Similar battle deaths of 300!

Owen, I thought one of the sites mentioned that a "cohort" was 300, etc.! , and there was a different word for 600, which was, I believe "Brigade" or two "cohorts!"

And, yes I made a "play on words", because of the asserted homo-sexual nature of the 300 killed by Phillip and Alexander! Thus "Hort" became "Heart!" Just what "opinion" could overide it?

And yes, I know most of them have degrees, and expertise, etc.!

And Shirley, I mean surely some of your friends have a Word Perfect Programme? Certainly the local College Library should?

So, be of good cheer! The time is near!

Edited by opuslola - 06-Dec-2010 at 14:13

in the roman legion were 10 cohorts, however first cohort had double strenght. In the ordinary cohort was moreless 500 soldiers, maybe up to 600. But usually legions didnt have full strenght because were being raised and released en masse, so in the end of its life there was probably much less soldiers.

Fair point from you both there, so we seemed to have all agreed it is between 300-600 amusingly.  I know Ottoway & Cyprien make the observation that an Auxillery cohort was of a larger size than a legionary cohort which may explain the variety of answers available?

Cohort I think, if I remember my Roman lectures correctly, comes from the Latin; cohors and cohortes.

Thanks Mosquito, what we really see is that history has no pat or correct answer for the real number, that is, it could have moved from the number 300 to the number 600 or so, numerous times!

And yes, Owen we are told that it is related to "garden!"

But, resorting again to the mention of a "Sacred Band"(of brothers?), I would well bet $10.oo to $1.00, that no one else here has seen or heard of this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Krimissus

http://www.c3iopscenter.com/documents/The%20Battle%20of%20Crimissos%20River%20341%20BC.pdf

Please note the spelling of the name of the river, and ask yourselves if this does not remind you of another famous river and the battle(s) fought there?

Such as; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Issus

Can any of you find any reason that Issus cannot also be spelled as Issos?

You must note that I project or believe that the words "Issos" or "Issus" merely means mostly the same as our modern word "Issue(s)", or mostly, "flow", "flu", "flum!", or "Flume'", or "river!"

Can any of you even consider this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pineios_River_(Thessaly)

Could you perceive that "enios", or "aios?" could equal "Issus" or "Issos", or "isos?", or even "ios?", or even "os?", or "us?", etc.?

Perhaps you might well consider seeing this list of rivers in Greece?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rivers_of_Greece

Then perhaps you might well consider my proposition?

Regarding the number of 300 warriors;

I also hope that you read this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_300_Champions

Oh! As well perhaps one should again consider this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_of_the_Light_Brigade

Thus maybe only 607 men?

Regarding Greek rivers and famous battles, I'd again bet that none of you have ever regarded this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Achelous_(1359)

Sorry, I know that I sometimes ask too much from "scholars!"

But, can any of you name the two rivers or streams, etc., that actually run thru or around ancient Athens?

Edited by opuslola - 07-Dec-2010 at 16:55

Hi Opuslola, always a puzzle to be found when I wake in the morning, I start to look forward to them now!  The sacred band battle was known, always a nice anecdote when you write on the Theban Band to show the Carthaginian equivalent.  Don't know if the Carthaginian one was sexually connected in the same way, do you know anything on that?

The river observation, I will inject one point which is that the Greek for river is Potamos;

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/definitionlookup?redirect=true&lookup=river&type=begin&options=Sort+Results+Alphabetically&.submit=Search&lang=greek

So if the ending of the all the rivers are similar as you describe, does it not just denote that it is in fact a river?  It would be like saying there is something suspicious that the River Thames, the River Avon and the Hudson River all have 'river' in their name.  If we accept that the names are not suspicious, then you have observed that many battles throughout time occur by rivers, which is not surprising.

I had a question for you and your theory, in terms of later battles being rather close or identical in reports to ancient battles; have you found any similarity to the battle of Cunaxa (401 BCE) and the fighting in Fallujah (2003CE-present) as the sites are meant to be very close to one another?

Mosquito - I didn't know they fluctuated so much, thanks for clarifying that point

Regards

Dear Owen, did you really read about the Sacred Band of Carthage? Did you read these words about the battle at the river?

"As long as the Sacred Band
held, reinforcements could stream
across the ford to turn the tide of
battle. Timoleon saw his victory
slipping away. At this moment, the
gods intervened. To the
Greeks (at least it seemed so to
them). A violent thunderstorm
erupted onto
storm benefited
important ways. First, the wind blew
the rain and hail
Carthaginians,
backs of the Greeks.
heavy rain greatly slowed
crossing of the Carthaginian
mercenary reinforcements. And,
finally, the very heavily armored
hoplites of the Sacred Band became
mired in the quickly developing mud.
The Greek hoplites were apparently
more lightly armed, but it was the
Greek peltasts especially that found
they could now work their way
around the flanks of the Sacred
Band. The peltasts commenced to cut
it to pieces. Nearly all the sacred
Band fought and
stood. The Greeks claim to have
counted
on the field.
Carthaginian
Significance of the Battle
Timoleon's victory at Crimissos
solidified the hold of Syracuse on
Eastern and Central Sicily. It also
cavalry charge. But
unprepared,
flight of the chariots. But
intervened on the side of the
the battlefield. The
the Greeks in three
into the faces of the
but only onto the
Second, the
the
died where they
12,500 Carthaginian dead
The remainder of the
army scattered in flight."

The copy and paste did not do well but the gist of it came through, that is these words; "the very heavily armored hoplites of the Sacred Band became mired in the quickly developing mud."

Do the above words not erily remind you of the forces/kinghts of Walter de Brienne, whom were also heavily armoured and likewise mired in the muc, whilst facing the Catalans? Did not the desertion of some of the mercenaries also remind you of the desertion of the Catalans that were on the side of Duke Walter, to their brothers on the other side?

Is it not recorded that the rest of the army of Waltier deBrienne were destroyed or scattered?

Could the area across the river have been deliberately flooded, or were clay pots placed in the area?

These three or four similarities, at least, cast doubt as to just which account is the real one?

Or did the ancient accounts of historians only indicate that they were pure and simple plagerists?

Did not my explanation of the rivers that flow thru Athens surprise you? At least the names of them should have?

"Read more: Athens, city, Greece — Infoplease.com

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0805192.html#ixzz17SwzosKR

Thus the correct answer, which I know all of you found surprising was 'the Kifisós and Ilissus rivers!'

Just how close is "Kifisos" to "Cephissus", etc.? Perhaps you can well visualize Alexander at the battle of the "Il-issus", in Greece? Rather than in Asia? Issus v. Is(s)os, etc.! Could not the confusion of the names of rivers or places, that historians found in the so called "ancient accounts" / Greek?, have placed them in inserting information of a similar nature?

Strange is it not?"

And please rather than just ignore the propositons I have given you and post derisive remarks to impress your friends, etc., it would be much better if you actually did the research into the assertations I have mostly given unto you?

If you are unwilling or unable to perform such, then please merely dismiss me and spare me the time and effort to provide you with the information that I already have? As well as the effort to provide you with much more!

I am not just "Singing Dixie" here! (that is an old American statement that you could not really understand!)

By the way, your last name (which I presume is Rees) could just as easily be spelled as "Rys" or "Reece", etc.?

Cheers!


Edited by opuslola - 08-Dec-2010 at 14:50

Originally posted by opuslola   Such as; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Issus Can any of you find any reason that Issus cannot also be spelled as Issos? You must note that I project or believe that the words "Issos" or "Issus" merely means mostly the same as our modern word "Issue(s)", or mostly, "flow", "flu", "flum!", or "Flume'", or "river!"

Read about this man here;

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernat_de_Rocafort&ei=oVIBTd_wJISClAeb_NTsCA&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCUQ7gEwAQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3DBernat%2Bde%2BRocafort%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4ADBR_enUS315US315%26prmd%3Divo

You might well notice that the fist name, if it really is one, is the same as "Berenger/Berengar, etc.", and is just another way to spell "Bernard" or "Bernado", etc.!

You will notice again that the almogavers are also referred to as the Catalans!

Please also note; http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ca&u=http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernat_de_Rocafort&ei=LktPTJz1B8OC8gbftuGgAQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CB0Q7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3DBernat%2Bde%2BRocafort%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4ADBR_enUS315US315%26prmd%3Dio
And notice the place to which they "repaired"?


http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ca&u=http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernat_de_Rocafort&ei=LktPTJz1B8OC8gbftuGgAQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CB0Q7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3DBernat%2Bde%2BRocafort%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4ADBR_enUS315US315%26prmd%3Dio

Also the reported birth place of Homer!/D'Omer?/ H'Omer?", or even "Omar/Omer?", and as such also "Otto" / "Otho", etc.!

And again, a different spelling;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Crimissus

Compare to Krimissus?

Edited by opuslola - 09-Dec-2010 at 17:28

Again regarding the rivers near and in Athens, we come to the above mentioned river named the Kifisos! It is funny that the site mentioned above should spell it so! Perhaps some clarification is needed?

So, see if the following sites clarify the situation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cephissus_(Athenian_plain)

The key sentence found in the above site is; "Cephissus (Athenian plain) (Greek Κήφισσος, Kifissós, Kephissós, Kêphissos) or Cephisus (Greek Κήφισος Kêphissos), a river flowing through the Athenian plain."

Please take close note of the possible spellings of this river? You might well note that it appears, at least to one of my previous sources, that another accepted spelling could be "Kifisos?", you see, it appears that the doubled "s" might well not be required! See the above spelling as "Kifissos!"

You will also notice that another spelling (as the spelling of this river seems to change with each historians account) is "Cephisus!", which I would contend could just as easily have been spelled as "Cephissus", or even "Cephissos?" / "Cephisus", etc.! I would also contend that it could have even been spelled as "Kefisos", or "Kefissos", or "Kefissus", etc., as well as "Kiphissos", etc.!

I will now ask you to name the river in Sicily where another famous loss of 300 warriors took place?

That river's name was "the Crimissos!", which I will also suggest could just as easily be written as "Krimissos", or "Krimisos", or "Krimissus", etc.!

While the use of "issus", "issos", "Isos", "Isus", etc. might not mean "river", can anyone see any reason why it could not mean "Issue" or more correctly "the issue of the "River? / Potamos"?

Actually, I do not have to accept that "Potamos", has always been the Greek word for "river!" In actuality, we can read this;

http://www.theoi.com/Potamos/Potamoi.html

From the above site, we read this;

"THE POTAMOI were the gods of the rivers and streams of the earth, sons of the great earth-encirling river Okeanos. Their sisters were the Okeanides, goddesses of streams, clouds and rain, and their daughters were the Naiades, nymphs of fresh-water springs.

The River-God was depicted in one of three forms:--as a man-headed bull; or a bull-horned man with the body of serpentine-fish from the waist down; or as a man reclining with an arm resting upon an amphora jug pouring water."

Wait just a moment while I regard the mention of "an arm resting upon an amphora (a clay jug) pouring water." Were not some "clay jugs" planted in the earth to stop a charging army?

But, most of all we see that the "potamoi" were merely the Gods of rivers, lakes and Oceans, etc.!

But, look!, later on we see the name of one of those gods;

"ILISSOS A River-God of Attika in southern Greece." As well as these;

"KEPHISSOS (1) A River-God of Phokis in central Greece.
KEPHISSOS (2) A River-God of Attika in southern Greece.
KEPHISSOS (3) A River-God of Argos in the Peloponnesos, southern Greece.
KRIMISOS A River-God of the island of Sikelia (Sicily) in Italy. He seduced a Trojan princess disguised as a dog."

Just how did the Greeks keep all of these gods seperate? It seems that it could be very confusing when translating or transcribing a document, etc.? Mistakes could, it seems, be easily expected, and perhaps common? Perhaps one should look at all of the gods listed at the site above?

And even this little site is informative;
http://www.hotelallegro.gr/potamos_en.php

Now examine the next site;

http://www.answers.com/topic/chaeronea

Where amongst other good points you will read these words;

"Chaeronea (kĕrənē'ə), ancient town of Boeotia, Greece, in the Cephissus (now Kifisós) River valley and NW of Thebes. There the Athenians and Thebans were defeated (338 B.C.) by the Macedonians under Philip II, and in 86 B.C. Sulla defeated the army of Mithradates VI of Pontus under Archelaus. Chaeronea was the birthplace of Plutarch."

I will leave it to your own devices to read about "Plutarch" here;

http://www.ask.com/web?&o=101881&l=dis&q=Plutarch






Edited by opuslola - 10-Dec-2010 at 20:34

I have to assume that either Owen has quit posting here, or he is busily writing a scathing denial / reply to my prior postings?

I hope it is the latter?