A question about mercenaries in the Hellenistic era

[Gaius Sempronius Gracchus]

Okay, so while in Total war games mercenaries are recruited in units, is this true to life? Would the mercenaries hired really have been more like small armies with disparate units (cavalry, spearmen, swordsmen etc.) coalesced around a commander?

[Arjos]

Afaik there weren't really mercenary hubs, where rulers could pick and choose or whatever...
Through contacts, friendly relations and professional contracts, polities could hire fighting men. Iirc the Romani were having "cultural shocks" in such dealings in Krete, where in their eyes the Kretikoi had become friends and allies of the SPQR. However finding out that people of the same town were being employed by their enemies as well, the Romani took it as "treason", while the Kretikoi amazed replied that was just what "being mercenaries" was all about...

I do not recall any all-round corp for hire, but along the same lines of "friendly relations", neighbouring rulers would receive a pay and join the campaign with their own tribal forces. Another example are the Ptolemaioi sending representatives in Thessalia or Aitolia and these would return with bands took here and there...

[Brandy Blue]

You might want to skim through Book I section 1 of the Anabasis. It is pretty short and you can find the Anabasis here http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1170/1170-h/1170-h.htm Essentially it bears out Arjos' idea that you would find mercenaries through your friendly connections, rather than by going to the rent-an-army aisle in Walmart.

You might want to skim through Book III section 3 too. It describes how a force of Greek mercenaries did not have enough missle troops and cavalry to deal with their situation. So they had to "transfer" some of their heavy infantry into the slingers or the cavalry. It suggests that mercenary groups did not come pre-calibrated with a good mix of different troop types. Instead it was up to the employer to recruit different troop types from whereever he could get them to create a suitable combined arms mix

[Gaius Sempronius Gracchus]

You might want to skim through Book I section 1 of the Anabasis. It is pretty short and you can find the Anabasis here http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1170/1170-h/1170-h.htm Essentially it bears out Arjos' idea that you would find mercenaries through your friendly connections, rather than by going to the rent-an-army aisle in Walmart.

You might want to skim through Book III section 3 too. It describes how a force of Greek mercenaries did not have enough missle troops and cavalry to deal with their situation. So they had to "transfer" some of their heavy infantry into the slingers or the cavalry. It suggests that mercenary groups did not come pre-calibrated with a good mix of different troop types. Instead it was up to the employer to recruit different troop types from whereever he could get them to create a suitable combined arms mix

Thanks, this is pretty much what I was questioning. It struck me that, in a time when fighting men were expected to supply their own equipment, there would be individuals from all 'ranks' who perhaps felt better off in paid soldiering than going back home to some crumby piece of land they were expected to make a living off of - or perhaps who could not settle back into civilian life such that there would be 'ragtag' armies of all classes coalesced around a leader who could, through his connections, find them work.

[Brandy Blue]

Well, that is an interesting way of looking at it. I suppose that might be exactly how a lot of people became mercenaries. Another reason might be exile. It was a fairly common punishment back then. General Alcibiades served the Spartans for a while when he was exiled from Athens, IIRC. I suppose he could count as a mercenary general, though no army coalesced around him AFAIK.