[002]
jatay3
Current Version
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
2. However, hoplite battles seldom generated enough casualties in actual combat to threaten the Spartan predominance. Furthermore no Greek state before the Macedonian empire possessed a strong enough exploitation arm to make up for that.
to:
2. However, hoplite battles seldom generated enough casualties in actual combat to threaten the Spartan predominance. Furthermore no Greek state before the Macedonian empire possessed a strong enough exploitation arm to make up for that in the rare event of a Spartan retreat.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
3. Therefore, \'\'so long as\'\' Sparta\'s policy remained restricted to the maintenence of hegemony over the Peleponece then having a body of severely trained hoplites that can be usually trusted to win a head-to-head clash, and almost always trusted to maintain good enough order to prevent a hot pursuit in the rare instances of a retreat is very useful. Spartiates could not prevent raiding or partisan warfare. What they could do is always be a present threat. And so long as they were always there, Sparta was there.
to:
3. Therefore, \\\'\\\'so long as\\\'\\\' Sparta\\\'s policy remained restricted to the maintenence of hegemony over the Peleponece then having a body of severely trained hoplites that can be usually trusted to win a head-to-head clash, and almost always trusted to maintain good enough order to prevent a hot pursuit in the rare instances of a retreat is very useful. Spartiates could not prevent raiding or partisan warfare. What they could do is always be a present threat. And so long as they were always there, Sparta was there. The reluctance of Sparta to risk Spartiates in battle becomes understandable. It may have short term disadvantages but it also has considerable advantages.
