SHARK
First Post
Greetings!
Well, I was just doing some work on different campaign stuff, and I took a break for a bit. Relaxing on the couch with a cold Root Beer, I began watching the History Channel. On this evening was a program about "The Real Sparticus." They talked about gladiators, and gladiator life, as they developed the story on Sparticus. (I love the gladiator helmets!
) Sparticus gradually built an army of some 80,000 men. Some estimates might go a bit higher, say over a hundred thousand troops, including some camp followers and so on. Now, in the program, they talked about over the short span of Sparticus' rampage over the Italian penensula, his army suffered the loss of some 20,000 German gladiators who balked at his leadership and wanted to travel separately from Sparticus. For their stupidity, the Romans fell on the Germans and slaughtered all 20,000 of them. Sparticus continued to march up Italy, and defeated a Roman army of two Roman Legions, which would be approximately 12,000 men, plus potentially a like number in auxilliary warriors. Sparticus' army marched south, and was met by Crassus' army of six Roman Legions. Approximately 36-75,000 soldiers. The army of gladiators wiped them out to the man. In a long march down the Brutium, Sparticus became cornered, and he broke out of the trap and marched north for the second time. Again, more German gladiators whined and argued, and travelled separately. The regathered army of Crassus fell on the Germans, and slaughtered them as well. That day alone, 35,000 German gladiators died. The three Roman armies converged on Sparticus, and the slaughter began. In the forgone fighting, even though some gladiators tried to flee, Sparticus fought on. As he charged Crassus, Sparticus dropped and killed two Centurions outright, and continued fighting. Gradually, he was worn down, and Sparticus was killed. However, his body was never recovered. In addition, it is estimated that by this time, Sparticus' army was now at about 60,000 or so. Only 6000 survived the day's struggle, and they were all gathered up and crucified on the road from Capua to the gates of Rome, where the bodies were left for three months to rot, and to serve as an example of the fate of those who raised their fist in rebellion to Rome.
I think it is interesting that these armies were raised so quickly, slaughtered, and more were raised. It certainly provides a different context than the one where people say that "Well, since the Middle Ages, 5000 men was a huge army, then in the game it would be unlikely to see armies larger than that."
I went back to some of my reading, and in Caesar's Legions, --(Caesar's Legions, by Sekunda, Northwood and Simkins, published by Osprey Books, Copyright 2000, hardcover, 143 pages.)--the author discusses that in the years of the early Republic, that--
"Rome was capable of raising 700,000 foot soldiers, and 70,000 cavalry...It was Rome's capability to raise such huge armies which defeated Macedon. No matter how many armies the incompetance of Roman military commanders might lose, there was always a near-inexhaustible resorvoir of manpower to draw on. The first years of the Third Macedonian War saw many Roman reverses, but these didn't matter; all that mattered was the last battle." (Caesar's Legions, pg. 92)
I recall that one of my History professors, a Ph.D on Ancient History from USC, used to explain that Rome could lose 80,000 soldiers in one day--and soon have them replaced. Throughout Rome's history, Rome lost many battles, but never, ever, lost a war.
To my mind, a key ingredient of the success of the Roman Empire was the system of maintaining a professional military war machine. The Romans not only trained and equipped a standardized, flexible army, but they kept it sharply honed and fed by the supply of raw, eager manpower from the four corners of the empire. These recruits were in an almost constant stream of recruitment, training, and waiting in the wings for action. The Roman Legion was made up of tough men, who believed in the Empire, and the values that it stood for. These men were simple, rough men, given steady pay, loot, training, comradeship, discipline, and purpose. They served in the legions for terms of 25 years. These men became expert military engineers and craftsmen, as well as professional killers with a thirst for blood and conquest.
The opponents that faced Rome had no such professional military system. Their whole society was agriculturally based, rather than urban, and thus, while the barbarian warriors were often physically powerful, and incredibly brave, they did not have the training that the average Roman soldier had. In addition, when a Celtic, Dacian, German, or African tribe lost "X" amount of thousands of troops, whether in vicotry or defeat, the tribe could not recoup such severe losses quickly, and of skilled warriors lost, certainly not. The Romans, however, would soon have another well-trained army arriving on the scene in a few weeks or a few months. Rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat. The Romans could ostensibly keep up the pressure for however long it took, until the enemy was simply annihilated, their ashes thrown to the winds. However, though the Romans possessed such coiled, massive strength, it also took pains to develop the tactical finesse and strategic ability of it's legions, and the legion commanders. This focus on training and excellence built up such a leverage in skill and expertise, that the Romans could often fight enemies who vastly outnumbered their own forces, and emerge victorious. This kind of "Force-Multiplier" really sharpened the Roman Legions into an invincible war machine.
Even the more urban enemies, like the Greeks, the Carthaginians, the Palmyrans, and the Persians, though they could often field *initially* a well-trained and well-equipped army, they had no recoil ability. They essentially had no "depth." Once that initial army was crushed,--(If it was defeated)--there was no capacity left for serious resistance, counter-attack, or reconstitution of an effective army for additional campaigns. Once the initial army was spent, that was it. The nation then simply laid prostrate for the conqueror. They never developed the kind of military system that the Romans possessed. Their governments, their economies, their military organizations--were often significantly different from that of the Roman Empire, and in total, they weren't set up for the constant maintaining of a huge, professional military. Thus, in the end, they were broken to the yoke of slavery.
Now, in considering some of these things, it becomes clear that within the game, one does not have to remain chained to an impoverished 12th century European model, for their military capabilities, or for their economic systems. Also in ancient times, in a similar fashion, the Ch'in Empire of China maintained professional armies of hundreds of thousands of troops--perhaps even millions--for centuries, maintaining order, and repelling invading hordes. The Ch'in Empire had a similar system of good roads, laws, established training, manuals on strategy and tactics, as well as sophisticated communications and administration. This deep capacity also permitted the Ch'in Empire to fight massive campaigns, and to also easily replace losses in the hundreds of thousands quite effectively. In an earlier article, I mentioned that in 1066, when William The Conqueror of Normandy invaded Britain with 15000 knights, there were powerful African Empires and kingdoms that routinely fielded armies of 200,000 soldiers on campaign.
With these ideas as a backdrop, imagine then that the fantasy world has magic, and healing, and a thousand other things that assist people living longer, healthier, and having food and water purified, and having diseases cured relatively easily. In this kind of fantastic world, with even modest magic and spells,--imagine what kind of armies and fleets might be possible? The potential for armies and for empire-building is truly incredible!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Well, I was just doing some work on different campaign stuff, and I took a break for a bit. Relaxing on the couch with a cold Root Beer, I began watching the History Channel. On this evening was a program about "The Real Sparticus." They talked about gladiators, and gladiator life, as they developed the story on Sparticus. (I love the gladiator helmets!
) Sparticus gradually built an army of some 80,000 men. Some estimates might go a bit higher, say over a hundred thousand troops, including some camp followers and so on. Now, in the program, they talked about over the short span of Sparticus' rampage over the Italian penensula, his army suffered the loss of some 20,000 German gladiators who balked at his leadership and wanted to travel separately from Sparticus. For their stupidity, the Romans fell on the Germans and slaughtered all 20,000 of them. Sparticus continued to march up Italy, and defeated a Roman army of two Roman Legions, which would be approximately 12,000 men, plus potentially a like number in auxilliary warriors. Sparticus' army marched south, and was met by Crassus' army of six Roman Legions. Approximately 36-75,000 soldiers. The army of gladiators wiped them out to the man. In a long march down the Brutium, Sparticus became cornered, and he broke out of the trap and marched north for the second time. Again, more German gladiators whined and argued, and travelled separately. The regathered army of Crassus fell on the Germans, and slaughtered them as well. That day alone, 35,000 German gladiators died. The three Roman armies converged on Sparticus, and the slaughter began. In the forgone fighting, even though some gladiators tried to flee, Sparticus fought on. As he charged Crassus, Sparticus dropped and killed two Centurions outright, and continued fighting. Gradually, he was worn down, and Sparticus was killed. However, his body was never recovered. In addition, it is estimated that by this time, Sparticus' army was now at about 60,000 or so. Only 6000 survived the day's struggle, and they were all gathered up and crucified on the road from Capua to the gates of Rome, where the bodies were left for three months to rot, and to serve as an example of the fate of those who raised their fist in rebellion to Rome.I think it is interesting that these armies were raised so quickly, slaughtered, and more were raised. It certainly provides a different context than the one where people say that "Well, since the Middle Ages, 5000 men was a huge army, then in the game it would be unlikely to see armies larger than that."
I went back to some of my reading, and in Caesar's Legions, --(Caesar's Legions, by Sekunda, Northwood and Simkins, published by Osprey Books, Copyright 2000, hardcover, 143 pages.)--the author discusses that in the years of the early Republic, that--
"Rome was capable of raising 700,000 foot soldiers, and 70,000 cavalry...It was Rome's capability to raise such huge armies which defeated Macedon. No matter how many armies the incompetance of Roman military commanders might lose, there was always a near-inexhaustible resorvoir of manpower to draw on. The first years of the Third Macedonian War saw many Roman reverses, but these didn't matter; all that mattered was the last battle." (Caesar's Legions, pg. 92)
I recall that one of my History professors, a Ph.D on Ancient History from USC, used to explain that Rome could lose 80,000 soldiers in one day--and soon have them replaced. Throughout Rome's history, Rome lost many battles, but never, ever, lost a war.
To my mind, a key ingredient of the success of the Roman Empire was the system of maintaining a professional military war machine. The Romans not only trained and equipped a standardized, flexible army, but they kept it sharply honed and fed by the supply of raw, eager manpower from the four corners of the empire. These recruits were in an almost constant stream of recruitment, training, and waiting in the wings for action. The Roman Legion was made up of tough men, who believed in the Empire, and the values that it stood for. These men were simple, rough men, given steady pay, loot, training, comradeship, discipline, and purpose. They served in the legions for terms of 25 years. These men became expert military engineers and craftsmen, as well as professional killers with a thirst for blood and conquest.
The opponents that faced Rome had no such professional military system. Their whole society was agriculturally based, rather than urban, and thus, while the barbarian warriors were often physically powerful, and incredibly brave, they did not have the training that the average Roman soldier had. In addition, when a Celtic, Dacian, German, or African tribe lost "X" amount of thousands of troops, whether in vicotry or defeat, the tribe could not recoup such severe losses quickly, and of skilled warriors lost, certainly not. The Romans, however, would soon have another well-trained army arriving on the scene in a few weeks or a few months. Rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat. The Romans could ostensibly keep up the pressure for however long it took, until the enemy was simply annihilated, their ashes thrown to the winds. However, though the Romans possessed such coiled, massive strength, it also took pains to develop the tactical finesse and strategic ability of it's legions, and the legion commanders. This focus on training and excellence built up such a leverage in skill and expertise, that the Romans could often fight enemies who vastly outnumbered their own forces, and emerge victorious. This kind of "Force-Multiplier" really sharpened the Roman Legions into an invincible war machine.
Even the more urban enemies, like the Greeks, the Carthaginians, the Palmyrans, and the Persians, though they could often field *initially* a well-trained and well-equipped army, they had no recoil ability. They essentially had no "depth." Once that initial army was crushed,--(If it was defeated)--there was no capacity left for serious resistance, counter-attack, or reconstitution of an effective army for additional campaigns. Once the initial army was spent, that was it. The nation then simply laid prostrate for the conqueror. They never developed the kind of military system that the Romans possessed. Their governments, their economies, their military organizations--were often significantly different from that of the Roman Empire, and in total, they weren't set up for the constant maintaining of a huge, professional military. Thus, in the end, they were broken to the yoke of slavery.
Now, in considering some of these things, it becomes clear that within the game, one does not have to remain chained to an impoverished 12th century European model, for their military capabilities, or for their economic systems. Also in ancient times, in a similar fashion, the Ch'in Empire of China maintained professional armies of hundreds of thousands of troops--perhaps even millions--for centuries, maintaining order, and repelling invading hordes. The Ch'in Empire had a similar system of good roads, laws, established training, manuals on strategy and tactics, as well as sophisticated communications and administration. This deep capacity also permitted the Ch'in Empire to fight massive campaigns, and to also easily replace losses in the hundreds of thousands quite effectively. In an earlier article, I mentioned that in 1066, when William The Conqueror of Normandy invaded Britain with 15000 knights, there were powerful African Empires and kingdoms that routinely fielded armies of 200,000 soldiers on campaign.
With these ideas as a backdrop, imagine then that the fantasy world has magic, and healing, and a thousand other things that assist people living longer, healthier, and having food and water purified, and having diseases cured relatively easily. In this kind of fantastic world, with even modest magic and spells,--imagine what kind of armies and fleets might be possible? The potential for armies and for empire-building is truly incredible!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
