Romans outnumbered Seleucidans at Magnesia?

[Aryaman2]

Hi all
According to the entry in Wikipedia, Antiochos III was outnumbered by the Romans in the battle. The article is based on a book by J.D. Grainger "The Roman war of Antiochus the The Great" has anybody read the book? I am interested in knowing how he made his calculations. I checked Amazon, but the book is rather expensive!

[Gaius_Calvus]

Hi,

I recently read Goldsworthy's "In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire (Phoenix Press)." I found it to be a very good work.

In it, he gives a great account of the Macedonian wars with a detailed account of Magnesia. Unfortunately, I don't have the reference at hand right now, but can check for you tonight.

In the meantime, it is quite reasonably priced thru Amazon (about $11 US + shipping).

Calvus

[Aryaman2]

Thanks for the suggestion, but normally all accounts follow the sources, Appian and Livy, considering that the Romans were heavily outnumbered, and I am interested in how Grainger arrives to the opposite conclusion, especially since he doesn´t reduce, as it would look likely, the size of the Seleucidan army, he accepts basically the very questionable numbers given by Livy on Antiochos army, instead he doubles the number of Romans present in the battle according to the sources.

[Gaius_Calvus]

Yes, they certainly do, as does Hans Delbruck, but in his case he applied some pretty good metrics to attempt to prove/disprove the claims of numbers in the ancient sources.

Perhaps check his work that covers the period:

Delbrück, Hans (1920): History of the Art of War, University of Nebraska Press; Reprint edition, 1990. Translated by Walter, J. Renfroe. 4 Volumes.

I own them and read them while I attended the US Army's "School of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS), but don't have the particular volume in front of me, otherwise I would give you a citation.

This might lend you another frame of reference on which to evaluate numerical claims.

Calvus

[Aryaman2]

Thanks again, however I own Delbruck´s work, He dismiss the battle of Magnesia without discussion on the grounds that Livy account of the battle is pure fantasy, so unfortunately no information to get from that. BTW I would be interested in knowing what is the curriculum in the SAMS, I am surprised to see Delbruck in, after all, although valuable, it is already dated, is anything else related to Military History?

[Gaius_Calvus]

Sorry, my memory did not serve me well with that recommendation! :oops:

The SAMS curriculum is about one-third military theory, one-third military history, and one-third practical application in military planning.

Very similar to the old German Imperial Army Kriegsakademie that trained the generalstab officers with a similar goal -- to create a cadre of dedicated military planners.

Calvus