Comment by RcouF1uZ4gsC | Hacker News Reader

Comment by RcouF1uZ4gsC | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

What is interesting is how certain techniques in warfare are conserved. Reading about how a concrete wall was constructed to hem in the opposing forces and force their capitulation in 2008, brought to my mind the Battle of Alesia in 52 BC by Julius Caesar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Alesia).

In that battle, as in the battle for Sadr City, the Romans were constrained from a direct assault on the city. The Romans built a wall surrounding the city, cutting off the enemy from supplies. Eventually, the Celtic warriors inside the city were forced to try to attack the Roman wall and were defeated (as was a relieving force trying to attack the Romans from the other side). The Celtic leader Vercingetorix surrendered (he was taken to Rome as a prisoner and eventually strangled), and this cemented Julius Caesar's reputation as a brilliant commander.

That these two battles separated by over 2000 years and with completely different weaponry, still share the same basic plot, is to my mind amazing.

>That these two battles separated by over 2000 years and with completely different weaponry, still share the same basic plot, is to my mind amazing.

I agree. I also found it fascinating when they mentioned how when placing the wall pieces, the soldier unhooking the segment was at risk from enemy sniper fire, and how a mantlet could be used to protect the soldier. Mantlets has been around as long as sieges and were there to shield trench diggers from castle archer fire. It's incredible how many historical parallels can be drawn here.

I think it really underscores the importance of studying history not just in war, but in all things.

I recall reading once that one of the reasons the Spanish were able to conquer S. America is that, with writing, the commanders had available to them a thousand years of military knowledge.

This is mentioned in the article:

"Operation Gold Wall employed medieval siege warfare tactics with a twist. Instead of a city’s population withdrawing behind castle walls to wait out the besieging army, coalition forces brought a modern version of a siege engine up to the edge of JAM’s safe haven and built a wall around the enemy. This was very similar to the ancient tactic of circumvallation, an example of which was seen when Julius Caesar built a twelve-foot-high, eleven-mile wall around Alesia to defeat 60,000 Gauls in 52 BC."

For an no-nonsense analysis of the battle of Alesia, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU1Ej9Yqt68 on the Historia Civilis channel.

Sounds like the Battle of Alesia was a conventional siege, whereas Sadr City was, well, "urban warfare", a battle to weed out the rebels from lived-in neighborhoods.

The Battle of Alesia wasn't a conventional siege in the sense that the defenders weren't behind a wall to defend themselves from open attackers, but the attackers were behind the walls using it against the defenders. The wall is offensive in this context, as a type of blockade, instead of a defensive structure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment_(military)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com