Greek names for stuff (Q?)

[chairman]

Ok, so I've been working on unit lists for what might turn into a game someday, and I'm curious about what the accurate names for certain units would be. So here are some of my units' names if a few of the EB greek scholars could advise me:

Campanian Hoplites (current latin/greek mix: Campanici Hoplitai)

Theban Sacred Band (Thebanoi Heiros Lochos)

Marine Hoplites (Epibatoi Hoplitai)

Spartan King's Guard Regiment (Spartiatai Hippeis Hoplitai)

Spartan Foriegners' (periokoi) Hoplites (Periokoi Hoplitai)

Successor non-cata armored cavalry (Hippeis Holosideroi)

BTW, what's the latin for slinger (IIRC it's funditores, maybe)

Also what does deuteroi mean exactly? Pantadapoi? Haploi?

And does anyone know what the Athenian freed slave regiment of horse-archers was called (aside from plain hippotoxotai)?

I will probably have more questions soon. I ask here because this forum has so many intelligent people. Thanks in advance!

Chairman

[keravnos]

Ok, so I've been working on unit lists for what might turn into a game someday, and I'm curious about what the accurate names for certain units would be. So here are some of my units' names if a few of the EB greek scholars could advise me:

Campanian Hoplites (current latin/greek mix: Campanici Hoplitai)

Theban Sacred Band (Thebanoi Heiros Lochos)

Marine Hoplites (Epibatoi Hoplitai)

Spartan King's Guard Regiment (Spartiatai Hippeis Hoplitai)

Spartan Foriegners' (periokoi) Hoplites (Periokoi Hoplitai)

Successor non-cata armored cavalry (Hippeis Holosideroi)

BTW, what's the latin for slinger (IIRC it's funditores, maybe)

Also what does deuteroi mean exactly? Pantadapoi? Haploi?

And does anyone know what the Athenian freed slave regiment of horse-archers was called (aside from plain hippotoxotai)?

I will probably have more questions soon. I ask here because this forum has so many intelligent people. Thanks in advance!

Chairman

Campanian Hoplites = Kampanioi Hoplitai

Theban Sacred Band = Hieros Lochos Thebaion

Marine Hoplites = Epibatai Hoplitai

Spartan King's Guard Regiment (Spartiatai Hippeis Hoplitai)... (Not sure if they used hoplitai, that would be a bit superfluous I think, back then Spartiatai hippeis would be enough, but I imagine that people won't know that those aren't mounted so you could use "hoplitai" in addition to that.

Spartan Foriegners' (periokoi) Hoplites = Perioikoi hoplitai Perioikoi means" those who live around, aren't foreigners, but native populations who live in the mountainside and weren't made into helots (eilotai) The foreigners who would live in Sparta would be Metoikoi, thus Metoikoi Hoplitai

Successor non-cata armored cavalry, I would try "Thorakismenoi hippeis" or "Bareis hippeis" meaning literally "heavy horsemen"

BTW, what's the latin for slinger (IIRC it's funditores, maybe)
(Ascensi maybe? I don't know, but there are many Romani experts here who do)

Also what does deuteroi mean exactly? Pantadapoi? Haploi? ---> Deuteroi mean SECOND (in this case second rate)



And does anyone know what the Athenian freed slave regiment of horse-archers was called (aside from plain hippotoxotai)?


The literal translation would be "Apeleutheroi hippotoxotai", but I have to ask. Didn't Athenians also use Skythian horse archers? I imagine you are refering to the period of Peloponnesian war, when Athens created "hit and run" horsemen whose job was to harass the troops of Peloponnesean alliance.

Oh, and BTW, I think there are many smart people around here, many MUCH smarter than us members. I really think it is a success that this forum has gathered as many enthousiasts, military historians or plainly interested people in the Hellenistic era that it depicts. It really does give us EB members the strength to carry on. :yes:

[Tellos Athenaios]

IIRC the Athenians employed Skythian slaves as their archery corps? Might be one and the same, ehm, unit? :idea2:

[chairman]

Thanks Keravnos!

I didn't actually mean foriegners with the perioikoi, but I couldn't remember what their status actually was. If I use perioikoi (as a second class spartan unit), would the correct name be "Perioikoi Hoplitai"?

On the latin slingers, IIRC, accensi were baggage handlers or some-such supernumerary group who were armed with slings for the sake of the game, while funditores means ~ "sling-armed soldier".

Chairman

[russia almighty]

I don't think the peri's should be second rate in your game or mod though. Having Spartan drill instructors would probably make you somewhat hardcore.

[keravnos]

Thanks Keravnos!

I didn't actually mean foriegners with the perioikoi, but I couldn't remember what their status actually was. If I use perioikoi (as a second class spartan unit), would the correct name be "Perioikoi Hoplitai"?

On the latin slingers, IIRC, accensi were baggage handlers or some-such supernumerary group who were armed with slings for the sake of the game, while funditores means ~ "sling-armed soldier".

Chairman

Perioikoi hoplitai is great. So far as the accensi go, well, I think you know better.
So far as having Spartan instructors, it sure is great, so long as you survive...

[chairman]

@Russia: second-rate Spartan is still quite relative though, compared to something like other states' militia hoplites :beam: . Besides, the perioikoi weren't held to nearly as high standards as the Spartan homoioi "equals", so 'second-rate' is not too far off.

OK, so more name questions (greek):

In units like Thessalian cavalry, does the 'ethnic' or 'type' descriptor come first? Example, is it Thessalike Xystophoroi or Xystophoroi Thessalike?

In my game I want peltasts to be more like the 5th century style rather than the armored 3rd century style. For the heavier version, should I call them Thorakitai Peltastai?

Also does "Hoplitai Haploi" mean militia hoplites or is it something else? And what exactly does "pantadapoi" mean?

For Latin:

Clipeata means 'armed with hoplite shield' but would that mean that say Samnitici Clipeata is Samnite Hoplites? :inquisitive:

And what is the latin for Latin as in the Latin tribes allied to Rome?

Thanks!

Chairman

[keravnos]

@Russia: second-rate Spartan is still quite relative though, compared to something like other states' militia hoplites :beam: . Besides, the perioikoi weren't held to nearly as high standards as the Spartan homoioi "equals", so 'second-rate' is not too far off.

OK, so more name questions (greek):

In units like Thessalian cavalry, does the 'ethnic' or 'type' descriptor come first? Example, is it Thessalike Xystophoroi or Xystophoroi Thessalike?

In my game I want peltasts to be more like the 5th century style rather than the armored 3rd century style. For the heavier version, should I call them Thorakitai Peltastai?

Also does "Hoplitai Haploi" mean militia hoplites or is it something else? And what exactly does "pantadapoi" mean?

For Latin:

Clipeata means 'armed with hoplite shield' but would that mean that say Samnitici Clipeata is Samnite Hoplites? :inquisitive:

And what is the latin for Latin as in the Latin tribes allied to Rome?

Thanks!

Chairman

So far as whichever gets first, it makes no difference as both were used. As a rule of thumb, "Ethnic" goes first, or rather "regional", as in "Thessalikoi hippeis"

Thessalikoi=Plural male
Thessalike=Singular female, but could also be used in "Thessalike ile" (=thessalian [cavalry] squadron) if such a unit is desired.

I would use "Thessalikoi xystophoroi", even if "Xystophoroi Thessalikoi" is fine. It depends really where you would want the emphasis placed. On the unit or where it is from.

Now, so far as peltasts is concerned, hmm, "Peltastai thorakitai" defeats the purpose of them, I think... however I can see no alternative.
Peltastai by EB time had been mostly eclipsed by Thureophoroi, and then Celtic/Romani influence turned those into "Thorakitai".
I would rather go for "Peltastai Epilektoi" or "chosen peltasts" as the best among the Peltasts would basically buy the means to arm themselves in battle. But that is me.

"Hoplitai haploi" means "plain hoplites" or "Simple hoplites", even "levy hoplites" and it signifies the big majority of people who couldn't afford neither a shield, nor a helmet and had one provided for them by the state. This would signify the bigh majority of the "Demos" in urbanized areas such as Athens, or Sparta.

In fact if there was to be a "categorization" of sorts of hoplites, in my opinion it would go something like this...

1. Hoplitai Epilektoi (Chosen hoplites). I would like to refer you to the following thread where they and their historical appearances are discussed in length...
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?p=2838929#post2838929
(Those would be the city states' finest- basically the aristocracy, able to afford a full bronze muscle cuirass and a 10 mm bronze coated aspis). They were small in number and a force which was always on standby, rather than conscripted or levied into action like the two following categories. (Only the finest of helmets for those, aka (phrygian, without facemask probably, rich attic, or thracian or thracoattic, with engraved cheekguards etc)

2. Hoplites (Linothorax cuirass, 5 mm bronze coated aspis shield). These would mean the "medium" hoplites who would be the sons of middle class citizens, aka merchants, farmers, with good armament mostly and elaborate helmets (Attic, Thracian, even the odd Corinthian from grandpa who fought in Salamis and won't let anybody forget :laugh4: . Later on the Italo-Corinthian/Pseudo-Corinthian would come into effect, but more so in S. Italy/Sicily, whereas in mainland Ascalon/Sidon type helmets would prevail)

3. Hoplites haploi (Plain wooden aspis shield sometimes without even bronze coating). Those would be the large majority of the city dwellers in the ancient times. Living in bad conditions, 2nd or 3rd sons, with not much to go on with, and as Hammond writes in "Phillip of Macedon"..."In any slave-owning society every citizen without a capital of sorts find himself in direct opposition to the slave-labor which works without payment". As such what Aristophanes (famous comedian) writes in 393 BCE. "Let's send a fleet! The poor vote YES!, while the "moneyed" [meaning the well off,store owners, artisans, aka middle class] and farmers NO!". The poor always hoped for loot or even a "klerouchy" meaning the killing off of original people and the creation of an Athenian colony in there. According to Isokrates, they were most pleased with the Rhetors who would ask for war than those who wanted peace. In fact in 355 when Athens tried to mobilize its allies for war, the real reason was its poor citizens who had reached a "boiling point" so far as their living conditions were concerned. Being poor in ancient greek world was just about the worst fate, with the absolute worst being a slave in the mines. A house-slave would be sure to have something to eat, for a poor freeman this wasn't guaranteed. It was that reason why as Aristoteles wrote "The Demos tried to alleviate some of that pressure on the poor with altruism payments, but those never managed to raise the living standard of those poor beyond that of a (minimum wage) worker". Their greatest chance was a succesful war. In that they would serve either as rowers, or as "hoplitai haploi" with all the necessary equipment provided for them by the state. In fact Hammond considers that "Theorikon Tameion" (=Theorikon fund, in name a way to supplement the ticket for poorer people to watch the theatrical plays of greats as Euripides, Sophokles and others) was established in 354 BCE in Athens as a way to insure a "ready to be conscripted" force for Poor Athenians to go to war. Those who would sign up for free tickets would be called up for service. Their loss whould help stabilise the state, while their off chance of winning would create a "Kleruchy". This meant that the Aegean island which would have that Kleruchy installed on (as was the case in 90% of the time) would stay Athenian. (Look up the history of Samos Island for more details)

Hoplitai Haploi mean "plain", "simple", "unadorned" hoplites. The hoplitai haploi would have a Konos or pilos helmet, wear a simple chiton or exomis, or even a loincloth, and their equipment was as good as the cheapest weapon supplier that won the contract. A knife would have to do where the richer hoplites would have a xiphos or kopis, and having a knife to use wouldn't be sure. Again, it depended on what the state was willing to pay for armament. The bronze coating on their shields would be the thinnest possible, and about half of them wouldn't have any to begin with.

-> "Misthophoroi" hoplites would be the n.2. Xenophon mentions that all the hoplites who went to fight did have a cuirass, most linothorax so they wouldn't qualify for "hoplites haploi".

"Pantodapoi" means " Those who come (originate) From ALL over". To be distinguished from "Allodapoi" which means "Those who come (originate) from ELSEWHERE".

I hope that was helpful. When you do have some more news for your game, do let us know. :yes:

[Jolt]

Funditores would be the correct term for slingers in latin, as the "sling" was called "funda" or something to that effect, since most Latin languages use that word or something similar to refer to the sling.

[chairman]

:bow: :bow: :bow:

Keravnos: I knew some of that stuff already, but you organized it and added so much to it ... that is awesome! My thanks to you for that great information! I'm also so pleased that you take interest in my game idea.

About the game, it's something my brother and I have been concepting since the MTW days. It's hopefully going to be a historically accurate game similar to TW encompassing the whole world throughout the period of written human history. So we've been working on it for some time now, with me mostly doing lots of research on militaries, politics and backgrounds of the ~200 playable factions (originally was going to be just 100 factions). We eventually hope to sell the idea to a game company (like CA or something). I hope you guys don't mind that I draw on EB in developing this concept. It's mainly a recognition of the incredible accomplishment, both scholarly and organizationally, that EB is.

On grades of hoplites, I have a similar but more detailed list to yours. From top to bottom:

Epilektoi Hoplitai
Thorakitai Hoplitai
Hoplitai
Iphikratous Hoplitai
Ekdromoi Hoplitai
(don't have levy unit yet but haploi sounds good, especially after reading your post)

Other related units include:
Spartiatai Hoplitai
Spartiatai Hippeis Hoplitai
Perioikoi Hoplitai
Heiros Lochos Thebaion
-and two marine hoplite units
Epibatai Hoplitai
Iphikratous Epibatai Hoplitai

All of these units are in the classical hoplite style (except for the ekdromoi), but the Iphikratids might use a unique formation.

There will also be plenty of regional hoplites in Italy to represent the greek colonies and greek-influenced Italic peoples (including Romans, Latins and Etruscans).

@Jolt: thanks for the confirmation. I thought that I could refind the answer on wiki, but strangely couldn't find it :no: . BTW, if funditores were used in a unit name like the auxillia, would it be like "auxillia funditorii" or something?

Thanks

Chairman

[Jolt]

I'm not well versed in latin, and my knowledge comes from own language (Portuguese) as well as Spanish and French, which are Latin Languages.
As far as I'm aware (Once again, I'm not sure) Funditores are already plural of the word Funditor or Funditore (I'm kinda speculating really) since in Portuguese, we call the sling "Funda" and the slinger "Fundideiro" (pl. Fundideiros) mainly because our word for the funditore: "Fundidor" is already taken, meaning in English "Forger" or "Blacksmith". Still, our plural of "Fundidor" is "Fundidores" which is why I think "funditores" is a plural word already.

Summing it up, I suppose the correct term for what you wish would be "Auxillia Funditores"

(p.s.- Not sure as well, but I think Auxillia, as an adjective, should come after Funditores, making it "Funditores Auxillia", but I'm not sure of that in Latin)

[Ayce]

Funny, Romanian is a Latin language, but „funda” has nothing to do with sling, it means that 8 shape you get when tying a knot ~D

chairman: Peltastai Epilektoi is recommended, using Thorakitai makes using Peltastai a bit useless.

[chairman]

Thanks Jolt. As soon as I posted I realized my mistake; thanks for confirming that again, as well as the word order. Latin is more difficult for me because I don't speak any of the Romantic languages, and to me Greek seems to be easier to discern derivetives through suffixes.

Chairman

[chairman]

Ok, so I have a new group of units that I'm working on. They're the Galatians that were hired by the Ptolemies and Seleukids and settled as klerouchoi. I want an infantry and a cavalry unit with another agema unit for the Ptolemies. I used some of the Ptolemaic units from EB as the name basis. Here is what I have put together so far:

Galatikoi Klerouchoi (Galation infantry swordsmen essentially the same as in EB)

Galatikoi Klerouchikon Hippeon (Galatian cavalry as a mix between the EB Galatian cavalry and hellenistic medium cavalry)

Galatikoi Klerouchikon Agema (Elite Galatian guard unit serving under the Pharoah utilizing some hellenic equipment but not pikes)

The thing that I realized is that the 'ikon and 'eon endings designate a specific unit like a regiment rather than general term for a troop type. This is fine for the agema unit, but I'm wondering for cavalry unit, if I want to be a more general title, should I change it to "Galatikoi Klerouchoi Hippeis"?

I'm also thinking of introducing a Celtic-influenced Hellenistic unit called Hippothureophoroi. Would this name be correct?

Any advice or suggestions is welcome. Thanks in advance.

Chairman

[chairman]

Now I've got some Thrakian units that I'm working on. As I already mentioned, my form of peltests are more based on the 5th rather than 3rd century. So what might I call more armored, short rhompaia-wielding peltasts of the later period? I used the placeholder of Thrakioi Thureophoroi, but that seems more like a spear armed unit than rhompaia armed. And I'm hesitant to use a Thrakioi Drepanai for the reason that this is almost only scythe armed rather than rhomphaia, javelin and pelta equipped. Any suggestions welcome.

The other unit I'm working on is an Odrysian guard cavalry unit. So far I have it as Odrysai Basilikon Hippeon. It would be a medium armored unit of simple short-lancers with-or-without javelins.

Chairman

[keravnos]

Ok, so I have a new group of units that I'm working on. They're the Galatians that were hired by the Ptolemies and Seleukids and settled as klerouchoi. I want an infantry and a cavalry unit with another agema unit for the Ptolemies. I used some of the Ptolemaic units from EB as the name basis. Here is what I have put together so far:

Galatikoi Klerouchoi (Galation infantry swordsmen essentially the same as in EB)

Galatikoi Klerouchikon Hippeon (Galatian cavalry as a mix between the EB Galatian cavalry and hellenistic medium cavalry)

Galatikoi Klerouchikon Agema (Elite Galatian guard unit serving under the Pharoah utilizing some hellenic equipment but not pikes)

The thing that I realized is that the 'ikon and 'eon endings designate a specific unit like a regiment rather than general term for a troop type. This is fine for the agema unit, but I'm wondering for cavalry unit, if I want to be a more general title, should I change it to "Galatikoi Klerouchoi Hippeis"?

I'm also thinking of introducing a Celtic-influenced Hellenistic unit called Hippothureophoroi. Would this name be correct?

Any advice or suggestions is welcome. Thanks in advance.

Chairman

Some advice on the names if I may,
Galatikoi Klerouchoi Hippeis would be correct here

and
Agema Klerouchon Galaton would be the correct way to transilterate...
ΑΓΗΜΑ ΚΛΗΡΟΥΧΩΝ ΓΑΛΑΤΩΝ which would be as the Ptolemaioi would speak it.

Hippothureophoroi would be stretching it a bit. I haven't seen any of that in any ancient texts I have read, used like that. Thureophoroi hippeis would suffice I think.

Oh, and it is, "Hieros Lochos" not "Heiros lochos".

I absolutely love the concept you and your brother are cooking up. Best of luck with it. :yes:

I will respond on the Marines thread in a while, just gathering up some stuff, as all of this discussion does bring some hidden gems into the surface.

[chairman]

Thanks; on the Galatians, that is exactly what I wanted to know. Also thanks for correcting the Hieros Lochos.:yes:

Yeah, for the Galatian cavalry, that's what I thought. And the AKG sounds good too.

This is a bit of a different question. In the current Materia Celtica thread, Elmetiacos made the proposition that the galatian units should be renamed in Galatian Keltic instead of celtic derived greek (for non-klerouchoi galatians in galatia). Would using greek like EB does be acceptable? Or should I ask one of the celtic members on this? Any input on this is welcome.

About our game, I actually think that the concept is older than EB itself, since the original concept was developed by my younger brother back in the days of MTW. One funny quirk is that since neither of us has the ability to start programming, we have had to concept the game while we watch major companies like CA implement ideas that we had thought of. That's not to say they "stole" any of our stuff, LOL :laugh4:, just that we feel unable to actually use our research. However, it has given me time to build up quite a database of ideas and units.

One of the things that I've considered while playing EB is the idea that under Philip II and Alexander, the pez were closer to EB's deuteroi than the pezhetairoi, since Philip's phalangites were inspired by his cousin(?), Iphikrates. From what I have researched, the Makedonian armies only gained heavy armor late in Alexander's reign and under the Diadochi, leading to slower, clunkier battle tactics. Several units in EB were affected by this: Peltastai, Prodromoi, Pezhetairoi, Thureophoroi, Hypaspitai, and Hetairoi.

EB has given me such inspiration since it is the result, not of major gaming corporations, but of genuinely enthusiastic fans! There is still hope for our game.

Chairman

[chairman]

Does anyone know what to call the Persian national units that Alexander organized along Makedonian lines in the later part of his reign? I have read sources calling them Persian Silver Shields, but "Persikoi Argyraspidai" doesn't sound right. I know that some of them were armed as phalangites, others as hoplite kardakes, and others still as heavy archers to be placed in with the phalanx (maybe coming up right behind or maybe even in between the ranks). Obviously, Alexander didn't accomplish this whole project, but I remember that at least some of these units had been formed, and were used by the Diadochi (I'm guessing Seleukus since he didn't have the royal troops yet).

Thanks in advance

Chairman

[Tellos Athenaios]

Epgionoi? Perhaps?

[abou]

TFrom what I have researched, the Makedonian armies only gained heavy armor late in Alexander's reign and under the Diadochi, leading to slower, clunkier battle tactics. Several units in EB were affected by this: Peltastai, Prodromoi, Pezhetairoi, Thureophoroi, Hypaspitai, and Hetairoi.
Oh, certainly not! We may see the adoption of heavier armor (sometimes; wait for EB2 :beam:), but we definitely see just as much flexibility, if not more.

[chairman]

@TA: that word looks familiar, and IIRC doesn't it have something to do with ancestry or something? It's on tip of my tongue and I can't remember (this is why I need to learn greek). "sons of ....". Oh well.

@Abou: I did'nt mean that Diadochi armies weren't flexible, I was just illustrating the increase in armor under the Successors. Under Philip II and Alexander, we hear of hoplites and phalangites "running" and such (can't remember where I read this), but under the Successors, we see slower, more sterotyped battles with the phalanx unable to act in an offensive role. I think that our image of a purely defensive phalanx comes from historians who were writing after the death of Alexander. The phalanx often was used in offensive roles in the earlier period, fully capable of crossing large distances quickly with ease, while Pyrrhus and Philip V are often criticized for trying to use the phalanx as an attacking force. I'm not trying to get into an argument here or even terribly challenge any of EB's statements. I apologize if that's what it looked like. I understand my inferiority when it comes to research on the subject compared to EB's historians.

I do remember reading that while peltasts had gained armor over the course of the 5th and 4th centuries, the hoplite had lost armor, especially the majority of citizen hoplites. This partially explains the ease with which the Makedonians were able to defeat the allies at Chaeronea, since the lightly armored allied hoplites were vulnerable to the pikes of the phalanx.

Thanks though for taking interest in my questions.

Chairman

[chairman]

Keravnos: do you know what the greek form would be for "paeonian", as in the Paeonian squadron that served with Alexander? I'm considering a cavalry unit from Paeonia/Dardania to represent this.

Also, can someone explain to me what the "asthetairoi" were exactly? Wikipedia describes them as "chosen pezhetairoi", "elite bodyguards of the Macedonian kings". However, this doesn't make much sense in light of the hypaspitai and other agema. IIRC, someone once mentioned them as being drawn from cities of Makedon rather than the rural areas. :inquisitive:

Thanks for any insight.

Chairman

[Korlon]

One difference could be that the Asthetairoi wielded sarissas while the Hypaspistai did not.

[chairman]

Korlon: yeah, but I was meaning more that the agema didn't have sarissas until the veteren phalangites were created into the argyraspidai. According to Wiki, the asthetairoi were around from the beginning, and if they were recruited from the cities, they would have been original to Alexander's army. However, there doesn't seem to be much information on them, which makes me wonder if they are an antiquarian reconstruction like the chrysaspidai(sp?). I can't remember where else I have seen the asthetairoi mentioned, but I hope somebody can help clarify this for me.

Thanks in advance.

Chairman

[O'ETAIPOS]

Keravnos: do you know what the greek form would be for "paeonian", as in the Paeonian squadron that served with Alexander? I'm considering a cavalry unit from Paeonia/Dardania to represent this.

Also, can someone explain to me what the "asthetairoi" were exactly? Wikipedia describes them as "chosen pezhetairoi", "elite bodyguards of the Macedonian kings". However, this doesn't make much sense in light of the hypaspitai and other agema. IIRC, someone once mentioned them as being drawn from cities of Makedon rather than the rural areas. :inquisitive:

Thanks for any insight.

Chairman

If you'd like to wait till later in the week (Wednesday?) I'll comment on Philip/Alexander army and Asthetairoi. There are some strange ideas floating around that do not really fit evidence.
I have so many work now that I can't distract, sorry.

[Idomeneas]

IIRC the Athenians employed Skythian slaves as their archery corps? Might be one and the same, ehm, unit? :idea2:

Τhere used to be a number of Skythian slaves acting as police force on foot in Athens. They carried clubs and bows.
Hippotoxotai as far as i know was a different unit. A cavalry unit most propably consisting of mercenaries or troops supplied by special agreement with the city-state. Alcibiades was assigned to that squadron as a punishment. This unit was considered a ''bad transfer'' because it wasnt a unit of citizens plus the fact of the extreme behaviour of Skythians and their drinking problems. AA could help them alot it seems:laugh4:

[chairman]

@Idomeneas: I don't know whether that slave unit contained skythians or not, though I'm sure it's a possbility. I do know that Athens maintained two permanent units of archers: the skythian archer regiment serving as city police (ouch if you break the law), and a unit of slaves who were purchased at the city's expense and trained as horse-archers. AFAIK the skythian archers would have been mercanaries hired from overseas, while the origins of the slaves was probably pretty various.

Chairman

[chairman]

OK, so this is more a question about Latin (or ancient Italic languages?). What would I call units recruited from the Italian allies after their disbandment as natively equipped troops in the 2nd Punic War? Until their betrayel to Hannibal, the Samnites and other Italian allies were armed and organized along traditional lines native to their respective regions. However, after around 211, the allies lost many of their priviledges, and, when recruited, were armed and organized along Roman lines. What might these units be called? I was thinking something along the lines of Hastati Socii, Princepes Socii (don't think I need Triarii) and Equites Socii. If there is a better alternative or if there is something inherently wrong in the Latin, please feel free to inform me. My Latin is practically non-existant except for what I have picked up in reading history books. Thanks.

Chairman

[keravnos]

Keravnos: do you know what the greek form would be for "paeonian", as in the Paeonian squadron that served with Alexander? I'm considering a cavalry unit from Paeonia/Dardania to represent this.

Also, can someone explain to me what the "asthetairoi" were exactly? Wikipedia describes them as "chosen pezhetairoi", "elite bodyguards of the Macedonian kings". However, this doesn't make much sense in light of the hypaspitai and other agema. IIRC, someone once mentioned them as being drawn from cities of Makedon rather than the rural areas. :inquisitive:

Thanks for any insight.

Chairman

Alexanders' Hetairoi cav. division was organised into 8 "ilai" (plural). Each "ile" (singular) had 200 Hetairoi other than the last one which was called "Basilike ile" or "royal squadron" and numbered 400 hetairoi.

Thessalikoi hippeis (Alexanders' other heavy cav. division) had also 8 "ilai", 7 of 200 horsemen each with the last one called "Pharsalike ile" numbering 400 horsemen.

If Paiones were admitted into the "Hetairoi" which is how Alexandros' would have done it, they would be undoubtedly be spread among the "ilai", and be Hetairoi among all others, Macedonians thraikians what have you.

If they were to be alone, fighting under their commander, they would be part of the Allied horsemen (which would be all the other horsemen allies of alexander, which we do not have so much information on). In which case they would be called "Paionikoi hippeis".

I think that both happened. That the Paionian King's brother (a liege of Phillipos II and Megas Alexandros and all other Makedones king up until Perseus) did fight and was one of the best Hetairoi along with the higher nobility of his kingdom, wheras lower nobility, richer landowners would form the "Paionikoi hippeis" and fight along with the rest of the "Allied cav."

So far as Asthetairoi are concerned, I think that O'ETAIPOS knowledge in the field is much better than mine and as such I will wait for him to speak, and I think you should too. :yes:

[chairman]

Thanks Keravnos. From reading Nick Sekunda's "The Army of Alexander the Great" (Osprey MAA 148), Alexander's cavalry was divided into the Makedonian/Thessalian cavalry, Allied cavalry and Mercanary cavalry. The Makedonian cavalry included the Hetairoi, Prodromoi, Thessalian cavalry, Thracian cavalry contingent and the one Paeonian squadron. So the Paeonians were outside of the Hetairoi and Prodromoi, but within the forces of the Makedonian kingdom.

About the asthetairoi, O'etaipos said he would get back to me on wednesday. I do indeed hope that he will illuminate this part of The Makedonian military for me.

About the Thessalians, would it be more appropriate to term them xystophoroi or hippeis? Hippeis seems to indicate a more medium cavalry, melee rather than shock impact oriented unit.

@TA or anyone who knows: if the Persian national units under Alexander were called epigonoi, what types of units and names for those units would be appropriate? I have next to no understanding of how these troops were organized aside from some few vague ideas. I've read things that make me guess that Alexander intended them to act as a balance to the true Makedonian troops of the Foot and Cavalry Companions, similar to the Urban Cohorts balancing the Praetorian Guard. I don't know how far this analogy can be taken. I am also quite vague in understanding what troop types they would have fulfilled, phalangites, hoplite kardakes, traditional sparabara or archers.

Thanks for anyone's help. :2thumbsup:

Chairman

[Watchman]

About the Thessalians, would it be more appropriate to term them xystophoroi or hippeis? Hippeis seems to indicate a more medium cavalry, melee rather than shock impact oriented unit.If it's the Alexandrian period, weren't they still sticking to the "classic" hippeis kit - a bundle of javelins, a few mid-size dual-purpose spears, or a single longer spear somewhat according to personal preference ? No shields as of yet, and what I've read of them in action under Alexander rather suggested they mainly survived the massed onslaught of the Persian heavy cavalry at Issus primarily by exploiting their mobility and evading the worst of the charges...

[chairman]

Watchman: would our sources then suggest two units for the Thessalians: one called hippeis for the classical pre-Alexandrian period and the other called xystophoroi for the the hellenistic post-Alexandrian period? And do we know if the Thessalians ever used shields like some of their southern neighbors?

I currently have two Thessalian cavalry units, but one of them is a light skirmisher unit, based on the very common depictions of earlier Thessalian Hippakontistai, armed with a pair of light javelins and only wearing a turned-down chiton, stiff colorful cloak and a sun hat. These images were quite common on different pottery that has been found all over Greece, seeming to indicate the widespread practice of hiring Thessalian light cavalry as mercanaries.

[Watchman]

I know for a fact Greek cavalry didn't pick up shields until after Alex. Whether that was Italic-Tarentine, Thracian and/or Persian influence, no idea. Obviously, they wouldn't be using xystons before Alex either, and I'm under the impression the ones that went with him into Persia were still using the old pattern of equipement (the xyston still being a bit of a "Macedonian" weapon at the time, apparently).

[Jolt]

@TA or anyone who knows: if the Persian national units under Alexander were called epigonoi, what types of units and names for those units would be appropriate? I have next to no understanding of how these troops were organized aside from some few vague ideas. I've read things that make me guess that Alexander intended them to act as a balance to the true Makedonian troops of the Foot and Cavalry Companions, similar to the Urban Cohorts balancing the Praetorian Guard. I don't know how far this analogy can be taken. I am also quite vague in understanding what troop types they would have fulfilled, phalangites, hoplite kardakes, traditional sparabara or archers.

Thanks for anyone's help. :2thumbsup:

Chairman

The word Epigonoi (Meaning "Successors") was employed by Arrian when describing the foreigners who were trained in Macedonian combat-style (Phalanx), and arrived equiped with the full array of Macedonian armor and
weaponry, marching in an orderly phalanx formation, brought shortly before the Opis Mutiny (After the arrival of the non-Macedonian Epigonoi, Alexander finally gave the demobilization order to his Macedonian Veterans, who refused to demobilize, because they saw that the army was being taken over by the conquered Non-Macedonian people). These Epigonoi were 30,000 and were from Bactria.
Persians and others were also being allowed to enter the ranks of the elite Companion Cavalry after suffering heavy losses in the Gedrosian Cross.

As to were names come into place... (Not my specialization since I don't have any knowledge about Ancient Greek)

I would suppose that it would be the usual names with the prefix "Epigonoi (Ethnic Name)

Like "Epigonoi Persikoi Phalangititai" or "Epigonoi Dahae Hippotoxotai" and the like.

Hope this helps! Cheers.

[chairman]

Watchman: so the Thessalian cavalry up into Alexander's day would have had a short lance and a pair of javelins, with no shield. Shields were obviously not used until the early Diadochi, but what about armor? Can we expect the Thessalian cavalry to have worn bronze cuiress, linothorax or similarly heavy body armor, or would they have been more likely to have only worn a helmet and cloak?

What about more southern Greek cavalry? I've read that often, Greek hippeis would ride to the battlefield but dismount to fight as hoplites. However, if they didn't carry shields, then this seems rather strange, as the most important piece of the hoplite panoply was the aspis. I hope somebody can help straighten this out for me.

Thanks.

Chairman

[O'ETAIPOS]

Coins from Thessaly (reign of Alexander of Pherai - Ist half of IVcBC) show horsemen with helmet, muscle cuirass with pteryges and good cavalry lance. Not necessarily xyston, but still strong and reliable.

Greek hippeis would not fight as hoplites, except in very special conditions.
They should be equipped with a mix of weapons:
helmet or hat
cuirass or not (many would not have it!)
lance or lance and javelin or 2+ javelins
sword (probably slashing)
some would probably have quite good armour.

One important thing is they would not be placed in units based on armament. Instead those were teritorial units that group completely different sets of gear.

Compared to Thessalians Greeks should lack skill and more importantly thare should be fewer of them, because the further south, the horses were more expensive, as ther were no pastures for breeding of horses. You need much more space for huge steeds needed to breed proper cav horses, than it is needed to feed those you bought from outside.

[chairman]

Thanks O'etaipos. So before the xyston gained broad use, which spear should we expect them to have used? Is the lonche or did even the cavalry use doru? Or is it another type of lance?

Also, did you say that you could explain about the asthetairoi? I would really appreciate any help in demystifying them.

Chairman

[Watchman]

Although, weren't some aristocratic corps of elite hoplites termed hippeis because they were wealthy enough to own horses, and rode those to and from the battlefield - but dismounted to fight ?
...bloody ancients and their overlapping and confusing terminology...

Anyway, AFAIK the mainstay Greek cavalry fighting-spear was pretty much functionally identical to the infantry doru, although it might have gone by a different name and had slight design differences. Far as I've ever read it was used overhand.

Body armour would AFAIK pretty much range from none at all (though I imagine most wore at least a helmet anyway - these weren't people too tight on money after all) to various versions of the 'lino' and monolith bronze, I'd imagine pretty much according to personal preference, the depth of purse and the encumberance limits of the mount.

Swords would be the usual mix of xiphos and kopis, again pretty much according to personal preference (as with the infantry sidearms). Xenophon apparently thought the latter better, but as this was essentially an early skirmish of the "thrust vs cut" debate that raged over cavalry swords until the whole arm was phased out of use in the first half of 20th century... :shrug:

The Macs and Thessalians had the best cavalry in Hellas, not in the least due to their homelands being sort of micro-steppes dominated by an equestrian aristocracy, with apparently the Boeotians coming a credible second due to their territory being just about the best suited for horse-breeding in the whole peninsula south of Thessaly. A strong cavalry arm certainly didn't hurt the Thebans' rise to prominence.

[abou]

@Abou: I did'nt mean that Diadochi armies weren't flexible, I was just illustrating the increase in armor under the Successors. Under Philip II and Alexander, we hear of hoplites and phalangites "running" and such (can't remember where I read this), but under the Successors, we see slower, more sterotyped battles with the phalanx unable to act in an offensive role.Well, do we?

At Pydna we see the phalangites able to fight uphill and throw the Romans back in the first clash. There was a forced march of the Argyraspides and Hypaspistai in the moments up to the clash at Arius. We also see rapid alterations in the formation and marching over rough ground during the fighting at Beith-Zacharia.

The phalanx has always been used as an anvil for the cavalry hammer - or at least it should. It was never meant to be used in a strictly offensive role and that wasn't the case with Alexander or Philip.

The Diadochoi were intense guys. They really don't get the study they should.

[chairman]

Abou, I concede my position. You have convinced me, and I will keep your points in mind the next time I run across an account of Diadochi warfare. It is just too clear an example of how much propaganda the Succussors have to fight agianst just to be fairly represented in the history books, from the classical writers themselves to modern historians.

Now, if we understand that the Diadochi's phalangites were just as mobile as those under Alexander, should phalanxes in RTW be better represented by not having speed penalties? Or is this actually accurate?

On a related note on the topic of phalangites, does anyone have any info on the asthetairoi? Any help would be appreciated.

Chairman

[chairman]

Bump

[Watchman]

Now, if we understand that the Diadochi's phalangites were just as mobile as those under Alexander, should phalanxes in RTW be better represented by not having speed penalties? Or is this actually accurate?What do you mean, "speed penalties" ? The main limiter on phalangite mobility in RTW is the phalanx special formation itself, whose effects are hardcoded. And the necessity of maintaining drill did make them rather cumbersome IRL.

Other than that, their speed allocation is a simple issue of suitable skeleton availability. (IIRC there's exactly one, so...)

[chairman]

We'll that's what I was wondering about, whether it would be more accurate if the phalanx function did not slow down the unit using it. It's hard to see phalangites in formation running as fast as other infantry units that don't use the phalanx function. I wasn't talking about phalangites when they are out of formation. That's all.

Chairman

[chairman]

Bump

[abou]

Well, a tight block of 256 men wouldn't be able to go out in a full run with their pikes down, but they could certainly move faster than a walk. Blame the animation for that one.

[keravnos]

2 quick answers.

On Thessalian hippeis, they would be armed as O ETAIPOS says, with a tendency to become almost Hetairoi like. They are considered along with Hetairoi, Alexandros' heavy cav.

On Asthetairoi, (Pending O ETAIPOS final say on the matter), based on my interpretation of Hammond, I think they are those Makedones settled in the cities founded by Phillipos. One of their primary functions would be to defend the borders, and pacify the region they were settled in. The other would be to provide a steady flow of Pezhetairoi for the King to use at times of war.
-Other interpretations include coming from "ASTEA" or larger cities within the kingdom of Macedonia, (where most of the population would dwell in small or larger villages).

Again, I must point to Macedonian Faction Coordinator, O ETAIPOS, for a final word on this matter.

@ chairman, feel free to pose any other questions you wish, however be advised that, as everyone else, we are all dependent on RL and answers may not be as quick in responding as we might wish.

[chairman]

Thanks Keravnos.

So the asthetairoi really aren't any different from the pezhetairoi? That makes sense. It's too bad wikipedia doesn't always get it right.

About response time, I understand how busy everyone is. I just bump the thread so that it is easy to find and to show that I'm paying attention to what people are saying.

@ Abou: so the problem is more one of imperfect animation for phalangites rather than an inherent slowness on the part of the historical phalanx? That is, other than the need to maintain order by not sprinting in formation.

BTW, who exactly is the faction coordinator for each faction?

Chairman

Edit: W00T!! 100 Posts!!

Cheers