How did Caesar defeat Pompey in greece?

[slackker]

having watched the Rome mini-series by HBO, i went on a google spree trying to find out wat tactics caesar used while being outnumbered by pompey.

was it due to pompey's arrogance having defeated caesar once?
was it due to the fact that Caesar had more experienced troops?
its juz questions that i seek answers, esp now i'm starting on my julli campaign, attempting to relive Gaius Julius Caesar exploits. albeit trying to outdo him by getting a share of africa!

[The Dane]

Well you could read on wikipedia or what ever it is called. But I really don't know how reliable it is.
Btw I didn't know Pompey had defeated Caesar?? Then again I havn't read much (if any) thing about caeser....

[Seleukos]

Moved to the VV.

The battle of Pharsalus was mainly due to Pompey's inexperienced troops. Pompey could have used Caesar's disasterous attack on Dyrrhachium and crushed his army but was urged by the Senate to engage at Pharsalus, which was a bad idea considering Caesar's troops would have the experience advantage in a pitched battle.

[turcopolier]

Well, this is what I (think) I know:
Pompey knew of the fact that his troops would have a hard time against Ceasars veterans, and wished to avoid a battle, atleast so soon. The Senate, however, insisted on it after the previous victory. Pompey obeyed.
He had superiority in cavalry, both he and Ceasar knew that. Ceasar placed some of his best troops (not sure if it was the Tenth...) on the right flank, covered in the forest, with lighter troops ahead of them, visible to Pompey. The cavalry engaged the lighter troops and then the heavy elite forces hidden in the forest stormed the cavalry, crushing them in close combat where they couldn't use their mass for a good charge. With the cavalry dispersed, Ceasar's other legions cornered the reimaning enemy army against Mt. Pharsalus, almost crushing it totally.
So I would say that it was due to Ceasar's superior troops, and use of superior tactics. Pompey tried to do the best of the situation by using an overwhelming force of cavalry, which was what advantage he had, to flank ceasar's army.

Not sure if everything is right, so I'm open for corrections.

[slackker]

ahh so pompey's calvary was ambushed by caesar's heavy infantry. but he shld have known its unwise to bog calvary down in hand to hand combat, esp in forested areas. so i presume its a tactical blunder by pompey. and plus caesar's army encamped on a hill, it wld make it easier to defend on the steep slopes as your flanks are somehow "reduced"

and the experienced legions of caesar would definitely hold the line beta. plus if pompey's calvary were truly wiped out in the ambush, caesar's calvary wld be free to get behind pompey's lines.
interesting. i've also a feeling that pompey sensing that his forces defeated caesar and he would be weakened. but somehow battle weary and wounded they are, they fought for their lives.

[turcopolier]

Well, it wasn't in the forest exactly, but in front of it if I remember correctly. The Tenth rushed the open ground when the cavalry where engaged with the lighter auxilia and couldn't manouver. But you're right, he should have foreseen it. And I'm not sure what role Ceasar's cavalry played, I think they engaged Pompey's first to lure his cavalry into the trap, meaning that the majority had been routed already...

[The Dane]

The Senate, however, insisted on it after the previous victory. Pompey obeyed.

And that is why politicians should stay out of things (like strategies) wich they have no knowlegde about!

[turcopolier]

And that is why politicians should stay out of things (like strategies) wich they have no knowlegde about!

You'll hear no argument from me on that point!

[MasterCommander]

i thought that pompey's calvery routed and fled thus running over his left flank i think thus opening his line up

[Mímirswell]

Our knowledge of Pharsalus comes from many sources:

1. Appian, Civil Wars Book II, Chapter 64-82
2. Lucan, Pharsalia Book VII (warning: not easy reading)
3. Julius Caesar's Civil Wars Book 3

In addition to those excellent resources above, Plutarch's Parallel Lives, Life of Caesar and Life of Pompey as well as Suetonius have a few tidbits.

As for the dispositions of the army at the battle, these maps should help you:

Source: http://heraklia.fws1.com


Source: http://redrampant.com

Now, the second map isn't entirely correct. Caesar, knowing that it's difficult to see troops behind cavalry (especially heavy), placed his auxiliaries in front of his heavy cavalry as though to protect them, while his true objective was to obscure the six cohorts hiding behind the cavalry.

Most of the information needed to understand the battle has already been said save this:

" When Pompeius' left wing crumbled, even then the legionaries retreated step by step still locked in battle, while the allies retreated headlong, making no resistance and shouting 'We've lost.'…Caesar then made a particularly shrewd move to avoid another trial of strength and to ensure that the result decided not an isolated battle, but the whole campaign. He sent heralds into the ranks all over the battlefield, who ordered the victors not to harm their fellow-countrymen, but attack only the allies…Caesar's men, sweeping through them, began to kill the allies, who were unable to resist, and the most tremendous carnage ensued. "

Caesar, having already showed clemency to Ahenobarbus at Corfinium, capitialized on it by playing on the morale loss of pompey and the allied troops fleeing. In doing so, the inexperienced troops Pompey were leading stopped fighting and allowed Caesar's army to pursue the routed forces and slay a majority of them.

Edit: As to Caesar's Cavalry, I'm fairly certain they never routed. As you can see, they were protected by the Auxiliaries. Likely after the Cohorts ambushed Pompey's Cavalry trying to Envelop the flank, Caesar's own cavalry joined with the cohorts in enveloping the exposed flank in the infantry.

[turcopolier]

Ok, I won't argue... :sweatingb
Nice links!

[Centurion-Lucius-Vorenus]

And that is why politicians should stay out of things (like strategies) wich they have no knowlegde about!

well for them they thought it was the only honourable thing to do. Remember Caesar had force them from Rome and itally, which was a sacrilege. Abandoing rome for romans is like the christians losing the reilic of the true cross at the battle of Hattin, Its a huge dishonour so you have to get the relic back. For Pompey he needed to defeat Caesar in a pitched battle to regain his honour.

[antaeus]

just in case you're interested caesars books are published online all over the place... theres a number of translations available, but the are all close enough to make a good read.

http://classics.mit.edu/Caesar/

or

http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/mo...c/CaeComm.html

for a start, theres dozens more web sites that have all or part. if you are going to follow caesars wars any further, theres nothing like a first hand (if biased) report of the battles.

and re: politicians and war... you cant seperate the two. war is extreme politics. soldiers do often lack the ability to look at the bigger picture sometimes. politicians dabble in soldiery sometimes because they see things that the generals dont or wont. to use this case as an example... the generals are for the most part focused on winning the war, they dont care for the opinions of farmers in africa for example. but on the other hand, politicians have to convince the farmer in africa that the war is just so the farmer will grow the grain that will feed the soldiers. simplistic example i know but its just illustrating a point. when soldiers take control of the greater picture things usually go bad because they lack the experience and understanding of dealing with the people and the economy.

so people might complain about non military figures 'messing' with generals plans, but the same is true of the reverse. a happy medium where soldier generals and political figures work together is ideal... a good example of this would be augustus himself who used the senate and generals to form a complete administration where both helped and influenced the other.

[slackker]

tks Mimirswell, that was a very informative post. i rem in epi 7, where pompey after defeated, fled and met one of caesar's centurion who survived the storm, actually explained to him how he lost. it was similar to the way u described. although he said a single cohort repelled his calvary and his calvary routed and ran thru pompey's left flank, caesar sensing the chaos, charrged into pompey's left. what i felt rather funny is that pompey's troops literally let caesar's troops thru to pursue the routing allies. somehow they were amazed at caesar's call not to kill them.

1 tactical blunder by pompey and heavily penalized.

[Sam]

IIRC, there was a problem issuing orders on Pompey's side because the men under his command didn't speak one common language, so the orders needed to be translated into several different languages. This would have caused a lot of 'sluggishness' in Pompey's ranks.

[antaeus]

thats why soldiers were trained to march and maneuver to standards rather than verbal orders. more likely it was that caesars troops were better drilled so they could react to commands without having to be told anything, whereas pompeii's command had less experience - so they had to be issued verbal instruction at which point language issues arise..

much in the way a martial artist knows to punch without thinking, a soldier has to be trained to follow standards without having to mentally think about what each instruction means. thats why they drill for hours on end, day after day until their bodies know the drills without the minds interferance.

[Sétanta]

Caesar is an alien lifeform with much more advanced knowledge than any human
pfft everybody knows that

[MasterCommander]

Caesar is an alien lifeform with much more advanced knowledge than any human
pfft everybody knows that

pfft true that everyone know that Caesar had 1337 haxx00r skilz lol j/k

[Chuffy]

And that is why politicians should stay out of things (like strategies) wich they have no knowlegde about!

Roman Generals were politicians.

[SbSdude]

Right.

I actually wrote my dissertation (2004) on the subject, and before entering into the realms of Political Theory spent a vast amount of time researching various elements of the Pharsalus campaign. If you like, I could upload the main body of the dissertation for your perusal. Having spent so long on the subject i'm a little hesitant to throw myself back into a long debate over the why's and whatnots of the campaign. However the way the battle was showcased in Rome the tv series did absolutely no justice to the campaign or battle that either great men fought.

If I could sum up my view in one paragraph so be it. Pompey's strategy was working, Caesar's army was tired, low in morale and vastly outnumbered. Caesar himself would loathe to admit that Pompey was having the better of him, but after Dyrrhachium this was the case. For whatever reason Pompey decided to give battle that August morning god only knows, a combination of Senatorial pressure and a need to retain his dignitas is my view. There was simply no need to give battle, particularly at that precise time during the campaign. Strategically Pompey was probably Caesar's equal, but tactically there are very few who could even compare with Caesar through history. So why he decided to fight I don't know.

Caesar was also one hell of a lucky git, i'll give him that