Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Speculative History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Speculative History Speculative History Forum - Alternate History, What If Questions, Pseudo History, and anything outside the boundaries of mainstream historical research


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 1st, 2018, 05:55 AM   #11
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2016
From: USA
Posts: 6,131

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Howard View Post
These types of discussions are pointless because they ignore the context. The English lost at Hastings because of what happened before the battle even started.
Fact: Ancient Greeks, especially Spartans, were better distance runners then the Saxon British. On this alternative timeline, every year modem cities around the world would host Hastings Run, 225 miles long, commemorating when the whole of the Greek hoplite army jogged from Stafford Bridge to Hastings, arriving fresh to quickly and easily defeat the cowardly and backwards Norman Easteners, who clearly don't understand freedom.
aggienation is offline  
Remove Ads
Old June 3rd, 2018, 02:54 PM   #12

Spike117's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Sep 2017
From: United States
Posts: 256

Apologies for late posting, been caught up the past few days and didn't have time to reply.

While these discussions are purely theoretical and ultimately don't produce anything spectacular, I have to disagree that they are pointless.

In the last discussion about the Romans in this scenario, I know at least I learned a substantial amount about the Norman and Roman militaries (and to a lesser extent the Anglo-Saxons), and it brought up things I didn't know and points I didn't consider.

You could argue that it is still overall pointless, but you could also argue that about many historical discussions. I find it a good learning experience, and at the very least it's entertaining and causes you to apply what you know a little bit.

Additionally, I feel like while technology/equipment/etc. aren't as important as the other factors mentioned, that doesn't mean that they are worthless and don't warrant discussion; if they weren't important whatsoever, then there would be no reason for them to ever change or evolve.

I may have also misspoke when setting up the scenario. I didn't exactly mean the specific circumstances of the battle. More just the Greek forces that fought at the Hot Gates, and William's invasion force. Since they

As for if William and Leonidas are leading them, I'm going to say yes. I don't know much about Leonidas' actual leadership capability, but he does seem to have a lot of bravery.
Spike117 is offline  
Old June 3rd, 2018, 04:05 PM   #13

Dan Howard's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2014
From: Australia
Posts: 3,016

Superior equipment helps to make individuals less likely to die but it has little effect on the overall outcome of a battle. Most battles were decided well before either side suffered 10% casualties.
Dan Howard is offline  
Old June 4th, 2018, 02:46 PM   #14
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,591

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike117 View Post
Let's say that the Greek Army that fought the Persians at Thermopylae (numbering around 7,000 with many different Greek groups involved) was at Hastings when William of Normandy attacked.

For the sake of this, both sides are willing to fight (so the Greeks won't be standing there saying where are we )

I know there was a similar topic with the Romans, but the Greeks to me seem like a better fit for the topic.

Who do you think would win and why?
I think the Saxons would have been able to hold off Leonidas and his 300.

The Normans had a cavalry arm and that made a big difference.



The Spartan Hoplites would have had a shock when struck by a Dane-axe wielded by a House-Carl.
Poly is offline  
Old June 5th, 2018, 07:36 AM   #15

Spike117's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Sep 2017
From: United States
Posts: 256

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Howard View Post
Superior equipment helps to make individuals less likely to die but it has little effect on the overall outcome of a battle. Most battles were decided well before either side suffered 10% casualties.
That is true. However, when comparing different warriors/armies from various cultures, there's also their mentality, training, discipline, war philosophy, strategic tendencies, and preferred tactics.

While it's hard to quantify any of those, I think it's still worth discussion.
Spike117 is offline  
Old June 5th, 2018, 07:40 AM   #16

Spike117's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Sep 2017
From: United States
Posts: 256

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poly View Post
I think the Saxons would have been able to hold off Leonidas and his 300.

The Normans had a cavalry arm and that made a big difference.



The Spartan Hoplites would have had a shock when struck by a Dane-axe wielded by a House-Carl.
I mean, the Greeks did have around 7,000 in the actual battle.

The Normans did have the cavalry arm, but phalanxes are generally pretty good against cavalry. The Norman cavalry couldn't even break the Saxon shieldwall until the Saxons started breaking ranks, which I believe a phalanx would be a lot less likely to do.

I do agree that a hoplite wouldn't be prepared for something like a Dane-ax, at least initially, though I thought only the Saxons had the Huscarls? And I don't think it's necessarily a tide-turner, they'd come around after a while.
Spike117 is offline  
Old June 5th, 2018, 10:14 AM   #17
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Slovenia
Posts: 3,229

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike117 View Post
Let's say that the Greek Army that fought the Persians at Thermopylae (numbering around 7,000 with many different Greek groups involved) was at Hastings when William of Normandy attacked.

For the sake of this, both sides are willing to fight (so the Greeks won't be standing there saying where are we )

I know there was a similar topic with the Romans, but the Greeks to me seem like a better fit for the topic.

Who do you think would win and why?
Poor Greeks would be trampled by Norman horse after being softened with arrow volleys.
macon is offline  
Old June 5th, 2018, 11:57 AM   #18

Res Ipsa Loquitur's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Oct 2015
From: Belfast
Posts: 282

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnincornwall View Post
Depends which area of your carpet you set up your toy soldiers on. If it's a bit that mum hasn't hoovered yet and is covered in bits, it might cause havoc for the Norman toy soldiers attacking

Whatever happens, in the end they will all get knocked over as I get called for my tea and go play on my bike after.
That takes me back! That epic battle between the Ancient Britons and the WW2 Japanese Infantry.
Res Ipsa Loquitur is offline  
Old June 5th, 2018, 08:16 PM   #19

richiethewanderer's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: beijing
Posts: 382

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Howard View Post
The only reason the English lost at Hastings was because of what happened in the weeks leading up to the battle. Replacing English with Spartans would have done nothing to change that. William of Normandy didn't cause the English defeat at Hastings, Harald Hardrada did. If Godwinson had the same army at Hastings that he had at Stamford Bridge, he would have easily defeated the Normans. Even with his second-rate army of hastily-raised raw recruits, a forced march, and no sleep for two days, he almost won.
To be fair at stamford bridge they broke a truce and attacked a small segment of the viking army followed it into camp. and his force march and no sleep for two days also included a week's rest in london. superior numbers and the high ground negate a night's rest. its not like the normans were staying in 5 star hotels sleeping in. they were in hostile country surrounded by strange enemies
richiethewanderer is offline  
Old June 5th, 2018, 10:21 PM   #20

Pacific_Victory's Avatar
Conseiller du Roi
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: MARE PACIFICVM
Posts: 7,538

How do the Spartans deal with the Norman cavalry?

It seems to me the Normans could simply hold the Spartans in place with arrow fire or skirmishing infantry while their cavalry smash the outmaneuvered Greeks flanks and rear.
Pacific_Victory is online now  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Speculative History

Tags
army, greek, hastings, holds, leonidas



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How big was the total Greek army if united? TheMusicMan Ancient History 7 August 16th, 2017 11:13 AM
What was the objective of the Greek army in Thermopylae? Mnesiphilus Ancient History 31 June 24th, 2014 09:39 AM
Roman Army vs Greek Army reuben Ancient History 275 June 14th, 2011 09:29 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.