Sjakihata
10-05-2004, 15:58
Hi,
I noticed that the CA has projected this battle, quite different from what really happened.
First of all, the year is wrong, it is not 55 bc, but 53 bc. Then the advance force, actually led by Crassus' son, is true enough, it gets decimated (not only by a tenth, but really destroyed). However, the battle between the parthians and the romans was a genuine battle, were Crassus legion stood firm and no real out come was decided. Untill nightfall, when the romans was forced to withdraw, then the parthians seized the moment and harrassed/attacked their lines and finally killing everyone but 500 and crassus.
What is portrayed in the historical battle, is not near what happend.
a sidenote, that battle is completely impossible to win :charge:
I noticed that the CA has projected this battle, quite different from what really happened.
First of all, the year is wrong, it is not 55 bc, but 53 bc. Then the advance force, actually led by Crassus' son, is true enough, it gets decimated (not only by a tenth, but really destroyed). However, the battle between the parthians and the romans was a genuine battle, were Crassus legion stood firm and no real out come was decided. Untill nightfall, when the romans was forced to withdraw, then the parthians seized the moment and harrassed/attacked their lines and finally killing everyone but 500 and crassus.
What is portrayed in the historical battle, is not near what happend.
a sidenote, that battle is completely impossible to win :charge: