Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

The Battle of Pharsalus. It is 48 BC. Julius Ceaser has conquered Gual and made play to become the head of the Roman State. The political divisions in Rome are deep, however, and Ceaser has rivals. Pompey the Great is chief amoung them. Pompey, much like Ceaser, has made a name for himself by driving the vastly superior Roman legions against border states in the East. He has expanded the Empire, like Ceaser in Gaul, and has just as legitimate claim on power. Pompey is supported by his allies in the Roman Senate and by his conquered vassel states.

http://history.boisestate.edu/westci...alusbattle.jpg

The above picture is from here.

Keep in mind that this battle is fought between essentially equally matched forces, technologically speaking. Both sides are making use of the legion, which is the dominant heavy infantry war machine of it's day. Ceaser's troops are veterens of his campaigns in Gual. Pompey outnumbers Ceaser and employs Greek and Syrian troops to supplement his ranks.

Overall, the advantage is to Pompey. Pompey has about 40,000 men and Ceaser only has 22,000. In addition to numbers, Pompey has a vastly superior cavalry wing. The weakness in Pompey's forces, however, is that they are largely inexperienced. This will benefit Ceaser in several ways.

Pompey was actually camped on the side of a mountain called Dogantzes some miles from Pharsalus proper. Ceaser was actually positioned closer to the city several miles across a plain from Pompey.

This is where several key aspects of Ceaser's genious and experience come into play. Pompey had massed his forces with his right protected by a river and the superior cavalry forces protecting his left. To open battle, Ceaser knows that he must cross the plain in a charge, which, over several miles, will exhaust his men. Ceaser anticipates that Pompey will order his cavalry to flank him and try to crush his legions in a vice. To counter this, Ceaser makes a fourth battle line behind is cavalry on his right.

In the middle of the charge, Ceaser stops. This confuses Pompey's lines, who are all rowled up expecting to break an infantry charge. Instead Ceaser closes the field from here in a steady march. This causes Pompey to order his cavalry to attack Ceaser's right. The lines meet in the center and legion to legion are locked in a stalemate. Ceaser's lighter cavalry breaks and is routed, as anticipated. However, Ceasers fourth battle line attacks the cavalry at this point and Pompey's cavalry never makes the anticipated charge into Ceaser's flank. Unable to keep up a defensive action against a legion with their momentum broken, Pompey's cavalry retreats into the foothills to try and regroup.

At this point, the Ceaser's fourth line executes a left wheel into Pompey's rear and left flank. It's all over. Pompey's army is out maneuvered. Magnanomously, Ceaser orders his army to only kill the troops from Pompey's vassel lands and not their own coutrymen.

The Roman Senators in Pompey's camp are put to the sword. Ceaser takes command of Pompey's remaining Roman troops and gives them a pardon. Pompey's ally troops are slaughted. Pompey himself makes it to the sea and escapes to Eygpt.

Ceaser later hears Pompey is in Eygpt and pursues him there. In Eygpt, Ceaser meets Cleopatra and fights the first battle of the Nile. But, that is another story.

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

Nice post. I wish the HBO series Rome had done a complete recreation of this, but I'm guessing their budget didn't allow for it. They gave a basic explanation which wasn't as detailed as yours. Crazy to think how different history would be if Caesar or Pompey had made a couple of decisions differently. And yes, Caesar was a pimp.

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

Yes, this is another great post. I liked this a lot, as I've always been interested in the first 5 emperors, but I don't know that much about Julius Caesar. I've been only vaguely aware of the fact that Julius Caesar (NOT the first emperor of Rome as many believe, but founder of the Roman Empire for sure) fought Pompey in a civil war. This fills in some of the background of these two nicely.

thanks
db

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, this is another great post...
thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

This battle was another good choice Exsub! This whole story is great, with Carrhae and Crassus included.

Do you really think that Caesar's force was inferior?

His troops were just too battle hard, and they were totally dependent on Caesar and Caesar alone. They had just shattered Sextus's army, in such a convincing fashion it must have scared the pants off the green force of virgin soldiers waiting for Caesar in Macedonia. But then at the time Pompey was still considered Rome's greatest general by the people. But years of grinding warfare have a measured effect on soldiers, some of those men had been fighting since the first Gallic war.

Which do you consider to be the most dangerous spot for Rome's transition to a Julio-claudian empire Pharsalus or Actium?

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

[ QUOTE ]
This battle was another good choice Exsub! This whole story is great, with Carrhae and Crassus included.

Do you really think that Caesar's force was inferior?

His troops were just too battle hard, and they were totally dependent on Caesar and Caesar alone. They had just shattered Sextus's army, in such a convincing fashion it must have scared the pants off the green force of virgin soldiers waiting for Caesar in Macedonia. But then at the time Pompey was still considered Rome's greatest general by the people. But years of grinding warfare have a measured effect on soldiers, some of those men had been fighting since the first Gallic war.

Which do you consider to be the most dangerous spot for Rome's transition to a Julio-claudian empire Pharsalus or Actium?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you taliking about Sextus Pompeius? There are so many characters in Roman history I get lost.

I'm a bit confused what battle you are refering to. The battle immediately proceeding Pharsalus was Dyrrhachium and Ceaser almost lost his ass.

I would still give the advantage to Pompey. A lesser general than Ceaser would have not been able to neutralize the cavalry, no matter how tough and battle hard their men.

I was, in fact, intending to do a separate post on Actium. I really consider Pharsalus more of a defining moment for the creation of the Ceasers. If Ceaser had lost, history might remember the Pompeys. Hail Pompey! I can hear it now.

Actium, if anything, is proof that Antony was a second rate general. Even though Cleopatra abandoned him, I think he had enough of a defensive position in the face of Octavians forces that he could have at least kept his army. As it was, he abandoned the field and left his forces in chaos to be destroyed. Got to go right now. I'll post more on this later.

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

Don't forget the added awesomeness of the fact that Pompey was married to Caesar's daughter.

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

Just in case you guys are ambitious, you can get Rome:Total War and there is a Pharsalus mod available. Refight it from either side, against the AI or someone else. It plays in real time, so you can see how fast these things really went.

Very addictive game, and about as close to realistic as you're going to get without raising your own army.

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

Ex,

Another enjoyable read. For future threads I'd like to see some breakdown of any of the famous battles of the Thirty Year War, maybe the battle of Lutzen. Gustav II Adolf was the coolest king ever.

Swede

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

If we're putting in requests, I'd love to see something more modern, even if it's the Civil War. Or battles most of us have heard of, but know nothing about (Battle of the Bulge? Outside of watching "Band of Brothers", I'm pretty clueless).

Or if you really want to stretch, give us a battle where the hugely out-numbered force won.

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

[ QUOTE ]
If we're putting in requests, I'd love to see something more modern, even if it's the Civil War. Or battles most of us have heard of, but know nothing about (Battle of the Bulge? Outside of watching "Band of Brothers", I'm pretty clueless).

Or if you really want to stretch, give us a battle where the hugely out-numbered force won.

[/ QUOTE ]

Midway?

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

[ QUOTE ]
If we're putting in requests, I'd love to see something more modern, even if it's the Civil War. Or battles most of us have heard of, but know nothing about (Battle of the Bulge? Outside of watching "Band of Brothers", I'm pretty clueless).

[/ QUOTE ]

Lame. Ancient battles are far more awesome. Just turn on the History Channel if you want to know about WW2.

[ QUOTE ]

Or if you really want to stretch, give us a battle where the hugely out-numbered force won.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you haven't read about it, check out the Battle of Thermopylae.

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

I was referring to Sextus Pompeius yea. His army was destroyed before Pharsalus in Cisalpine Gaul I think, or maybe a little farther west.

I like your theory on Actium taking a backseat. I think though, that the admiral Marcus Agrippa was the deciding factor at Actium. Octavian couldn't have lasted even hours commanding that force, and after all, he was found hiding in the bushes by days end. Octavian even named his daughter after Agrippa, and in the end his blood would find it's way into Rome's Julio-Claudian dynasty.

ExSub, if you're contemplating putting off another exceedingly important task to entertain the increasingly demanding audience of 2+2, I suggest the Battle of Hurtgen forest. It was the worst of the worst for WWII. My mother's first husband was in a division that lost 80% of frontline troops. I heard someone request something recent, this is as moving as it gets without heading into remote antiquity.

Cam

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

[ QUOTE ]
Or if you really want to stretch, give us a battle where the hugely out-numbered force won.

[/ QUOTE ]


He already did Gaugamela and Thermopylae, how outnumbered do they have to be?

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

these threads are pure awesomeness

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

Actually, I do take requests. But, I'm not going to establish a cycle of quiet zone posting codependency, here. My writings are very much a matter of whim and what interests me on any given day. I do appreciate everyone's positive remarks and I'm happy to write. So far, I've only done about one or two of these battle posts a week and that's probably the pace I'm going to keep. Swede's request for something about the thirty years war got me reading yesterday, so that's probably next. It's about time someone talked about the Swede's contributions to western civilization.

In the Que:
Midway
Sinking Bismark
Battle of the Tin Can Sailors (Laytee Gulf?)
The Bulge
Cambraceres' Mom's first husband (This might be part of the Bulge? have to see)
Thermopylae (actually not done yet)
Siege of Tyre
Trafalgar

I've even considered writing about things like how to make a sword (samauri) and how to do things like cast a cannon or lay the keel of a ship. All of these activities were economics based and had a big impact on how history unfolded. It's not just about battles, but that's typically how things end up being decided.

As I've read history, first I fell in love with the idea it was about bloodlines. Then, I got the idea it was about fighting over God. Then, I started thinking it was about wealth. Then, I fell in love with idea that it was about control of economy. These days, I'm really in love with the notion that it is about ideas competeing with each other to achieve control of economy through different means. I am really starting to think there is a metahistory, if you will and it will ultimately achieve the best system for the human species to survive.

What would be really awesome is if I start reading history here that I haven't studied yet. I welcome any discussions you guys might have to offer. Lord knows, I'm far from an authority. I can always learn more.

Re: Pompey vs. Ceaser
 

I held to my simplistic views more tenaciously than you did, and still have a hard time defeating the tendency to use broad generalizations in an attempt to characterize a campaign or it's causes. All human conflict seems to stem form the morbidly alluring idea of controlling the productive faculty of man. No matter if one is speaking in terms of goods, services, or ideas, the "point" of all this commotion is to take what is distinctly human and direct it in accordance with the will of what powers may be. In some societies, men owned nothing, and only an artificial legal structure held any meaningful clout. In others, citizens own exclusive property, and cannot be legally deprived of this right.

Both these systems are pointed in the same direction, disparate, not unlike. Both serve to facilitate, and in some cases initiate, the classification, quantification, and regulation of the general product of the average citizen. The ancillary benefits for government are obscene, a productive and healthy society, one with both guns and butter, makes for well off officials ans wealthy politicans. I'm not saying that should change or anything mind you.

The point is, all war and political machinations are about you and I and what we do as a matter of course. Short of naked subversion, a government can stand to allow many things, so long as the populace can find their work boots, or thinking caps, or what have you.

Got to go back to work, stupid private sector!

Cam