A small but very dense book by Donald W. Engels which is a very detailed study of Alexanders campaigns from the logistic point of view. It's not the usual glamour associated with Alexander, it's the day to day work of the foragers, the supply trains, the headaches about what route to take and in which season and so on.<br>
It gives a striking picture of how an army moved by animal and human power only. As one of the --enthusiastic-- critics wrote: "Engels deals with what at first sight might seem the drab question of supplies, showing how the needs of an army of men on the move limited and conditioned the strategy of Alexander".<br>
The publisher is University of California Press. <p></p><i></i>
Salve,<br>
<br>
Another publication by the same author deals with Alexander's intelligence efforts:<br>
<br>
Engels, D., 'Alexander's intelligence system' in: <i> Classical Quarterly</i> 30 (1980) 327-340.<br>
<br>
For the Roman period a number of publications have appeared on logistics in recent years:<br>
<br>
Erdkamp, P., <i> Hunger and the sword. Warfare and food supply in Roman republican wars (264 - 30 BC)</i> (Amsterdam 1998) 324p.<br>
Roth, J.P., <i> The logistics of the Roman army at war (264 BC - AD 235)</i> (Leiden 1999) 400p.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Sander van Dorst <p></p><i></i>
Posts: 1,313
Threads: 193
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
4
Hello,
any new publications on the subject of ancient logistics? Are there any articles in journals? And why is Roth so obscenely expensive?!
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
Posts: 6,734
Threads: 489
Joined: Mar 2001
Reputation:
27
That's not Roth's fault. It's publishing house Brill. They are expensive, always. They really only aim for academic libraries to buy it.
Posts: 1,313
Threads: 193
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
4
I read somewhere that Engels book, while extrememy insightful on the one side, is said to contain also some apalling errors. After reading the whole book, I wonder what these errors could be. Anyone having an idea?
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
Posts: 4,483
Threads: 634
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation:
0
He somewhere says that if you mill grain the volume of flower is less than the initial volume. One visit to a mill would have taught him that it's the other way round. The explanation is that more air is mixed with the stuff itself. (Without access to a mill, use of a plain coffee grinder would have been quite instructive too.)
He also says (in appendix 2) that the Pillar of Jonah is a mile high. If he had just visited the place he would have known better.
His reconstruction of the return from Gedrosia (with a double campaign, army an navy supporting each other) is pure speculation, according to A.B. Bosworth (in Alexander in the East).
Personally, I found some criticism exaggerated and unfairly harsh, but I can not deny that I found some of the book's pedantic statements really irritating. Page 117: "the army passed the Pillars of Jonah (note the correct spelling)..." for example, with a footnote to a book from 1919, as if the eldest spelling of a name is the only correct one.
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Posts: 354
Threads: 3
Joined: Aug 2004
Reputation:
0
No book is perfect, as far as I know. Engels did make a few errors, but considering the amount of information he dragged into the book, he did a very impressive job. The issues Jona notes are not terribly significant, IMHO. (The Gedrosian campaign plan may be speculation, but I suspect that any detailed reconstruction of this is speculative.) The most significant error that I am aware of is the overestimation of the food needed for a soldier per day - his data are based on US Army statistics, and are, so I understand, slightly higher than requirements for older men (i.e. above their early 20's); Alexander's army would have initially had a certain fraction of older soldiers, and this would have increased with time leading to a mild reduction in the logistical demand overall.
Felix Wang
Posts: 4,483
Threads: 634
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation:
0
Quote:The issues Jona notes are not terribly significant, IMHO.
I agree! The book is very useful; I have the impression that the criticism it received was exaggerated and caused by Engels' pedantry. But the quality of scholarship depends on results and information, not on style.
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Posts: 2,462
Threads: 93
Joined: Jun 2006
Reputation:
0
I find it funny that Alexander is seen as the greates conqueror both by classical authors as modern ones... He never consolidated anything!
M.VIB.M.
Bushido wa watashi no shuukyou de gozaru.
Katte Kabuto no O wo shimeyo!
H.J.Vrielink.
Posts: 4,483
Threads: 634
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation:
0
Quote:He never consolidated anything!
I think that is exaggerated.
Sogdia and the Punjab were, indeed, lost, but Egypt and the Near East were handed over to his successors. Iran and Iraq were ruled by the Seleucids for about a century-and-a-half; Syria even longer; Egypt remained Ptolemaic for almost three centuries. The title "the Great" is, in my view, not entirely misplaced.
On the other hand, I agree that southern Afghanistan, Sogdia, and the Indus valley were never really consolidated. The latest book by Frank Holt, which I had the honor to review, is quite illuminating.
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Posts: 2,462
Threads: 93
Joined: Jun 2006
Reputation:
0
would love to read it!
M.VIB.M.
Bushido wa watashi no shuukyou de gozaru.
Katte Kabuto no O wo shimeyo!
H.J.Vrielink.
Posts: 196
Threads: 18
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation:
0
check ebay - there is a copy on there
|
