02-14-2012, 05:18 AM
By the way, one could of course question the numbers given by Diodorus, but according to him, from Artaxerxes 400,000 men (this is his account), 15,000 were killed, mainly by the Greeks, while from the 83,000 men of Cyrus only 3,000 were slain, since Cyrus' men are mainly attested to have fled quite quickly, their master having been slain almost as soon as the engagement began.
Thus, according to Diodorus too, there was no chance of any retreat stratagem played on the part of the Persians.
As for Xenophon's account, the Greek perspective is clearly given when the Greeks set up a trophy before returning to their camp. As far as they were concerned they won the battle, Cyrus had lost his life and the campaign with it. And when the emissaries of the King arrive and demand their surrender, they proclaim themselves winners and challenge him to meet them in battle. So, as Paul says, it was a tactical victory for Cyrus, since victory in battle is only defined as conquering the field but a strategical defeat, since the campaign was over and won by Artaxeres. This is no strange thing to happen. Didn't the Americans win all battles at 'Nam and then "lost" the war?
Thus, according to Diodorus too, there was no chance of any retreat stratagem played on the part of the Persians.
As for Xenophon's account, the Greek perspective is clearly given when the Greeks set up a trophy before returning to their camp. As far as they were concerned they won the battle, Cyrus had lost his life and the campaign with it. And when the emissaries of the King arrive and demand their surrender, they proclaim themselves winners and challenge him to meet them in battle. So, as Paul says, it was a tactical victory for Cyrus, since victory in battle is only defined as conquering the field but a strategical defeat, since the campaign was over and won by Artaxeres. This is no strange thing to happen. Didn't the Americans win all battles at 'Nam and then "lost" the war?
