午夜久久国产精品1000,国产jk福利在线

Bruce Jurin
A Spartan army of what, 10,000 hoplites and a few thousand supporting troops against the might of Rome? Not a serious question.

一支由大約10,000名重裝步兵和幾千名后勤部隊(duì)組成的斯巴達(dá)軍隊(duì)，面對羅馬的強(qiáng)大力量？這不是一個嚴(yán)肅的問題。

Martin Lloyd
Unlikely - individual fighting skill wouldn’t be that important if the Romans were serious about fighting Sparta.

不太可能——如果羅馬人認(rèn)真對待與斯巴達(dá)的戰(zhàn)斗，個人戰(zhàn)斗技能就不那么重要了。

We can assume a Spartan hoplite would be better than a Roman legionary in a straight fight. However, the Romans would typically not need to fight Sparta on Sparta’s terms. First of all, Rome could raise SO many more troops than Sparta that Sparta would almost have to take defensive positions. Second, the Romans could use naval blockades and besieging to starve out the city of Sparta. They could gather the support necessary to keep themselves supplied in the field for longer than Sparta could reasonably withstand such a siege.

我們可以假設(shè)，斯巴達(dá)的重裝步兵在直接對抗中會比羅馬的兵團(tuán)士兵更強(qiáng)。然而，羅馬通常不需要按照斯巴達(dá)的方式與他們作戰(zhàn)。首先，羅馬可以征召比斯巴達(dá)多得多的兵力，斯巴達(dá)幾乎不得不采取防守陣地。其次，羅馬可以通過海上封鎖和圍城戰(zhàn)術(shù)將斯巴達(dá)城市圍困至饑餓。羅馬可以獲得足夠的支持，以在戰(zhàn)場上保持補(bǔ)給，超過斯巴達(dá)能夠承受圍困的時間。

The other thing is the helots are an ongoing weakness of Sparta, the Romans could exploit that - the helots have plenty of reason to defect, or betray the Spartans.
One of my favorite things the Romans had been known to do was build walls around the place they were besieging, effectively having their own fortifications containing the besieged foe.

另一個問題是，斯巴達(dá)的赫洛特（奴隸）始終是其弱點(diǎn)，羅馬人可以利用這一點(diǎn)——赫洛特有充足的理由叛變或背叛斯巴達(dá)。羅馬曾經(jīng)做過的一件事是，在圍攻的地方周圍修建城墻，從而有效地為圍困的敵人建造了自己的防線。

However, politics is a massive factor in wars.
What does Rome want? A lot of these hypothetical deathmatches of “who will win” miss out what the victory conditions are and assume they just want the other side dead no matter what the cost - and that’s not normally how wars are fought.

然而，政治在戰(zhàn)爭中是一個巨大的因素。
羅馬想要什么？許多關(guān)于“誰會贏”的假設(shè)性死亡比賽忽視了勝利條件，并假設(shè)他們只想不惜一切代價讓對方死去——但這通常不是戰(zhàn)爭的作戰(zhàn)方式。

The Romans might not find it viable to field entire legions to besiege Sparta indefinitely, and they might not be willing to just wither the city away into nothing. That’s where things get more complex, because if the Spartans are fighting for survival and the Romans are not, then the Romans might not be so committed.

羅馬人可能不會覺得派出整個軍團(tuán)無限期圍困斯巴達(dá)是可行的，他們也可能不愿意就這樣讓城市一點(diǎn)點(diǎn)被摧毀。這就變得更復(fù)雜了，因?yàn)槿绻拱瓦_(dá)人是在為生存而戰(zhàn)，而羅馬人則不是，那么羅馬人可能不會那么投入。

If the Romans don’t have control of allies to resupply their armies, that can change things too.
If we assume the helots stay loyal to Sparta, that changes things.

如果羅馬人沒有控制能夠重新補(bǔ)給其軍隊(duì)的盟友，這也會改變局勢。
如果假設(shè)赫洛特忠誠于斯巴達(dá)，那么局勢也會發(fā)生變化。

Linus Skov
Could the Roman legions at the top of their game have beaten the Spartans?
Please don’t believe all the hype about the Spartans. Sparta was a small city with very limited resources. It had an unusually well-trained and disciplined army, but it was nothing compared to the military might of Rome.

羅馬軍團(tuán)如果處于巔峰狀態(tài)，能擊敗斯巴達(dá)嗎？
不要相信所有關(guān)于斯巴達(dá)的夸大宣傳。斯巴達(dá)是一個小城市，資源非常有限。它擁有一個異常訓(xùn)練有素和紀(jì)律嚴(yán)明的軍隊(duì)，但與羅馬的軍事力量相比根本無法相提并論。

The Romans thrashed the Spartans soundly on several occasions. Sometimes they didn’t even really have to fight, because their superior diplomatic skills and logistical abilities enabled them to deliver tens of thousands of troops to a single siege.
The Romans were better equipped, better trained and with superior technology. And their entire social structure and the sheer size of their city almost ensured victory.

羅馬人在多個場合輕松打敗了斯巴達(dá)。有時他們甚至根本不需要真正作戰(zhàn)，因?yàn)樗麄兏鼜?qiáng)大的外交技巧和后勤能力使他們能夠在單一圍城戰(zhàn)中調(diào)集數(shù)萬兵力。
羅馬人裝備更好，訓(xùn)練更精良，且擁有更先進(jìn)的技術(shù)。他們的社會結(jié)構(gòu)和城市的龐大規(guī)模幾乎可以確保勝利。

Ernest W. Adams
I’m pretty sure of it. The Roman shields were designed to be held close together (they had straight sides), with just enough room between them to stick a short stabbing sword. This was almost impossible to penetrate. In their tight ranks, and supported by cavalry, archers, and slingers, they were very hard to stop.

我?guī)缀蹩梢钥隙ǎ_馬會贏。
羅馬的盾牌設(shè)計(jì)是緊密排列的（它們有直邊），之間只有足夠的空間插入一把短劍。這幾乎是無法被突破的。在緊密的陣列中，加上騎兵、弓箭手和投石手的支援，他們幾乎難以被阻擋。

Amateur Historian
Absolutelly not.
The cost of a spartan was immense compared to that of a roman legionary, far beyond what the quality difference between the two would justify.
The spartans would never have had the logistics to stand before the romans.

絕對不會。
斯巴達(dá)人對比羅馬軍團(tuán)的成本極其高昂，遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過了兩者之間的質(zhì)量差距所能解釋的范圍。
斯巴達(dá)人根本沒有足夠的后勤能力來與羅馬軍團(tuán)抗衡。

David M. Prus
Absolutely not.
The Spartans required coalitions- they had a sizable portion of the Peloponnese in their control, but the rest of the peninsula and indeed Greece needed to maintain an alliance with them in order for them to project power.

絕對不會。斯巴達(dá)人需要通過聯(lián)盟來維持力量——他們控制了伯羅奔尼撒的大部分地區(qū)，但整個半島乃至希臘其他地方需要與他們結(jié)成聯(lián)盟，才能確保他們能投射出足夠的力量。

The Romans, by the time they entered Greece, had a massive, veteran army that had just conquered Sicily, southern Gaul, Iberia and northwest Africa. The Spartans tried to play the Romans off against other Greeks but ultimately failed.

當(dāng)羅馬進(jìn)入希臘時，已經(jīng)擁有一支龐大且經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的軍隊(duì)，這支軍隊(duì)剛剛征服了西西里島、高盧南部、伊比利亞和非洲西北部。斯巴達(dá)人曾試圖利用羅馬人和其他希臘城邦之間的矛盾，但最終失敗了。

Even if the Spartans were able to form a coalition against the Romans, they were antiquated in their military organization, tactics and technology, and still would lack the numbers. The grand Greek alliance at Platea which included all but the northern Greeks but included Corinth, Athens, Sicyon, Mycenae, Megara, Tegea, etc. still numbered about 100,000, probably less. However, the Romans were able to raise similar size armies such as the infamous doomed 90,000 of Cannae, and were far better organized, led and equipped. The Romans would still have the advantage, especially since Sparta’s allies would abandon them if given an opportunity.

即使斯巴達(dá)人能夠聯(lián)合其他力量對抗羅馬，他們的軍事組織、戰(zhàn)術(shù)和技術(shù)都已經(jīng)過時，且依舊缺乏足夠的兵力。公元前479年的普拉提亞戰(zhàn)役中，盡管包括科林斯、雅典、西錫安、邁錫尼、墨伽拉、特吉亞等城邦在內(nèi)的希臘大聯(lián)盟人數(shù)也約為10萬，可能更少。然而，羅馬能夠召集同等規(guī)模的軍隊(duì)，比如著名的坎尼會戰(zhàn)中命運(yùn)悲慘的9萬人，而且羅馬的軍隊(duì)在組織、指揮和裝備上遠(yuǎn)勝一籌。羅馬仍然會占據(jù)優(yōu)勢，尤其是考慮到斯巴達(dá)的盟友在機(jī)會來臨時會拋棄他們。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

The Romans conquered Greece by exploiting local politics: Achaeans vs Macedonians vs Laecomedonians vs Aetolians. The Spartans also tried to do so, but were less successful since they lacked the wealth, military might and diplomatic skill of the Romans.

羅馬通過巧妙利用當(dāng)?shù)氐恼尉謩菡鞣讼ＥD：亞加亞人、馬其頓人、古斯巴達(dá)人和埃俄利亞人之間的斗爭。斯巴達(dá)人也曾試圖這樣做，但由于缺乏財(cái)富、軍事力量和外交技巧，他們的成功遠(yuǎn)不如羅馬。

The Spartans relied on their reputation gained by the Persian wars (and indeed by Persian support itself) and the hatred of Athens, Thebes, Persia, and Macedon to form their alliances, but the Romans could play the game quite well.Indeed, their allies extended outside of Greece, and their army had both Asians, Europeans and Africans. The Spartans were long past their prime, but the Romans were rapidly approaching their own prime.

斯巴達(dá)人依賴的是他們在波斯戰(zhàn)爭中建立的聲譽(yù)（甚至得到了波斯的支持）以及與雅典、底比斯、波斯和馬其頓的仇恨來構(gòu)建他們的聯(lián)盟，但羅馬同樣善于進(jìn)行這種政治博弈。事實(shí)上，羅馬的盟友不僅僅限于希臘，他們的軍隊(duì)里也有來自亞洲、歐洲和非洲的士兵。斯巴達(dá)已經(jīng)過了巔峰期，而羅馬則正迅速接近自己的巔峰。

The Spartans at their prime would not be a match for Phillip V of Macedon, and the Romans broke him in a bloody clash in Thessaly. The Romans lacked the logistical problems of the Persians, and have superior technology than from 300 years before.
The Spartans would fall.

即使是斯巴達(dá)在巔峰時期，也無法與馬其頓的腓力五世匹敵，而羅馬則在塞薩利的一場血腥沖突中擊敗了他。羅馬沒有波斯那樣的后勤問題，且技術(shù)比三百年前更為先進(jìn)。斯巴達(dá)最終將會失敗。

Christian Desaix
Not if the Romans were serious about making war on Sparta.
The Romans had access to far larger manpower reserves than the Spartans could dream of, and the Romans were notoriously dogged and determined. The Spartans never fielded more than 5000 full Spartan citizens. A single Roman legion is approximately 5000 men…not counting auxiliaries.
And also…a Roman legion of, say, the first century was far better trained and equipped than the Spartans in their supposed heyday.

如果羅馬人認(rèn)真對待與斯巴達(dá)的戰(zhàn)爭，情況就不同了。
羅馬擁有遠(yuǎn)比斯巴達(dá)想象中的更龐大的兵員儲備，而且羅馬人以頑強(qiáng)和決心著稱。斯巴達(dá)人從未能調(diào)動超過5000名全體斯巴達(dá)公民的兵力，而一支羅馬軍團(tuán)大約就是5000人……還不算輔助兵員。
此外，像公元一世紀(jì)的羅馬軍團(tuán)，其訓(xùn)練和裝備遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)優(yōu)于斯巴達(dá)的黃金時期。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

Thomas Schwarz
In war, one never knows. However, even at their peak, Spartans were beaten by other Greek cities in battle, so they were not superior to everyone. This is because Spartans were not the war machine that we see in movies. Spartan society was an outlier among Greeks, but they did not have a standing army that trained as an army on a continuous base. Greek warfare was based on units, so individual fighting skills only went so far.

戰(zhàn)爭中，永遠(yuǎn)無法預(yù)知結(jié)果。然而，即便是在最強(qiáng)盛時期，斯巴達(dá)人也曾被其他希臘城邦擊敗，因此他們并非無敵。斯巴達(dá)并不是電影中所呈現(xiàn)的戰(zhàn)爭機(jī)器。斯巴達(dá)社會在希臘中算是一個異類，但他們并沒有像現(xiàn)代軍隊(duì)那樣擁有一個常備軍，持續(xù)進(jìn)行集中的訓(xùn)練。希臘的戰(zhàn)爭基于各個單位的配合，因此單個的戰(zhàn)斗技能也有限。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

When Rome conquered Greece, e.g. in the first and second Macedonian war, they had legions with veterans from the second Punic war, which were experienced, well trained, and working as a unit, and it showed in their successes.
Rome also had vastly more resources than Sparta.

當(dāng)羅馬征服希臘時，比如在第一次和第二次馬其頓戰(zhàn)爭中，他們的軍團(tuán)中有很多來自第二次布匿戰(zhàn)爭的老兵，這些士兵經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富，訓(xùn)練有素，并且能夠作為一個整體協(xié)同作戰(zhàn)，這也在他們的勝利中得到了體現(xiàn)。
羅馬的資源也遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過斯巴達(dá)。

Well… Jokerfan49
Having had a look at your profile, I saw that you are very much into video games etc.
If/when you might decide to move out of this frx of mind and look at real life, you will realise that things are not like the video game designers and Hollywood “historicals” would have you believe…

看了你的資料，我發(fā)現(xiàn)你非常喜歡視頻游戲等。如果你有一天決定從這種思維框架中跳出來，看看現(xiàn)實(shí)生活，你會意識到事情并不像視頻游戲設(shè)計(jì)師和好萊塢的“歷史片”讓你相信的那樣……

Spartans were living in a small city that managed to conquer and enslave their neighbours and thus ensure the necessary labour to feed themselves.
This, however, came at the cost of a continuous fear of the enslaved Messenians/Helots revolting and killing their masters, which happened in the Messenian wars and other, lesser, uprisings over a few centuries that the Spartans suppressed and not easily.

斯巴達(dá)人生活在一個小城市，這個城市通過征服并奴役鄰近的人民來確保必要的勞動力，供養(yǎng)自己。然而，這也付出了代價，那就是持續(xù)對奴隸梅西尼人/赫洛人起義的恐懼，梅西尼戰(zhàn)爭以及其他一些較小規(guī)模的起義發(fā)生在幾個世紀(jì)內(nèi)，斯巴達(dá)人雖最終鎮(zhèn)壓了這些起義，但并不輕松。

This state of affairs was the reason for a) the Spartans living in a continuous state of alx, b) dedicating their whole life, as men, to preparing for a fight against their rebelling slaves and c) not having any time for intellectual endeavours like philosophy, theatre, science or anything else.

這種局面造成了：a）斯巴達(dá)人生活在持續(xù)警覺的狀態(tài)中；b）他們作為男人，把一生都奉獻(xiàn)給了為抵御反叛奴隸的戰(zhàn)爭做準(zhǔn)備；c）他們沒有時間從事哲學(xué)、戲劇、科學(xué)或其他任何事物。

So, OK, they were good warriors and that was about all they were.
The reason the area of Sparta was not often conquered lies in the fact that, except for the actual small plain surrounding the city itself, the rest is rather barren and not really worth any conqueror’s time and effort to have it.

所以，好吧，他們是優(yōu)秀的戰(zhàn)士，僅此而已。
斯巴達(dá)地區(qū)不常被征服的原因在于，除了圍繞城市本身的小平原，其他地方相當(dāng)貧瘠，并且不值得任何征服者為此付出時間和精力。

The answer to your question, therefore, lies in the above… the Spartans were defeated by the
Thebans, right in their home area, in the 4th c. BC, while still in their prime, but subsequent armies didn’t find it worth the effort to bother with them… which is not exactly because of their bravery.
Now… in a hypothetical scenario, facing the Romans in open battle, the Spartans would have been massacred in no time flat, though I very much doubt that the Romans would bother with actually sending an army to occupy the area, besides in Roman times the Spartans were, like all other Greek cities, paying their taxes to Rome like all good Roman subjects.

因此，回答你的問題的關(guān)鍵在于上面所說的……即使在巔峰時期，斯巴達(dá)人也曾在公元前4世紀(jì)被底比斯人擊敗，就在他們的家鄉(xiāng)地區(qū)，而后來的軍隊(duì)沒有覺得值得花時間去對付他們……這并不是因?yàn)樗麄兊挠赂摇?br /> 現(xiàn)在……在一個假設(shè)的情境中，面對羅馬人，斯巴達(dá)人在公開戰(zhàn)斗中會很快被屠殺，雖然我非常懷疑羅馬人會派軍隊(duì)去占領(lǐng)該地區(qū)，畢竟在羅馬時期，斯巴達(dá)人和所有其他希臘城市一樣，像所有忠誠的羅馬臣民一樣向羅馬交稅。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

Several centuries later, these same Spartans would be governed by their landowning oligarchy, which would extract taxes from the poor farmers and pay part of the proceeds, keeping the rest for themselves, to the Ottoman Administration that ruled all of Greece and surrounding areas. They will however still tell you with great pride that “never did the Turks set foot in Mani”, Mani being the southernmost and most barren part of the area.
Hollywood fantasies and video-game-heroics are not real life… History IS.

幾個世紀(jì)后，同樣是這些斯巴達(dá)人，他們將由擁有土地的寡頭統(tǒng)治，他們將向貧窮的農(nóng)民征稅，并支付部分收益，其余部分歸自己所有，交給統(tǒng)治整個希臘及其周邊地區(qū)的奧斯曼政府。然而，他們?nèi)匀粫浅Ｗ院赖馗嬖V你，“土耳其人從未踏足馬尼”，馬尼是該地區(qū)最南端和最貧瘠的部分。好萊塢的幻想和電子游戲中的英雄不是真實(shí)的生活，歷史才是。

如果斯巴達(dá)戰(zhàn)士處于巔峰時期，他們能夠成功抵御羅馬帝國的進(jìn)攻嗎？

如果斯巴達(dá)戰(zhàn)士處于巔峰時期，他們能夠成功抵御羅馬帝國的進(jìn)攻嗎？