Battle of Thermopylae

[hoplite07]

Okay, in this battle, Ive read several sources saying that there were around 20,000 Persian casualties. Is this accurate? Also, did the 300 Spartans do the majority of the killing, or what? Because I know or read they did relays but one source said that they werent successful.
And did the Spartans ever surprise attack the Persians?


thx, much appreciated

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Give me the number of the Persians who fought and I'll tell you if 20,000 casualties is accurate :twisted: But you see,we don't even know the number of Persians and everything you read is based on speculation,considering how much suplies they could have,how many their ships were,how many could live with the resources of Greek land and how many seems "logical".As far as I know Herodotus does not mention casualties.Does any one other mention?
We don't know who did the majority of killing,we can guess it was the Spartans but not necessarilly.We do know that the most brave hoplite who fought was the Spartan Dienekes,which again doen't mean all his co citizens were as brave.And anyway,brave does not always mean successful.Though Herodotus just sais that "he fought best"
Herodotus does not mention any surprise attack by the Greeks.I think it is Plutarch(?) who does.Supposedly a very small team of them attacked the Persian camp one night.
Khaire
Giannis

[geala]

It might be possible to estimate casualties if we think about the battle formation, the time and the space of the battle. About 7000 Greeks were present, but only a part could have been in the first two rows of the phalanx and used their weapons. How long was the Greek battle line? The pass was as narrow as 50 metres (or 15 m ?) at that time, but I have the feeling, the battle line was broader, being formed in a wider part of the pass. The battle lasted for about three days? How many men at the same time could have done damage for what time ... ?
You see, I don't know much about the battle but if one would have the factors perhaps the numbers could be judged.

I believe it is much to high if casualties should mean dead men. When people fight each other in firm formations and have only spears as main weapons and some kind of shields, the killing factor is rather low normally before the formation breaks.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Since 3000 Phokeans were sent to guard the path and never fought,only 4000 Greeks were in the battlefield.I don't believe the Greeks would have used all their hoplite units together.I mean,not all the 700 Thespians would have formed a single phalanx of great depth,simply because it's not possible to form a phalanx of 70 depth!Note that when the Thebans did this 100 years later,they were trained about it.At a guess I'd say each time a phalanx of 16 or so depth was leading,allowing the others to rest.By the way,300/16=18 Spartans fighting on the front.A good number if the passage was 15m wide.
I'm affraid,Wolfgang,we cannot ever say how many and for how long could be efective in any such situation...We always get surprised by what men can do when desperate!20000 casualties means 5 Persians killed by EVERY Greek.This without counting the last day.Most of rear rankers never made it to the actual fight,so this increases the number of kills for the front rankers.And if we count the greek casualties,too,this increases even more the kills needed by every Greek to reach the number of 20.000.I don't know if it is impossible,but it is MUCH!
Khaire
Giannis

[Hoplitesmores]

They fought for several days so for me everything is possible.

[hoplite14gr]

I would advice our young friend Brazelton to check the "Thermopylae" threads in the Greek Section. He will get lots of info and comparisons.

Dear Giannis the Phokians were 1000. The source for the "commando raid" is Strabo.

In ancient battle few casualties happen on first conatact but when one side turns then the overpowering side can do terrible execution.

Effective defence by an archer against ans armored footman in close combat is out of the question. After the "sparabara" obstacle was penetated it was not abattel any more just execution.
So horric casualty ratios are not impropable.

Kind regards

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

I see,two terrible unforgivable mistakes on my part.One on the Phokians and one on Strabo... :oops:

[Felix]

I agree that a losing army often suffers much worse losses than the victors, but most of this happens when an army is routed and being pursued by the winners. Thermopylae is different in that the Greeks had little opportunity to conduct any pursuit. They could defeat each attacking wave of the Persian army, but it is unlikely the Greeks could pursue them any distance. The main reason is that the rest of the massive Persian army was standing nearby. Secondly, as far as I know, most or all of the attackers were more lightly equipped than hoplites; and as we know from the later use of peltasts, an unarmoured man with a smaller/lighter shield can easily outran a pursuing hoplite.

If you examine battles where pursuit was not conducted, the losses are much more even than battles which ended with one side collapsing.

[hoplite14gr]

Agreed Felix but only on condition that the commanders of the light troops used them properly. I belive that part of the cazualty problem was that Persian commnaders wasted their troops trying to impress the High King or the High King's meddling in the issue and not allowing them to do their job. There are endless histolical examples on armies wasted for the shake of politics.

Kind regards

[Ghostmojo]

Well, Xerxes had cause to dig huge pits to bury his fallen troops so that the vast army that still remained, would not be too disheartened by the number of their fallen comrades lying around the battlefield, as they marched past south towards Athens.

Three interesting things occur to me which rarely get much coverage when discussing Thermopylai:

(a) What do we know about the Phokian Wall which was rebuilt by the allied Greeks upon arrival in the pass? Size? Ramparts? Useage?

and

(b) Where did the 700 Thespians fall - alongside the Spartans or at the other end of the pass?

and

© What about the 400 Thebans and 100 Mykeneians? Did they all surrender? Or just the Thebans? Or did some of the Thebans actually do the decent thing (a rarity for Thebans as the bad-boys of classical Greek panhellenism prior to Chaeroneia) and join their fellow Boeotians?

Interesting and thought-provoking stuff hey?

[hoplite14gr]

The Mycenenans retreated along with other Pelopeonesans.

The Phokians were not rich and the wall was poorly maintained if at all.
It main purpose was to fend off Thessalians

Pauasanias at his 10 th book says that Leonidas tried to strengthen it.

But the wall even in ruins could aid the defence if it was garissoned with light troops. Malians and Trahinians were good slingers and could support hoplites from the wall.

Plutarch a Beotian claims that the demokratic Thebans were exiles and joined Leonidas. They surrendered probably at the time he was killed.
It was those Thebans that stayed behind that joined the Persian cause.

It is probably true because the Athenians were adamant in punishing the
Thebans after Platea but they let the Thessalians get off lightly.

Thebans were probably on the "wrong side" because at Salamis Plateans and Thespians (both Beotians) joined as marines.

Kind regards

[Ghostmojo]

I suspect some of the Thebans may well have viewed themselves as Pan-Hellenic patriots and perhaps the 400 in the pass deserve a better press?

However, they are often described as being held hostage by Leonidas and surrendered just as quickly as they were sure the Spartans' anihilation was imminent. Unfair?

I prefer to think that some of them did rise to the occasion.

The proposed Athenian treatment of Thebes after Plataia is perhaps reminiscient (or prescient) of the intentions Thebes (and others) had for Athens after the Peloponnesian War (had the Spartans not intervened in remembrance of Athens' fine Persian war record).

In any event the Thebans formed one point of that unfortunate triangle of powers in Greece. The struggles between the others - Athens and Sparta - and Thebes itself were perhaps inevitable given the Greek predeliction for discord. Was it due to the friction between Ionian, Dorian and Aeolian?

[hoplite14gr]

It was a habit untill mid 17h century for the army to yield when the leader was dead. One propability is that they abandoned the effort after Leonidas went down. The Spartan simply carried on the fight.

Probably these 400 hoplites were the missing votes in the decision to join with the Persians or not when the issue was discussed in Thebes.

The "Spartoi" Beotian families had a yet un-researched role to play in these events. Tribal issued stop matter after middle of the Peloponesian war though.

The problem with the much later Pelopidas and Epameinondas was that they were respectable gentlemen beliving in the Archaic ideal of the autonomus city in an era that this ideal was dead.

Kind regards

[Ghostmojo]

It is somewhat pleasing to think of the rehabilitation of at least some of the Thebans during the Thermopylai campaign. 8)

I take your point about the leader falling/fleeing which certainly accounted for many Persian collapses during this and later periods.

However, I don't surpose that many Greeks present were surprised that the Spartans carried on - possibly with renewed vigour (as they fought to retrieve Leonidas' body).

The surprise came much later at Sphakteria.

Thebes' own period of hegemony was a fragile thing though - based as it largely was upon the (charismatic leader) presence of Epameinondas and Pelopidas. Thebes also sadly was destined for an utter and irreversible demise (much later along with Corinth) which Sparta and Athens were spared.

[hoplite14gr]

The loss/recovery of the body might be "poetic description" by Herodotus.
If you go to this thread:
http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=17139
you will see a reconstruction of the Spartan battle line.

If Leonidas was hit his 2 bodyguards would push-shove for enough tine to give the rear rankers space for taking the body back draging it almost vertically. I cant think of a pure "Homeric" encounter

The Spartan line of thought was more ""bloodyminded" compared to the rest of the Greeks, that why Sfacteria was a shock.

Kind regards