Talk:Battle of Nemea

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece.
If you would like to participate, you can improve Battle of Nemea, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
Mid This article has been rated as a Mid priority article
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. To participate, improve this article or visit the project page for more information.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article is on a subject of Mid-importance within classical antiquity.
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] Casualty statistics of the Nemea

I would like to raise the question as to why the article only mentions Diodorus statistics as to Allied casualties; certainly, Xenophon's claim in the Agesilaos, 8 'Lakedaemonians' to 10,000 allies, is spurious, but the emphasis on such outlandish numbers should certainly indicate that the defeat was not a 'standard' hoplite battle in terms of numbers. Equally, I feel that it should be noted that this is one of the few, if maybe the only, battle in which Lakedaemonian troops 'attack' a retreating enemy, which may preclude the reliance on 'standard' proportional casualties. If anybody knows of any reason, other than the sheer disproportion between the two figures, as to why Diodorus figures are 'exact,' please comment. If not alternate suggestions as to the quantity of losses, obviously with reasoning, would be appreciated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 137.73.88.101 (talk) 21:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC).