Hi, Im really interested int eh history of Epirus and I was wondering if anyone could post some pictures of some sort for epirote troops?
Printable View
Hi, Im really interested int eh history of Epirus and I was wondering if anyone could post some pictures of some sort for epirote troops?
Sorry this pic is part of a bigger one availiable in warlord armies by tim newark by concord publications, really worth getting:
Demetrius' elite Leukaspides troops desert, and then celebrate Pyrrhus of Epirus as the new King of Macedon, 288 BC.
http://ancientbattles.com/WAB_Succes..._of_Epirus.jpg
I don't know how distinct they were, they appear to be a standard successor styled army with a mix of Macedonian pikes, mercenary hoplites, slingers, Thessalian cavalry, and elephants. This link doesn't have pics, but it might be interesting to you: Battle of Heraclea There is some more info if you poke around the URL a bit.
I am an Epirote myself in ethnicity so Im really scyked about the whole game having distinct units. Now I can make my own. Like this one: 24x Chaeonian Guards Phalanx (shield, light armor, pike) (L/S/M)
I need some screen shots of them though.
http://www.image-dump.com/image.php?x=18051
This is the Chaonian Guard Phallanx as depisted in the Diadochi mod. I think it's pretty accurate considering I've seen a little(original greek) statue of a unit just like it.
There are very few depictions of distinct characteristics by the Epirote armies, as apparently by that era there was little difference between them and the standard diadochoi armies.
But Epirots were mostly known for their light - peltast-like - infantry. They were mountainous people, for the greater part, and they had a long tradition of fighting against Illyrians, so one could understand why the lightly armed, highly mobile infantryman was their standard fighter.
You might also find this link useful on the history of Pyrrhus. Pyrrhus the Eagle
And of course there is also info on the Hannibal site: Barca Net -- Look for Pyrrhus
I find Pyrrhus' battles to be more interesting than many later battles in getting an idea of evenly matched armies of the time. The Romans he faced were post Servian/pre-Polybian legions much like what the Romans would have been using in the 1st Punic War. The end of Pyrrhus' invasion just precedes the start of RTW.
His phalangites won their first two major battles with Rome and probably only lost the third because of the attempted night attack, and later stampeding of his elephants into his phalanx. Folks try to claim that the Roman legions won every battle with the phalanx, and therefore the legion was superior 1vs1. The argument falls apart when you take a closer look at the record of Pyrrhus, Hannibal, and even Philip V at Cynocephalae. These battles illustrate the frontal strength of the phalanx, and also its weakness in flexibility/speed of movement/ease of disorder. There was superiority to the Roman system when facing phalanx based infantry, but not in the head-to-head match up. One of the bigger weaknesses with phalangites is that they can't pursue very well. Therefore, if they win, they can't destroy their enemy as completely. Even worse, if they lose, they tend to be trapped.
Pyrrhus battles provide a very good look at elephants with their strengths and weakenesses. "Live by the elephant, die by the elephant!" Or something like that.
Does anyone know what the territorial/national symbol of Epirus would have been?
I have no idea. I dont' think we have any indication of any. Today's sumbol of the region is a double-headed eagle. Even from back then Pyrrhus was known as the Eagle King.
No they didn't fight the Illyrians almost ever. They always had compassion with them and from time to time they would mix. Trust me Im Epirote myself.Quote:
and they had a long tradition of fighting against Illyrians, so one could understand why the lightly armed, highly mobile infantryman was their standard fighter.
Yes he also invented the Elephant tower I beleave.Quote:
Pyrrhus battles provide a very good look at elephants with their strengths and weakenesses. "Live by the elephant, die by the elephant!" Or something like that.
I really want to get this book about Epirus. Just gotta wait till i get a credit card cause i can only get it on line. When I do I'll post some pics here.
If I'm not mistaken the Indians used towers on their elephants against Alexander. The tower is even known as a Howda, which to me would not seem out of place in an Indian language.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byzantine_Prince
In this website(Heraclea) it says:
I'm not sure what this refers to. I guess Pyhrrus might have invented a large tower that actually held people within it with arrows. The Indian one is more like podium. At least from what i've seen in the movie Alexander.Quote:
and the all important, 20 war elephants with towers holding troops, an invention that is credited to Pyrrhus.
BP, the fact that you are an epirote yourself (btw I am a Kretan) doesn't prove that you know history as well. Read a couple of ancient sources and then tell me if they didn't fight with the Illyrians every other day. Of course they mixed, everymody mixed with everybody from the dawn of history. But they also constantly fought, as was the deal in the fragmented ancient world - the fact that I mention specifically the Illyrians is because of the proximity with the Epirot Greeks.
Compassion? What has compassion got to do with this, anyway? Were the ancient Greeks... compassionate to each other?
Early Epirote armies where basically similar to Illyrians; tribal irregular levies armed with javelins and spear. This appears to have developed into a more typical Hellenistic style army around the time of Alexander of Epeiros (a contemporary, friend, and ally of Philip II).
Pyrrhos's armies consisted of Epeirote and Macedonian Levies (armed as a phalanx), mercenary javelinmen/hoplites (Aitolians, etc), and Epeirote, Thessalian, archers, and general mercenary cavalry (also Elephants, of course). The Macedonian and Thessalian troops that fought in Italy were troops "loaned" from Ptolemy Keraunos (the various Kings in Greece/Macedonia were happy to give him troops to get rid off him). In Italy and Sicily, of course, he recruited the local troops and levies to serve in is armies of course. In Greece he briefly was King of Macedonia and Sicily and could draw on their ressources. He also hired mercenary Gauls (who lost him Macedonian support when they looted the royal tombs).
Pyrrhos's army is recorded as having an "agema" of Guard cavalry; probably very similar to Alexander's companions initially. It is believed that Pyrrhos may have adopted shields for his cavalry after campaigning with the Tarantines in Italy.
There is almost no evidence for the existence of guard infantry (the only "proof" being a stray reference to a "picked body" of men) as in the Macedonian/Seleucid/Ptolemaic armies. This can be seen from the report that the best Phalangites in the force that Pyrrhos took with him to Italy were the 5000 Macedonians he had received from Keraunos.
Later Epeirote armies would have been fairly indistinct from other Hellenistic greeks; though they also hired mercenaries (including one infamous gang of mercenary Gauls who were hired to guard the Capital city of Phoinike and promptly betrayed it to a passing fleet of Illyrians that sacked the city and enslaved its entire population).
Just because they were close doesn't mean that there was huge wars between us. There's was no more if not less then the amount of violance we had within the tribes. Do you know the Epirote tribes by heart? No? Ok. I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosacrux redux
Uhh it's not just that im Epirote my friend. I have read an entire book on Illyria. Have you? No? Ok. The fact that I mentioned that Im Epirote had to do more with the current state of affairs not the ancient ones although I know the history quite well.
I said "compassion" because of Pyrrhus, who apparently you know nothing about. If you read his biography you'd realize hin family was actually dethroned and he was adopted by the King of then Illyria who raised him as his own child. Not only that but he also helped get him the throne back when Pyrrhus was 12. He did this by actually invading using his own troops. So I think that deserves some recognition.
Try not to be such a smart ass, please. I never said anything offensive to you.
:stop: There is too much assuming going on here by more than one party. Let's not make assumptions about someone we don't know.
BP,
I agree with Rosacrux on this. Just because you (or me or anyone else) are from a region or ethnic group, does not mean you have a lock on that group/region's ancient history. (And I am not saying you don't already know a lot about it.) I can't think of any area of the Med. back then that did not have periodic warfare with their neighboors. They might be best buddies for 100 years, then spend 10 years trying to kill each other off. The ancient world was one where cities were regularly sacked, the inhabitants massacred or sold as slaves. Greek cities even did this to their *own* citizens when one group gained control over another through some sort of coup. It is hard to imagine such a world compared to the relatively docile one of today. If one starts talking about compassion and the like, the post starts to lose an air of credibility. I'm not saying it is necessarily inaccurate, it is that others will see it as a subjective account rather than an historical one.
It has always been common for nobility to use their armies to install their own allies/claimants on neighboring thrones. That and a suitable marriage and you rapidly establish your own claim to the territory. That''s why securing power often involved hunting down and killing every single possible claimant from the former regime--even one's own blood relatives.
~:cheers:
The Ancient Illyrians were great raiders (much like the Kretans of the same time), and thus rarely had anything resembling peace. They certainly had no compunction about sacking and enslaving their neighbors, and the Epirotes were among their victims (as mentioned, one famous raid enslaved the entire population of the Epirote capital). There also didn't exist any strong central authority; the inability of Queen Teuta to control her "pirates" was one of the reasons for the eventual Roman conquest of the Illyrians.
I never said that there were not wars between. Did you read my preveous post. I said that there were no more wars between the Illyrians and Epirotes then within clans in Epirus. Also it is a fact that the then king of Illyria helped install Pyrrhus to the throne not because he would gain something from it but because he fermly beleaved that he was the descendent of the great Achilles(which is fact). And Pyrrhus proved himself alright. He conqured Macedon, Aetolia, northen Peloponese, Sicily, And almost destroyed the Roman Republic. HE is the greatest hero of all and it's all because of the compassion of the king who treated him as he would his own children.
[IMG]
http://www.epirus.de/Geschichte/images/Pyrrhus-route-map.jpg[/IMG]
And another thing: Illyria was almost never a singular state so any wars with greeks were certainly no more then pety rivalries between clans. For example Macedon had enormous wars with Illyrians but that's not to say that it compares to anything even close to the one between Athens and Sparta.
BP: you've spouted a lot of B.S... Epirots fought the Illyrians constantly.
You've read one book? One book does not an expert make.
Saying 'trust me, I'm Epirot' is like saying 'trust me, I'm a grad student'...
Both can be wrong about their area of interest.
Try reading some good journal articles on epirus. This might help you.
I beleave we have a languge issue here. See you suck at englisha and can't understand a simple sentence while I CAN!!!
So trust me on that, I'm a high school graduate.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe the next phase of this thread is "My dad can beat up your dad" followed by the sticking-out of tongues. Or we can skip all that and I can close the thread - unless we show a little more maturity here. I'd rather not close the thread because then I'd have to go find my keys...
Why don't you all stop comparing how many books you've read on the subject or stating how ill-informed the other is, and start supporting your side of the issue. Provide a link, quote a book, suggest a good book on the subject - something other than what is currently going on in this thread. BTW BP, this includes an image of your high school diploma...~;) (just kidding ~:pat: )
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
I hate how these threads go out off topic so easily. This was about Epirote troops! Not whether or not Epirus had wars with Illyria.
So about the troops, were they a lot more like the Macedonian light phalanx?
THe area of what is now NW Greece and southern Albania at the time was known for using skirmish style troops, peltasts and such. Mountainous areas within the greater Greek world generally produce such a style of warfare, light javelineers, slingers, archers, for use in raids, see Thrace, Crete, etc. By the time of the Successors and the late Republic, I'd concur that the armies of Epirus would be much like the Successors, perhaps lighter on cavalry and phalanx and more skirmishers, but supplemented with Illyrians, Celts, and other troops from the greater Greek world.
As for the national symbol as Epirus was a monarchy, it would likely be the king or a royal symbol, like the fasces for Etruscans/Rome. Albania's symbol is the double headed eagle, but I would suspect that since ethnic Albanians are in fact Illyrians, the symbol is Illyrian in origin. Then again, I'm mostly Germanic with some Baltic and Slavic mixed in, so what would I know?
the double headed eagles in russian, albanian, and serbian coats of arms all come from marriages, alliances, or other associations with the eastern roman (byzantine) empire; russians adopted the symbol after the marriage of the last byzantine princess to ivan, skanderbeg adopted the symbol and was also married into the palaeologue family somehow, the mrnjacevik (sp?) family adopted the eagle symbol on their arms and stephan dushan also established it as regalia based on the imperial use. the symbol itself is thought to pre-date the palaeologues and come from anatolia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Suebius
-
It was also used for expressing a claim on the Roman legacy; as was with the usage by the Selchuq Saltanate of Rome (Rūm ― روم). However, I kind of remember beyond a cloudy mess of information that they also had marital relationships with one or more "New Roman" dynasties.
-
The double-headed eagle is the byzantine church's symbol so automatically the country's symbol. I dont' think Illyirians had a symbol.
Also Epirus is pretty doubtful to have a symbol. If we did it's probably lost by now.
Does anyone have any suggestions for any books about Epirus? Not today's books. I mean the ancient kind so I know that the information is actually credible.
One cannot find anything more exhaustive or thorough on the history of Epeiros than N.G.L. Hammond's Epirus: The Geography, the Ancient Remains, the History and the Topography of Epirus and Adjacent Areas. 1967. Oxford University Press. 800+ pages. Anything else by Hammond you can find on jstor about Epeiros is going to be as accurate as anyone can be on it today.
Also see P. Cabanes' L'Epire de la mort de Pyrrhos a la conquete romaine. 1976.