Go tell the spartans, strangers passing by, that here obedient to there laws we lie

[jerby]

Uhhh....

yeah..it indeed wouldn't be teh first time..

cannae..well basically every battle the Pre-marian romans lost was because of sheer arrogance an overconfidence in numbers...
Thermopyale seems to fit that row.
Gaugamela is also a nice one in this row.

[Reverend Joe]

cannae..well basically every battle the Pre-marian romans lost was because of sheer arrogance an overconfidence in numbers...
Thermopyale seems to fit that row.
Gaugamela is also a nice one in this row.

As I said, no general with any sense . After several days of slaughtering your men on a forest of spear-points, even the worst general will realise it's rime for a change of pace. However, what I always learned was that the tactics did not change, even when it was only the Spartans defending the pass.

As you said, Cannae was an act of arrogance. If the Roman generals had seen the trap lain before them , I doubt they would have sent their men to die en masse.

What happened at Gaugamela? I never learned that particular battle...
I know, it's sad.

[GoreBag]

What about the entirety of World War I up until the closing 100 days or so?

[Reverend Joe]

Look, forget I said anything. The only reason I commented on this thread was because I despise stories of a vastly outnumbered force overcoming the odds and defeating, or at least nearly defeating, the enemy. That's why I hate the Greeks. I think it's an obsession that began with "The Charge of the Light Brigade"- when I first read it, it struck me as a load of crap. Noone should glorify the butchering of perfectly good elite soldiers, regardless of the outcome of the battle. It's sick. That's what cannon fodder is for.

Okay, rant over. I hope you don't take this personally- it's just that I hate Alfred Lord Tennyson.

[King of Atlantis]

No, you guys are telling me the Spartans didnt hold it by themselves. My dream is crushed...

[jerby]

well, if it looked like i was personal, i was sorry..it was more meant of a (sarcastic)joke.
and about the glory of being butchered is, in a way, indeed dumb. but it's somehow heroic, i personally found it breathtakign to read how spartans(&allies)stood up against such a force, each man taking 10 persians with him. but at Thermopylae it was mostly a neccesity to atke that stand..dunno how futile it was in your book.

about gaugamela. it was a Victory of Alexander on Darius, on open field. alexander being outnumbered 1:2 or even 1:3 (Alex had 47.00 inf, and 7.00 cav. Darius is guessed between 100.00 and even 500.00). what actually happened isn't know. the dust was kicked up rapidly. and nobody coudl really notice what was goign on everywhere.
quite possibly Alexanders strategy of an echelon-phalanx with light cav on the left. and heavy cav+alexander on teh right.
it's not really a typical case of alex slaughtering teh Persians. Alexander didn't win, Darius just lost: Darius himself fled, and with him, a lot of his army. probably one section of darius his line refused, creating a gap in wich Alexander rushed to get to Darius. maybe soembody else can get it better..

[Steppe Merc]

about gaugamela. it was a Victory of Alexander on Darius, on open field. alexander being outnumbered 1:2 or even 1:3 (Alex had 47.00 inf, and 7.00 cav. Darius is guessed between 100.00 and even 500.00). what actually happened isn't know. the dust was kicked up rapidly. and nobody coudl really notice what was goign on everywhere.

No way could Darius forces be that big. Don't trust ancient historian's numbers or modern historians that go by their numbers. 100,000 is quite unlikely, 500,000 is impossible.

[Ellesthyan]

No way could Darius forces be that big. Don't trust ancient historian's numbers or modern historians that go by their numbers. 100,000 is quite unlikely, 500,000 is impossible.

But why? We know the Persians had, at that time, the biggest army in the world. We know they were extremely good with logistics. We know they needed a double bridge made of ships to get the army to Europe. We know that they had problems keeping it together. We know that they conquered Thrace only to organise supplies. We know that they needed a whole fleet to supply their army. We know that they had the resources both in recruits as in gold to support it.

Coupled with quite a few ancient historians talking about numbers in the millions, wich are probably overestimated, but still; it get's pretty likely the army was unusual huge, and that 100,000 would be small, while 500,000 is topping it, but still possible. Further more, it could be that many thousands were non-combatans, getting the score even higher. Lastly, the Persians in battle used massed, but weak infantry forces, mostly archers, backed by the 10,000(!) elite immortals and powerful cavalry. With such a strategy it is not unlikely for the immortals to be 10%, most certainly less, of the total army, making 100,000 nearly a given. One could argue that the Persian army (because of the difficulty of accepting high numbers) consisted almost only of immortals and cavalry, but that seems to me to be extremely unlikely.

Just saying that ancient historians are unreliable is easy, but getting proof is nearly impossible. Neither can I proof they used such massive armies, but I can show you that it is possible and likely. If I may ask, what are the reasons modern historians have for ignoring Herodotus when he comes with numbers, and why are they so sure that the actual number is only in the tens of thousands?

[Wishazu]

Look, forget I said anything. The only reason I commented on this thread was because I despise stories of a vastly outnumbered force overcoming the odds and defeating, or at least nearly defeating, the enemy. That's why I hate the Greeks. I think it's an obsession that began with "The Charge of the Light Brigade"- when I first read it, it struck me as a load of crap. Noone should glorify the butchering of perfectly good elite soldiers, regardless of the outcome of the battle. It's sick. That's what cannon fodder is for.

Okay, rant over. I hope you don't take this personally- it's just that I hate Alfred Lord Tennyson.

umm... the spartans were wiped out, they lost the battle of Thermopylae, and it was only the first day of fighting that the spartans werent right at the front. and not all 300 were killed, 1, a man named Aristodemus survived and returned to Sparta where he was shunned and dishonoured for abondoning his post. He reclaimed his honour a year later by dying in battle against the Persians

[Reverend Joe]

umm... the spartans were wiped out, they lost the battle of Thermopylae, and it was only the first day of fighting that the spartans werent right at the front. and not all 300 were killed, 1, a man named Aristodemus survived and returned to Sparta where he was shunned and dishonoured for abondoning his post. He reclaimed his honour a year later by dying in battle against the Persians

True, but my point was that they were left to be slaughtered (almost) to a man. The greeks should have pulled up any auxiliaries- if they had any- and told them to hold the pass. This would have saved the lives of 300 Spartan soldiers, who could have been used at another battle, possibly eve to defend Athens.

Anyway, my main point is that the glorification of such a slaughter is a twisted military obsession with honor and glory which I despise. My hatred of Tenysson also got thown in; but that is partly because I dislike most English poets (Chaucer and Colerige are definite exceptions.)

Actually, I seem to have lost my own train of thought. Well, as long as we are on the subject, I like cottage cheese.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Well there was a military point and a "religious" point to it as well, though they might not outweigh the tactical importance of having those men available later - no one can really answer that question: their success while killing off a lot of the innumerable Persians also arguably frightened the Persian soldiers much more when at the end of the episode--did it make a difference at Plataea? Maybe, maybe not, but I'd wager the average Persian didn't know much about them before Thermopylae, but knew a lot more and didn't want to meet any more of them after it. Also, at least after the fact an oracle from Delphi was passed around that it was prophesised that a Spartan king must die for the Spartans to defeat the Persians. To us it seems like pure fantasy, and I'm not saying the omen was true, but did it inspire the Spartans and the other Greeks then at Plataea and Salamis too even? It's quite possible - they believed much much more than modern cultures that magic and omens and especially the oracular responses of Apollo did actually carry weight and affect things. Just some points to think about...

[Wishazu]

True, but my point was that they were left to be slaughtered (almost) to a man. The greeks should have pulled up any auxiliaries- if they had any- and told them to hold the pass. This would have saved the lives of 300 Spartan soldiers, who could have been used at another battle, possibly eve to defend Athens.

Anyway, my main point is that the glorification of such a slaughter is a twisted military obsession with honor and glory which I despise. My hatred of Tenysson also got thown in; but that is partly because I dislike most English poets (Chaucer and Colerige are definite exceptions.)

Actually, I seem to have lost my own train of thought. Well, as long as we are on the subject, I like cottage cheese.

Well they werent really left to be slaughtered at all, they decided to stay. What the spartans achieved at Thermopylae was to slow down the persians for a short time allowing the other greek cities to prepare and also the effect those 300 had on the persians was to completely destroy their moral, They were an army used to easy victory but had been stopped in their tracks by a miniscule force. As to bringing up auxiliars etc. it would have been a senseless waste of life, once the spartans were outflanked there was no way to defeat the persians, there was simply too many of them. As to glorifying the death of the 300, why not? they died for what they believed, they were following a code of honour that had been instilled in them since birth. Remember, it was the code the produced these amazing fighters in the first place

[Fenrhyl]

Look, forget I said anything. The only reason I commented on this thread was because I despise stories of a vastly outnumbered force overcoming the odds and defeating, or at least nearly defeating, the enemy. That's why I hate the Greeks. I think it's an obsession that began with "The Charge of the Light Brigade"- when I first read it, it struck me as a load of crap. Noone should glorify the butchering of perfectly good elite soldiers, regardless of the outcome of the battle. It's sick. That's what cannon fodder is for.

Okay, rant over. I hope you don't take this personally- it's just that I hate Alfred Lord Tennyson.

Well, ever heard of the Bir Akeim battle ? It took place in 1941 when the Afrika Corps ran through the allied (mostly british though) line of defence in Lybia... Every english strongpoint yelded and retreated in front of the enemy (with good reason) but the southermost point of defense, held by the 13th half Brigade of the french foreign legion was ordered to hold the enemy. And they held 10 days. Rommel tried to have them surrender but was answered "Nous sommes venus nous battre, pas nous rendre" 'wa come here for fighting, not surrendering." Hitler ordered the prisonners to be executed on the spot like terrorists and De Gaulle ordered the same ; the next day Hitler ordered the prisonners to be treated according to Geneve's convention (wich gives you an idea of the beating the germans were receiving.) The germans were not able to overcome their enemy. Roughly a quarter of the Afrika corps was engaged because the british, seeing this as an advantage tried to break the encirclement to rescue the men in Bir Akeim and to turn the situation to their advantage. The Afrika corps lost a great amount of munitions, heavy weaponry, panzers and men while trying to break the resistance of the french who, deeply entrenched in sand, concrete and stone, were anxious to see a relief force coming to help them. In the end, after the germans freed 500 indian ghurkas to the defenders (wich was smart, the french were roughly 400, 500 more men to feed was a serious problem to solve when water reserves were thin) the english command decided he was neither able to relieve the fort nor to bring supplies in time (the RAF did not control the sky yet) and ordered the defenders to retreat ... and they did. They sallied with their vehicles by night and took the safe way through their own mine field. I don't know the exact number but some suicided themselves in a frontal attack of the german lines, shattering them in the process and allowing their comrades to leave the field with no damage.

Don't mess with the foreign legion.

On the field it was obviously a defeat. On a larger scale it stopped the german onslaught dead in its tracks and gave the allies time to regroup and prepare their defenses. Most of the defenders survived.

More importantly, they proved that De Gaulle was right in his recommandations about "modern" warfare and they proved that "blitzkrieg" tactics could be countered. It caused a shift in the allies tactivs in north Africa that, in the end, lead to the result we all know.

As you can see, all this kind of actions are not necessarily a waste of human life (though war in general is an awful waste.)

Interestingly, a pararell with the thermopylai was made at the time of the battle (hey, i managed to stay in the topic !)

[conon394]

Steppe Merc

No, it is not possible.
Iranian farmlands were good. However, even with their good lands and with supply trains, one satarpy could not support over 100,000 people in an army. That would just be impossible.

Do you have any idea how much it takes to support good horses? Even if most were derived from steppe ponies and similar breeds, it would still be incredibly difficult in a settled land.

Actually I do have an ideal how much horses need to eat. And I don’t know that steppe ponies are better than the Persian stock. In any case they are a different ball game, depending on grazing they could not be readily switched to grain fodder. But as to farmland you’re making a logical mistake in suggesting Iran as the source of Persian supply. The Persians directly controlled Egypt, and indirectly the Black sea grain exporting regions (are we still taking about Xerxes or Darius III anyway?). The Black sea region alone could supply enough grain to feed something like half of the 300,000 or 400,000 people of 5th century Athens (and other city states as well). With 2 of the breadbaskets of the ancient world why is it so difficult to believe the Persians could support a 100,000 man army?

Edit: oops sorry Steppe, I was tired and didn't notice the point was discussion had firmly moved to just Alexander's battles and associated Persian numbers at them...

But you really cannot use the not a soldier argument. Arrian had been a commander, and his primary source was Ptolemy. Now did Ptolemy have his biases sure, but you got to admit he was there and was most defiantly a soldier.

[SigniferOne]

You know, after being truly impressed by the creativity and quality of content in the mod you guys have, it takes a thread like this to remind me what the soul of EB really is, and why I was so right to reject the invitation to join, long ago.

Steppe Merc has really been a colorful poster here:

Persian infantry did not suck. It was different.

And that would have been bad, if the Persians had won?

That is just REVOLTING.

You can't believe historians.

Who should we believe, then? You?

And Urnamma explained it excellently, it is he who helped me realize how impossible large armies were.

Well, congratulations guys, you are certainly growing yourselves a worthy disciple here.

I've lately started to judge EB solely on its wonderful skins and many unique ideas, and started to think that maybe I didn't mind EB at all now, but in fact quite appreciated it and its high quality. It took this thread to see under the covers and remind me again what kind of people flourish in this group.

Teleklos, how can you manage to still be part of that 'team'? Would it be so bad if the Persians had won? You tell me.

[Iskandr]

I believe the actual quote was "Go and tell the Lacodaemonians..." not Spartans. Also, there were, in fact two survivors of the 300, both of whom were disgraced and one of whom committed suicide. As far as skirmishers and whatnot, the pass at Thermopylae isn't exactly a wide open space, it's not like the Spartans had flanks to harrass at that point.

[jerby]

I believe the actual quote was "Go and tell the Lacodaemonians..." not Spartans. Also, there were, in fact two survivors of the 300, both of whom were disgraced and one of whom committed suicide. As far as skirmishers and whatnot, the pass at Thermopylae isn't exactly a wide open space, it's not like the Spartans had flanks to harrass at that point.

2? i only know of the squire(Xeo). and as far as i know teh spartans retreated to a 'hill' and teh persians didn't try to get to them. the just archered them to death...
i believe skirmish also means archery, and not just harrassing with javelinmen, dunno exact.

[Simetrical]

I believe the actual quote was "Go and tell the Lacodaemonians..." not Spartans.

Yes, but you can't put that in iambic pentameter as easily.

Gŏ téll thĕ Spártăns, strángĕr pássĭng bý,
Thăt hére ŏbédiĕnt tó thĕir láws wĕ líe.

Of course, you have to fudge obedient as three syllables instead of four, but it still works. You'd have to recast it entirely to work in Lacedaemonians, that's an extra three feet.

Edit: From Wikipedia, the actual text was

ὦ ξεῖν', ἀγγέλλειν Λακεδαιμονίοις ὅτι τῇδε
(O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti täde)
κείμεθα τοῖς κείνων ῥήμασι πειθόμενοι.
(keimetha tois keinon rhämasi peithomenoi.)

and a literal translation is

Oh foreigner, tell the Lacedaemonians
that here we lie, obeying their words.

I doubt you could make a much more literal rhyming couplet in iambic pentameter out of those lines.

[Reverend Joe]

a literal translation is

Oh foreigner, tell the Lacedaemonians
that here we lie, obeying their words.

I doubt you could make a much more literal rhyming couplet in iambic pentameter out of those lines.

Let's go with that one... I hate English. And it's all I was ever taught, besides a smattering of French- and the French was an elective!

[caesar44]

[QUOTE=meatwad]

As you said, Cannae was an act of arrogance.

Not Hannibal genius's ?

[jerby]

[QUOTE=caesar44]

As you said, Cannae was an act of arrogance.

Not Hannibal genius's ?

well yeah..that;s what i said, that's what meatwad agrees.
the romans didn't use any kind of strategy..just a large block of men+little cav at teh sides. Hannibals 'trap' was nice, but had the romans 'echeloned' or even a mainple, that would have bene almost enough..
versus a more capabale general hannibal would have lost a lot more men, or even lost...
sorry for getting off-topic on my own topic.

about teh numbers Ceaser stated on teh roman unit-count. It might have been teh real numbers, but of of 1 army in 1 place.. but 'all' soldiers scattered abotu Italy.

[Steppe Merc]

In addition, few legions or armies are ever exactly their proper strength. It's often more of a guidline, due to deaths, deserstions and lack of soldiers.

[Kagemusha]

The Spartans and Thebans were ordered to stay as a vanguard at thermopylai by Leonidas,after the Creeks found out that the persians were encircling them.The Thespians refused to leave with other Creeks and stayed with Spartans and Thebans.
Herodotos claims that the Thebans surrendered during the battle and after that the Spartans and Thespians were surrounded on a hill and killed by javelins and arrows.Here is a link with some maps and a photograph of the supposed hill of the last stand of the Spartans.

[the_handsome_viking]

As I said, no general with any sense . After several days of slaughtering your men on a forest of spear-points, even the worst general will realise it's rime for a change of pace. However, what I always learned was that the tactics did not change, even when it was only the Spartans defending the pass.

As you said, Cannae was an act of arrogance. If the Roman generals had seen the trap lain before them , I doubt they would have sent their men to die en masse.

What happened at Gaugamela? I never learned that particular battle...
I know, it's sad.

why wouldnt that have happened? I mean think about what the zulus were like at Rorke's Drift.

common sense isnt always that common.

and in the end the spartans lost.

[O_Stratigos]

"Oh foreigner, tell the Lacedaemonians
that here we lie, obeying their words."

I am not so sure that “τοις κεινων ρημασι πειθωμενοι” translated as “obeying their words” is correct..
I believe “practicing their convictions” might be closer, but I defer to Teleklos for a more accurate translation.

O_Stratigos