02-17-2012, 06:18 AM
Quote:The notion that because the Persian Empire may have been populated by 50 million people it could assemble an army of 400-500,000 seems all pervasive. It matters not how many one can assemble what matters is how one commands and controls such. It also very much matters how one supplies such.The answer to the latter seems to be that because the Empire was large it could provide a huge supply train. The argument is utterly circular and proves nothing.
The sheer numbers of ships Herodotus proposes will have largely denuded the eastern Mediterranean of those who made it function economically: the sailors. The naval history in classical times shows that such crews aren't trained and supplied at the drop of a hat.
Again, why is it that Antiochus III, the "Great King", thought he could defend his empire with 70,000 when a former Great King failed with 600,000 and 1,000,000? Had the population of the former Persian Empire (which could supply 100s of thousands) been decimated?
Again, the answer is Antiochus' figure is in the realms of reality; Herodotus' figures are not.
Paralus|Michael Park
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους
Wicked men, you are sinning against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander!
Academia.edu
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους
Wicked men, you are sinning against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander!
Academia.edu
