Bithynia or Syracuse??

[Dutchhoplite]

Hi guys,

Besides the Seleucid campaign i´m now playing i want to try something different ..

Playing Syracuse with the Koinon or play Bythinia with Epeiros..

Getting them there will not the main problem but i´m thing of army composition ;)

Syracuse will be mainly Greek with some regional units but Bythinia?? Hellenistic/Thracian??

Any tips or suggestions??

[keravnos]

Personally I picture Bithynia with Greek elites on top med Trhaikians (as according to all sources they were a Thraikian tribe which migrated from Thrace to Asia minor) and low level units Anatolian+Thraikian mix (dressed like anatolians). This kingdom was never really subjugated, and never really did become hellenistic, but only his kings and nobles would be, and do so by choice.

Galatians... Love/hate affair, as it was them who invited them over, but then fought many wars against them. Your choice as to whether to have them in your army's roster.

[MeinPanzer]

Unfortunately, for the Bithynian army we only really have information from the 2nd c. BC, but we actually have quite a bit. Bithynia was totally Hellenized by the 3rd c. BC at the latest, and by the end of the 3rd c. there was pretty much not a trace of their Thracian origins beyond names used (and Greek names were becoming more popular).

The primary source for Bithynian troops are a number of funerary stelae from Bithynia depicting soldiers. The types seen include your standard heavy Hellenistic cavalrymen (lance, large round shield, helmet, cuirass, sword), thureophoroi, and peltastai (one of the clearest depictions of late Hellenistic peltasts comes from a Bithynian stele: a man is shown standing at ease wearing a cuirass and helmet and carrying a small, rimless pelte, two javelins, and a sword). There's also a depiction of an infantryman carrying a large round shield like the cavalry carry but wearing only a helmet and carrying only a sword for a weapon, so that could indicate that they employed light hoplites, too. It seems very likely that the Bithynians didn't employ the phalanx.

So, for proper Bithynian troops, if you're going with Epeiros, your best bet would be maybe one unit of Hoplitai Haploi, a whole bunch of Thureophoroi, maybe one unit of Thorakitai (we don't have direct evidence for them in the Bithynian military, but a stele depicting one has been found in niehgbouring Mysia), and a few Hetairoi Aspidophoroi. Sprinkle in as many generic light troops as you'd like (slingers, archers, akontistai).

As for auxilliaries, the Bithynians, of course are famous for their connection to the Galatians, and a healthy dose of Galatian mercenaries would round out an army nicely. All the peoples other than the Galatians that the Bithynians lived near seem to have been thoroughly Hellenized themselves, so any neighbouring units would pretty much look like the Bithynians.

[Hax]

Wasn't..Bithynia eastern?

[MeinPanzer]

Wasn't..Bithynia eastern?

What do you mean, exactly? If you mean culturally, then you'd have to define what you mean by "eastern," but the Bithynians were basically a Thracian group that settled in northwest Anatolia probably in the Bronze Age. Being right across the Hellespont, they had close contact with Greeks but were known for being quite barbaric up until the late fifth century, when the different tribes began to coagulate into one kingdom under Doedalsos. However, it wasn't until Zipoetes came to the throne in 297 BC that the Bithynian kings began to pursue a program of Hellenization, and this reached its apogee under Nikomedes I in the 280s-260s BC. They established Greek cities, major trading contacts, and began to become benefactors of Greek poleis. Bithynia was very much a Hellenized kingdom, right down to the individual level, where many people gave their children Greek names.

[keravnos]

Thanks for that clarification, MP, I was under the impression that the Hellenization of Bithynia occured at early CE. In your debt.