Pyrrhus of Epirus Illustration

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Where is the link to Johnny's site? :?

[Marcus Mummius]

Where is the link to Johnny's site? :?

http://community.imaginefx.com/fxpose/j ... portfolio/

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Thanks Jef, I could only access the Pyrrus picture from Johnny's link!

[Ceasar Augustus]

Great site, I really like it.

[Johnny Shumate]

Sorry that I had to disable the responses... A certain fellow was out to destroy me for some reason.... I don't mind critical feedback at all... This kid was leaving vulgar and immature comments... I want to keep my online portfolio a professional site and not a place for "trash talkers" to have a platform...

Does everyone know that the battle of Sybota will be in the next issue of Ancient Warfare Magazine...?

Glad everyone likes it..!

Johnny

[Paralus]

I don´t think Corinthians were unskilled plus Thukidides is an Atheninan!

They and the Spartans - more so - were much less skilled than the Athenians. They were still fighting in the "old way". This is the point of Thucydides' observation. He counterpoints it with his vivid description of the out-sailed Peloponnesians off Naupactos some five years later. In that action he has Phormio point out the lack of naval skill of the Peloponnesians when he claims that the Peloponesians wish to catch them in narrow waters so as to turn the action into a battle on land at sea. Just as was Sybota. Conversely, the Peloponnesian commanders, including Brasidas, wax lyrical about their courage all the while trying to shoot the elephant in the room: the Athenian's clear advantage in naval tactics and skill (1.87):

So far as you are concerned you may lack the enemy's experience, but that is more than made for by your superior daring. This skill of theirs, which is the thing which you fear most, has to be combined with courage.

As with others of his speeches, Thucydides is working the theme. Here it is the fear of Athenian naval tactics and skills which were, demonstrably, better than the Peloponnesian.

That Thucydides is an Athenian is of minor import. He spares neither himself (Amphipolis) nor the Athenians (take your pick) throughout his narrative. He is most definitely an imperialist and enjoys the descriptions of power and its use and those who wield it: the Melian dialogue; Mytilenian debate; Brasidas' rise and undermining by certain Spartans and more. He is not often caught out favouring the Athenians and in these scenarios he is demonstrating for readers what, in his time, was an accepted fact.

This likely is not the place for a 'source criticism' essay on Thucydides...

If you have your decks full of combatants and you fight in a narrow place, why bother with elaborate tactics? You just let your marines clear the enemy decks and you acquire less damaged ships, spoils and slaves.
You investment is partly returned.

A pity the skilled Corinthians were in no way interested in your economic analysis (1.50):

After their victory, the Corinthians, instead of taking into tow and dragging away the ships that they had put out action, turned their attentions to the men. They sailed in and out of the wreckage, killing rather taking prisoners. Thus they unknowingly killed some of their own friends...

They were pursuing vengeance pure and simple. A precursor of the hatred that would now fester between 'founder' and 'colony' and which would see Kerkyra fall into that particularly bloody Greek city state stasis. And they showed a little sailing skill in so doing. This they had no intention of attempting in the battle.

Given the number of hoplites, archers and javelineers aboard the ships there was not ever any intention to fight a naval engagement. Rather a “land engagementâ€

[Ceasar Augustus]

Thank you for all that data I will be sure to go to you next time I need information on the greeks

[Marcvs75]

Nice picture from the internet. Don't know who made it

[Ceasar Augustus]

It certaintly is an excellent drawing.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Sorry that I had to disable the responses... A certain fellow was out to destroy me for some reason.... I don't mind critical feedback at all... This kid was leaving vulgar and immature comments... I want to keep my online portfolio a professional site and not a place for "trash talkers" to have a platform...

Does everyone know that the battle of Sybota will be in the next issue of Ancient Warfare Magazine...?

Glad everyone likes it..!

Johnny

Sorry to hear about that Johnny!
I guess some people are alive only because it is illegal to shoot them.... hock: hock: :oops: maybe tha twas a little un-pc of me?

Look forward to seeing the next issue then! 8)

[Ceasar Augustus]

How do you subscribe?

[Johnny Shumate]

Try this...
http://www.ancient-warfare.com/cms/

[sesdelta38]

Nice picture from the internet. Don't know who made it

I've seen that picture. It's an illistration from the Osprey book, Early Roman Armies. I saw it on a Russian forum. I discovered this forum through a thread in the Roman Military history & Archeology forum. I have it in my favorites.

[Sean Manning]

I note you've disabled comments on your portfolio Johnny - too many backsides??

Pity, I quite like your Battle of Sybota. A difficult thing to capture but you've gone very close (Thuc.1.49):

The fighting was of a somewhat old-fashioned kind, since they were still behindhand in naval matters, both sides having numbers of hoplites aboard their ships, together with archers and javelin throwers. But the fighting was hard enough in spite of the lack of skill shown: indeed it was more like a battle on land than a naval engagement. When the ships came into collision it was difficult for them to break away clear, because of the number engaged and of their close formation. In fact both sides relied more for victory on their hoplites, who were on the decks and who fought a regular pitched battle there while the ships remained motionless.

Thucydides implies that only the Athenian ships employed ramming tactics or anything other than "hoplite" fighting. Greek naval warfare had not progressed one iota from the Persian wars - outside of Athens that is. Something Phormio would so devastatingly demonstrate some six or so years later.

One disagreement there, Paralus. Thucydides implies that both sides tried ramming, but prow-to-prow not in the flanks or against the oars. As ships became stuck or grappled ("it was difficult for them to break away clear") movement probably stopped.

There were four basic tactics for disabling an enemy in ancient naval battle. To wit:

1 ramming head on
2 ramming the flanks or oars of the enemy by clever manoeuvering
3 grappling and boarding
4 (rare) setting your opponent alight with flaming missiles or fire-pots

These were supported by shooting at the enemy marines and deck crew (and the rowers, if the enemy ship wasn't cataphract) but you couldn't defeat an enemy with projectiles alone. In their glory days, I think that the Athenians prefered #2 and their less-experienced enemies #1 and #3.

I can't wait to see the Sybota article and picture, Johnny!

[Paullus Scipio]

....there will also be articles on 'Athenian tactical preferences', and another on Boarding in the next Issue of AW, exploring the matters you refer to in some detail..... D