Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Julius Caesar vs Alexander the Great

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Very astute counter.
    As Darius found out, when Alexander is on your tail he will simply follow you to the ends of the Earth. At some point Caesar would have to turn and fight.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by zraver View Post
      As Darius found out, when Alexander is on your tail he will simply follow you to the ends of the Earth. At some point Caesar would have to turn and fight.
      Like Alesia? Do remember that Caesar had no hesitation to fight a winter campaign and build frankly a most ingenius fortification system.

      Give Caesar time to prepare and the odds shift dramatically in his favour.
      Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 16 Jun 09,, 03:46.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Mihais View Post
        See Caesar's ''Gallic Wars'' ;also Tacitus and Arrianus as ancient sources.
        More recent one-''Cavalry Operations in the Ancient Greek World'' by Robert E. Gaebel.There are also some interesting papers written by US Army CGSC students,but I don't have them at hand right now and I don't remember the authors names.
        Gotcha. Which brings the question: What did Caesar mean when he send the Germanic cavalry to "charge" the Gaullic flank or rear? Granted that that the effect was auxilliary to the infantry effort, I am having trouble seeing how this light infantry and cavalry mixed force fight on a tactical level.
        All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
        -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
          Give Caesar time to prepare and the odds shift dramatically in his favour.
          I've gone over Alesia again ... and as far as I can tell, this was the first time in history that an offensive force shaped the battlefield.

          I have to give the edge to Alexander as far as tactical brilliance is concerned but like Rommel against Montgomery, Caesar may lose battles but he will win campaigns against Alexander.

          In fact, Alexander against Caesar is almost a repeat of Hannibal against Cassius.

          The Roman engineering works at Alesia renders all of Alexander's advantages moot.

          Comment


          • #65
            I don't understand why some consdier Alesia to be a mistake because Ceasar allowed himself to be pinned between a besieged city and a relieving force. The point was that he deliberately laid siege to a city in spite of the presence of a relief force and beat them both down.
            All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
            -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

            Comment


            • #66
              As an engineer, it was the greatest work in history. An offensive and defensive work within the same operational enviroment.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                As an engineer, it was the greatest work in history. An offensive and defensive work within the same operational enviroment.
                Sir with all due respect- driving a half mile long 200 yard wide mole to Tyre trumps that. Alexanders engineers were every bit as good as Caesar's.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by zraver View Post
                  Sir with all due respect- driving a half mile long 200 yard wide mole to Tyre trumps that. Alexanders engineers were every bit as good as Caesar's.
                  Z,

                  You've missed the point.

                  I agree absolutely that Tyre matches Alesia BUT Caesar's Alesia shaped the battlefield while Alexander's Tyre was obstacle breaching.

                  Do you see the difference?

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Triple C View Post
                    Gotcha. Which brings the question: What did Caesar mean when he send the Germanic cavalry to "charge" the Gaullic flank or rear? Granted that that the effect was auxilliary to the infantry effort, I am having trouble seeing how this light infantry and cavalry mixed force fight on a tactical level.
                    Flanks and rear are keywords here.The attack that broke the Gauls could have been delivered either by a mixed unit or by a all cavalry force,depending on the time needed.The mixed formation was generally used fighting other cavalry.BTW,the MAcedonians also did this in a number of battles(e.g Granicus).But the purpose of the cav. was to get to strike at the open flanks and rear.
                    It worked by having young and resilient men run side by side,literally,with the horsemen.When they neared the enemy,they launched javelins and then either stood to allow friendly cav to reform behind them,or intermingled in the melee.So in case the friendly horse are beaten back,they won't be routed.
                    Those who know don't speak
                    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                      Z,

                      You've missed the point.

                      I agree absolutely that Tyre matches Alesia BUT Caesar's Alesia shaped the battlefield while Alexander's Tyre was obstacle breaching.

                      Do you see the difference?
                      Sir,Caesar shaping the battlefield was not unique in the respect that he had done it before in GAul.The main advantage was to force the enemy either to attack on Caesar's terms,or pull back because of lack of supplies.Armies at the time lacked organized logistics,so when the local source of food and fodder as well as whatever they brought with them was exhausted,the army broke apart.The Gauls number becames a disadvantage.
                      BTW the Romans did this since imemorial times on all sorts of foes.It worked best against large eastern forces and against the GAuls.
                      Sir,the Romans had a saying:war are won with the spade.
                      Those who know don't speak
                      He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                        Sir,Caesar shaping the battlefield was not unique in the respect that he had done it before in GAul.
                        On the tactical level and never on the operational level, let alone the strategic level. The relief force at Alesia should have been able to carry on the war ... but Caesar read it right that it was done at Alesia.

                        Compare that to Alexander when 2000 Elephants essentially said, "screw you" and Alexander ran with his tail between his legs.

                        My point here is that if you allow Caesar to have a prepared defence, he will collober Alexander's hasty attack.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                          the Romans had a saying:war are won with the spade.
                          or by politicians. :)

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                            On the tactical level and never on the operational level, let alone the strategic level. The relief force at Alesia should have been able to carry on the war ... but Caesar read it right that it was done at Alesia.

                            Compare that to Alexander when 2000 Elephants essentially said, "screw you" and Alexander ran with his tail between his legs.

                            My point here is that if you allow Caesar to have a prepared defence, he will collober Alexander's hasty attack.
                            Sir, Alexander beat the Indians, sufering around 1,000 losses for 21-23,000 Indian losses. He had arounf 41,000 men vs as many as 58,000 Indians including 200 Elephants. He completely routed the Elephants and Indian cavalry and ended up with the Indians facing the phalanx on one side and the Cavalry on the other so they surrendered. He then co-opted them and made Porus his regent.


                            Sir, if Caesar prepares a defense, then wouldn't be more like obstacle breaching? Or unless he retreated into a fortified place like a city or fortress couldn't Alexander simply move around the Roman lines? Alexander had experience crossing rivers, mountains and other natural barriers in the face of the enemy. He also reduced far more cities and fortresses than any conqueror until Genghis Khan. I think your not giving the Macedonian engineers enough credit.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                              It worked by having young and resilient men run side by side,literally,with the horsemen.When they neared the enemy,they launched javelins and then either stood to allow friendly cav to reform behind them,or intermingled in the melee.So in case the friendly horse are beaten back,they won't be routed.
                              Now that's interesting. The reformed Swede cavalry of Gustavus Adolphus fought with very similiar tactics, whereby arquebassiers were permenantly assigned to the cavalry, to shoot the Swede troopers in or if their attack failed, to repulse the counterattack.
                              Last edited by Triple C; 16 Jun 09,, 12:02.
                              All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
                              -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Z,

                                Originally posted by zraver View Post
                                Sir, Alexander beat the Indians, sufering around 1,000 losses for 21-23,000 Indian losses. He had arounf 41,000 men vs as many as 58,000 Indians including 200 Elephants. He completely routed the Elephants and Indian cavalry and ended up with the Indians facing the phalanx on one side and the Cavalry on the other so they surrendered. He then co-opted them and made Porus his regent.
                                Making Porus a regent from a man like Alexander has the suspcious sign of being an admission of weakness. Alexander never tolerated anything less than complete subjugation before and made no deal with those whom he vanquished. IMHO it is telling that Porus walked away with full honor and suffered no debasement in his status as king.

                                Originally posted by zraver View Post
                                Sir, if Caesar prepares a defense, then wouldn't be more like obstacle breaching?
                                I dunno. Alexander's attack on Tyre was a brutish power drive, but Caesar's move to encircle Alesia actually forced his enemy's hands.
                                All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
                                -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X