Vanished Persian army said found in desert

[Melvadius]

Politics are starting to surround this discovery:

 

There is also an item from the Tehran times which possibly takes a more balanced stance (rebuttal even) to the reported finds:

 

TEHRAN -- Three Iranian archaeologists have made various comments about a story reported by the Greek historian Herodotus that says Cambyses lost an army in Egypt.

 

After a resume of the ancient stories it continues:

 

Egyptian archaeologist Zahi Hawass, currently serving as Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, has rejected the claim of the Italian brothers.

 

Twenty years ago, the Castiglionis had discovered the ancient Egyptian

[JGolomb]

Mel - great find...

 

This is turning into quite a little story-within-a-story, eh?

 

Any other theories you're aware of about what they MAY have found if not the 50k soliders?

 

J

[sylla]

Any other theories you're aware of about what they MAY have found if not the 50k soliders?

This was evidently an irregular communication from irregular findings; nothing else can objectively be said on the purported findings themselves until they are regularly and properly analyzed.

 

BTW, even if Herodotus' 50K story might well have been a bit unreliable from the beginning, the mere obvious fact that Darius didn't die there proves absolutely nothing in either way.

Edited December 2, 2009 by sylla

[JGolomb]

This was evidently an irregular communication from irregular findings; nothing else can objectively be said on the purported findings themselves until they are regularly and properly analyzed.

Yeah, but the irregular drama is a LOT more fun.

 

BTW, even if Herodotus' 50K story might well have been a bit unreliable from the beginning, the mere obvious fact that Darius didn't die there proves absolutely nothing in either way.

I'm glad you pointed this out. I didn't quite follow the logic on the Darius "conclusion", but it seemed a bit circumstantial.

[Melvadius]

BTW, even if Herodotus' 50K story might well have been a bit unreliable from the beginning, the mere obvious fact that Darius didn't die there proves absolutely nothing in either way.

I'm glad you pointed this out. I didn't quite follow the logic on the Darius "conclusion", but it seemed a bit circumstantial.

 

I can't speak Persian either ancient or modern but I did wonder if the precise meaning of the 'Archer' reference has been lost either in the editing process of the article or else somewhere in translation.

 

Is it possible that originally it was both a title as well as a technical term or at least a close analogy of the original Persian words were if that is the case then the title of commander-in-chief (possibly 'first or lead archer'?) could have been translated into English as simply 'archer' so leading to the confusion.

 

Irrespective of that; the Iranian archaeologists seem to be of the opinion that the lose of a significant proportion of their army was something that 'would' have been recorded by the Persians in the way described. It may simply be wishful thinking on their part then again maybe it isn't, with the monumental and other evidence available to them they are probably best placed to make such speculations.

 

Not knowing enough about the cultural habits of the period or indeed much about modern Iranian archeology I wouldn't like to speculate further.

[sylla]

[Melvadius]

Actually, Darius' silence is exactly what would have been expected from any mildly rational autocrat; no Empire has ever boasted of its failures. After all, Teutoburg was not mentioned at all by Augustus' Res Gestae.

 

Technically I could probably argue the case for the 'glorious' defeat at Dunkirk being a possible exception to this rule given that those who escaped basically formed the core of the later victorious British and Commmonwealth armies but agree that otherwise it is an exceedingly rare, if not invisible, occurance in the historical record

[sylla]

Technically I could probably argue the case for the 'glorious' defeat at Dunkirk being a possible exception to this rule given that those who escaped basically formed the core of the later victorious British and Commmonwealth armies but agree that otherwise it is an exceedingly rare, if not invisible, occurance in the historical record

Offending post deleted

[Melvadius]

In any case, the rescue of more than 330,000 soldiers from certain annihilation in 1940 was a strategic victory of immense consequences, for which the British armed forces and population can be rightly proud; hardly would I be able to compare such success with either Teutoburg or the demise of the Cambyses' expedition .

 

The British generally still have pride in the success of the Dunkirk evacuation but we shouldn't forget that others were involved as well:

Operation Dynamo

A total of five nations took part in the successful evacuation from Dunkirk - Britain, France, Belgium, Netherlands and Poland.

In total 338,226 troops were evacuated (220,000 British, 120,000 French, some Belgian and Dutch, and even some German prisoners of war) aboard around more than 900 vessels.

[sylla]

The British generally still have pride in the success of the Dunkirk evacuation but we shouldn't forget that others were involved as well:

Operation Dynamo

A total of five nations took part in the successful evacuation from Dunkirk - Britain, France, Belgium, Netherlands and Poland.

In total 338,226 troops were evacuated (220,000 British, 120,000 French, some Belgian and Dutch, and even some German prisoners of war) aboard around more than 900 vessels.

Victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan.

John Fitzgerald Kennedy

[Melvadius]

Victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan.

John Fitzgerald Kennedy

Unless your the Canadian behind the

'French military victories, don't you mean defeats?'

internet scam from a few years back

 

[Edit] one thing I should however correct it may not be considered politically correct however the originator of that particular quotation is actually an Italian (at least a Roman connection):

 

‘La vittoria trova cento padri, e nessuno vuole riconoscere l’insuccesso’

 

by Count Galeazzo Ciano which comes from his diary (1946) vol 2, 9 September 1942

 

Although admittedly he only claimed a '100' fathers - Kennedy always did tend to make errors in his quotations having apparently actually said that he was a 'Berlin cake' (rather than his intent of indicting that everyone was a 'resident' of Berlin, which everyone tends to accept he 'did' say)

 

BTW Ciano was an Italian facist politician, son in law of Mussolini (1903-44)

 

Oxford Dictonary of Quotations (2004) 6th edition [End edit]

 

Although I suspect we are drifting a bit too far so to return to the topic....

 

As we have already discussed (and basically agreed) I fully expect the arguments about the 'significance' of the 'army' remains to continue for months if not years yet at least not until after a proper archaeological report is completed - and possibly not even then with the power of the internet to keep spawning false rumours running forever.

Edited December 4, 2009 by Melvadius