Herodotus gives the number of 2 million+ for Xerxes' army, including attendants.
...
The Achaemenid Empire had manpower reserves similar to Nazi Germany,
who deployed more troops farther.
On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 17:13:00 -0700 (PDT), Tiglath wrote:
Herodotus gives the number of 2 million+ for Xerxes' army, including attendants.Wow
...
The Achaemenid Empire had manpower reserves similar to Nazi Germany,
The Achaemenid Empire had at its height about 35 million people, Nazi Germany in June 1941 had
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/List_of_countries_by_population_in_1939
Germany 86 million
Italy 43 million
Finland 3 million
Romania 20 million
Plus many supporters in almost all of Western and Eastern Europe to draw manpowwer.
Plus drawing 2 million males from 35 million population would be
impossible.
who deployed more troops farther.Putting aside, railways, trucks and cargo planes,
On Monday, July 26, 2021 at 8:36:27 PM UTC-4, SolomonW wrote:(b)
On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 17:13:00 -0700 (PDT), Tiglath wrote:
Herodotus gives the number of 2 million+ for Xerxes' army, including attendants.
...
The Achaemenid Empire had manpower reserves similar to Nazi Germany,Wow
The Achaemenid Empire had at its height about 35 million people, Nazi
Germany in June 1941 had
That's too low. They had at least 50 million, or 44% of the world's population, a Guinnes Record.
Some sources quote up to 70M for the vast empire of more than 2M square miles.
To that Xerxes added the populations of all countries in his way.
Germany had 65M in 1933.
This is not a thread about the Nazi or for the Nazi obsessive. If you don't have anything about Xerxes, Varro, or Fabius, go elsewhere, before I ask politely.
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/List_of_countries_by_population_in_1939
Germany 86 million
Italy 43 million
Finland 3 million
Romania 20 million
Plus many supporters in almost all of Western and Eastern Europe to draw
manpowwer.
Plus drawing 2 million males from 35 million population would be
impossible.
Prove it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_global_manpower_fit_for_military_service
who deployed more troops farther.Putting aside, railways, trucks and cargo planes,
Exactly. You are lost again. I am talking LOGISTICS, not speed or range.
The logistics to supply and maintain trains, trucks, and aircraft, never mind tanks and other war machines in winter over thousands of miles, mostly on enemy territory are incredibly more difficult than sustaining men, horses, camels, and mules,
over a relatively short march on home ground
and in nice weather.
manpowwer.
Plus drawing 2 million males from 35 million population would be
impossible.
Prove it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_global_manpower_fit_for_military_serviceSuch figures are for modern armies for some short time.
I was not talking speed or range but logistics. A 2 million army, as you claim, need a lot of food.
Also consider 2 million soldiers in the days before hygiene and sanitation
Bullshit.
You have the usual lack of integrity when faced with contrary evidence. You suck, PIGVOMIT.
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 18:30:14 -0700 (PDT), Tiglath wrote:
Bullshit.
You have the usual lack of integrity when faced with contrary evidence. You suck, PIGVOMIT.Yeah
at this point, I will leave your nonsense.
On Tuesday, July 27, 2021 at 4:47:53 AM UTC-4, SolomonW wrote:
n almost all of Western and Eastern Europe to draw
Such figures are for modern armies for some short time.manpowwer.
Plus drawing 2 million males from 35 million population would be
impossible.
Prove it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_global_manpower_fit_for_military_service
Bullshit.
You have the usual lack of integrity when faced with contrary evidence. You suck, PIGVOMIT.
The list I gave you shows how many people are of between ages 16 and 49 for a given population,
It turns out that Portugal alone has more than 2 million males in that age range.
PORTUGAL. A country with only 36K square miles and ten million people.
Imagine how many people of military age there were in an empire with many times the population of Portugal.
Believe it or not there were people in antiquity of age between 16 and 49.
Men of military age for Xerxes to levy.
I should stop here because if you cannot understand that you statement below is just another of your ignorant assertions, the rest will suck too:
"[D]rawing 2 million males [of military age] from 35 million population would be impossible."
- PIGVOMIT
You are unable to observe, for instance, that in all those figures, in the average population, there is about one-fifth of males of military age.
Besides, since you have not read Herodotus, you should not really participate in this, because I am not here to teach you history. I prefer people with INFORMED opinions.
The actual combatants were 1.7M, the rest were attendants and camp followers, which need not be of military age and can be female and even children.
I was not talking speed or range but logistics. A 2 million army, as you
claim, need a lot of food.
Again, you are ignorant of the fact that Xerxes spend FIVE years preparing the march and the food depots along the way. Grain keeps for a long time. The Persian fleet was also never far.
--Also consider 2 million soldiers in the days before hygiene and sanitation
The sources say nothing about plague or disease in such a large army on the march. Nobody disputes it was a very large army. The dispute is about how large.
I see you have nothing intelligent to say.
Thank you, PIGVOMIT, but I rather have no one posting in my thread than this wet crap you write.
Be well, off you go.
Imagine how many people of military age there were in an empire with many times the population of Portugal.
Believe it or not there were people in antiquity of age between 16 and 49.
Men of military age for Xerxes to levy.To take today's data as evidence of what could be done is foolish.
For a start, life spans of then and now are very different.
Consequently the age group from which armies might be drawn are very different. Archaeology suggests the life expectancy was about 40 years
or less.
Second, gathering all the troops from the wide areas necessary to form
a massive army takes significant time and organisation. Whether or
this could be done in historical times is questionable.
Third, the logistics of feeding such an army is a horrendous task. Traditionally armies lived off the countryside. The problem with very
large armies is that the leading edge strips the country bare and
those who follow starve.
Fourth, disease. Disease generally killed more soldiers than combat.
Keeping an army in one place for long was usually a recipe for
disaster. So too was marching a large army through the droppings of
the vanguard.
For all these reasons drawing together and maintaining an army of 2
million males from a 35 million population would have been so
difficult s to be improbable.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
A bit of history, right? Can't hurt.
I'll get into Varro and Fabius next.
On Thursday, July 29, 2021 at 11:36:07 PM UTC-4, Eric Stevens wrote:
Imagine how many people of military age there were in an empire with many times the population of Portugal.
To take today's data as evidence of what could be done is foolish.
Believe it or not there were people in antiquity of age between 16 and 49. >> >
Men of military age for Xerxes to levy.
For a start, life spans of then and now are very different.
Consequently the age group from which armies might be drawn are very
different. Archaeology suggests the life expectancy was about 40 years
or less.
Stevens believes in antiquity there was nobody older than 40, it seems.
The AVERAGE longevity of past times is brought low mainly due to infant mortality, around 30% sometimes.
It means that for every infant that died another person lived to see 70. Yes lack of medical treatment also contributed but less.
Since all people of military age HAD SURVIVED infancy, there is no reason to think that there were fewer as percentage of the population than today, since the population didn't include dead infants. Duh.
Second, gathering all the troops from the wide areas necessary to form
a massive army takes significant time and organisation. Whether or
this could be done in historical times is questionable.
Questionable only by morons like you who don't read history.
He doesn't even read the posts he replies to, since I clearly said that Xerxes had FIVE years to gather the men and supplies for his expedition. Xerxes was the emperor, with absolute power to help his recruiting efforts.
Third, the logistics of feeding such an army is a horrendous task.
Traditionally armies lived off the countryside. The problem with very
large armies is that the leading edge strips the country bare and
those who follow starve.
Xerxes army certainly depleted the food and water everywhere they went through. They also had food caches along the way, and a huge navy never far to supply their needs.
Fourth, disease. Disease generally killed more soldiers than combat.
Keeping an army in one place for long was usually a recipe for
disaster. So too was marching a large army through the droppings of
the vanguard.
That's funny. He thinks that instead of doing the possible, they did the impossible.
Who said the 2M people gathered in one place? Ignorant moron. Read some history.
Who said that the van shat in the middle of the road to pave the way? Hilarious!
For all these reasons drawing together and maintaining an army of 2
million males from a 35 million population would have been so
difficult s to be improbable.
Sure. Great post Geocentrist.
Don't get your hopes up, you failed to show any signs of rehabilitation and human worth, so I'm slamming you back into the kill cell.
Enjoy!
--
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Xerxes army certainly depleted the food and water everywhere they went through. They also had food caches along the way, and a huge navy never far to supply their needs.
Fourth, disease. Disease generally killed more soldiers than combat.
Keeping an army in one place for long was usually a recipe for
disaster. So too was marching a large army through the droppings of
the vanguard.
That's funny. He thinks that instead of doing the possible, they did the impossible.
Who said the 2M people gathered in one place? Ignorant moron. Read some history.
Who said that the van shat in the middle of the road to pave the way? Hilarious!
On Saturday, July 31, 2021 at 12:02:23 AM UTC-4, Eric Stevens wrote:
Xerxes army certainly depleted the food and water everywhere they went through. They also had food caches along the way, and a huge navy never far to supply their needs.
Fourth, disease. Disease generally killed more soldiers than combat.
Keeping an army in one place for long was usually a recipe for
disaster. So too was marching a large army through the droppings of
the vanguard.
That's funny. He thinks that instead of doing the possible, they did the impossible.
Who said the 2M people gathered in one place? Ignorant moron. Read some history.
Who said that the van shat in the middle of the road to pave the way? Hilarious!
YOU. See above. "Keeping an army in one place for long..." As if it applied here. Buffoon.
Stevens not only gorges on bats, he is as blind as a bat.
Drink the sour milk, pussy.
Gentle Readers (???) see one more time why you are a loon and deserve every insult you get here, times over.
SLAM!... LOCK!
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 296 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 51:54:54 |
Calls: | 6,650 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 12,200 |
Messages: | 5,330,383 |