Battle Of Tunis, Legion versus traditional phalanx Options

[barca]

The Legion versus Phalanx debate always uses the example of the legion against the Macedonian phalanx. Little if any attention is given to Legion versus Hoplite Phalanx.
In the war against Pyrrhus they were pretty evenly matched. The legions subsequently evoved so that they won easily at Cynoscephale, Pydna, and Magnesia, Once the llegionaires got past the hedge of spears and got in close, the Macedonian phalanx didn't stand a chance.
The Macedonian phalangites were hindered by the long two-handed Sarissa: they could only carry a very small shield, they had lighter armor, and carried an inferior sword.

These hoplites of a traditionan pre-Macedonian phalanx were much different. They carried a shorter one-handed spear. They could therefore carry the larger Hoplon shield. It appears that they also had heavier armor and greaves. Their traditional hoplite sword ws 2ft long and was good for both cutting and thrusting. Some carried the Kopis, a heavy slashing sword. They were certainly able to take care of themselves at close quarters.

During the 2nd Punic War, the Carthaginians hired a Spartan Mercenary to train their troops. He put together a phalanx that easily defeated the Roman legions at the Battle of Tunis. Polybius does not go into detail about the makeup of this particular phalanx, but I would assume that it was the Hoplite-style phalanx.

It is not clear what formations were used by Hannibals troops. Many believe that his African infantry fought in traditional phalanx formation. Others have suggested that his formations had to be more like a legion--how else could his armies have been so maneuverable?