300 The Movie - A logistical history lesson!
A very interesting movie has just been released in the Australian theatres. "300" is the story of the Greek alliance troops (300 Spartans and a larger number of other Greek soldiers) who immortalised themselves by stalling the much larger Persian army of King Xerxes I at the pass of Thermopylae in 480BC. For two days they fought against a superior force before being defeated on the third day. It is said that as many as 2.5 million soldiers were encamped on the Persian side against a force of between 7,500 to 11,500 soldiers of the Greek alliance on the other side. It is very much a story of a great military strategy, of interpreting the dreams of Delphi and of the political alliances within the Greek speaking city-states.
Why am I writing of this just after the blog about Logistics and Alexander the Great's Army? Quite simply because a study of required logistics to feed and house an army of 2.5 million soldiers, plus as many followers of the army, creates a slightly different picture of what may have happened without changing the essence of the story and its outcomes.
Is it likely there were 2.5 million Persian soldiers at Thermopylae? Just to place the size of the army in context:
• The population of Toronto (2006) was estimated to be 2.5 million people and you can double that number for Greater Toronto.
• The size of the US Army force (excluding other allied forces) in Iraq in 2007 is estimated to be about 150,000 troops (Keegan, 2007).
The actual size of the Persian army has caused a significant amount of discussion as the Wikipedia stub "Size of the Persian Army" (Battle of Thermopylae) indicates. It is worth reading the views of Strecchini (Size of the Persian Army) as well.
The existing discussions take a number of angles to estimating the size of the Persian force. Many contemporary scholars are apparently skeptical of Herodotus (de Selincourt, 2003) and his estimates. To explain their disbelief, some say that Herodetus confused the Persian terms for thousand (chiliarchy) and then thousand (miliarchy). The implication is that the Persian force was only 250,000 soldiers, a tenfold reduction of the size of the Persian forces ranged against the heroic Spartans. Others say that it's impossible since the normal size of the Persian army was 300,000 soldiers and that at best the size of the army was doubled to 600,000.
The other factor that needs to be considered is geography. It has been stated that the area in front of Thermoplyae was only a few square miles. Let's assume 5 square miles (possibly being generous). 2.5 million people over 5 square miles means 500,000 in one square mile (2.6 square kms). That's about 5 square metres per person..... excluding walkways, public facilities, cavalry and transport animals, sleeping quarters, etc. That's a very crowded army site and we have not included the baggage train! This fact alone (subject to confirmation of the area in front of the Thermopylae Pass) means that the size of the Persian army needs to be looked at in detail again.
Does it really matter whether the size of the Persian army was at least 20 times the size of Greek forces set against it in Thermopylae! In one way, in terms of the numerical advantage, it doesn't matter. King Xerxes I knew it would only be a matter of time before he would get through. That the back pathway shown to the Persians by a local Greek shepherd cut the battle down to a three day engagement is not important, except in showing that the Greek Alliance had chosen their position wisely. The Persians still got through.
The interesting point is the logistics one. The Persian fleet, which was involved in supplying the Persian army, had been pinned down by the Greeks and in fact lost some of their fleet to a storm. This was likely an important food supply. Even with only 300,000 soldiers and an equal number of followers, the Persian army needed the equivalent of 400 metric tonnes of grain equivalent per day to feed the army alone! That means two ship loads of grain every day if my calculations are correct (refer Notes in previous blog). Delays in the campaign would have started to cause problems in terms of the available food.
Remember, the battle took place somewhere between September 18th and 20th in the modern calendar. The winter colds sets in Greece seriously by mid-November, particularly in the northern provinces of modern Greece. The population of Greece at the time of Alexander the Great was estimated recently (Herman Hansen, 2006) to be between 10 and 13 million, including slaves. The population of Modern Greece (July 2006) was estimated to be 10.7 million (CIA Factbook, 2007). Hmmm... the point is that King Xerxes I may not have had enough food stored away for his army in Greece and would have wanted to return at least part of his army back to Asia Minor. He could not ship such a large army; they would need to march to northern Greece and be transported across the Hellespont.
That the Persian Army was much larger than the Spartan forces and the Greek allies is likely undisputable. One point does emerge quite strongly though; mounting these campaigns required a significant logistic planning effort and in the less productive Greek lands, you could have an army so big that it would be difficult to use the strategem of a larger size effectively without choosing where to fight to your advantage. The Greek alliance probably had the advantage there.
The implications for Alexander the Great was significant here as well. If you can choose your battlefield carefully, through the use of battle-hardened troops one could negate the superior numerical advantage of the Persians. What a lesson! Oh, by the way, Alexander the Great faced a similar situation at the gates of Susa, the last natural mountain pass barring his way to Persepolis. What a great irony it was that the Persian commander did not choose to fight there to the death. What an even greater irony that Alexander the Great also had to resort to a backpass through the mountains to win!
Don't you just love history! Pity about the historical accuracy (or lack thereof) of the movie 300 (Lytle, 2007) !
Bibliography
CIA The World Factbook 2007
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/gr.html
de Selincourt, Aubrey (translator) Herodetus: The Histories Penguin Classics reissue edition, 2003
Keegan, J. "50,000 more US troops can save Iraq" Telegraph.co.uk 03 Jan. 2007
Lyttle, Ephraim "Sparta? No. This is Madness" Toronto Star 11 March 2007
http://www.thestar.com/article/190493
Strecchini, Livio C. "The Size of the Persian Army"
http://www.metrum.org/perwars/persize.htm (read 08April2007)
Herman Hansen, Mogens The Shotgun Method: The Demography of the Ancient Greek City-State Culture The University of Missouri Press, 2006
Wikipedia "300 (film)" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_%28film%29 (read 07April2007)
Wikipedia "Battle of Thermopylae" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_at_the_Pass_of_Thermopylae#_note-Maurice
(read 07April2007)
Why am I writing of this just after the blog about Logistics and Alexander the Great's Army? Quite simply because a study of required logistics to feed and house an army of 2.5 million soldiers, plus as many followers of the army, creates a slightly different picture of what may have happened without changing the essence of the story and its outcomes.
Is it likely there were 2.5 million Persian soldiers at Thermopylae? Just to place the size of the army in context:
• The population of Toronto (2006) was estimated to be 2.5 million people and you can double that number for Greater Toronto.
• The size of the US Army force (excluding other allied forces) in Iraq in 2007 is estimated to be about 150,000 troops (Keegan, 2007).
The actual size of the Persian army has caused a significant amount of discussion as the Wikipedia stub "Size of the Persian Army" (Battle of Thermopylae) indicates. It is worth reading the views of Strecchini (Size of the Persian Army) as well.
The existing discussions take a number of angles to estimating the size of the Persian force. Many contemporary scholars are apparently skeptical of Herodotus (de Selincourt, 2003) and his estimates. To explain their disbelief, some say that Herodetus confused the Persian terms for thousand (chiliarchy) and then thousand (miliarchy). The implication is that the Persian force was only 250,000 soldiers, a tenfold reduction of the size of the Persian forces ranged against the heroic Spartans. Others say that it's impossible since the normal size of the Persian army was 300,000 soldiers and that at best the size of the army was doubled to 600,000.
The other factor that needs to be considered is geography. It has been stated that the area in front of Thermoplyae was only a few square miles. Let's assume 5 square miles (possibly being generous). 2.5 million people over 5 square miles means 500,000 in one square mile (2.6 square kms). That's about 5 square metres per person..... excluding walkways, public facilities, cavalry and transport animals, sleeping quarters, etc. That's a very crowded army site and we have not included the baggage train! This fact alone (subject to confirmation of the area in front of the Thermopylae Pass) means that the size of the Persian army needs to be looked at in detail again.
Does it really matter whether the size of the Persian army was at least 20 times the size of Greek forces set against it in Thermopylae! In one way, in terms of the numerical advantage, it doesn't matter. King Xerxes I knew it would only be a matter of time before he would get through. That the back pathway shown to the Persians by a local Greek shepherd cut the battle down to a three day engagement is not important, except in showing that the Greek Alliance had chosen their position wisely. The Persians still got through.
The interesting point is the logistics one. The Persian fleet, which was involved in supplying the Persian army, had been pinned down by the Greeks and in fact lost some of their fleet to a storm. This was likely an important food supply. Even with only 300,000 soldiers and an equal number of followers, the Persian army needed the equivalent of 400 metric tonnes of grain equivalent per day to feed the army alone! That means two ship loads of grain every day if my calculations are correct (refer Notes in previous blog). Delays in the campaign would have started to cause problems in terms of the available food.
Remember, the battle took place somewhere between September 18th and 20th in the modern calendar. The winter colds sets in Greece seriously by mid-November, particularly in the northern provinces of modern Greece. The population of Greece at the time of Alexander the Great was estimated recently (Herman Hansen, 2006) to be between 10 and 13 million, including slaves. The population of Modern Greece (July 2006) was estimated to be 10.7 million (CIA Factbook, 2007). Hmmm... the point is that King Xerxes I may not have had enough food stored away for his army in Greece and would have wanted to return at least part of his army back to Asia Minor. He could not ship such a large army; they would need to march to northern Greece and be transported across the Hellespont.
That the Persian Army was much larger than the Spartan forces and the Greek allies is likely undisputable. One point does emerge quite strongly though; mounting these campaigns required a significant logistic planning effort and in the less productive Greek lands, you could have an army so big that it would be difficult to use the strategem of a larger size effectively without choosing where to fight to your advantage. The Greek alliance probably had the advantage there.
The implications for Alexander the Great was significant here as well. If you can choose your battlefield carefully, through the use of battle-hardened troops one could negate the superior numerical advantage of the Persians. What a lesson! Oh, by the way, Alexander the Great faced a similar situation at the gates of Susa, the last natural mountain pass barring his way to Persepolis. What a great irony it was that the Persian commander did not choose to fight there to the death. What an even greater irony that Alexander the Great also had to resort to a backpass through the mountains to win!
Don't you just love history! Pity about the historical accuracy (or lack thereof) of the movie 300 (Lytle, 2007) !
Bibliography
CIA The World Factbook 2007
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/gr.html
de Selincourt, Aubrey (translator) Herodetus: The Histories Penguin Classics reissue edition, 2003
Keegan, J. "50,000 more US troops can save Iraq" Telegraph.co.uk 03 Jan. 2007
Lyttle, Ephraim "Sparta? No. This is Madness" Toronto Star 11 March 2007
http://www.thestar.com/article/190493
Strecchini, Livio C. "The Size of the Persian Army"
http://www.metrum.org/perwars/persize.htm (read 08April2007)
Herman Hansen, Mogens The Shotgun Method: The Demography of the Ancient Greek City-State Culture The University of Missouri Press, 2006
Wikipedia "300 (film)" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_%28film%29 (read 07April2007)
Wikipedia "Battle of Thermopylae" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_at_the_Pass_of_Thermopylae#_note-Maurice
(read 07April2007)
posted by ozunani at 7:07 AM
1 Comments:
hi lambros.. i really enjoy reading ur blog... just dont be lazy and write more lool ... talk 2 u later
ciao
Post a Comment
<< Home