phalanx uses long-reach weapons such as spears or pikes. They were highly effective at keeping a line as well as tearing cavalry apart. This was popularly used by states using spear-doctrines, such as Greece, Carthage and Sparta.

A testudo (named after the latin word of tortoise) uses short range weapons. It was purely designed to protect from missile fire until engagement, meaning their numbers wouldn't dwindle prior to the combat. This was mostly used by states using close-combat techniques, notably Rome, certain parts of Gaul (taking after the Romans) and more as Rome's expansion begun and swords became more produced.

So no, you're wrong here. Two different words, two different usages.
User avatar #135 - charagrin (01/28/2014) [-]
I am beginning to think that a large chunk of FJ does not know how to read, and most likely did not graduate high school, where all this is taught. A Phalanx is not one specific amount of men in one specific position wielding one specific weapon. Just like all guerilla fighters do not use bombs, or rifles, or knives. They use different tactics against different enemies.
#138 - comradewinter (01/28/2014) [-]
I think you went to special education if you were taught about ancient military tactics. There's not a single school I know of that teaches such. All we learned was the introduction of Hoplites, which were basically people with large shields.
User avatar #145 - charagrin (01/28/2014) [-]
I went to public school, Chelsea Elementary and then Cony High, right here in Maine. Unless we have a wildly different curriculum than the rest of the country...Did you not have history class? Not trying to be rude, genuine curiosity, what did they teach you for classes? I got World history, calculus, introductory algebra, Medieval lit, art, expressive writing, and a few crummy classes. Then in high school I got more calculus, in depth world history, plus American history more in depth, advanced algebra, metal shop, electronics, comp sci, etc. I have never heard anyone say they had different.
#149 - comradewinter (01/28/2014) [-]
We learned loads from history classes, but they were related to society. You know, stuff that we might actually have any use for.
User avatar #152 - charagrin (01/28/2014) [-]
Like how do do taxes, fix a car, plan a budget, weigh political candidates, and ethics? I don't think any of us were taught that by the school itself.

I have a use for what I learned. Abstract and critical thinking, problem solving, and rapid assessment. Exactly what all those useless classes are supposed to teach you, like algebra. Very few people use algebra in their adult life, but the skills it gave you have many applications you may not even notice.
#156 - comradewinter (01/28/2014) [-]
Let's be honest here; you will never have any use for knowledge about warfare that became outdated as soon as the Renaissance kicked in.

Not just that, but false knowledge too.
User avatar #159 - charagrin (01/28/2014) [-]
I am still trying to figure out what you are trying to argue with me about. You say I was wrong, and that it is a Testudo. I SAID it was a testudo, 4 hours ago.

We are literally splitting hairs. As for me being right or wrong. Well, I would prefer to go by what multiple teachers with decades of experience and college degrees taught me, rather than one internet anon who can't even make up his own mind or read a whole thread before commenting.
#164 - comradewinter (01/28/2014) [-]
"The rioters need to learn guerilla tactics and become mobile, Rome learned the hard way that a phalanx cannot respond quickly to enemy movements to the sides and rear."


"It is a modified Testudo Formation"

It's not a "modified" Testudo formation, it's a Testudo formation. It's not used to hold a line, nor is to knock protestors off their horses. A phalanx and a testudo is not the same, as they have two different usages. Calling this thing a phalanx is just wrong, plain and simple. Unless you like to refer to a machine gun as a rifle.
User avatar #173 - charagrin (01/28/2014) [-]
And I disagree. A guerilla who fights from horseback, and one who fights by night are both guerillas. Likewise, this is a modified Testubo Formation, which is itself a heavily modified "phalanx" pattern. I don't really care if you aree or not, I even double cheked on assorted history sights and they all said similar things to what I remembered from a classroom almost 8 years ago. You can whine, bitch, complain, give me red thumbs, and throw a tantrum, but until you pull out a BA in History with an experience list long enough to outdo 4 teachers, 3 professors, and my own meaningless minor in Ancient Histories, I am going to ignore you. You are just arguing for the sake of arguing. it's almost like I said it's black, and you are trying to say it's darker black. have a nice day, I am just gonna go and relax. Take joy in the red thumbs you throw my way, at least you will know they are there. That should be some comfort. Now, im off! Weeeeee
#259 - comradewinter (01/28/2014) [-]
You seem a little bitter. Are you alright? Also, take a look at this first. This is a phalanx.
#260 - comradewinter (01/28/2014) [-]
And this is a testudo. One reliant on stability and covering of ground, and one that's a makeshift fortress.

I honestly don't give a fuck what your educational background is, as it's clearly at fault. If I were you, I'd ask for any money spent on these schools back. Or just call a professor and ask if I misunderstood something. The latter is probably the closest to correct.
#133 - charagrin (01/28/2014) [-]
This is a phalanx grouping in Testudo formation. Again, phalanx is just the term for a group of men following a dense formation.

Quote Phalanx- "The term itself, as used today, does not refer to a distinctive military unit or division (e.g., the Roman legion or the contemporary Western-type battalion) but to the general formation of an army's troops. Thus a phalanx does not have a standard combat strength or composition but includes the total number of infantry, which is or will be deployed in action in a single phalanx formation.
#142 - comradewinter (01/28/2014) [-]
The term "phalanx" means "finger". Where does this come from? The fact that's it fucking pointy. It was introduced before swords were ever in use, and as such it became a term for any sort of grouping at the time.

However, as time progressed and the testudo was introduced, a phalanx simply became nothing but a spear/shield formation. Pretty much how land vehicles started out as "automobiles", but were later classified as cars and trucks.
User avatar #147 - charagrin (01/28/2014) [-]
Exactly, so what are we arguing about? We are using two different definitions for the same word.
#151 - comradewinter (01/28/2014) [-]
No, you are saying that a phalanx means grouped formation. It was seldomly used for that, like back in the 800's BC, but as new words were introduced, it demanded a spear to make sense. And since riot police tend to use a baton, it would be a testudo.
User avatar #155 - charagrin (01/28/2014) [-]
You mean like what I said in comment 33, FOUR HOURS AGO? "Yes, yes it is. It is a modified Testudo Formation popular among both Phalanx units as well as general infantry during approximately 700BC-400AD. It was used to counter long range attacks, and allow practiced soldiers to quickly close in upon ranged units to take advantage of their pikes, spears, and even swords in general melee. "
#121 - True. If I could live there, I would, but I know my place as a… 01/27/2014 on Japan's History Books 0
#113 - **** off, stop trying to change other countries. … 01/27/2014 on Japan's History Books -1
#22 - Scottish will ALWAYS be British, if you mean in a geographical term  [+] (1 new reply) 01/26/2014 on Remove kebab -5
User avatar #62 - Encarna (01/26/2014) [-]
Geographically the island that Scotland, Wales and England are on is called "Great Britain" but that does not mean that all of its inhabitants are "British". That isn't entirely true at least for now, if Scotland does in fact gain independence then they/we will no longer be British but instead Scottish.
#21 - fer ***** sake, the british and scottish are INCO…  [+] (1 new reply) 01/26/2014 on Remove kebab -1
#53 - klutzyspy (01/26/2014) [-]
to be fair you've made it pretty complicated
#160 - U GOT FUKEN TOLD M8 01/24/2014 on The new book by Mr. Mackey -1
#159 - FUUUUUUUKEN HEEEEEEELLL THAT WAS SUM FUNNY **** 01/24/2014 on The new book by Mr. Mackey -1
[ 24 Total ]

Comments(0):

 

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
No comments!
 Friends (0)