+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Greek Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: Xerxes Five Million Men (/showthread.php?tid=3387)
Re: logistics - floofthegoof - 05-31-2005
Quote:There are a number of works that deal with logistics in premodern armies, I am right now reading one on the Ottoman Empire. There are 3 different types of maximum numbers for armies
1) Maximum number that can be raised
2) Maximum number that can be mobilized (Rhoads Murphey, using the very detailed accounts of the Ottoman Imperial government, puts it at around 70% of 1)
3) Maximum number that can be fielded as a single army (a fraction of 2). Xerxes army is number 3, and that is one of the reasons I am on the minimal numbers, however after taking a look at Delbruck I must say I feel rather maximalist, he puts the Persian army at around 25.000
25,000 is very low indeed. I get the feeling that 25,000 men could survive indefinately in Greece, and with Xerxes funds could buy all the food they needed and stay at the nicest hotels. Forget about having to resort to thievery and siezing harvests. Since he is the lowest we've seen, can you give us a short summary of his methods? I googled and couldn't find much regarding Hans Delbruck.
I wonder if the Holiday Inn at Pella had a swimming pool? :lol:
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - Felix - 05-31-2005
The discrepancy between Plutarch and Herodotus for the Greek casualties is indicative of the problem of numbers. Herodotus gives specific numbers for some Greeks, totalling 160; I don't recall the relative numbers of soldiers from each city-state, but I will estimate the total (in line with the numbers given) might be 1,000. Plutarch gives a nice round figure of 60,300!
This underscores the fundamental problem of taking Herodotus' size for Xerxes' army and then trying to "rationalize" it. If you took Plutarch as a starting point, the calculations are rather different.
The scholarly estimates of Xerxes' army do disagree. But they all agree that the number of soldiers was somewhere at or less than 150,000, and the average and median figures are going to be roughly 100,000. (without doing the math?!).
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - Anonymous - 06-01-2005
[quote="floofthegoof
Last year I read all of Livy, and this is what I'd like to bring up about the war with Hannibal. Cannae happened very early in Roman history, and the army was made almost entirely of Italians. Rome at that time only controlled part of Sicily, Sardinia and Spain. Nothing like the empire of Xerxes. Another thing that is notable about that time period, is that Hannibal's army of ~60,000 was able to forage in Italy for 10 years! This is about 200 years after the Persian wars. That makes me guess that it would take a much larger force to starve in 1 season, although I don't really know the difference between the climate in northern greece and southern Italy.
Good point, Floof, I'm ashamed I didn't think of it myself! As to the climate issue and fertility, Hannibal was all over Italy like a nasty rash, but was forced to spend considerable amounts of time in "thirsty Apulia", where his forage problems were maximised.
From these regions he passed by the cities of the mainland, one of which has near it a lake of about thirty stadia in circuit, full of fish and very salty; this was drained dry by watering the beasts of burden alone.
They drank "very salty" water? I don't know about mules, donkeys, camels and oxen, but no horse would drink such water and I don't think any other animal could do so and live. Sounds like a flight of fancy to me.
Pity, because if this is an exaggeration, we have to be very cautious with the rest of it, too.
It's very interesting to read how he calculates it and particularly the European states he lists.
As for the service-train which followed them and the crews of the light corn-bearing vessels and all the other vessels besides which came by sea with the force, these I believe to have been not fewer but more than the fighting men. Suppose, however, that they were equal in number, neither more nor fewer. If they were equal to the fighting contingent, they made up as many tens of thousands as the others. The number, then, of those whom Xerxes son of Darius led as far as the Sepiad headland and Thermopylae was five million, two hundred and eighty-three thousand, two hundred and twenty.
Very interesting.
I do, however, wonder how there were provisions sufficient for so many tens of thousands, [2] for calculation shows me, that if each man received one choenix of wheat a day and no more, eleven hundred thousand and three hundred and forty bushels would be required every day.(sub1) In this calculation I take no account of the provisions for the women, eunuchs, beasts of burden and dogs.
Fascinating stuff!
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - Anonymous - 06-01-2005
But I think you mistyped the dates.
Good God, so I did! I evern forgot to count down, rather than up! :oops: Sorry!
You chaps have been frightfully busy whle I was away, haven't you?
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - hoplite14gr - 06-01-2005
We all agree that Herodotus figures need downsizing.
The question was how big was the army of Xerxes to make such an impression?
When the National Archelogical School excavated the the tomps of Marathon they found 192 bodies and a boy sceleton(!) in the Athenian tomp, 50 sceletons in the Platean tomp and 100 bodies in the tomp of the "servants".
Odd quantities of other remains yielding more than 200 skulls have been found in the area. That partly confirms Herodotus Athenian Marathon casualties so don´t just throw him in the dustbin!
Athens could raise in "PANSTRATIA" 13200 hoplites which suggest 13200 psiloi and we have records for 200 horsemen and 400 archers Sparta could raise 20000 hoplites possibly more. As I wrote before Archaologists say that in Pelloponisos there were at least 10 cities that could field between 5000 and 10000 hoplites with their servants fighting as psiloi. If in grave danger south Greece could raise 100000 troops the 150000 from the Persian side they wouldn´t make the terrible impresion suggested by Herodotos.
Yes we can downsize the Greek troops too but most scolars say that the 100000 figure can be supported by the data of excavated ancient cities polpulation estimates. So how much the Persian Army was?
Certainly not millions but 200000 must be a minimum to seem impresive to 100000.
Kind regards
Stefanos
Xerxes 5 million - Anonymous - 06-01-2005
I agree with you, Stefanos. I would conclude Xerxes might have had as many as 500,000 to start with and left 200,000 at least with Mardonius.
I was very interested in what you said about tomb finds.
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - floofthegoof - 06-01-2005
Quote:We all agree that Herodotus figures need downsizing.
The question was how big was the army of Xerxes to make such an impression?
When the National Archelogical School excavated the the tomps of Marathon they found 192 bodies and a boy sceleton(!)
Quote:CXVII. In the battle at Marathon about six thousand four hundred men of the foreigners were killed, and one hundred and ninety-two Athenians; that many fell on each side.
Lol! :lol:
That is extremely curious. Either Herodotus is right on the money, or there has been some fudging going on over the millenia.
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - Felix - 06-01-2005
Herodotus may have been well informed about Athenian casualties, perhaps from documents existing in his time. This does raise a question, though: who counted the Persians, and how would Herodotus get such numbers? As Aryaman2 noted, even if the army was supposed to be 500,000 (or 5 million), it would not be that number when finally mustered, and would be less by the time it reached Thermopylae. The nicely rounded figures (to the 10,000) cannot correpsond to the exact number of men eating rations/carrying weapons on a given day.
We know from medieval data (i.e. 14th century England) that the numbers of men called up always exceeded the number assembled, and the numbers gathered always exceeded the number at a day of battle.
Another question- if the final defeat of the Persians led to over 250,000 corpses (I think my math is right), what happened to them? They had to be disposed of, since the battle took place in an inhabited area; leaving them to rot would have produced some health problems. Burning this many bodies would have taken a stupendous amount of wood - and the logistics of amassing that much wood are difficult to envision. If they were buried, one can imagine the labor involved - and all quarter-million corpses left no trace, nor did their graves.
One other point: the calculations about losses en route to Thermopylae likely severely underestimate the losses. The problem is, once the numbers of men exceed the readily available food, all of the excess men starve. If a valley can feed 100,000 men marching through it, then 200,000 men are on half-rations, and 400,000 men are on quarter-rations. 400,000 starving men are likely to suffer huge losses from disease - far more than 200,000 men who are hungry, and compared with minimal losses for 100,000 men. If the army were increased to 600,000 men, it is likely that pretty much all the extra 200,000 will die. The logistical problem is quasi-exponential once the carrrying capacity of the land is exceeded.
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - floofthegoof - 06-01-2005
I posted the method of counting the land force earlier. H. gives us the 'fence' method.
One might think that there should be a giant mass grave or something at the Platea battlefield.(maybe there is?) Although once a big bonfire got hot enough, you could probably feul it with just the bodies, without needing much additional wood.
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - Felix - 06-02-2005
I don't think the "fence" method would work, though. The problem is very simple - people are not all the same size. When you have ethnic groups ranging from "Ethiopia" to the Indus to Bactria, they aren't the same. When you have different types of warrior, they aren't the same size. If one group is composed of (to use European warrior types) Balearic slingers, and the next group is battle-axe wielding Germanic shock troops, 10,000 men occupy different amounts of space. This is even more marked if they assemble with arms and armour. A sling takes up a lot less space than shield + armour + spear + sword/axe. So the method is an approximation; and nobody knows how inexact it is - assuming it was really used at all. It makes a nice story, though.
Take the Immortals, for example, Everyone knows the friezes of warriors from the persian capital. Those men carry large conical shields. If each shield sticks out, say, 6 inches in front of the body, this is a significant amount compared to the depth of an unarmoured light infantryman such as a javelin thrower. Fifty ranks of men, each with a 6" deep conical shield, take up at least an additional 25 feet compared to shieldless types.
The Persian point of view - Aryaman2 - 06-02-2005
The Persian registers are too fragmentary for that period, apparently there is no mention of the Greek campaign. Persian especialists note that it would be unlikely Xerxes commanded himself the expedition, as in 481 he was crushing the revolt of Bel-Shimani, and in 479 he was fighting the revolt of Samas-Eriba in Babylon. This last revolt would be the main reason for the withdraw of the main Persian army before Plataea.
I have collectes a couple of inconsistencies by Herodotus from the Persian point of view
1) From a cuneiform tablet known as Persepolis Fortification tablet 684, we know that Mardonius was married to a woman named Ardušnamuya. This text was written in March 495, which offers a terminus ante quem for the wedding ceremony. This contradicts the words of the Greek researcher Herodotus of Halicarnassus, who states that Mardonius was still 'being a young man and recently married to Artozostre, a daughter of king Darius' in 492 (Histories 6.43). On the other hand, there is no reason to doubt Herodotus' words that Artozostre/Ardušnamuya was the daughter of Darius and his beloved wife Artystone
2) Herodotus has a very strange story to tell about an event that took place after the battle of Plataea
"The body of Mardonius however had disappeared on the day after the battle [...] I have heard the names of many men of various cities who are said to have buried Mardonius, and I know that many received gifts from Artontes, the son of Mardonius, for having done this"
To the Greek audience of Herodotus, this made perfect sense, but a Persian would be shocked to hear this. It was not their custom to bury the dead. Zoroastrianists have their bodies exposed to the vultures.
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - hoplite14gr - 06-02-2005
I agree with Aryaman2 about the Iranian burial customs.
Very intersting the point about Mardonius. But are we talking of Mardonius son of Govrias or another Persian aristokrat with the same name?
Plutarchos also attacks Herodotus for contradictions from that time. He went as far to suggest that his palm was "greased".
Herodotos did not report everything right but he did not report everything wrong either so thats why a combination of sources and calculations might bring us closer to the truth.
Burial customs were different but both cultures had a respect for the dead and Mardonius corpse handling was possibly written for a Greek audience.
But would an open minded Greek would be understanding of "ceremonial abandonment" of the dead to nature and would an open minded Persian understood the fact that burial to the ground would be the Greek way of showing respect to the dead? There were diblomatic ties between the wars so there must be people from both sides with an understanding of the others habits.
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - floofthegoof - 06-02-2005
I'm not terribly surprised that their are no Persian records of the campaign. Just as Xerxes would want to inflate his numbers for the ears of the Greeks before the campaign, he would likewise not want to be remembered for a disasterous campaign.
Xerxes commonly executed people who spoke with a tone he disliked. I would not want to be his chronicler. "Oh great king! I have prepared for you a complete record of your gigantic failure against the Yuana." Rather, I suspect he never mentioned it again, and neither did anyone else in his court.
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - Aryaman2 - 06-02-2005
Quote:I'm not terribly surprised that their are no Persian records of the campaign. Just as Xerxes would want to inflate his numbers for the ears of the Greeks before the campaign, he would likewise not want to be remembered for a disasterous campaign.I was thinking of administrative texts, not the kind of records you suggest, because in fact he wasn´t remembered for a disatrous campaign, in the Daeva inscription he says
Xerxes commonly executed people who spoke with a tone he disliked. I would not want to be his chronicler. "Oh great king! I have prepared for you a complete record of your gigantic failure against the Yuana." Rather, I suspect he never mentioned it again, and neither did anyone else in his court.
"King Xerxes says: By the grace of Ahuramazda these are the countries of which I was king apart from Persia. I had lordship over them. They bore me tribute. What was said to them by me, that they did. My law, that held them: Media, Elam, Arachosia, Armenia, Drangiana, Parthia, Aria, Bactria, Sogdia, Chorasmia, Babylonia, Assyria, Sattagydia, Lydia, Egypt, Yaunâ, those who dwell on this side of the sea and those who dwell across the sea, men of Maka, Arabia, Gandara, India, Cappadocia, the Dahae, the haoma-drinking Sacae, the Sacae wearing pointed caps, Thrace, men of Âkaufaciyâ, Libyans, Carians, and the Nubians"
prompted by these discussion, I have been reading quite a bit these days on the Persian Empire, and the impression I get is that it was very unstable, rfiddled with revolts, Darius fought no less than six revolting kings, and he devotes much more room in his Behistum inscription to these wars than to any external wars. Xerxes had to fight many revolts as well, and 2 of them in 481 and 479 BC, during the Greek campaign. It seems unlikely to me he could commit that many resources to that campaign.
Re: Xerxes Five Million Men - floofthegoof - 06-02-2005
Quote:It seems unlikely to me he could commit that many resources to that campaign.
That's interesting. I wonder how many troops he would need for the home guard. Do you think it would be feasable to use such a campaign as a tool for stabilization? If you empty all these lands of a good portion of it's fighting men, maybe you would get less trouble from them in the short term? It is often said that troops need to be kept busy to prevent chaos. Perhaps Xerxes felt that such an endeavor was needed to keep his empire in focus.