08-10-2007, 10:40 PM
My information comes from a few papers by Bosworth and Justin's epitome.
"After the departure of Alexander from Macedonia, almost all Greece, as if to take advantage of the opportunity for recovering their liberty, had risen in arms, yielding, in that respect, to the influence of the Lacedaemonians, who alone had rejected peace from Philip and Alexander, and had scorned the terms on which it was offered. The leader in this insurrection was Agis, king of the Lacedaemonians, but Antipater, assembling an army, suppressed the commotion in its infancy. The slaughter, however, was great on both sides; for king Agis, when he saw his men taking to flight, dismissed his guards, and, that he might seem inferior to Alexander in fortune only, not in valour, made such a havoc among the enemy, that he sometimes drove whole troops before him. At last, overpowered by numbers, he fell superior to all in glory. "
Curtius rufus called it something like the most viscious battle of its day, between the two most warlike nations. He says that the losses were high- something like 5,000 and 3,000, way high for the victors, and almost all the Macedonians wounded.
A large part of the Spartan forces contained the remnants of the Greek Mercs from Persian service, so they had already faced Alexander. Even with this they were outnumber almost 2 to one by Antipater. The Spartans were supposedly winning at first, then born down by Antipater's numbers, but as this seems to be almost a literary motif with Spartan losses who knows about it's accuracy.
As to Corrhagus, I don't know what he commanded, but would he have come down from Acrocorinth and faced Agis in battle with only peltasts?
Paul
"After the departure of Alexander from Macedonia, almost all Greece, as if to take advantage of the opportunity for recovering their liberty, had risen in arms, yielding, in that respect, to the influence of the Lacedaemonians, who alone had rejected peace from Philip and Alexander, and had scorned the terms on which it was offered. The leader in this insurrection was Agis, king of the Lacedaemonians, but Antipater, assembling an army, suppressed the commotion in its infancy. The slaughter, however, was great on both sides; for king Agis, when he saw his men taking to flight, dismissed his guards, and, that he might seem inferior to Alexander in fortune only, not in valour, made such a havoc among the enemy, that he sometimes drove whole troops before him. At last, overpowered by numbers, he fell superior to all in glory. "
Curtius rufus called it something like the most viscious battle of its day, between the two most warlike nations. He says that the losses were high- something like 5,000 and 3,000, way high for the victors, and almost all the Macedonians wounded.
A large part of the Spartan forces contained the remnants of the Greek Mercs from Persian service, so they had already faced Alexander. Even with this they were outnumber almost 2 to one by Antipater. The Spartans were supposedly winning at first, then born down by Antipater's numbers, but as this seems to be almost a literary motif with Spartan losses who knows about it's accuracy.
As to Corrhagus, I don't know what he commanded, but would he have come down from Acrocorinth and faced Agis in battle with only peltasts?
Paul
Paul M. Bardunias
MODERATOR: [url:2dqwu8yc]http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=4100[/url]
A Spartan, being asked a question, answered "No." And when the questioner said, "You lie," the Spartan said, "You see, then, that it is stupid of you to ask questions to which you already know the answer!"
MODERATOR: [url:2dqwu8yc]http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=4100[/url]
A Spartan, being asked a question, answered "No." And when the questioner said, "You lie," the Spartan said, "You see, then, that it is stupid of you to ask questions to which you already know the answer!"
