如果斯巴达战士处于巅峰时期，他们能够成功抵御罗马帝国的进攻吗？-网帖翻译-龙腾网

Bruce Jurin
A Spartan army of what, 10,000 hoplites and a few thousand supporting troops against the might of Rome? Not a serious question.

一支由大约10,000名重装步兵和几千名后勤部队组成的斯巴达军队，面对罗马的强大力量？这不是一个严肃的问题。

Martin Lloyd
Unlikely - individual fighting skill wouldn’t be that important if the Romans were serious about fighting Sparta.

不太可能——如果罗马人认真对待与斯巴达的战斗，个人战斗技能就不那么重要了。

We can assume a Spartan hoplite would be better than a Roman legionary in a straight fight. However, the Romans would typically not need to fight Sparta on Sparta’s terms. First of all, Rome could raise SO many more troops than Sparta that Sparta would almost have to take defensive positions. Second, the Romans could use naval blockades and besieging to starve out the city of Sparta. They could gather the support necessary to keep themselves supplied in the field for longer than Sparta could reasonably withstand such a siege.

我们可以假设，斯巴达的重装步兵在直接对抗中会比罗马的兵团士兵更强。然而，罗马通常不需要按照斯巴达的方式与他们作战。首先，罗马可以征召比斯巴达多得多的兵力，斯巴达几乎不得不采取防守阵地。其次，罗马可以通过海上封锁和围城战术将斯巴达城市围困至饥饿。罗马可以获得足够的支持，以在战场上保持补给，超过斯巴达能够承受围困的时间。

The other thing is the helots are an ongoing weakness of Sparta, the Romans could exploit that - the helots have plenty of reason to defect, or betray the Spartans.
One of my favorite things the Romans had been known to do was build walls around the place they were besieging, effectively having their own fortifications containing the besieged foe.

另一个问题是，斯巴达的赫洛特（奴隶）始终是其弱点，罗马人可以利用这一点——赫洛特有充足的理由叛变或背叛斯巴达。罗马曾经做过的一件事是，在围攻的地方周围修建城墙，从而有效地为围困的敌人建造了自己的防线。

However, politics is a massive factor in wars.
What does Rome want? A lot of these hypothetical deathmatches of “who will win” miss out what the victory conditions are and assume they just want the other side dead no matter what the cost - and that’s not normally how wars are fought.

然而，政治在战争中是一个巨大的因素。
罗马想要什么？许多关于“谁会赢”的假设性死亡比赛忽视了胜利条件，并假设他们只想不惜一切代价让对方死去——但这通常不是战争的作战方式。

The Romans might not find it viable to field entire legions to besiege Sparta indefinitely, and they might not be willing to just wither the city away into nothing. That’s where things get more complex, because if the Spartans are fighting for survival and the Romans are not, then the Romans might not be so committed.

罗马人可能不会觉得派出整个军团无限期围困斯巴达是可行的，他们也可能不愿意就这样让城市一点点被摧毁。这就变得更复杂了，因为如果斯巴达人是在为生存而战，而罗马人则不是，那么罗马人可能不会那么投入。

If the Romans don’t have control of allies to resupply their armies, that can change things too.
If we assume the helots stay loyal to Sparta, that changes things.

如果罗马人没有控制能够重新补给其军队的盟友，这也会改变局势。
如果假设赫洛特忠诚于斯巴达，那么局势也会发生变化。

Linus Skov
Could the Roman legions at the top of their game have beaten the Spartans?
Please don’t believe all the hype about the Spartans. Sparta was a small city with very limited resources. It had an unusually well-trained and disciplined army, but it was nothing compared to the military might of Rome.

罗马军团如果处于巅峰状态，能击败斯巴达吗？
不要相信所有关于斯巴达的夸大宣传。斯巴达是一个小城市，资源非常有限。它拥有一个异常训练有素和纪律严明的军队，但与罗马的军事力量相比根本无法相提并论。

The Romans thrashed the Spartans soundly on several occasions. Sometimes they didn’t even really have to fight, because their superior diplomatic skills and logistical abilities enabled them to deliver tens of thousands of troops to a single siege.
The Romans were better equipped, better trained and with superior technology. And their entire social structure and the sheer size of their city almost ensured victory.

罗马人在多个场合轻松打败了斯巴达。有时他们甚至根本不需要真正作战，因为他们更强大的外交技巧和后勤能力使他们能够在单一围城战中调集数万兵力。
罗马人装备更好，训练更精良，且拥有更先进的技术。他们的社会结构和城市的庞大规模几乎可以确保胜利。

Ernest W. Adams
I’m pretty sure of it. The Roman shields were designed to be held close together (they had straight sides), with just enough room between them to stick a short stabbing sword. This was almost impossible to penetrate. In their tight ranks, and supported by cavalry, archers, and slingers, they were very hard to stop.

我几乎可以肯定，罗马会赢。
罗马的盾牌设计是紧密排列的（它们有直边），之间只有足够的空间插入一把短剑。这几乎是无法被突破的。在紧密的阵列中，加上骑兵、弓箭手和投石手的支援，他们几乎难以被阻挡。

Amateur Historian
Absolutelly not.
The cost of a spartan was immense compared to that of a roman legionary, far beyond what the quality difference between the two would justify.
The spartans would never have had the logistics to stand before the romans.

绝对不会。
斯巴达人对比罗马军团的成本极其高昂，远远超过了两者之间的质量差距所能解释的范围。
斯巴达人根本没有足够的后勤能力来与罗马军团抗衡。

David M. Prus
Absolutely not.
The Spartans required coalitions- they had a sizable portion of the Peloponnese in their control, but the rest of the peninsula and indeed Greece needed to maintain an alliance with them in order for them to project power.

绝对不会。斯巴达人需要通过联盟来维持力量——他们控制了伯罗奔尼撒的大部分地区，但整个半岛乃至希腊其他地方需要与他们结成联盟，才能确保他们能投射出足够的力量。

The Romans, by the time they entered Greece, had a massive, veteran army that had just conquered Sicily, southern Gaul, Iberia and northwest Africa. The Spartans tried to play the Romans off against other Greeks but ultimately failed.

当罗马进入希腊时，已经拥有一支庞大且经验丰富的军队，这支军队刚刚征服了西西里岛、高卢南部、伊比利亚和非洲西北部。斯巴达人曾试图利用罗马人和其他希腊城邦之间的矛盾，但最终失败了。

Even if the Spartans were able to form a coalition against the Romans, they were antiquated in their military organization, tactics and technology, and still would lack the numbers. The grand Greek alliance at Platea which included all but the northern Greeks but included Corinth, Athens, Sicyon, Mycenae, Megara, Tegea, etc. still numbered about 100,000, probably less. However, the Romans were able to raise similar size armies such as the infamous doomed 90,000 of Cannae, and were far better organized, led and equipped. The Romans would still have the advantage, especially since Sparta’s allies would abandon them if given an opportunity.

即使斯巴达人能够联合其他力量对抗罗马，他们的军事组织、战术和技术都已经过时，且依旧缺乏足够的兵力。公元前479年的普拉提亚战役中，尽管包括科林斯、雅典、西锡安、迈锡尼、墨伽拉、特吉亚等城邦在内的希腊大联盟人数也约为10万，可能更少。然而，罗马能够召集同等规模的军队，比如著名的坎尼会战中命运悲惨的9万人，而且罗马的军队在组织、指挥和装备上远胜一筹。罗马仍然会占据优势，尤其是考虑到斯巴达的盟友在机会来临时会抛弃他们。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

The Romans conquered Greece by exploiting local politics: Achaeans vs Macedonians vs Laecomedonians vs Aetolians. The Spartans also tried to do so, but were less successful since they lacked the wealth, military might and diplomatic skill of the Romans.

罗马通过巧妙利用当地的政治局势征服了希腊：亚加亚人、马其顿人、古斯巴达人和埃俄利亚人之间的斗争。斯巴达人也曾试图这样做，但由于缺乏财富、军事力量和外交技巧，他们的成功远不如罗马。

The Spartans relied on their reputation gained by the Persian wars (and indeed by Persian support itself) and the hatred of Athens, Thebes, Persia, and Macedon to form their alliances, but the Romans could play the game quite well.Indeed, their allies extended outside of Greece, and their army had both Asians, Europeans and Africans. The Spartans were long past their prime, but the Romans were rapidly approaching their own prime.

斯巴达人依赖的是他们在波斯战争中建立的声誉（甚至得到了波斯的支持）以及与雅典、底比斯、波斯和马其顿的仇恨来构建他们的联盟，但罗马同样善于进行这种政治博弈。事实上，罗马的盟友不仅仅限于希腊，他们的军队里也有来自亚洲、欧洲和非洲的士兵。斯巴达已经过了巅峰期，而罗马则正迅速接近自己的巅峰。

The Spartans at their prime would not be a match for Phillip V of Macedon, and the Romans broke him in a bloody clash in Thessaly. The Romans lacked the logistical problems of the Persians, and have superior technology than from 300 years before.
The Spartans would fall.

即使是斯巴达在巅峰时期，也无法与马其顿的腓力五世匹敌，而罗马则在塞萨利的一场血腥冲突中击败了他。罗马没有波斯那样的后勤问题，且技术比三百年前更为先进。斯巴达最终将会失败。

Christian Desaix
Not if the Romans were serious about making war on Sparta.
The Romans had access to far larger manpower reserves than the Spartans could dream of, and the Romans were notoriously dogged and determined. The Spartans never fielded more than 5000 full Spartan citizens. A single Roman legion is approximately 5000 men…not counting auxiliaries.
And also…a Roman legion of, say, the first century was far better trained and equipped than the Spartans in their supposed heyday.

如果罗马人认真对待与斯巴达的战争，情况就不同了。
罗马拥有远比斯巴达想象中的更庞大的兵员储备，而且罗马人以顽强和决心著称。斯巴达人从未能调动超过5000名全体斯巴达公民的兵力，而一支罗马军团大约就是5000人……还不算辅助兵员。
此外，像公元一世纪的罗马军团，其训练和装备远远优于斯巴达的黄金时期。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Thomas Schwarz
In war, one never knows. However, even at their peak, Spartans were beaten by other Greek cities in battle, so they were not superior to everyone. This is because Spartans were not the war machine that we see in movies. Spartan society was an outlier among Greeks, but they did not have a standing army that trained as an army on a continuous base. Greek warfare was based on units, so individual fighting skills only went so far.

战争中，永远无法预知结果。然而，即便是在最强盛时期，斯巴达人也曾被其他希腊城邦击败，因此他们并非无敌。斯巴达并不是电影中所呈现的战争机器。斯巴达社会在希腊中算是一个异类，但他们并没有像现代军队那样拥有一个常备军，持续进行集中的训练。希腊的战争基于各个单位的配合，因此单个的战斗技能也有限。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

When Rome conquered Greece, e.g. in the first and second Macedonian war, they had legions with veterans from the second Punic war, which were experienced, well trained, and working as a unit, and it showed in their successes.
Rome also had vastly more resources than Sparta.

当罗马征服希腊时，比如在第一次和第二次马其顿战争中，他们的军团中有很多来自第二次布匿战争的老兵，这些士兵经验丰富，训练有素，并且能够作为一个整体协同作战，这也在他们的胜利中得到了体现。
罗马的资源也远远超过斯巴达。

Well… Jokerfan49
Having had a look at your profile, I saw that you are very much into video games etc.
If/when you might decide to move out of this frx of mind and look at real life, you will realise that things are not like the video game designers and Hollywood “historicals” would have you believe…

看了你的资料，我发现你非常喜欢视频游戏等。如果你有一天决定从这种思维框架中跳出来，看看现实生活，你会意识到事情并不像视频游戏设计师和好莱坞的“历史片”让你相信的那样……

Spartans were living in a small city that managed to conquer and enslave their neighbours and thus ensure the necessary labour to feed themselves.
This, however, came at the cost of a continuous fear of the enslaved Messenians/Helots revolting and killing their masters, which happened in the Messenian wars and other, lesser, uprisings over a few centuries that the Spartans suppressed and not easily.

斯巴达人生活在一个小城市，这个城市通过征服并奴役邻近的人民来确保必要的劳动力，供养自己。然而，这也付出了代价，那就是持续对奴隶梅西尼人/赫洛人起义的恐惧，梅西尼战争以及其他一些较小规模的起义发生在几个世纪内，斯巴达人虽最终镇压了这些起义，但并不轻松。

This state of affairs was the reason for a) the Spartans living in a continuous state of alx, b) dedicating their whole life, as men, to preparing for a fight against their rebelling slaves and c) not having any time for intellectual endeavours like philosophy, theatre, science or anything else.

这种局面造成了：a）斯巴达人生活在持续警觉的状态中；b）他们作为男人，把一生都奉献给了为抵御反叛奴隶的战争做准备；c）他们没有时间从事哲学、戏剧、科学或其他任何事物。

So, OK, they were good warriors and that was about all they were.
The reason the area of Sparta was not often conquered lies in the fact that, except for the actual small plain surrounding the city itself, the rest is rather barren and not really worth any conqueror’s time and effort to have it.

所以，好吧，他们是优秀的战士，仅此而已。
斯巴达地区不常被征服的原因在于，除了围绕城市本身的小平原，其他地方相当贫瘠，并且不值得任何征服者为此付出时间和精力。

The answer to your question, therefore, lies in the above… the Spartans were defeated by the
Thebans, right in their home area, in the 4th c. BC, while still in their prime, but subsequent armies didn’t find it worth the effort to bother with them… which is not exactly because of their bravery.
Now… in a hypothetical scenario, facing the Romans in open battle, the Spartans would have been massacred in no time flat, though I very much doubt that the Romans would bother with actually sending an army to occupy the area, besides in Roman times the Spartans were, like all other Greek cities, paying their taxes to Rome like all good Roman subjects.

因此，回答你的问题的关键在于上面所说的……即使在巅峰时期，斯巴达人也曾在公元前4世纪被底比斯人击败，就在他们的家乡地区，而后来的军队没有觉得值得花时间去对付他们……这并不是因为他们的勇敢。
现在……在一个假设的情境中，面对罗马人，斯巴达人在公开战斗中会很快被屠杀，虽然我非常怀疑罗马人会派军队去占领该地区，毕竟在罗马时期，斯巴达人和所有其他希腊城市一样，像所有忠诚的罗马臣民一样向罗马交税。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Several centuries later, these same Spartans would be governed by their landowning oligarchy, which would extract taxes from the poor farmers and pay part of the proceeds, keeping the rest for themselves, to the Ottoman Administration that ruled all of Greece and surrounding areas. They will however still tell you with great pride that “never did the Turks set foot in Mani”, Mani being the southernmost and most barren part of the area.
Hollywood fantasies and video-game-heroics are not real life… History IS.

几个世纪后，同样是这些斯巴达人，他们将由拥有土地的寡头统治，他们将向贫穷的农民征税，并支付部分收益，其余部分归自己所有，交给统治整个希腊及其周边地区的奥斯曼政府。然而，他们仍然会非常自豪地告诉你，“土耳其人从未踏足马尼”，马尼是该地区最南端和最贫瘠的部分。好莱坞的幻想和电子游戏中的英雄不是真实的生活，历史才是。