Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 56 of 56

Thread: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

  1. #41
    ray243's Avatar Equites
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,820
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Quote Originally Posted by Col. Tartleton View Post
    Were they? Persia only needed to raise 5-10% of their population temporarily. At least half of which were noncombatants. The majority of which never saw combat.
    Why would the Roman Empire as stated by you to have a greater population than the Persian Empire be unable to raise a greater army?


    I'd argue that the basis of every historian's training to is to analyze the audience and bias of the source.
    Is our sources on the Russian army any less bias than the sources used by Herodotus?

    Except we know the Russians lied about things for propaganda, they were writing in the official capacity.
    And the Perians and Greeks don't? Does the fact that the Russians propagandise about some times devalue the official documents meant for Russians's generals?

    Likewise I don't necessarily take the Egyptian records as seriously as Greek and Roman scholars. Whereas Herodotus appears to be trying to get the most accurate account together and his own contemporaries critiqued and ridiculed his work. Who was he trying to convince? Certainly not us. Kind of a stretch to assume he was writing for an audience 2,400 years later. Was he writing down what he reasoned and put together or for a patron?
    So even if we assume Herodotus put together the most accurate picture he could paint, should we ignore the accuracy of his sources?

    Let's say Herodotus managed to get the size of the Persian army from official sources in the Persian Empire. Does this meant we should not scrutinised the reliability of that source?

    By and large it seems he wrote down what he heard from his sources and then throws in the occasional acknowledgement to the reader how crazy it sounds. He seems like a reasonable man for the period.
    Just because Herodotus is smart enough to question some of his sources does not meant we should accept everything he argued for blindly.

    I'm sorry, but if Xenophon had 10,000 crack hoplites and that was a trapped and dreadfully outnumbered behind enemy lines action thriller scenario you do have to suppose the Persians had vast reserves of manpower.
    Which does not necessary indicate the Perisan have a million man army!


    That's entirely speculation. The sources which suggest smaller numbers than Herodotus gives don't seem to have any idea what they're talking about.
    Herodotus himself is a secondary source!


    The Persian army to my understanding was organized into 30 divisions/corps. These were at least 10,000 strong as we see in the Royal Division, the Immortals. The Line Corps may have been up to 60,000 strong, swollen for the expedition. That's 1.75 million combatants. Double that for the support infrastructure and we can assume the Persian mobilization was about 3.5 million army soldiers, plus naval forces.
    No. Available manpower does not meant you can afford to mobilise all of them at once for the war effort.


    However you have to consider that the Soviet War machine had to produce a lot more war material than the Persian Empire would per person. How much mechanical advantage was counteracted upon by the differences in war material are hard to say. The Persians were raising extra livestock and storing extra food supplies, the armies were . The Russians were building Main Battle Tanks and heavy artillery, Bombers and Fighters. Uniforms, bullets, bayonets, boots, bombs, shells, rifles, helmets, rations, transportation, gasoline.
    How on earth does this prove your point in any way? Industrialisation still manage to free more manpower because less people are required to work in the fields. What is the point of having such a big army if your nation cannot feed so many men?

    You need to prove that pre-industrialisation societies can consistency muster million man army without much problem and deploy them for a far flung expedition. Almost every available source we have on pre-industrialised societies argue against that.


    Quote Originally Posted by torongill View Post
    Unfortunately it seems to me that some of the underlying reasons for disbelief among modern historians are "This simply cannot be done! Are you telling me that a bunch of illiterate fire-worshippers were able to do something which we with all our fancy technology and gadgets and gimmicks cannot?! You must be out of your mind!"
    Except every other pre-industrialised societies from every other time period and place were not capable of achieving those feats as stated by Herodotus.
    There is more reason to argue against the numbers stated by Herodotus than the reasons that arguing for him.
    Last edited by ray243; January 19, 2013 at 11:12 PM.

  2. #42
    Hanny's Avatar Pili Posterior
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,903
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Quote Originally Posted by ray243 View Post
    Except every other pre-industrialised societies from every other time period and place were not capable of achieving those feats as stated by Herodotus.
    There is more reason to argue against the numbers stated by Herodotus than the reasons that arguing for him.
    Nonsense, try reading some history.

    books.google.co.uk/books?id=6vnkts2rOJUC...n%20in%20415&f=false

    Attica 350,000 population, 2500 sq klicks of land gave 139 people a sq klick, compared to Persia 6.25.

    When Athens lost 40,000 of its citizens in sicly in 415,http://www.ancientgreekbattles.net/P...Population.htm it had sent 40,000/71,500, ie 55% of its males of mil age off to war in Sicliy, and lost almost all of them.

    Persian 2.6 million mil age males sent to Greece, froma male age range that was conscripted for 10 years mil service fo all, from its 50 million population was 5.2 sent of to war.

    Persians who invented naaval logistics of a scale never before practised, but cant achive a tenth of what the Greeks who imitated them?.

    Athens Sparta and all the Greeks mobolised 6%-25% of mil age males, but Persia when it did 5.2% is deemed to be a distortion of reality.

    www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/morris/120511.pdf

    Levels of military participation
    Ferejohn and Rosenbluth speak of “full mobilization” in classical Greece. But what does
    this mean? Reliable numbers are very hard to come by, but there has to be a quantitative
    basis to the discussion. There’s necessarily a lot of guesswork in the figures I offer, but
    here are a few cases to set some parameters.
    At Marathon in 490 BC, the Athenians fielded 9,000 hoplites. They took no
    cavalry, and must also have left some troops in the city; if they had a total armed force of
    10,000-15,000, out of a total resident population of maybe 200,000-250,000 in Attica, we
    get MPR = 4-6%.
    At Salamis in 480 BC, the Athenians had 180 ships. We can probably assume that
    they manned them all (though perhaps not at full strength of 180-200 men) from the
    population of Attica, requiring between 27,000 (skeleton crews) and 36,000 men. If the
    population of Attica was roughly the same as in 490, MPR = 11-18%.

    Hannibal's Carthage had c3.7 million people, he set out for Italy with 102k, sent 19k to Carthage, left 15k in Spain with his brother, c136k is 4%.Why cannot persia sent 5.25 of to war?.

    Barborossa was refernced earlier, and Germany 81 million put 3.8 mill into the Field Army, 1.2mill into the Repalcement army, 150k in the Waffen SS, 1.68 mill into the LW and 404k in the Navy for a total of 7,234,000, a mil mobolization of 8.9million of total population, a 10.9 mobolization. But thats misleading because males of mil age are what are used for warfighting, and they are different % of population, not the whole of it, all males in Germamys pop were 48.1 million, and 5.6 million of them were 60+ in 1939 so not avaialble, 15 million males never reached mil age, so the number of mil age males, was 27,500,000, and Germany mobolised 32% of its mil age males for its armed forces, the same ratio that Brunt found for Rome. Germany had 31.9% of its male population under 16, while SU had 45%, 12.2 over 60, to SU 6.2% and the SU over twice (200 million)the base pop level, meaning that as the war went on, the SU had more males reach mil age, less aged to support. if we only had that kind of data for other periods.

    Polybios total is 700k foot and 70k mounted.penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/2*.html#23

    8 Roman legions at 4500 each, from a latin population of 273,000 is a MPR of 13%
    penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/2*.html#23
    Each of the Consuls was in p301command of four legions of Roman citizens, each consisting of five thousand two hundred foot and three hundred horse.

    So Polybios gives us 8*5500=44,000 with the 2 Cn, he goes on:

    In Rome itself there was a reserve force, ready for any war-contingency, consisting of twenty thousand foot and fifteen hundred horse, all Roman citizens. Running total now 65500. He goes on: In Sicily and Tarentum were two reserve legions, each consisting of about four thousand p303two hundred foot and two hundred horse

    Total latins 74300 from cenus figure of 273k latins gives us Romes MPR of 27%

    Polybios gives 770k mil from a free population of c3.4 million, a MPR of 22%. http://www.paolomalanima.it/default_...les/Cycles.pdf

    Polybios gives:
    Latins eighty thousand foot and five thousand horse
    Allies 77+66+33+24=200k

    Of Romans and Campanians there were on the roll two hundred and fifty thousand foot║ and twenty-three thousand horse;

    Total 285K.

    Latins campanian and allies, 273K+200k=485K mobolised and in the field from a total population of 5 million, was 9.7% of total population, of free/slave population and liable for mil service, 14.2% acepted into service, out of the 22% available for mil service.

    Brunt gives 32% as Rome Punic wars MPR.http://www.eeb.uconn.edu/people/turc.../6Republic.pdf he gives free pop at 3 million to arrive at that.

    In 212 Rome had 230k in the field, a MPR of 27% of all males of mil age, 30% of those liable for mil service, and 7.6% of total Population.

    Persia does not need to get anywhere such MPR rates to find the numbers in Herodutus, using Roman authors numbers for its MPR and census data.
    Last edited by Hanny; January 20, 2013 at 05:03 AM.
    To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

  3. #43
    ray243's Avatar Equites
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,820
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Quote Originally Posted by Hanny View Post
    Persians who invented naaval logistics of a scale never before practised, but cant achive a tenth of what the Greeks who imitated them?.

    Athens Sparta and all the Greeks mobolised 6%-25% of mil age males, but Persia when it did 5.2% is deemed to be a distortion of reality.

    www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/morris/120511.pdf
    Do you know the level of difference between mobilising the various cities states to fight a war in Greece and mobilising a million men from central Asia and transport them all the way to Greece?

    Dealing with such a big numbers, you have to consider that we cannot simply scale the manpower of an empire accordingly. Even if we accept the idea that the Persians can potentially call upon a million men for its armies does not indicate that they can put them all to the field at once.

    How are you going to transport or forage enough food for a million men? How long can the resources of a particular area sustain a million man army?
    What about hygiene and outbreak of disease when you gathered a million men together, not including all the baggage followers?

  4. #44
    torongill's Avatar Equites Alares
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Canary Islands
    Posts
    5,835
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Quote Originally Posted by ray243 View Post
    Why would the Roman Empire as stated by you to have a greater population than the Persian Empire be unable to raise a greater army?

    How on earth does this prove your point in any way? Industrialisation still manage to free more manpower because less people are required to work in the fields. What is the point of having such a big army if your nation cannot feed so many men?

    You need to prove that pre-industrialisation societies can consistency muster million man army without much problem and deploy them for a far flung expedition. Almost every available source we have on pre-industrialised societies argue against that.

    Except every other pre-industrialised societies from every other time period and place were not capable of achieving those feats as stated by Herodotus.
    There is more reason to argue against the numbers stated by Herodotus than the reasons that arguing for him.

    1. It didn't have to. Force multiplier based on better armament, superior firepower, etc.
    2. Except it was possible to feed that many people. Persia had the two breadbaskets of the world in its possession, places where it was possible to have not one, but two crops per year. Egyptian export of grain practically fed Rome, day in, day out. A city of more than a million people.
    3. What far-flung expedition??? Until Thermopylae the persian army was for all intents and purposes in friendly territory. And it advanced as far as Athens, that's less than 150 km. Far-flung was the Arabic invasion and siege of Constantinople in 717-718 CE. Far flung was the Napoleonic invasion of Russia.
    4. I wouldn't be so fast in flinging "not capable" if I were you As a matter of fact, we need not look further than Rome. let's leave the size of Imperial Rome and the problems of supplying the inhabitants with food. Let's look at the second Punic war. In the height of the Hannibal war Rome and their allies maintained a fighting force of iirc at least 16 legions. And they did it with a hostile army in the center of Italy, army which had blazed its way through Italy. Look at Italy(you may want to include Sicily and Sardinia). Now look at the Persian Empire. Please encounter the three differences.

    edit: just saw your new post. You may start by preparing for five years beforehand. For example. By putting supply depots all along the route. By having the greatest supply fleet the world had ever seen. Besides, you're not putting them all in the field in the same place and the same spot. As to how you supply them, you have a fleet which operates with impunity. And you move very close to the coast to facilitate supply. That's how you don't rely on "foraging" and pillaging. The persians came with their supplies, precisely because they could not supply their force by devastating the surrounding land.
    Last edited by torongill; January 20, 2013 at 08:30 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hibernicus II View Post
    What's EB?
    "I Eddard of the house Stark, Lord of Winterfell and Warden of the North, sentence you to die."
    "Per Ballista ad astra!" - motto of the Roman Legionary Artillery.
    Republicans in all their glory...

  5. #45
    Hanny's Avatar Pili Posterior
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,903
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Quote Originally Posted by ray243 View Post
    Do you know the level of difference between mobilising the various cities states to fight a war in Greece and mobilising a million men from central Asia and transport them all the way to Greece?
    Yes. But you do not.

    Dealing with such a big numbers, you have to consider that we cannot simply scale the manpower of an empire accordingly. Even if we accept the idea that the Persians can potentially call upon a million men for its armies does not indicate that they can put them all to the field at once.
    Actually it does. Big numbers are are problem for people who cannot use them to understand what they mean.
    How are you going to transport or forage enough food for a million men? How long can the resources of a particular area sustain a million man army?
    In the manner provided by Herodotus.

    Surface water flowing at 3m a sec, yields a volume of 2.4m ( water sped is slower under the surface and is .8 of surface speed)@ width/depth of the river, a small stream of 2.5 m width and 1 m depth, could be typicaly around 45% of the total area as moving water, so 1.125 sq m a sec.

    Total water volume capacity in an hour. 1.125@3600=4050 sq m of water. 1,233,481 litres an hour.

    Water requirement was not a logictical limitation.

    Food, ignoring any animal portage.
    600k persons @30lbs each on average carry capacity, is 180,000,000 lbs forward lift a day.Enough to maintain themselves for 10 days min consumption. Moving at 10 miles a day, means they cover an area of 100 miles depth, by width of advance, assume that to be 10 miles, so 1000 sq miles. 1000 sq miles of region of the same population size of Punic period Italy, ie 28 per sq miles, means the food stored/grain in fields, in a 2 crop a year system, in that 1000 sq miles, is enough to feed 28000 for 6 months, which is 3@180@28000=15120000 lbs. If half is confiscated, 7,560,000 lbs is used to feed the passing army in a 10 day period.

    10 days requirement 600,000@3@10=180,000,000lbs, less 7,560,000 confiscated, which is 4 days requirements repalced during pasage.

    If the Army confiscates over a 20 mile frontage;100@20=2000 sq miles, @28 a sq mile, is 3@180@56,000=3,0240,000 lbs, if half confiscated, its close to meeting demand with supply from 20 miles by the 10 miles distance covered.

    http://www.unisa.ac.za/contents/facu...HELLESPONT.pdf

    This says it was done, by use of naval logistics, not that it could not be done.

    3000 ships at 80 tons each is a sea lift of 240,000 tons,
    1700,000 Mil, rest non coms, total 4200,000 men in three columns, is 1400,000 per column. The Mil element of each column in 566,666, is an 8 wide column of march. 70833 men long.( column is 8*70833) at 3 feet per man this is a frontage of 24 feet, and depth of 212449 feet. Persian units were in decimal, so 566 units, with 10 paces between units when moveing yields:5660 feet, for Mil only total of 218109 feet inc space between formations. Thats 40 miles depth and road space for the Persain Military

    Non coms, these are the herders of sheep etc, and are even less road bound than the mil, some will be on the road and some not, but the mil element sets the pace at 20 miles a day, marching for 5 hours of daylight to achieve 20 miles, the same as Romans were acustomed to doing. The non coms would be spread futher in frontage than the mil march column, and the secured space for this would be 30 mins to either side of the column which would be the min the column would cover to prevent from surpise attack, this is 4 miles frontage, and the mil mtd elements cover this area as the column advances. 4 miles frontage and the same depth as the mil element, is a box 4x40=160 sq miles, with 833,337k people in it, lets double the depth to 80 miles,giving the non coms 4*80=320 sq miles to graze and move in, the Persain mil elements are in the first 40 miles and then there is another 80 miles of only non coms. Total depth of the column is 120 miles, the mil elemenst are in the front 40 and the non coms spread over that, plus 80 more miles, total erea the coumn comprises, is 32 miles frontage and 120 miles deep.

    Think of this ( the mil element) like a Roman column that can wheel to face any threat, with non coms on either flank than fold back away from any threat, the mil column moving mostly on the roads and faster than the non coms, and is embedded and leading a compact column inside a large box area of slower moving non coms, that the mil element stretches back into for roughly half the total depth.

    The cav elements of the army therefore cover the 20 miles at a slow trot, 8mph, so it takes 2.5 hours to cover the daily advance of 20 miles, 2 hours grazing and .5 hours care, for the mounts leaves 3/4 hours of daylight, so it can move to each side of the Inf column for 2 hours to procure supplies and return with it to the column. The column is therfore power projecting its mtd elements 32 miles, making each days advance cover 32 miles frontage and 20 miles depth, ie 32*20=640 sq miles is covered by procurment elements for supplies, average poulation for Asia minor would be c18 per sq mile, so the cerial food stocks for that area covered would be, assumig 2 crops a year, 3 lbs per person ( a very low figure for all cerial crops but wheat at 3lbs a person will suffice) 3*18*640*176=6,082,560 lbs in the fields or in storage bins as these is the number value of crops to sustain 18 people per sq mile every 6 months.

    1400000 men at 3 lbs a day require 4,200,000 lbs of cerials day, and the column is each day moving over land that contains 6,082,560 lbs to confiscate.

    They dont need to carry any supplies of there own if they simply want to take want they need from the population they move through. Persian Skudra with a pop level of 750,000 people has enough crops in the fileds or in storage between harvest, at any point in time, to fully supply over 2 million who are passing through.

    Or they can get all they need from the storage dumps H tells us where placed along the march route, or port it with them, (1400000 men at 30 lbs on average is a forward day lift of 42,000,000 lbs, c 10 days carried at any point in time)) or they can use the 3000 transport ships that H tells us supplied the march route, 3000 ships at 80 tons each is a sea lift of 240,000 tons,(480000000lbs) at a consumption of 30 days duration, is 16000000 lbs a day, for 4.2 million Expedition total,that gives 4 lbs a day per person per day for 30 days.

    Persain Skudra that is moved through, also inclues the bread basket Black sea region that supplied Greece grain. A single Athenian fleet of 230 ships brought in 36,800,000lbs. http://www.pontos.dk/publications/bo...bss6_04_moreno Thre same region was suppling Greece with 13,000 tons per annum of cerial crops, 26,000,000lbs, when it was Persian controlled it supplied Persian needs. Skudra was c80,000 sq miles from Byzantium to Macedonia, so a pop density of c10 per sq mile.


    Persian logistical requirements:
    Skudra Thrace 250 miles to enter Macedonian lands. At 20mpd requires 25 days. Daily consumption at 3 lbs cerials per person, 4,200,000 lbs per column, three such columns.

    1,400,000 Column with a forward lift of 30lbs per person: 42,000,000lbs each column can carry 10 days without any cart of horses used.

    Persain fleet 3000*80=:480000000lbs Fleet can supply one column for 114 days, all three columns for 38 days.

    Duration of operation 25 days.
    4,200,000*25=105,000,000 lbs per column required.Total for all three, 315,000,000.

    Pop in region being moved through,32 miles by 120 miles=284 square miles, at 9 per per sq mile and 25 days (384*9*3*25=259200lbs)

    Army of three columns and pop of area the Army moves through total requirement.315,258,200 lbs

    Available per column:
    Carried by column:42,000,000 lbs
    Carried by Fleet 480000000lbs/3 =160,000,000 per column.
    Existing in region covered each days march at 9 person per sq mile using 2 crops a year384*9*3*176=1824768lbs).
    Existing in the dumps prepared for the armys passage, zero.

    Total available: 523,824,769

    Persian expedition was logisticaly sound and a feasible mil operation, using the numbers given by H.

    What about hygiene and outbreak of disease when you gathered a million men together, not including all the baggage followers?
    What about it?, which text tells us the Persaind suffered losses from disease?
    Last edited by Hanny; January 20, 2013 at 08:53 AM.
    To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

  6. #46
    Aquilifer
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Near Boston
    Posts
    325
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Just a small comment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hanny View Post
    3000 ships at 80 tons each is a sea lift of 240,000 tons
    I think it would've been higher. Using one credible source (Cecil Torr, Ancient ships p. 25), a merchant ship is capable of hauling, on average, 150 tons. It could be even higher if the ships were specialized for the task at hand, the highest ever recorded being around 1,000 tons. And we know how the Phoenicians were ship building experts, so they might have had the skill needed to build large cargo ships. So 450,000 tons.

  7. #47
    Hanny's Avatar Pili Posterior
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,903
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Yes you had made this point in the past, H gives 3000 smaller/transport ships, so its best to be conservative with the capacity estimate, but that does not make your point wrong.
    To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

  8. #48
    Aquilifer
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Near Boston
    Posts
    325
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Quote Originally Posted by Hanny View Post
    Yes you had made this point in the past, H gives 3000 smaller/transport ships, so its best to be conservative with the capacity estimate, but that does not make your point wrong.
    I'd be interested in the linguistics behind which term he uses for transport ships. It might indicate size of the ships he's referring to. I'll go check right now.

    First edit: http://www2.rgzm.de/navis/Themes/Com...rceEnglish.htm says:

    "Merchant ships which exceeded a 3000-amphora capacity (about 150 tonnes) could not travel upstream. They were obliged to anchor at sea and be unloaded onto smaller vessels, which shuttled between the ships and the river port of Ostia."

    Second Edit: At 7.97 Herodotus says: "τριηκόντεροι δὲ καὶ πεντηκόντεροι καὶ κέρκουροι καὶ ἱππαγωγὰ πλοῖα μακρὰ συνελθόντα ἐς τὸν ἀριθμὸν ἐφάνη τρισχίλια." Although I don't which one of those words is the one for transport.

    Third edit: Anyways what would you recommend as a commentary on Herodotus? All I have is Michael Grant but I thought he isn't enough.
    Last edited by Duptar; January 20, 2013 at 10:36 AM.

  9. #49
    Hanny's Avatar Pili Posterior
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,903
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Try The Athenian Trireme: The History and Reconstruction of an Ancient Greek Warship - page 51

    Penteconter 66sq m of cargo space, 2 are sent each with 150 person per penteconter for colonization from Crete to Cyrene is recorded by H, very usfull for landing supplies, on open beaches, or up river, as it has a shallow draft.

    As for the linguistics, you could try reading it in parralel.
    http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/hh/hh7090.htm
    Last edited by Erebus Pasha; January 20, 2013 at 12:38 PM. Reason: shortened link
    To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

  10. #50
    Princeps Prior
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,319
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Quote Originally Posted by money View Post
    Russia was fighting in Russia and then mobilized the entire country and every factory for war. Persians didn't have industrialization, roads like the Roman ones (or our roads) or a stable government in which everyone was content with the government. If Rome didn't have more than 300,000 or so I wouldn't expect Persia to come close to that number.

    Rome 300,000?Why?I am fairly sure that it's generally agreed by most historians that Rome had at peak 600,000 troops including auxilia, they had as many troops from the time of the M.Anthony/Octavian vs Cassius/Brutus civ war.

  11. #51
    Aquilifer
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Near Boston
    Posts
    325
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Quote Originally Posted by Hanny View Post
    Try The Athenian Trireme: The History and Reconstruction of an Ancient Greek Warship - page 51

    Penteconter 66sq m of cargo space, 2 are sent each with 150 person per penteconter for colonization from Crete to Cyrene is recorded by H, very usfull for landing supplies, on open beaches, or up river, as it has a shallow draft.
    What about the triaconter and oared supply ships?

    I've always wondered, is this what they would've used for naval supply in the Second Punic War? What, in particular, made it impossible to hold naval supremacy before the age of radar?

    As for the linguistics, you could try reading it in parralel.
    http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/hh/hh7090.htm
    I was using Perseus for the translation, which gives the same Greek.
    Last edited by Erebus Pasha; January 20, 2013 at 12:39 PM. Reason: continuity

  12. #52
    Col. Tartleton's Avatar Tribunus
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Transleithania
    Posts
    12,169
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Persia had 30 Corps drawn from something like 60 different nationalities which were at the very least 10,000 strong. Which would give a standard force of 300,000. Potentially 60,000 strong in this time period based on Herodotus' numbers of the Persian force. Which elevates to 1.75 million infantry, plus cavalry, support elements, and naval assets. Persia's population was at least 50 million and probably not more than 70 million.

    Rome had at it's peak 28 Legions drawn from across the empire which were formed into corps with the auxiliaries. That's about 15,000 men per detachment. That's 420,000 men in peace time. We know that Rome intentionally kept the number of legions low but very well trained and equipped heavy infantry. They planned to be outnumbered going into battles. That's well within their comfort zone. Persia on the other hand planned to outnumber the enemy with large numbers of less well trained and equipped light infantry and cavalry elements from a very multicultural force. The Assyrians for example were given almost complete autonomy and still fought in their traditional Assyrian style. Most of their forces were traditional native contingents. Only the core Iranic peoples dressed and fought in the Medic fashion.

    During the civil wars the number of legions was far higher, over 50. Rome's Legions were effectively at all times in their history supplemented by non Romans, non Italians, or even non Imperials. Rome's population was probably 120 million around the peak of Imperial power. Rome itself having over a million inhabitants and Alexandria roughly half that. Naturally the population fluctuated based on the borders, the migrations, and basic pre contemporary concerns like harvests and plagues.
    Last edited by Col. Tartleton; January 20, 2013 at 12:24 PM.
    Lurking at your bedside, watching you sleep.
    #Vampire Things

  13. #53
    Hanny's Avatar Pili Posterior
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,903
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Duptar

    Power projection over water pre radar, is dependednt on line of sight, and base to operate from, it was virtually impossible to control the sea and dominate it like you can on land, from a port you can dominate to a certain extent but thats as close to it as you can get. First PW was fought at sea because both side controlled ports, in combat zones, second had little to no combat at sea, because carthage had no ports in a combat zone to operate from, but could and did elude the huge Roman navy, and bring Mago back from liguria, hit Sardina with a massive invasion fleet, and so on, because control of the sea was limited to where the ships where and what they could see and interdict. By and large Rome controlled, without dictating who went where, in the sea, but could not prevent carthage from operating at sea to reach Italy, Liguria, sardinia etc.

    See if yoiu can find this online asa counter to Mahan. http://www.amazon.com/The-Influence-.../dp/0195056671
    Last edited by Hanny; January 20, 2013 at 12:27 PM.
    To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

  14. #54
    Aquilifer
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Near Boston
    Posts
    325
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    Quote Originally Posted by Hanny View Post
    Duptar

    Power projection over water pre radar, is dependednt on line of sight, and base to operate from, it was virtually impossible to control the sea and dominate it like you can on land, from a port you can dominate to a certain extent but thats as close to it as you can get.
    And, given that the range of triremes was 30 miles per day (which I think is conservative but Aubet challenges it in her book on the Phoenicians), it would be impossible to conduct a blockade on ports so you're right.

    First PW was fought at sea because both side controlled ports, in combat zones, second had little to no combat at sea, because carthage had no ports in a combat zone to operate from, but could and did elude the huge Roman navy, and bring Mago back from liguria, hit Sardina with a massive invasion fleet, and so on, because control of the sea was limited to where the ships where and what they could see and interdict. By and large Rome controlled, without dictating who went where, in the sea, but could not prevent carthage from operating at sea to reach Italy, Liguria, sardinia etc.
    I believe they did have Malta at the very beginning of the war but it was taken fairly quickly. At one point they did have a fair stronghold on Sicily and Hannibal did have some of the southern Italian ports (e.g. Locri) for a considerable time. And since we hear of the possibility of transporting boat parts on campaign and reconstructing them in Alexander's time, I think Hannibal should've tried something with his naval option like Hoyos says.

    See if yoiu can find this online asa counter to Mahan. http://www.amazon.com/The-Influence-.../dp/0195056671
    Unfortunately not. No links on rapidshare or archives.

  15. #55
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar Sixth Heaven Demon Lord
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    11,730
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    False, there were corps of only 2,000 or 3,000, the size of each corps depends on the region it is from.
    Common sense: Greece is not ideal for apparently 1 million + (is that what you people are saying?) to live and forage in one area. Disease alone would decimate 3/4 of the army before they would even get anywhere or has everyone forgotten the massive disease related casualties of the 19th Century?
    Last edited by Lord Oda Nobunaga; January 20, 2013 at 05:02 PM.

  16. #56
    Aquilifer
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Near Boston
    Posts
    325
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Delbrueck: Myths and myths

    I don't know why but when I copy pasted your post on an internet search this thread came up: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...=329695&page=3

    Ironically it did have a few things of interest and related to the discussion.

    35 Quinq and 5 Triremes all fuly manned, 18 without adequate crews in Spain, 55 quinq`s at Carthage. Rome having a fleet of 220 quinq`s, so any seaborne inavsion could not be protected not could suffienct sea lift be marshalled to lift his army of 90k inf and 12k mounted plus 58 elephants, which he split to take with hima nd leave with his brother.
    Any seaborne lift had to cover a considerable distance to reach its destination, therby exposing the sea lift to a consular army that would drasticly outnumber it depending on how much was dispacthced by sea, given that x number of men require y amounts of grain and water, we can aduce the requirements that would ned to be carried on the transports to suatin the lift, and of course compare it to what is required on land anc compare the expected 16 miles a day on land to 3/4 knots at sea. One caveat here is that the wind in that part of the Med are not in Hannys favour at the time he found he wanted to leave for italy, meaning oars for the best speed against the wind.
    We can aduce the requirements, but you never ended up doing it in that thread. Maybe this time?

    the elephants could carry anothing required thbat was of bulk, do you mean siege equipment?, if so its only wood, so to produce siege equipmemt only requires men with skill and time to produce it
    I read somewhere that elephants most likely weren't used to carry any supplies, I'm thinking it might be Scullard Elephants in the Graeco-Roman world but there's another Osprey book which might be what I have in mind.

    What does need to be borne in mind is the logistics, each horse requires 10lbs of grain a day plus an equal amount of foder, so the grass needs to be there to provide the fodder, or more grain is required. 90k foot requires 90 tons a day of grain, (2lbs of grain per man) plus 225 tons water (5lbs water per man), 12k horses require 60 tons of grain a day, plus the same of fodder, plus 4800 tons of water, so the simply act of carrying sucha load would be a considrable task if undertaken by sea, even if sucha quantity of shipping could be found. a mules load was 200lbs each.
    Although at the same time I think (correct me where I'm wrong) there was horse transports in existence and that merchant ships could easily be constructed if Hannibal wanted to. Unless the amounts needed couldn't be obtained, but then again Carthage was an agricultural problem. He could get everything he needed for the campaign locally.

    and that time was required to acumalte suffiecnt loggistics to propel the army forward through hostile regions or where no grass/grain could be purchased or siezed
    But where was it impossible to purchase what the army needed?

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •