Definition of "Phalanx"

Observing the pawn structures given in the course, it looks like the definition of a "Phalanx" is "two or more adjacent pawns which are also a majority relative to the same files of the opponent".
But the "internet" seems to define it as just a lump of adjacent pawns. Isn't this also what Steinitz meant (he introduced this term I think).

What do you think? Shall I keep the unspoken definition of the course author?

For practical reasons it is better to stay with the definitions of the author since we want to understand what they are trying to communicate.

But you captured my interest and I went to the history of the phalanx and found the this page quite interesting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx. Any parallels with chess?

Yeah, I knew about Roman military term.

But you're right, whatever Steinitz meant with "Phalanx", best is to stick with the authors usage.

PawnCustodian wrote:For practical reasons it is better to stay with the definitions of the author since we want to understand what they are trying to communicate.

But you captured my interest and I went to the history of the phalanx and found the this page quite interesting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx. Any parallels with chess?

That full stop is not meant to be there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx

Just for clarity