+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Legionaries V.S Spartans (/showthread.php?tid=20214)
Pages:
1
2
Legionaries V.S Spartans - princeofcarthage - 01-30-2012
Hi fellows,
I was watching a History Channel specail about the battle of Thermopyle and how the spartans were the best fighting force in the world,and i was wondering, who was the better foot solder, the spartan or the legionary? The Spartans and the Roman's never actually faced off as Sparta was basically gone by the time the romans, so this matchup really intrigued me?
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - Ghostmojo - 01-30-2012
Quote:Hi fellows,
I was watching a History Channel specail about the battle of Thermopyle and how the spartans were the best fighting force in the world,and i was wondering, who was the better foot solder, the spartan or the legionary? The Spartans and the Roman's never actually faced off as Sparta was basically gone by the time the romans, so this matchup really intrigued me?
We have had this discussion before Daniel. Quite recently in fact. I have searched the pages here to no avail looking for it. Perhaps somebody else remembers where it is?
The Romans and Spartans did meet on a couple of occasions during the War against Nabis. Not quite your typical legionary meeting your peak period hoplite admittedly, but they did have a few encounters. The Roman general involved was Flamininus and the conflict took place around Gytheion and Sparta itself (195-192 BC).
Nabis was a tyrant (claiming descent [possibly true] from Damaratos) who had taken over Sparta with a mixed band of pirates, mercenaries and some citizen troops. It is hard to say what the typical Spartan warrior was like during this very late twilight period in Sparta's history, because there probably wasn't one. By this time I guess they would be more like thureophoroi or similar light/medium troops rather than your traditional hoplite. They may have had phalangites as well for some field battles against the Akhaians.
Even after the Makedonian hegemony over Greece had been ended by the Romans there was still some squabbling going on. Long after Athens, Thebes, Korinth, Epeiros etc. had faded from the pages of Greek military history; as ever, belligerent to the end, the Spartans (and Akhaians) are the last Greeks we hear much of before the Pax Romana in Hellas.
But amazingly, Sparta sensibly sided with the winners during the wars between Pompey, Anthony and Octavian - fielding allied troops at Pharsalos and Phillipi - and became a 'free' city during the Roman Principate period.
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - Vindex - 01-30-2012
I think this is it - topic called Who Would Win.
http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat.html?func=view&catid=13&id=301655#301717
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - Ghostmojo - 01-30-2012
Quote:I think this is it - topic called Who Would Win.
http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat.html?func=view&catid=13&id=301655#301717
That's right. Well done! 8)
The Spartans won hands down (blind-folded with one armed tied behind the back) as I remember!
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - Vindex - 01-30-2012
...probably why I remembered it despite my Roman bias in other matters!
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - princeofcarthage - 01-31-2012
so do you think Sparta at her prime would have been able to fend off the Roman invasion if they wished?
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - Ghostmojo - 01-31-2012
Quote:so do you think Sparta at her prime would have been able to fend off the Roman invasion if they wished?
A home game with the home crowd in attendance? Yup! Walls or no walls ...
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - princeofcarthage - 01-31-2012
So i guess Rome wasn't the most elite fighting force in the world
hock: its amazing to think about how the world would have been different if Rome never conquered Greece and the lands beyond. :-o
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - markusaurelius - 01-31-2012
Daniel, I think the word "team" had to come into play. A roman legionary is not some super human fighting machine, trained from birth to fight (like a Spartan). But put the whole command and control/logistics and a few thousand legionaries behind the Roman side, and I know where I'd be. The Romans won IMO because they could out build and out maneuver pretty much anyone. Nothing like building roads, bridges, sieges and infrastructure to win the day :-D Oh and if you beat the first legion, there are a few more marching towards you on that nice paved road :wink:
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - princeofcarthage - 01-31-2012
See this is what has been confusing me :? I know in single combat a spartan could defeat a legionary and in an even pitched battle with the Roman legionary's alone and without a brilliant commander (such as Julius Caesar) the Spartans could win, but when you throw the Roman tactics, training, battle formations, and their great commanders, its a tough one to call :neutral:
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - Gaius Colletti - 01-31-2012
It really depends on many factors such as terrain, leaders, equipment...
Let's not forget the Spartan led under Leonidas at Thermopylae were no less well trained than the Spartans at the Battle of Leuctra, in which the Thebans were able to outwit and outsmart the predictable Spartans. The Spartans were so conservative and traditional that they refused to evolve better techniques and essentially taught they Thebans how to fight them.
The Spartans refused to build walls and siege equipment even, that's how traditional they were. Had the warrior state of Sparta kept their excellent agoge training in addition to exploiting new fighting techniques they could have dominated the known world, but unfortunately they didn't.
That said even though I tend to more interested in Roman history, I find the Spartans exceptionally interesting
Legionaries V.S Spartans - joeandmich - 01-31-2012
Something you may consider. Spartans usually numbered around 10,000. While Roman soldiers numbered in the tens of thousands. They also have auxiliaries from other nations and tribes.
One on one Spartans may have been better fighters due to their training. But war is totally different.
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - Vindex - 01-31-2012
Quote:See this is what has been confusing me :? I know in single combat a spartan could defeat a legionary and in an even pitched battle with the Roman legionary's alone and without a brilliant commander (such as Julius Caesar) the Spartans could win, but when you throw the Roman tactics, training, battle formations, and their great commanders, its a tough one to call :neutral:
And that is why it is such a fascinating subject and leads to many joyful hours of pondering, debate and "what ifs".
But we'll never know the answer to your question. We can speculate until the cows come home but each entitiy, Spartan and Roman, have given us their own unique contribution to history.
My own opinion is - Spartan hoplite versus Roman legionary may well see the Spartan winning; but the Spartan army at it's very best would not be a match for Rome's industrial approach to war.
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - Ghostmojo - 01-31-2012
Quote:So i guess Rome wasn't the most elite fighting force in the world
Well, please remember that my reponses were also tinged with a little tongue-in-cheek humour! :wink: However, having said that the rise of Rome was by no means a certainty. Historically they were impressive - but they were also lucky. Had Alexander III survived, returned to Greece and then headed west (as he had suggested he might) then Rome might have remained a small provincial Italian city under one or other of his Successors - or its emergence might have been somewhat delayed. Ditto Hannibal, had he had more luck, more reliable allies and some seige equipment. Rome didn't win the 2nd Punic War - Mr. Barca lost it.
And remember that Roman culture had been thoroughly Hellenised. Via Rome, Europe and then the world inherited not just Roman culture, but also Greek culture too. When the Roman Empire split - the Greek-speaking eastern bit evolved its own way. The difference between western Roman Catholicism and eastern Greek Orthodoxy was to play a major role in shaping mediaeval Europe - and it still does. The great Russian empire is a direct descendant of Byzantium (originally the Greek city of Byzantion before it became Constantinople). And of course whilst many Greeks became not just Romanised, and convinced that Rome was the salvation of them - equally many Romans were Hellenised.
Imagine that Rome had not become preeminent for 500 years. Perhaps we would be living in a similar world that was more Greek-based (church particularly) with Christ having arrived under a Successor regime. It might still be similar. Who knows? Had Carthage become preeminent then I've no idea what would have happened.
Re: Legionaries V.S Spartans - Ghostmojo - 01-31-2012
Quote:... My own opinion is - Spartan hoplite versus Roman legionary may well see the Spartan winning; but the Spartan army at it's very best would not be a match for Rome's industrial approach to war.
It is obviously of great interest to debate this but a bit like saying who would win - an 18thC Prussian musketeer or a 19thC British rifleman? Both fine military traditions, but the time difference and technology would - or should give the advantage to the latter.
A Roman Imperial Army at the peak of its all-conquering efficiency could still be liable to defeat. Not likely, but still possible. This is an army perhaps 500 years after the events at Thermopylai. 500 years was not so great in that age as it has been in recent centuries (the exponential development curve of military technology being somewhat less inclined than say between 1500 and 2000!), but it still mattered.
A Roman army of the earlier hoplite period (using typical tactics of the time) that might have encountered a Spartan army would probably (but not necessarily) have been slaughtered, or broken and run away. The Spartans were beaten at Leuktra because of five factors: (a) the sheer weight of numbers deployed by Epaminondas shattered the line, despite the bravery of the Spartans; (b) the actual Spartiates present were small in comparison to the entire force; © Kleombrotos was brave, but not bright, and still probably partially drunk (from the night before); (d) Epaminondas was an exceptional commander (untypical of Thebes or anywhere else); (e) Thebes had developed some crack troops of its own (Pelopidas' Sacred Band). All of these factors combined to produce this monumental reversal.
Having said that, immediately after the battle the Spartans regrouped and were ready to attack again - but they didn't, wiser heads prevailing.