Question about Tindanotae

In the unit description for the Tindanotae, it says, “They favored devotion to Heracles, or traditional Gallic war gods like Teutatis; later, in severely reduced numbers due to Roman domination, they would be generally Christian fanatics.”

I find the idea fanatic Christian berserkers really interesting (and amusing), but I was wondering what the source for that is. I know you guys have access to sources that not all of us have (though as a university student I have access to a bunch, too), but I would really like to find the source. It would definitely change my conception of the Galatians, who, up until now, I assumed had been fully assimilated into Greco-Roman culture long before Christianity was a major factor in Asia Minor.

I'd be interested myself.

ok ok! im quite drunk when i say this......But! i read/heard/listneded that western or albeit "native" Gallic had died out over vulgar soon to be frank latin. that there was still an eastrn Gallic ( as in Galatians of central turkey) language up to around the 4th-6th century AD

and reformed judaism ( christianity) spread through asia minor like hot cakes! ina fat camp.

Well, according to Wikipedia, the Galtians were still speaking Gallic in the time of St. Jerome. But its an unsourced statement from Wikipedia. Plus, I've read some Jerome and don't remember him talking about Galatia (my knowledge of Jerome is by no means exhaustive, though). So I take it with a graim of salt.

Anyway, even if they did maintain the language, that's very different from retaining the traditional fighting style. Already by EB's time frame nude fighting was on its way out. Languages, on the other hand, have a tendency of sticking around a long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Uticensis

In the unit description for the Tindanotae, it says, “They favored devotion to Heracles, or traditional Gallic war gods like Teutatis; later, in severely reduced numbers due to Roman domination, they would be generally Christian fanatics.”

---

the writer who inserted that did not mean 'nude' fanatics in particular, i think. then it would be a matter of fanaticism / zeal, which is centered on religion, if you look at the quote you mentioned. Christian Gaelic-speakers think highly of themselves in that fashion. also, I am pretty sure that person was referring to Christian fanatics during a Christianized Roman Empire, hmm but then again, upon reevaluation, it seems phrased rather badly unless claiming that Celts were the true / early Christians and fanatic in a time of persecution :inquisitive: and that the Christian god was worshipped primarily in the function as war-god? Reminds me of Constantine, but the description is way too vague for my taste.

Yeah, the whole Christian war god thing made me think of Constantine too. I took the descirption to mean they still fought in this manner during the Christian Roman Empire. I tried reading it just as vague "fanaticism," but it doesn't make sense that way under the description of fanatic infantry unit.

I know a great deal about the later Empire (more than about EB's time frame), and I have no knowledge of Galatia being a source of soldiers of any sort (Isauria to the south was a major source, though). And though some of the German tribes Rome faced had rather fanatic "berserker"-like soldiers, I don't think the Romans ever utilized them.

So the description confuses me, and I really want to know what it means. Hey, maybe there were Tindanotae fighting beside Constantine or one of his successors but its only recorded in some obscure source somewhere; you never know.

Isn't one of the parts of the New Testament titled "Galatians" (same way as in "Corinthians" and whatever there now are) or something...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

Isn't one of the parts of the New Testament titled "Galatians" (same way as in "Corinthians" and whatever there now are) or something...?

---

indeed there is. It was Paul's letter to the church he had started there which was one of the earliest churches.:beam:

The Celts who invaded Asia Minor and carved out their own domain were never very numerous in the first place; classical authors, who tended to exaggerate numbers anyway, put them at about 10,000 warriors. Their language would probably always have been restricted to an aristocratic minority, like Norman French in England or Sicily. By the time of St. Paul's epistle, I would have thought everyone in Galatia was speaking Greek.

Well, as I get it the area where the Galatians settled wasn´t exactly populated by Greeks, but more by various mountain tribes and the likes. In fact I remember reading that the local population of Cappadocians were allowed to live on in pretty much the same way as before, just paying tribute to new masters. I believe the Galatians were indeed more of an military aristocracy, but one that remained largly intact for many centuries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elmetiacos

Their language would probably always have been restricted to an aristocratic minority, like Norman French in England or Sicily. By the time of St. Paul's epistle, I would have thought everyone in Galatia was speaking Greek.

---

If they were not all speaking Greek, then they would have at least adopted Greek customs ad culture. That’s why I’m so curious about the Tindanotae. The description says, or at least strongly implies, that they were still around during the Christian Roman Empire, albeit it far fewer numbers than during EB’s time.

Even when one culture melds with another, they don't completely change. Instead, the two cultures mix into a new one, with one dominent. Even if the Galatians would have appeared Hellenized, the could have still held the romantic concept of a warrior fighting for his god in their minds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarcusAureliusAntoninus

Even when one culture melds with another, they don't completely change. Instead, the two cultures mix into a new one, with one dominent. Even if the Galatians would have appeared Hellenized, the could have still held the romantic concept of a warrior fighting for his god in their minds.

---

But we're looking for sources on the Tindantotae.

Exactly. Anything is possible, but I'm looking for documentation.

So does anyone on the team know where this came from?

It's another made up word. The Galatian Celts may well have had such warriors, but they didn't go by the name "Tindanotae". The stuff about Christian berserkers, devotion to Herakles-Toutatis and carving words into their flesh (a Viking trick, I think) is likewise fantasy, as is much of the elaboration on the descriptions of Celtic units.

Well, you said it, not me. but I have my suspicions as to the truthfulness of the description, that's why I asked for sources.

It's all a bit of a "running sore", really. Some time ago, a fake Celtic scholar supplied a load of wrong information to the EB Team (or so some people - and I'm one of them - are saying; it's not officially recognised) Sadly, a lot of effort was put into incorporating all the wrong material and undoing the damage will take more effort. There's a thread called "Materia Celtica" somewhere about where some of us have been discussing this and what might be done.

Yes, well, I've seen some aspects of the Celtic factions that seemed rather odd to me (such as the Irish version of Thorakitai Agema), but I haven't gotten involved in a discussion of such things since Celtic culture is by no means my area of expertise, and I definitly don't want to accuse anyone of making stuff up unless I really know I'm right.

The Later Empire, however, is something I quite versed in, and the idea of Celtic berserkers in Galatia around at that time seemed highly questionable to me, so that's why I brought it up, as politely as possible.

it would be helpful if there was somebody in charge of such matters concerning cultures/language such as Celts who bothered to explain 1% to the fans :yes: unfortunately, not everybody has time for that.

nobody is perfect of course and it would be easy to make mistakes when no peers are around to review and collaborate on material. i don't think any deep malevolence is needed to explain the kinds of things that can happen with unchecked power... <ehem> Bushery.

I think ritual scarification is easily a possibility without stretching the imagination

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blitzkrieg80

it would be helpful if there was somebody in charge of such matters concerning cultures/language such as Celts who bothered to explain 1% :yes:

nobody is perfect of course and it would be easy to make mistakes when no peers are around to review and collaberate on material. i don't think any deep malevolence is needed to explain the kinds of things that can happen with unchecked power... <ehem> Bushery

---

indeed.

Funny how differnt people have differnt interpretations...

For me Christian Fanatics was never about beserker type troops, but more that these people were "fanatically Christian". ie they believed very strongly in their religion. What we can then draw from that is they would have the same self belief on the battlefield as - say - Joan of Arc's French troops. So, these latter day Galatian people can fight in any style and still be fanatics.

Their mentality therefore has more in common with early "proto-crusaders" than maniacs involved with drug induced frenzies of violence.

Anyway, I wouldnt have any evidence of what actually took place either way, but that is what the statement seemed to mean to me when I read it... :oops:

Indeed. From my reading of the Tindanotae&#180;s description I simply gathered that in the time of the Late Empire/Early Christianity there existed some people in this area that fought with unusual dedication and fanaticism, only that they worshipped the christian God. I at least didn&#180;t take it that they actually fought nude, only that they were a bit fanatic.

The kind of odd relic often enough preserved in relatively insular highland communities, in other words.

Indeed. Some people just seem to have an tendency to become fanatics to whatever dominant faith/cause/chieftain/whatever that exists in the area. It seems to me that at least some of the Galatians were these kinds of people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by General Appo

Indeed. Some people just seem to have an tendency to become fanatics to whatever dominant faith/cause/chieftain/whatever that exists in the area. It seems to me that at least some of the Galatians were these kinds of people.

---

Why does it seem to you that this is the case?

Wait, wait, wait! None of this is backed up by sources. Even if the description is just about religiously fanatic soldiers, not necessarily nude berserkers (which would be weird, considering the claim is only in the description of the Galatian berserker unit), that isn't any more backed up by the sources.

In the Christian Roman Empire, troops came primarily from barbarian federates, especially around the Rhine and Danube, or from conscripts from within the Empire. Conscripts were not known for their ferociousness in battle, quite the opposite really. And the Hellenized people of the East were seen as especially soft. What’s more, during the earlier times of Christianity, Christians refused to fight in the military. A famous example is Saint Maximilian, who was put to death for resisting when he was drafted into a legion.

Now the Romans did heavily recruit from the Isaurians, who lived to the south of Galatia in western Kilikia, put these men were mostly thieves and marauders who had no religious reason to fight, and very well may have been pagans until very late.

It seems that the description of the “Tindanotae” is inspired by the fact that St. Paul wrote a famous letter to the Galatians, which meant that there was an early Christian community there. But that is a long way from meaning that those people became fanatic berserkers or crusaders, or whatever.

If there is a source that backs what the description says, excellent, I’d love to see it. But as far as I can tell, the last mention of the Galatians is in Paul’s letter, or perhaps a mention by Jerome about their language. But that’s it.

Highland regions were always kind of lawless and heavy on minor everyone vs. everyone raiding and feuding. Nominal subjugation and pacification by one empire or another never changed that detail much. What's more, unless I'm entirely mistaken Galatia would have been part of the eastern "border marches" of the Roman Empire, a region which often enough was a full-blown war zone for years to an end as such frontier lands between major empires now always were...

I'd rather imagine the inhabitants were plenty enough used to warfare, even if they had no desire to sign up for the Legions for quarter a century.

Not really. Galatia was not really a lawless region like Isauria was-Ankyra was an important administrative center and large, Hellenized city under the Romans. The Arabs and Armenians would have been the people caught in the border zones in constant states of warfare. Galatia, the area around Ankyra in the middle of Asia Minor, would not be in such an area until Seljuk Turks invaded the Empire around the turn of the Second Millenium AD. I imagine the Galatians spent a cushy thousand years under Roman domination seeing very little warfare anywhere near their homeland. The Persians broke though under Heraclian in the Sixth century, but they were driven back fairly quickly.

You mean like when the Byzantine-Muslim frontier ran in Asia Minor and the former had to come up with specific strategies for dealing with deep raids-in-force, just to name a Late Antiquity/Migration Period example...? :inquisitive:

Moreover even if major armies aren't operating in the region, wartime in the frontier lands tends to have everywhere been characterised by all kinds of vicious back-and-forth raiding and irregular fighting by border forces, local auxiliaries and whatever opportunists turned up. And the heavily mountainous Asia Minor region really should not have had any shortage of intractable mountain tribes, hill bandits and whatever to liven things up...