EB - Countdown to Open Beta: Arche Seleukeia

Greetings Europa Barbarorum fans!

As we continue to creep closer to the open beta, we would like to begin recording contact information for those of you who wish to be a part of our closed beta group. This group may receive a version of EB prior to the open beta being released, to help us hammer on it and get rid of major bugs, and will have access to future betas, all of which we plan to be closed betas.

You may find a signup area in our public forums. Please be aware that we will keep this group relatively small, and it will be made up of people who have time to commit to actual playtesting (both general and focused on what we desire at the time). If you're just in to get your hands on EB before everyone else, and provide no feedback, you will be removed from the group and never be allowed to participate in future betas. This also goes for anyone who shares the version before it is publically available.

We also invite those of you who have a background in historical research to sign up. We would definitely like to invite some of our long-term fans to join. If you cannot commit to the things we request above, however, please do not add your name to the list.

We are happy to say that things seem to be coming together, that we are overcoming the obstacles that newly discovered limitations have presented, and a playable open beta is now closer to reality than ever. We are not yet ready to announce a release date, however.

This week, the EB team is proud to present:

http://img267.echo.cx/img267/8961/lo...1medium8al.jpg

http://img58.exs.cx/img58/3332/seleucid1au.jpghttp://img130.echo.cx/img130/3629/seleukidmap5ao.jpg

Alexandros knew. The key to his empire lay in Babylonia, not in Makedonia. After his death, Seleukos, another Makedonian, fought to regain Babylon for himself, and in 312 the city welcomed him with open arms and great joy. He repaid that generosity, retaking Susiana and then Media, pushing the limits of his new empire back to the Indos and then west to Syria, claiming much of Anatolia as his own. As a great old king he passed the throne to his son Antiochos seven years ago. Now the new king, of Makedonian and Persian blood, and master of an empire that stretches from the shores of the Aigaion to the borders of the Indos itself, must struggle to hold together his father's glorious gains. The wisdom of Achaemenid advisors, and now ancestors, will continue to guide this young empire and her army, but one thing must be remembered: Babylonia is still the key, even now, to the greatest empire in the world.

Alexandros' vision of a strong infantry combined with a Persian willingness to use local soldiers and their own styles of warfare have given the great king a powerful army for his empire. Persian light infantry and men from across the empire fighting in the Makedonian phalanx will be your basic footsoldiers. Greeks who have settled in Syria will form the bulwark of your regular troops and the best of their number, trained at the highest levels, are equipped for use as Argyraspidai, the famed "silver shields" and the legendary Hypaspistai. With the strong and fast Thureophoroi and their heavily armored cousins, the Thorakitai, few armies in the world can match your forces. Recruit skirmishers from across your empire and combine them with your cavalry forces, which include Median armored Lonchophoroi and Greek cavalry armored in the manner of the Kataphraktoi, to complete your mighty forces.

A great king must not allow his provinces to rebel, as petty princes are attempting to do in the "kingdoms" of Pontos, Baktria, and Armenia. Such is the burden of ruling a vast empire and you will not have the luxury of dealing with your enemies one at a time. Crucial decisions must be made in dealing with these rebellious princes; will you allow them begin their own empires, perhaps lessening your greatness, or will you risk your armies in an attempt to bring them to heel. The Ptolemaioi to the south were once allies to your father, but they now see their best hopes of expansion coming at your expense. They will send countless soldiers across the desert into the middle of your realm; if you are to preserve your Empire, they must be turned back, especially in southern Anatolia. Expand where you are able; some nearby cities are prime targets, isolated as they are from allies. Also, it would be unwise to take lightly the beating of hooves from the north. Our heavy cavalry have a difficult time standing against the great hordes of Armenian, Sarmatian, and especially Parni horsemen, and letting too many fall defending the northern borders will leave the Empire’s heartland exposed to attack from the treacherous Ptolemaioi. But take heart, great king! The blood of Alexandros and the Achaemenid rulers of the past will aid your throne, which is the greatest in the known world! Take heart, and prosper!

It may be in your best interest (if you wish) to reflect upon the history of your new empire. Great Seleukos built up his base of power among the elites and non-Greeks of Babylon in the years after the death of Alexandros in 323. The prize for his role in the murder of the regent Perdikkas two years later was the satrapy of Babylonia. He earned the favor of its citizens, and though he was forced out by Antigonos in 315, Antigonos and his violent behavior towards Babylon resulted in the reclaimation of the city by Seleukos in 312 with just a handful of soldiers. But Antigonos was not directly opposed in his actions against Seleukos, and it was left to Seleukos to contend with him directly in 'Asia' for a number of years without intervention of the other states. Seleukos' role in these years seems to have been focused on developing his possessions in Central Asia, further expanding his network of allies and base of power. While in the Upper Satrapies of Central Asia, he saw much potential for growth and expansion and he later put this experience to good use. But a final battle with Antigonos was sure to occur, however slow it was in developing.

In 301, after the Battle of Ipsos, when Kassandros, Lysimachos, and Seleukos defeated Antigonos and Demetrios, Seleukos finally was rid of the enemy that had plagued him for so many years. Antigonos, an octogenarian at the time, fell on the battlefield, while Demetrios escaped with a small portion of the army. Seleukos received Koile-Syria and Phoinikia, but as soon as he arrived there, Ptolemaios claimed the area as his own, and Seleukos agreed to not contest the claim "because of their friendship." Seleukos spent the time after Ipsos consolidating his eastern possessions and sending out numerous colonies across his domain. He capture Demetrios in 286 whereupon the latter was slain, and then he took advantage of uncertainties in Anatolia. He invaded western Asia Minor and defeated and killed Lysimachos in 281 at the Battle of Koroupedion near Sardis. Before the battle, Selelukos had already appointed his successor, and now the torch has been passed. The Seleukid dream of capturing Makedon itself was not to be fulfilled just yet though, as Seleukos was slain by a dispossessed heir of Ptolemaios who had sought the aid of Seleukos, but now it does lie within your grasp if you choose to direct your interests toward the west. Your father's legacy was considered the greatest of his age, and it is up to you to match his success.

"In my view, it is beyond dispute that Seleukos was the greatest king of those who succeeded Alexandros, of the most royal mind, and ruling over the greatest extent of territory, next to Alexandros himself." (Arrian, Anabasis VII.22,5)

Here we have a few action shots:

http://img267.echo.cx/img267/2491/med23ix.th.jpg
http://img267.echo.cx/img267/4123/battle5qm.th.jpg
http://img267.echo.cx/img267/7195/thero45am.th.jpg

Some of the units you will find in the Seleukid armies:

http://img267.echo.cx/img267/5990/as...evys5po.th.jpg
The most basic and numerous of the infantry units used by the non-European Successor States were the Pantodapoi infantry. These men were called from a variety of nationalities and were usually settled in certain areas for garrison duties and the like. There were Jews, Syrians, Cilicians, Persians, Assyrians, Native Egyptians, and many other peoples counted among their number. They are not particularly reliable soldiers, but they are certainly better than their eastern counterparts. They can give a good account of themselves in battle if deployed properly. They wear no armor, and have only a light shield for protection, so most other infantry will slaughter them in droves. They can fend off light cavalry for a time, if need be.

Historically, the Pantodapoi were a group of various nationalities that were used as a militia levy and defensive group for towns and villages prone to raiding. While the name is conceptual (meaning, from everywhere), they were a standard fighting force of the day. They were trained rudimentarily, but had enough training to be counted as superior to many militia levies. They had some experience fighting off nomadic raiders, so they can be useful against light troops and some light cavalry.

http://img228.echo.cx/img228/6162/pa...itai9xk.th.jpg
Pantodapoi Phalangitai are the standard levy of the Seleucid Kingdom and others influenced by the Successors, including Pontus. They are tough and reliable infantry, but are prone to rebellion and discontent and are hence more expensive than their Macedonian contemporaries. They are mostly levies of Jewish, Syrian, and Persian descent that are co-opted into the army. They fight as pikemen, with a soft leather cuirass, pikes, round Illyrian style shields and Phrygian caps. This makes them a viable pike unit, though they are less disciplined and more prone to flee than more reliable Greeks and Macedonians that make up the Pezhetairoi. They can be counted upon to present a solid wall of spear points to the enemy, but their lack of discipline and intensive training makes them even more prone to a flanking attack.

Historically, the Seleucids and others used pike levies from their various subject peoples to make up parts of the battle line that were facing the enemy’s least valuable troops. They gave decent accounts of themselves at many battles, but were the first line to break in the disasters at Raphia against the Ptolemies and in Macedonia against the Romans. They made up more and more of the Seleucid battle line as time went on, due to the dwindling number of Greek recruits that the army could draw upon for the pike units (most went to the more elite units), and more and more Asiatic peoples were put into the Pezhetairoi class and given land grants, to make up the loss. Still, these more unreliable formations were still used in many places.

http://img274.echo.cx/img274/2697/peltastai9jq.th.jpg
The peltast is a type of elite skirmisher that sacrifices heavy arms and armor for mobility and range. They are armored in linen and carry a medium sized ovular shield. Originally, they carried a crescent shaped ‘pelta’ that gave them their name, but this was phased out in the fourth century. Their armaments consist of several javelins and a sword. All this makes them light and mobile, but still easily able to engage in melee after their javelins have been thrown. They are a versatile unit but one must remember that their primary arms are javelins, and they are not equipped to stand toe to toe with heavier infantry. Their role is one of speed, harassment, and critical flanking maneuvers.

Historically, the Peltast was often a hoplite or Pezhetairoi phalangite equipped to fight in the manner of a skirmisher. This meant that they were extremely adept melee combatants as well as being deadly with their javelins. Peltasts were used to great effect on ancient battlefields but by 270 B.C. the Thureophoroi was becoming the dominant ‘melee’ skirmisher and the Peltast was carrying more javelins and was used in a manner that was consistent with this. This was simply a matter of specialization, and it did not mean that peltasts would be any less effective if deployed correctly. Their light armament makes them extremely fast, but tends to be to their detriment in melee combat. They were mostly used in the role of supporting missile troops who charged in at the last moment, after they had spent all their javelins. The great Athenian general Iphikrates is credited with the invention of the peltast as a distinct unit, and it is he that first employed them in this manner to great effect against the heavier armored and better trained hoplites of Sparta.

http://img267.echo.cx/img267/1668/theunit3qy.th.jpg
Pezhetairoi are the bread and butter military unit of the Successor States. They are well disciplined and highly motivated pikemen that are armed and armored to the teeth. They are armored in a linen cuirass, a Thracian cap, a bronze greave on the right leg, stout boots, good bracers, and reinforced shoulder pads made from hardened linen (due to their experience with the deadly curved swords of Thrace). They have Illyrian style round shields attached to their bodies by leather straps that help support the weight of the shield and keep their hand free to grasp the sarissa. They are defensive infantry par excellent. They are the anvil of the two part Macedonian system of warfare, the heavy cavalry being the hammer. They should be used to anchor enemy soldiers while the Theurophoroi harass the flanks and the heavy cavalry smashes into the flanks and rear.

Historically, the Pezhetairoi are the classic Alexandrian phalanx. They were used to great effect against the Persians, Medes, Bactrians, Indians, Phoenicians, and many, many others. They are an effective force and have not changed much over the centuries. The Romans were able to defeat them as easily as they did for two main reasons. One, the Roman army was at a high state of readiness and tactical prowess after defeating the Carthaginians. Two, the heavy cavalry arm of the Successor armies had degenerated to the point where they were no longer able to field significant numbers to fulfill their part of the hammer and anvil tactic of Alexander. There were many small reasons, numbering among them the misuse of the Theurophoroi, the underuse of Peltasts, and the lax state of warfare that the Successor states were used to. In any case, the phalanx was not as anachronistic or inflexible as widely believed; it was simply used in the wrong way. In the thirteenth century onwards, pikemen in similar formations were able to work wonders with more capable generals and a better cavalry arm. Do not under appreciate pikemen, for they are still a war winning force.

http://img267.echo.cx/img267/9503/thero12ql.th.jpg
The Seleucids took to the thureophoroi and went one better, armoring their improved unit to the teeth and giving him a longer spear with a wider blade. These men are exceedingly well trained and often can make the difference in any battle simply by making their fearsome appearance known. They carry theuros shields with silver medusa heads emblazoned on the front and wear helmets that are strengthened with mail ‘veils’ further making their appearance fearsome. As if this was not enough, they carry heavy javelins to break enemy lines and long spears to drive the charge home when they are finished with their javelin throwing. They fight in an organized formation, but not in a phalanx, and are thus more mobile than the Phalanx. They are the best and fittest men within the Hypastistai and are often able to break an enemy line. They have no real weakness in battle, but are extremely expensive to maintain, so their numbers are always few and far between. They should be used as an elite shock infantry, because this is the role for which they were made. They should be well supported, because if these hardy and grizzled veterans rout, it could induce the rest of the army to do so as well!

Historically, the Seleucid Thorakitai Argyraspidai were a small elite unit of the Hypastists that were the leaders of an infantry charge. Their heavy armor was elaborate and expensive, making their numbers never more than one thousand (among six thousand Hypastistai). They were used during many battles, but were notoriously absent from Raphia due to their being refitted after a battle with rebels supported by the Parthians. They slowly dwindled in number as the kingdom’s finances did the same. They were no longer a factor when the Seleucid king fought the Romans in Macedonia, a battle at which they would have been sorely appreciated. If a capable ruler were to take the Seleucid throne and carefully manage the kingdom’s finances, perhaps he could utilize these fine soldiers far longer than happened historically.

http://img127.echo.cx/img127/8717/hypaspistai1js.th.jpg
Hypastistai are the elite spearmen of the Macedonian and Seleucid armies. They are armed and armored much as traditional hoplites, but with a few notable differences. Their secondary arm is a Celtic style longsword, adopted from the Galatians. They are armed with the traditional hoplite shield, and are armored with a metal cuirass. They are versatile and elite soldiers, often forming the right wing of the Hellenic battle line. Their heavy armor and weapons allows them to fight as elite spearmen or swordsmen, and they are able to fight the hardiest opponents. They should be deployed where the fighting will be at its absolute thickest, as they are able to charge in for a kill once the enemy has exhausted himself on their spear points!

Historically, the Hypastistai were the elite foot guard of the Macedonian king, armed much like fifth century hoplites. Alexander changed their armor and weapons to allow them to fight in the deserts of the Middle East. When Alexander was killed and the Seleucids and Macedonians inherited the elite forces, they mostly wiped one another out in internecine squabbling. Still, the tradition was there, and it was re-adopted by the successor armies in Macedon and Syria. Their equipment went through a further revolution, re-adopting heavier armor. They now wore the less expensive and easier to produce (in relation to bronze plate) scale or mail armor that only provided a slightly smaller degree of protection. They were last used operationally during the time of Philip V, due to the expense of keeping such a unit around. The Romans never got to feel the bite of the most powerful of the Successor infantry…

http://img267.echo.cx/img267/6278/med14zi.th.jpg
In the Seleucid and baktrian armies, these medium cavalrymen are very prevalent. Descended from the lesser Persian nobility they now render good service to their new masters. They are excellent medium cavalry, capable of skirmishing, charging, and fighting fairly well in melee. These cavalry are raised from the old Persian estates that had not seized by the Macedonian invaders. They are equipped with a cavalry spear and the single bladed Tabar axe with a vicious back-spike, well capable of penetrating heavy armour. The battle-axe was often used, especially by North Iranians. The spear was usually used overarm as a thrusting weapon. The shield used by these horsemen was the crescent shaped Scythian Taka shield. A conical persian helmet of iron is worn with brightly coloured helmet plume. Their armour is a scale cuirass with scaled shoulder guards and stiffened leather pteruges hanging from the waist. Loose richly embroidered trousers and a long sleeved tunic extending down to just above the knees, is secured by a leather belt. The horse has a stuffed Persian saddle and thick, bright coloured saddle cloth. The tails were tied up to prevent it being grabbed by the enemy. The forelock was left long and tired with ribbon to form a plume above the head.

Historically; The Macedonians came to Persia as invaders, sharing neither a common culture nor a common enemy. These lesser nobles are quick to make cause with any rebel, and the Greek upper class know this well. The Seleucids, and Baktrians intent on Hellenizing Iran, cannot rely on these men who are descended from a proud tradition, the Huvaka, Kinsmen cavalry who had faced Alexander the Great during late imperial times. It is for this reason that the Greeks often preferred to rely on mercenaries and Greek settlers, but these men are still able to be used in some roles and are conscripted in times of need. Some of these minor noble houses have intermarried with their Macedonian overlords and are thus somewhat more loyal than their neighbours might be. Still, they are often present in native revolts, due to the fact that they can often lead these revolts and have fewer opportunities due to their Iranian blood.

http://img127.echo.cx/img127/6351/he...ktoi6oi.th.jpg
After suffering heavy losses to the Parthian and Armenian Cataphracts, the Seleucid and Bactrian empires produced their own versions of these heavy horsemen, both adapting the unit to Greek technology and using superior metalwork to make them even more heavily armored. They are armored in an expensive combination of lamellar armor and chain, with heavy felt sandwiched in the middle. The resulting armor is tough and flexible, but offers outstanding protection. They are to be used as heavy shock cavalry, and have staying power in melee because of the sheer weight of their armor. They are slightly heavier than their Parthian counterparts, but lack the deadly maces that the Parthians carry and also the élan of their elite Parthian counterparts. Their horses are more heavily armored than those of the Hetairoi, but they lack the characteristic fierceness and discipline of the elite successor cavalry.

Historically, Hellenistic Kataphraktoi were at least as good as their Parthian enemy, but most Seleucid commanders did not quite understand how to use this cavalry. They won great victories over the Parthians when supporting the heavier and more elite Hetairoi, compelling the Parthians to settle for a peace treaty and suzerainty over some of the Seleucid eastern possessions. They passed into history when most of the unit was bribed by Pompey during his conquest of the east. They formed the basis for the Roman cataphracts of later ages.

http://img288.echo.cx/img288/9651/hetairoi9zg.th.jpg
the Hetairoi, or Companions, were the elite noble heavy cavalry of Macedon and the Successor states. They are an elite heavy cavalry that is second to none and arguably the best cavalry of the period. They fight with a degree of élan, discipline, and simple ferociousness that is matched only by the horsemen of Iberia, Carthage, and the best heavy cavalry of some of the eastern nomadic peoples. They are armored from head to toe in iron plate (some still had bronze, but this was falling out of favor rapidly by 250 B.C.), reinforced with mail at key points. Their horses are barded with felt barding and often have bronze plates to protect their heads. Their helmets, with the two plumes, mark them on a battlefield. They are best used as heavy shock cavalry, able to decide many battles with a single charge. They are the second part of the hammer and anvil of Alexandrian battle tactics. They are armed with a xyston and a kopis, and are well able to use both weapons. If these men have any weakness, it is the front of a line of spearmen. Horses simply do not like charging into a row of men armed with big pointy sticks. They are still able to give a decisive blow to the flank and rear of any infantry.

Historically, the Hetairoi were first created by Philip, following the lead of the cavalrymen of Thessaly, to the south. Philip went one better, armoring them to the teeth and giving them a Xyston, a twelve foot long lance tipped with a large steel head. They were armored head to toe in bronze plate, from helms to cuirass to bracers to greaves. Alexander often replaced this armor with lighter linen when they were traveling, but was quick to replace the bronze in any hard fought engagement. Alexander added little to their equipment but trained them to ride their horses in such a way that each man was an expert horsemen as well as a shock cavalryman. The successors kept this mold, but added mail reinforcement to the bronze armor at the joints before replacing it with iron and added felt and lamellar barding to the horses after encountering horse peoples that did the same. During the third century their usage declined with the successor’s ability to pay for such heavily armored men. They degenerated to such a point where only a handful were present at major battles, and were far from the war winning force that they had been earlier. Perhaps with a bit of luck and more funding, a commander could use them in their true glory once more…

A few surprises may be found in Seleukid territory:

Ereipia Babyloniaka (BABYLONIA)
http://img87.echo.cx/img87/7259/baby...28qk7yz.th.jpg

Artemision Ephesou (LYDIA)
http://img71.exs.cx/img71/8929/ephesosscreen24it.th.jpg

Varkana Drubustih (Gorgan Wall) (ASTAUENE & HYRKANIA)
http://img185.exs.cx/img185/740/gorganscreen17mn.th.jpg

And, a few goodies you may enjoy:

http://img280.echo.cx/img280/4660/lo...dium8al1je.jpg

http://img280.echo.cx/img280/7232/lo...mall9fv8bw.jpg

We would like to remind the fans that we welcome our fans to use the signature images we created; we made them for you to use. Please enjoy them as you wish.

We hope you enjoyed this week's update.

Please note that unless stated otherwise, ALL pictures shown in our news posts are of works in progress. We continue to improve on all parts of EB, and will do so long after our initial release.

Since some areas where these news items are posted cannot handle wide images, we appreciate your restraint from quoting full-size images.

As always, if you have questions or comments, the best place to post them would be here:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=70

Or here:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index.php?showforum=60

We give special thanks to http://www.imageshack.us who provide us with a simple, foolproof, and free way to show you all these pictures each week.

Have a wonderful day!

Sincerely,

-the EB team

Wow ! These units are really awesome especially the cataphracts and hipastistai, each week I want to play the faction you present....
About the Gorgan wall wasn't it built by Parthians ?

Very good work as always I become more and more impatient to play the beta ~D

:jawdrop: man, i don't have time to read the descriptions this minute but god sweet jesus those units look absolutely beautiful ~D you guys are gods

wow, great unist again. but about the pezetairoi. in greek (ancient) there is no H. only a "spiritus lenis" or "spiritus asper" at the beginnen for a H or just the first a,e,o,u,i
so pezHetairoi is useless. and should be pezetairoi. ( for as far as i know. but hellenes shoudl know more about this than me) btw. they have a greave on their Left leg

This is exelent work EB. This is my new favorit faction. :barrel: :medievalcheers:

:D just like bactria was it last week..
seleucid will get the best possble armie. but the worst starting location. gotta love them. personnaly i couldnt wait for the seleucids, allied hellenes or macedon.
so 1/3 of my dream has come true.

great work!
shouldn't it be 155 kilometer instaed of kilometre (or schould it be britsch englisch?)
(grogan wall)

YOU"RE LATE :whip: but great work, so this time i'll act like i didn't noticed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gertgregoor

...(or schould it be britsch englisch?)

---

let's bloody well hope so. ~:)

kilometer is the american spelling, whereas kilometre is british/english spelling, either way it is still pronounced the same.

Once again, beautiful work. ~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerby

wow, great unist again. but about the pezetairoi. in greek (ancient) there is no H. only a "spiritus lenis" or "spiritus asper" at the beginnen for a H or just the first a,e,o,u,i
so pezHetairoi is useless. and should be pezetairoi. ( for as far as i know. but hellenes shoudl know more about this than me) btw. they have a greave on their Left leg

---

Do mind that the spiritus asper adds the 'h' tone to the pronunciation of the word. In other words, when we transliterate from Greek, we must add the 'h' tone or we will not be transliterating correctly.

And do mind that the jolly old Brit doesn't speak correct English. He not only has whackass grammatical forms (police are? wtf?), but also has allowed his English to degenerate over the years, while in America the good old form was clung onto and subsequently preserved. Never mind the pronunciation -- that's so bad I won't even dare start on the subject. ~;)



~Wiz

when you see this maniac running at you..

https://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y9/dem0819/sta.jpg

it's time to pack your things up and go home.

Aafyfaendagitt! Absolutely superb units, as usual :bow:
Can't wait to break the Ptolemaioi lines with a great Kataphraktoi charge! :charge: :devil:

Was a bit surprised by _Arche_Seleukeia, though. Thought it was Basileia Seleukeion(sp?). Basileia = Kingdom/Empire? I'm not a great knower of Greek, though.

Anyway, thanks for y e t another splendid faction presentation.

Sfwartir
(impatiently awaiting the presentation of the Norvegia Ebrium faction, including the rather amazing, though disturbingly hairy, Naked Drunk Berserkr Fanatic unit.) ~D

That was one of the possibilties, yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sfwartir

Was a bit surprised by _Arche_Seleukeia, though. Thought it was Basileia Seleukeion(sp?). Basileia = Kingdom/Empire? I'm not a great knower of Greek, though.

---

We found ten possible (though not equally plausible) names for this faction. Here's an excerpt from a recent book on the Seleukids which might have helped push our decision to Arche.

From Sherwin-White and Kuhrt's "From Samarkhand to Sardis" (1993): (chapter 2: section on 'Defining the Seleucid State') "One factor about the Seleucid kingdom, at least, is indisputable: it was an empire, meeting two of the most basic criteria of imperial rule, i.e. (a) where one state, or central power, encompassing a large territory and incorporating a number of socities, often heterogenous in geography and culture, dominates the others by military conquest and military force, and uses the surpluses of the subordinated 'countries'; (b) there exists some sort of overarching administrative framework, which may be loose or tight. The state is created by conquest (Alexander the Great and Seleucus I) and perpetuated by military constraint (armies, colonies, military expeditions, garrisons), which permits the levy of tribute and service from the subjugated peoples. This broad definition the Seleucid kingdom fits."

There were contemporary references to the state as a kingdom 'basileia' as well as an empire 'arche'. Actually both exist in loyalty decrees from Ilium - OGIS 219). And basileia was our second highest vote-getting choice, but in the end I'm very glad Arche won out. It has the additional merit (though this was not ostensibly the reason for our choice) of being a closer match for what it's commonly referred to in English today ("empire") than basileia ("kingdom").

will i look like a complete jerk if i complain about cataphract horses again? ~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou

There were contemporary references to the state as a kingdom 'basileia' as well as an empire 'arche'. Actually both exist in loyalty decrees from Ilium - OGIS 219). And basileia was our second highest vote-getting choice, but in the end I'm very glad Arche won out. It has the additional merit (though this was not ostensibly the reason for our choice) of being a closer match for what it's commonly referred to in English today ("empire") than basileia ("kingdom").

---

I get your point. I am confused however, as the Byzantine Empire certainly did call itself the 'Basileia Romaion', and its Monarch was an Emperor, or 'Basileus'. Using the Byzantine Empire as an example, it seems like 'Basileia'/'Basileus' are used as terms for Empire/Emperor, rather than King/Kingdom?
After all, the Byzantine Empire was an actual Empire (as in 'ruled by an Emperor'), whereas Seleukos and his successors were Kings by title (and thus ruled a Kingdom, not an Empire).

However, as I stated earlier, I'm not an expert on the Greek language. Maybe a proper translation of 'Basileia' lies closer to our term 'Realm' rather than either 'Kingdom'/'Empire'?

Still, the decision has been made, and by all means, this isn't a crucial point to me. I don't wan't to be considered "difficult" ~;) You all do a great job with EB, and I can certainly live (and _happily_ so!) with an Arche Seleukeia :bow: ~:cheers:

Sfwartir

Another Successor army eh? Nicely done as always. I especially enjoyed the Companions.

There will be elephants too right?

Will the next week's faction be another Successor state? Can we see another faction type? Perhaps some nomads from the Far Eastern Steppes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emperor Umeu 1

YOU"RE LATE :whip: but great work, so this time i'll act like i didn't noticed

---

No. These are weekend updates; it was posted on the weekend and still is the weekend. :dizzy2: :whip:

I thought the phalanx formation was hardcoded and could not be edited. Do the overhand animations really work with the formation?

Speaking of animations, how are the other animations coming along?

You'll have to ask the unit guys about the overhand animation. I know the sarissae and xyston animations are in testing at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shifty157

I thought the phalanx formation was hardcoded and could not be edited. Do the overhand animations really work with the formation?

---

Although some aspects of the phalanx formations are hard-coded, others can be changed to fit our objectives. And there is no problem regarding fluidity of animation or killing power, if that is what you are refering by "really work".

Ah yes, I understand that though the pikemen are to hold their sarissas with both hands when in combat, they cannot do so when marching?

basileus is greek for king. Apparently the East Romans didn't care much for the difference between kings and emperors. I think that one can translate it to what suits the most; the meaning of basileus is quite flexible.
As a side note, the "emperors" of Rome were never actually called emperor, but rather princeps (first man), concul sine collegae, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Tomyris Reloaded

Ah yes, I understand that though the pikemen are to hold their sarissas with both hands when in combat, they cannot do so when marching?

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ellesthyan

As a side note, the "emperors" of Rome were never actually called emperor, but rather princeps (first man), concul sine collegae, etc.

---

As a side note to your side note, princeps only means first. The full title of Augustus was princeps senatus, which translates to 'first senate' but was a title given to the most distinguished senator traditionally. It's just another tribute to Augustus' remarkable capability to draw all the power his way without the people really noticing. "Iron fist in a velvet glove," as they say. Just a little note ~;)



~Wiz

Looking extremely interesting! Well played, me hearties! ~:) However, minor niggle, "Gorgan wall" desciption-last word reads "assistence" instead of "assistance". I just thought that if you were making a mod with such gusto, then you'd want every detail correct!
Unknown Chieftain

Quote:

---

Will the next week's faction be another Successor state? Can we see another faction type? Perhaps some nomads from the Far Eastern Steppes?

---

As much as I'd love to, we are limited by the amount of work done on a faction, and how much stuff we have to show. And we frankly don't have enough of any of the Eastern nomads to show.

these units r cool for this army but have u considerd using jewish units not just for rebels

Just noticing that the upside-down anchor (if that's what it is) does look kind of like a Corinthian helmet at the bottom. I wonder if that's where the vanilla faction icon came from?

Nice...

Impressive.

My forum name simply signifies my favourite faction, after all. ~D

And the name is better than Tsorim, which could be disputed as the various social classes of the "Carthaginians" did not actually have a "name" for themselves as we understand it, and several names could be used with no less or more accuracy than each other.

Edit: Thank you, Khelvan. Your decision is wise and respectable. :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AntiochusIII

By the way: Khelvan, could you delete (like - delete, not just close) that thread you created? I'm aware of the civil war in TWC (poor, poor Veronans) but you should not bring the issue, even with links, over here to the org. With respect. :bow:

---

This is a fair and valid point. I have locked it. I generally don't delete posts, but this one should probably go, as it will only incite the situation.

I suppose that I also let my emotions get away from me, and felt personally insulted as did the majority of our team members. My purpose was to ensure the community was aware of what was happening, but you're right, I can't let my anger at what happened allow me to make bad decisions. And that certainly was not an appropriate thing to do, so I apologize.

I hope that the decision will not be viewed too negatively, and is perhaps understandable, given that I was as shocked as the rest of you reading these things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by khelvan

I suppose that I also let my emotions get away from me, and felt personally insulted as did the majority of our team members. My purpose was to ensure the community was aware of what was happening, but you're right, I can't let my anger at what happened allow me to make bad decisions. And that certainly was not an appropriate thing to do, so I apologize.

I hope that the decision will not be viewed too negatively, and is perhaps understandable, given that I was as shocked as the rest of you reading these things.

---

Khelvan, I admire your (and the whole EB team's) maturity. After reading the monster thread about this cursed event at TWC, full of anger, lame excuses and accusations, I found your calm and seriousness incredibly appropriate and admirable. Once again, good job EB.

Yeah khelvan, it's probably for the best that you didn't keep that open and viewable for nutjobs like myself. I got angry. ~D

And like I said, soldier on, EB, soldier on. ~:cheers:

I too must state that I truly admire the level of maturity EB is demonstrating. I myself after reading what had transpired well, as embaressing as it is to admit blew my stack over at the RTR forum and got suspended. On top of that I was so disgusted with the behavior demonstrated, I uninstalled the mod from my computer in a fit of rage...So don't feel bad for letting your emotions get the better of you Khelvan, I'm a pro when it comes to that. =p

But on the units, they look outstanding, particularly the Hypastisti *love the overhand animation*.

I'm a longtime lurker and I must say that this mod keeps getting better and better, congrats!

I'm kind of confused about something though. In the recent updates you always seem to show two different maps so I'm wondering which one will be used in the mod.

I don't see how you could use the small one (the one used in RTW) because most of the seleucid territory isn't even on the small map. Same thing with last week's update, none of Baktria's territory is on the small map. So I'm hoping you'll use the big map, if that would be possible.

Anyway, thanks for another great update and keep up the good work!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GMT

I'm a longtime lurker and I must say that this mod keeps getting better and better, congrats!

I'm kind of confused about something though. In the recent updates you always seem to show two different maps so I'm wondering which one will be used in the mod.

I don't see how you could use the small one (the one used in RTW) because most of the seleucid territory isn't even on the small map. Same thing with last week's update, none of Baktria's territory is on the small map. So I'm hoping you'll use the big map, if that would be possible.

Anyway, thanks for another great update and keep up the good work!

---

I think thats because they use the standard RTW map to do playtesting and ballancing and what not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zero1

I think thats because they use the standard RTW map to do playtesting and ballancing and what not.

---

Not to mention that the official map is still mostly a secret ;)

I was trying to visualise the images from the seleukid army with a bigger size, but the quality of them decreases a lot ~:confused: . What I have done is: i) Copy the images and paste them to a word document; ii) Increase their size to make them bigger. But the images loose their quality. What I am doing wrong???

Can anyone help me, please :help: . For instance, Big_John, How did you manage to get a picture of the thureophoroi with this size and good quality?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LegVIIGemina-Tarraconense

I was trying to visualise the images from the seleukid army with a bigger size, but the quality of them decreases a lot ~:confused: . What I have done is: i) Copy the images and paste them to a word document; ii) Increase their size to make them bigger. But the images loose their quality. What I am doing wrong???

Can anyone help me, please :help: . For instance, Big_John, How did you manage to get a picture of the thureophoroi with this size and good quality?

---

Have you tried clicking on the picture?

These new units for Seleukeia look realy good, are you going to have larger unit sizes for the less veteren units?
otherwise i fear that people will only use the elite units on custom battles,

That's part of balancing.
If a player can recruit a lot of elite unit and win with such an army, then the game is screwed up.

What? What happened? Civil war? Where's my rifle? And my sabre!



~Wiz ~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Wizard

What? What happened? Civil war? Where's my rifle? And my sabre!



~Wiz ~D

---

~D Allow me to elucidate:

Two teams of fans, both alike in dignity,
In fair TWC, where we lay our scene,
From ancient grudge break to new mutiny,
Where civitate blood makes civitate hands unclean.
From forth the fatal text files of these two foes
A pair of star-cross'd modifications take their life;
Whose misadventured piteous overthrows
Do with their death bury their supporters' strife.
The fearful passage of their death-mark'd data,
And the continuance of their supporters' rage,
Which, but their modification's end, nought could remove,
Is now the two hours' traffic of our thread;
The which if you with patient eyes attend,
What here shall miss, the quote button shall strive to mend.

Hi all ~D

I am one of countless others lurking in this forum watching the development of EB, astonished by the depth of the mod, the enormous amount of research and detail that is invested in it and waiting with baited breath for announcements and the eventual release!! Seen the latest factions preview- the Seleucids- and noticing that you guys go to extraordinary lengths to ensure authenticity and accuracy on everything, I felt that I had to point out couple of things, Greek been my mother tongue, so without prejudice ... ~;)

The first one is about the card that says "Babylonian Ruins"; in Greek I believe should read "Babyloniaka Ereipia" instead of "Ereipia Babyloniaka" or alternatively "Ereipia Babylonos" or even "Ereipia tis Babylonos". As it stands, it sounds as what one might call "poor Greek"... :jester:

The other one is about the choice of the name “Arche Seleukeia”. I’ve read the post by Teleclos Archelaou several times trying to understand what is meant by the choice between “Basileia” and “Empire” (Autokratoria) and as to why “Arche Seleukeia” was finally chosen, but I must confess I don’t get it.. :embarassed:

I am sure you all know that the word APXH- arch, arche, archi- stands for “first”, “original”, “beginning”, also something akin to “the powers that be”(exousia) and it can be used to denote “greatness”; but when the word “arch” is used to signify “first” (as in the “top-one”) or “greatest” like in “archipelagos” or “archangel” and a lot of other Greek words, I believe it implies that it's “first” or “greatest” amongst others, and since there was only one Seleucid Kingdom –Empire, the choice of “Arche Seleukeia” appears quite strange... Pronounced correctly should sound as one word: “Archeseleukeia”, and with all due respect, IMVHO, this is not even “poor Greek” is more like a name just “made up” using these two words. :stars:

I believe the linguists in your team will agree that translations from one language to another can result in, some times, almost comical wording and there is no better example than this: “Our Galaxy is called The Milky Way”. To an English speaking Greek this is quite funny, because translated in Greek it means “Our Galaxy is called Galaxy” or “Our Milky Way is called Milky Way”! and who can forget the famous translation from English to Russian made by a computer of: “The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak”!! :devilish:

Remaining_In_Awe :bow:

O_Stratigos

I am not one of our Greek speakers, myself, but we do have both native Greek speakers and Ancient Greek speakers on the team. The faction name happens to be Ancient Greek, and while I don't assume you're trying to translate it into modern Greek, until one of our Ancient Greek guys comes along to answer this, that is the best I've got. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by o_megas

The other one is about the choice of the name “Arche Seleukeia”. I’ve read the post by Teleclos Archelaou several times trying to understand what is meant by the choice between “Basileia” and “Empire” (Autokratoria) and as to why “Arche Seleukeia” was finally chosen, but I must confess I don’t get it.. :embarassed:

I am sure you all know that the word APXH- arch, arche, archi- stands for “first”, “original”, “beginning”, also something akin to “the powers that be”(exousia) and it can be used to denote “greatness”; but when the word “arch” is used to signify “first” (as in the “top-one”) or “greatest” like in “archipelagos” or “archangel” and a lot of other Greek words, I believe it implies that it's “first” or “greatest” amongst others, and since there was only one Seleucid Kingdom –Empire, the choice of “Arche Seleukeia” appears quite strange... Pronounced correctly should sound as one word: “Archeseleukeia”, and with all due respect, IMVHO, this is not even “poor Greek” is more like a name just “made up” using these two words. :stars:

I believe the linguists in your team will agree that translations from one language to another can result in, some times, almost comical wording and there is no better example than this: “Our Galaxy is called The Milky Way”. To an English speaking Greek this is quite funny, because translated in Greek it means “Our Galaxy is called Galaxy” or “Our Milky Way is called Milky Way”! and who can forget the famous translation from English to Russian made by a computer of: “The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak”!! :devilish:

Remaining_In_Awe :bow:

O_Stratigos

---

-----------------------------------------------
"arche" alpha-rho-chi-eta (feminine noun)

II. first place or power, sovereignty (not in Hom.), cf. Hdt.1.6, etc.; Arist.Pol.1284b2 : metaph., of a stroke of fortune, D.21.196: pl., A.Ch.864 (lyr.); S.Ant.744 , etc.: c. gen. rei, S.OT737 ; power over them, Th.3.90, X.Ath.2.7, etc.: prov., Biasap.Arist.EN1130a1, cf. D.Prooem.48; method of government, Th.6.54 .

2. empire, realm, Hdt.1.91, Th.4.128, etc.

3. magistracy, office, Hdt.3.80, 4.147; Id.3.89 ; Th.8.70; D.59.72, etc.; to obtain an office, Id.57.25; Th.1.96 ; Id.6.54 ; Lex ap.Aeschin.1.21; withsg. Noun, Th.4.53 ; term of office, Antipho6.42 ; POxy.119.16 (iii A.D.).

4. in pl., the authorities, the magistrates, Th.5.47 , cf. Decr. ap. And.1.83; Th.6.54; collectively, 'the board', D.47.22, cf. IG1.229, etc.; Antipho5.48 ; but of a single magistrate, PHal.1.226 (iii B.C.); against authority, A.Supp.485; Id.Ag.124 (anap.).

5. command, i.e. body of troops, LXX 1 Ki.13.17, al.

6. pl., heavenly powers, Ep.Rom.8.38, al., cf. Dam. Pr.96; powers of evil, Ep.Eph.6.12, al.

------------------------------
Seleukeios, -a, -on‚ adjective

A. of Seleucus, IG11(2).203 B 22 (iii B.C.); name of a month at Ilium, OGI212.11 (iv/iii B.C.), Supp.Epigr.4.664.3 (i B.C.): festival of S., IG12(1).6.3 (Ery thrae).

----------------------------
Have posted this elsewhere, but here is the explanation of why using "empire" (for which 'arche' is the closest word and the word attested to used in the Seleukid empire) is the best way to go and hardly "made up":

Contemporary references to the state as both a kingdom 'basileia' and an empire 'arche' exist in loyalty decrees from Ilium - OGIS 219. From Sherwin-White and Kuhrt's "From Samarkhand to Sardis" ('93): (chapter 2: section on 'Defining the Seleucid State') "One factor about the Seleucid kingdom, at least, is indisputable: it was an empire, meeting two of the most basic criteria of imperial rule, i.e. (a) where one state, or central power, encompassing a large territory and incorporating a number of socities, often heterogenous in geography and culture, dominates the others by military conquest and military force, and uses the surpluses of the subordinated 'countries'; (b) there exists some sort of overarching administrative framework, which may be loose or tight. The state is created by conquest (Alexander the Great and Seleucus I) and perpetuated by military constraint (armies, colonies, military expeditions, garrisons), which permits the levy of tribute and service from the subjugated peoples. This broad definition the Seleucid kingdom fits."

------------
I will see to it that the noun-adjective word order is reversed in the Babylonian description.

Impressive references indeed to say the least, especially to an amateur enthusiast like me!! but- and there is always a “but” isn’t there, lol- it looks to me like a kind of a circular argument here, so please indulge me.. :book:

I thought scholars would need more than one source-reference to accept something, and because “From Samarkand to Sardis” asserts that the Seleucid Kingdom meets the criteria for an Empire, that does not necessarily makes it so. “(a) where one state, or central power, encompassing a large territory and incorporating a number of socities, often heterogenous in geography and culture, dominates the others by military conquest and military force, and uses the surpluses of the subordinated 'countries'; (b) there exists some sort of overarching administrative framework, which may be loose or tight. The state is created by conquest (Alexander the Great and Seleucus I) and perpetuated by military constraint (armies, colonies, military expeditions, garrisons), which permits the levy of tribute and service from the subjugated peoples.”.
That “episode” in 1066 meets the criteria but does not an Empire make.. OGIS 219 is constantly referring to the “Kingdom” and “King Antiochus, son of King Seleucus” “the King and his sister the Queen” and then someone comes along and says “no no, you are not a Kingdom you are an Empire because you meet MY criteria”.. ~:)

But this discussion is not about whether the Seleucids where an Empire or not, is about the use of the word APXH “arche”, and obviously here is used having the meaning of: government, low and order, powers that be, exousia etc.
In this case I find it very hard to believe that a scholar or native Greek speaker with some knowledge of Ancient Greek will accept that APXH = AYTOKPATOPIA. The word APXH, APXAI, TON APXON (both Os Omega) refers to the government or whatever power is in control at the time, and it will be a huge leap to accept it as meaning Empire. :sad2:

TH 4.128 -on the same day he arrived at Arnissa, which is in the dominion of Perdiccas.

Hdt 1.91 For when the god told him that, if he attacked the Persians, he will destroy a mighty empire.

I am not sure if these are what you are referring to, but if they are, since I have no access to the original Greek texts nor the fluency to read them and translate them correctly, I can only speculate ( shame on me) :embarassed: : If in the original, APXH is for dominion that does not Empire means (sic) and if the text states “he will destroy a mighty APXH” knowing that Persia was a mighty Empire… you can guess the rest ~:)
What I am trying to say is that you scholars find mistakes in old translations all the time, but I am far from been qualified to even suggest…. :hide:

What I meant by, that looks like a “made up” name, was about IF it was one word Archeseleukeia – Arche as in first, greatest etc, then it looked like is “made up”; as the name is obviously made of two words Arche Seleukeia- using Arche as meaning government, exousia or even (~:mecry:)Empire-, then I think that grammatically you are required to have the second word ending with “s” to signify as to whom Arche denotes to, so I believe it should be ARCHE SELEUKEIAS. But then if we accept ARCHE to mean Empire then it should be SELEUKEIAKH ARCHE, SELEUKEIAKH APXH… after all it was the British Empire not the Empire British.. oh boy.. :wall:

So what we have is this: using “From Samarkand to Sardis” as a source the Seleucid Kingdom is made an Empire > using APXH to an extreme stretch, the word is made to mean Empire > put the two together the Seleucid Kingdom becomes the Seleucid Empire > hence ARCHE SELEUKEIA! :surrender: Hmmm.. it looks circular to me, but then again what do I know... :juggle2:
Please don’t get me wrong, this is YOUR mod and if you say you want to call that faction North Korea or Supercalifragilistic I am all for it.. ~:cheers: (just release the friging Beta already!! :furious3: lol)

Finally, I must confess I did try to translate Arche Seleukeia to modern Greek or even English, attempting to understand what it means- no luck…- like you guys do with these almost unpronounceable barbarian names and then you go to great lengths to spell the correct pronunciation and translation, especially about what Tsorim is and why the name was chosen.
Now this begs a question: the name Carthage was changed and one of the reasons given is that Tsorim is what they called themselves, so it makes one wonder… what did the Arche Seleukeis (Seleukeides?) called themselves… :joker:

Still_Remaining_In_Awe :bow:

O_Sratigos

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by o_megas

Impressive references indeed to say the least, especially to an amateur enthusiast like me!! but- and there is always a “but” isn’t there, lol- it looks to me like a kind of a circular argument here, so please indulge me.. :book:

I thought scholars would need more than one source-reference to accept something, and because “From Samarkand to Sardis” asserts that the Seleucid Kingdom meets the criteria for an Empire, that does not necessarily makes it so. “(a) where one state, or central power, encompassing a large territory and incorporating a number of socities, often heterogenous in geography and culture, dominates the others by military conquest and military force, and uses the surpluses of the subordinated 'countries'; (b) there exists some sort of overarching administrative framework, which may be loose or tight. The state is created by conquest (Alexander the Great and Seleucus I) and perpetuated by military constraint (armies, colonies, military expeditions, garrisons), which permits the levy of tribute and service from the subjugated peoples.”.
That “episode” in 1066 meets the criteria but does not an Empire make.. OGIS 219 is constantly referring to the “Kingdom” and “King Antiochus, son of King Seleucus” “the King and his sister the Queen” and then someone comes along and says “no no, you are not a Kingdom you are an Empire because you meet MY criteria”.. ~:)

But this discussion is not about whether the Seleucids where an Empire or not, is about the use of the word APXH “arche”, and obviously here is used having the meaning of: government, low and order, powers that be, exousia etc.
In this case I find it very hard to believe that a scholar or native Greek speaker with some knowledge of Ancient Greek will accept that APXH = AYTOKPATOPIA. The word APXH, APXAI, TON APXON (both Os Omega) refers to the government or whatever power is in control at the time, and it will be a huge leap to accept it as meaning Empire. :sad2:

TH 4.128 -on the same day he arrived at Arnissa, which is in the dominion of Perdiccas.

Hdt 1.91 For when the god told him that, if he attacked the Persians, he will destroy a mighty empire.

I am not sure if these are what you are referring to, but if they are, since I have no access to the original Greek texts nor the fluency to read them and translate them correctly, I can only speculate ( shame on me) :embarassed: : If in the original, APXH is for dominion that does not Empire means (sic) and if the text states “he will destroy a mighty APXH” knowing that Persia was a mighty Empire… you can guess the rest ~:)
What I am trying to say is that you scholars find mistakes in old translations all the time, but I am far from been qualified to even suggest…. :hide:

What I meant by, that looks like a “made up” name, was about IF it was one word Archeseleukeia – Arche as in first, greatest etc, then it looked like is “made up”; as the name is obviously made of two words Arche Seleukeia- using Arche as meaning government, exousia or even (~:mecry:)Empire-, then I think that grammatically you are required to have the second word ending with “s” to signify as to whom Arche denotes to, so I believe it should be ARCHE SELEUKEIAS. But then if we accept ARCHE to mean Empire then it should be SELEUKEIAKH ARCHE, SELEUKEIAKH APXH… after all it was the British Empire not the Empire British.. oh boy.. :wall:

So what we have is this: using “From Samarkand to Sardis” as a source the Seleucid Kingdom is made an Empire > using APXH to an extreme stretch, the word is made to mean Empire > put the two together the Seleucid Kingdom becomes the Seleucid Empire > hence ARCHE SELEUKEIA! :surrender: Hmmm.. it looks circular to me, but then again what do I know... :juggle2:
Please don’t get me wrong, this is YOUR mod and if you say you want to call that faction North Korea or Supercalifragilistic I am all for it.. ~:cheers: (just release the friging Beta already!! :furious3: lol)

Finally, I must confess I did try to translate Arche Seleukeia to modern Greek or even English, attempting to understand what it means- no luck…- like you guys do with these almost unpronounceable barbarian names and then you go to great lengths to spell the correct pronunciation and translation, especially about what Tsorim is and why the name was chosen.
Now this begs a question: the name Carthage was changed and one of the reasons given is that Tsorim is what they called themselves, so it makes one wonder… what did the Arche Seleukeis (Seleukeides?) called themselves… :joker:

Still_Remaining_In_Awe :bow:

O_Sratigos

---

Χαιρετισμοί απο την πατρίδα!
Well mate you do have a point in the general notice that some times translations are tricky.
But in this case EB has a point about the grammar part at least. Now if Seleukeia is kingdom (Βασίλειο) οr empire (Αυτοκρατορία) is debatable.
But grammaticly there is nothing wrong with Σελεύκεια Αρχή or Aρχή Σελευκεια (γενική) though the second one is more poetic usage. In greek as you know we can use επιθετο and αντικείμενο vice versa.

How can it not be an empire? There are plenty of smaller empires than that of the Seleucids

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarcasm

How can it not be an empire? There are plenty of smaller empires than that of the Seleucids

---

Well, Empires are usually ruled by an _Emperor_, while Kingdoms, as the Seleucid one.. ~;)
A Kingdom remains a Kingdom until it's ruled by an Emperor, no matter its size.

the difference between empire/emperor and kingdom/king seems to be mostly semantic. was the british empire ruled by an emperor? teleklos has stated that ancient sources refer to seleukia as both an empire and a kingdom. so, in terms of EB's naming philosophy, either should be appropriate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sfwartir

Well, Empires are usually ruled by an _Emperor_, while Kingdoms, as the Seleucid one.. ~;)
A Kingdom remains a Kingdom until it's ruled by an Emperor, no matter its size.

---

Yet the British Empire was ruled by a Queen ~;)



~Wiz

Quote:

---

Well, Empires are usually ruled by an _Emperor_, while Kingdoms, as the Seleucid one..
A Kingdom remains a Kingdom until it's ruled by an Emperor, no matter its size.

---

The others pretty much stated my point...

Ehrrr....you really didn't think that answer through did you? :shifty:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Wizard

Yet the British Empire was ruled by a Queen ~;)



~Wiz

---

Actually, Victoria was Empress of India as well. If we're going to talk semantics, then as we all know the word Empire is derived from Emperor, which comes from the Latin Imperator which was originally used to solely to describe a General and only crossed over to the origins of its current meaning because of Augustus.

Given that Empire from a latin word which didn't even have the same meaning in this period as it does today, I think we should trust that the Ancient Greek phrase used conveys the nature of the Seleucid state just as accurately, if not more so, than any of the alternatives. :wink:

*ding* *ding* *ding* "Robert, tell this gentleman what he won!"

No retreat, no surrender, heheh ~;)

S l i g h t l y beerified at the moment, so please excuse any spelling errors
:barrel:

Now now, I did think my last comment through (not this one tho'). Epistolary Richard - you weasel ~:cheers: , beating me to it in your post, when reminding people that old Vicky was indeed an Empress as well - and that was supposed to be an ever so slight moment of triumph for me..aargh :charge:

Now, on to the British Empire. Yes, indeed the United Kingdom _had_ an Empire, but it _was_ a Kingdom (or "Queendom" ~D ), just as the Seleucids. As you all know, "empire" in this (modern) context means just about 'Has Lots of Territories'. An agreement of some sorts between Victorian Britain and say, the great nation of Beeroslovenia, wasn't referred to as an agreement between "the British Empire and Beeroslovenia", but between the United Kingdom and Beeroschl.. Bieromph..that other country. My point is, will it really be correct to refer to the Seleukid realm as an Empire, on the basis of its territories, when the nation itself was clearly a Kingdom? I do understand your points, I just..disagree a bit. Slightly. And veryvery humbly.
:hide:

I would still recommend "Basileia Seleukeion", but the poor little thing lost the vote. ~:mecry:

Arr, now I must be off to ye olde hammock to honour me missis. Night-night/good morning me ol' fruitbats! ~:grouphug:

The United Kingdom was a kingdom. The British Empire was an empire. In the case of the Seleukids in EB, the player runs the Empire, not just the kingdom. In this case, I would suggest a definition of "Empire" be a dominion of one kingdom over many other kingdoms, and the Seleukid Empire is just that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Epistolary Richard

Actually, Victoria was Empress of India as well. If we're going to talk semantics, then as we all know the word Empire is derived from Emperor, which comes from the Latin Imperator which was originally used to solely to describe a General and only crossed over to the origins of its current meaning because of Augustus.

Given that Empire from a latin word which didn't even have the same meaning in this period as it does today, I think we should trust that the Ancient Greek phrase used conveys the nature of the Seleucid state just as accurately, if not more so, than any of the alternatives. :wink:

---

That is all swell, but we're talking about the British Empire here, not the Indian one, a title created because ol' Vicky was jealous of her nephew being Kaiser and all. ~;)



~Wiz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shigawire

I can go on and on with a plethora of other Seleukid coins.. I think you can see where I'm going with this... I think it's fair to say that the root of the word Basileos should be employed.

---

If you are going with what the factions called themselves, and they themselves minted coins with a particular name on it, I would have to agree that we should use that name.

As I said in my earlier post, this is not about whether the Seleucids were a Kingdom or an Empire, rather it's about Arche=Empire, but what the hell lets give it a bash anyway :gossip: ~D

It would be very hard to decide between Kingdom and Empire, especially for the later since any short Corsican, megalomaniac, or little King could proclaim himself Emperor; sources referring to them as an Empire may well have been influenced by political, financial or just plain sycophantic reasons. We all know that ancient writers were capable of all of the above- not unlike contemporary ones…- and that they were quite prone to exaggeration; but in the final analysis if the Seleucids were an Empire they would’ve had to have an Emperor, and to my knowledge there is no reference of any Seleucid ruler being called thus. :mellow:

Translations can be so tricky.. as this discussion is in English, by “King” we all understand that it can be translated to Greek as Vasileus and one can live with it, [the letter of Antigonus to his son Demetrius referring to him as “ Vasileus Demetrius” (δοτικη) can of course complicate things..] but when it comes to Emperor… ahh, that’s a different kettle of fish :mask: .. to quote from Epistolary Richard’s post,“ we all know the word Empire is derived from Emperor, which comes from the Latin Imperator which was originally used to solely to describe a General” but ( I’ve started to really hate the word “but” :tongue: lol) in Greek, Emperor >Autokrator means Self Ruler and has nothing to do with a General per se,- even though very often he was originally a General- so although we converse in the same language we might understand things quite differently. ~;)

Of course, they did call themselves a Kingdom and the rulers of the realm Kings, but from ancient to contemporary times, for one- as a rule- to be King must be born of a King [never mind the Ελεω Θεου (by the grace of God) nonsense] so the Diadochoi, been merely Alexander’s generals had no legitimate reason to call themselves Kings. :shrug: One can say that a King can be an Emperor, but an Emperor could never become a King. You either got Royal Blood or, so sorry, no cigar ~:cheers: Wow!! am a poet!! ~:thumb: :laugh3:

Lets make a few suppositions: if we accept that one cannot be King unless his daddy was a King, then the Seleucids could not have been a Kingdom even though they did call themselves so and others accepted them as such; on the other hand, if the Carthage > Tsorim reasoning of “that’s what they called themselves” applies, then they should be called a Kingdom or else inconsistency rears its ugly head..
Since we don’t really know whether the sources referring to the Seleucids as an Empire did so as praise saying that it was as grand and mighty as an Empire, even though it was known as a Kingdom at the time, or used it as a derogatory term implying that it was not a “legitimate” Kingdom, therefore was actually an Empire; so if we accept its Kings were not “legitimate”, then it should have indeed be an Empire, but (grr.. that word again.. :skull: ) an Empire without an Emperor cannot an Empire be… :eeeek:

In conclusion: six of one and half dozen of the other… :lost: and am getting dizzy… :dizzy: ~:dizzy: :fainting: lol

Now let’s get to the main point. :smash:
To quote Epistolary Richard again: “Given that Empire from a latin word which didn't even have the same meaning in this period as it does today, I think we should trust that the Ancient Greek phrase used conveys the nature of the Seleucid state just as accurately, if not more so, than any of the alternatives.”
Since the case for Kingdom or Empire can be argued ad nauseam, IMHO the decision by EB to call them an Empire is quite valid; however, the choice of the word Arche-APXH to mean Empire, I do not- with all due respect- believe it is; even if we accept ~:mecry: Arche=Empire :bigcry:I believe that the grammar is incorrect in Arche Seleukeia, as it should be: Η Σελευκεια >Της Σελευκειας (γενικη indeed Indomeneas :wink3: ). I have no idea as how to convey this in English so if I may try to paraphrase very very roughly :embarassed: : Arche=Empire, who’s Empire? Seleukeia’s = Arche SeleukeiaS. :sweatdrop: :help:
Even though I do not accept the validity of Arche=Empire I might of course be wrong :shame: :charming: , so it would be enormously appreciated if someone presents more direct evidence of Arche=Empire, links and all if possible. Please keep in mind that we don’t all have access to the materials you scholars have ~:)



:thinking2: ~:idea: :jumping:

Now I am going to suggest the use of another word instead of Arche (and I have no doubt that you guys have already thought of it), then RUN LIKE HELL!! ~:eek: :uhoh2:

:drummer: :drummer: :drummer: :drummer:

KRATOS

:oops: :scared: :rifle: Runiiiiiiiiiing…….. ~:wave:

And_Still_Remaining_In_Awe :bow:


O_Stratigos

Impressive!

By the way, you really love those smilies don't you? :tongue2:

Just so you know... though the pronunciation of the letter 'Beta' in Modern Greek is 'V', that is due to the process known as "palatalization." In classical Greek, they pronounced 'Beta' as 'B.'

Yes, thank you :book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_alphabet#Main_table,
http://www.cogsci.indiana.edu/farg/h...an/grkphon.htm, since I am no scholar I just try to keep things as simple as possible for everyone reading this thread, myself included!! :beam:

O_Stratigos :bow:

Great websites o_megas.

To clarify which part of speech we are using for words in the name of the faction: Seleukeios, -a, -on is the adjective "Seleukid". Indeed Arche (fem, sing., nom.) needs Seleukeia to modify it correctly. What is being requested here by o megas is the fem., sing., genitive form of the noun that means Seleukeia, the smaller region, which does not refer to the whole of their realm. This would give us "Empire of (the area called) Seleukeia". The only other option along these same lines would be Arche Seleukidon ("'Arche' of the Seleukids"). We thought the use of the adjective (agreeing with its modified noun) would be better than the genitive plural form "of the Seleukids".

I actually didn't even vote for Arche Seleukideia (though I gave it as one of the ten possibilities I put forth for the vote), but it got more votes, and I think the other folks were right about it upon reflection.

@ Teleclos Archelaou

Please forgive my ignorance, but after reading your post 3-4 times I still don’t understand what you are saying… :embarassed: obviously my English is as bad as my Greek!! ~D I would really appreciate if you can explain it in plain English. ~:)

What I hope you are NOT saying- in part- is that, if Malta conquered all the Mediterranean countries, then it couldn’t be called the Maltese Empire because Malta is too small… ~:eek: :embarassed:
Anyway, I have to go away until tomorrow, but what really worries me is your silence about that cursed world Arche… maybe the deed is done and Arche is going to stay; :bigcry: if so please let me know so I can begin my lamentation… :wall: and I DO mean lamentation.. my 1000 word lamentation… unless you ask for mercy... :grin: lol

Quote: “I actually didn't even vote for Arche Seleukideia (though I gave it as one of the ten possibilities I put forth for the vote), but it got more votes, and I think the other folks were right about it upon reflection”.

Hmm.. am not so sure I believe you are considering this: “1.138. The verbal plays on arche cannot be coincidental:[49] the Athenian arche ('empire') is echoed in the arche ('archonship') of Themistokles, which is seen as the arche ('beginning') of Athenian might” and it is also echoed in Teleklos Archelaou … :evilgrin: ~D
Delusions of Immortality along with an Immortal Mod? :laugh4: ~:joker:

O_Stratigos :bow:

Let me try to explain, for I did understand...

Seleukeios | Suleukeia | Seleukeion

This is the nominativus adjective, which translated into English means 'Seleukid'. It is not possessive, like the genitivus. Rather, it describes a word.

In English, that would equate to 'cool' relating to 'water'. So, in 'cool water', 'cool' is the adjective.

Since 'Arche' is a feminine word, we use the feminine nominativus form of the adjective, which is the middle word above. So, translated, that should give us 'Seleukid Empire'.

Continuing my little example, 'water' is a nominativus. Therefore, in ancient Greek, that would mean the adjective would have to be a nominativus as well. And, just as well in ancient Greek, it should also be of the same sex as the word it is connected to. Therefore, we use 'Seleukeia' since 'Arche' is feminine.

Now, that was the grammatics. The meaning of 'Arche' I leave to the real Greek linguists, for I dropped Greek in favor of Latin two years ago...



~Wiz

impressive for a dutchmen.tough english grammar is not my strongpoint.
still very impressive. ;) i dropped both, couldnt stand the boredom. maybe it was my teacher. altough i found greek easier than Latin, since i understood the alfabet perfectly (mind you im using the past-form), i still sucked at both

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Wizard

I dropped Greek in favor of Latin two years ago...

---

I dropped Greek and Latin in favor of sex even before... ~;p

Oh, don't begin -- you're reminding me of my gay Latin teacher.

Bah, too late.

But, let me get this straight. You like sex whilst following courses? :0



~Wiz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Wizard

But, let me get this straight. You like sex whilst following courses? :0

---

Team work is important. ~:joker:

gay latin teacher? not so bad. my (ex-)teacher is as old as the language. the damn bitch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerby

my (ex-)teacher is as old as the language. the damn bitch

---

Not bad. Not many can have a Latin native teacher... :laugh4:

:'D yeah i know. but I swear to god that woman was born in anticuaty. the looks likes she is about to vaporiza and turn in to dust...

The Wizard: Thank you for the easy explanation, obviously your grammatical knowledge is far superior to mine, ~:) but I always took Seleukeia to be fem. as a given; that’s why I wrote in one of my other posts; Quote: “Η Σελευκεια >Της Σελευκειας (γενικη indeed Indomeneas ). I have no idea as how to convey this in English so if I may try to paraphrase very very roughly : Arche=Empire, who’s Empire? Seleukeia’s = Arche SeleukeiaS” :balloon2:

Maybe I should’ve been more specific about what I don’t understand in Teleklos Archelaou’s post, so here it is: “What is being requested here by o megas is the fem., sing., genitive form of the noun that means Seleukeia, the smaller region, which does not refer to the whole of their realm.” What have I "requested", what is “Seleukeia, the smaller region” and what “which does not refer to the whole of their realm” means in this context? ~:confused: ~:eek:

Now, this is interesting.. ~;p Teleklos Archelaou again:“The only other option along these same lines would be Arche Seleukidon ("'Arche' of the Seleukids" so, if Arche Seleukeidon was an option and obviously you followed this: Oi Seleukeis (des?), Ton (omega) Seleukeidon (omega), doesn’t also this follow: H Seleukeia, Tis (eta) Seleukeias?!?! or is my Greek grammar really that rusty… :embarassed: :wall:

Anyway, never mind all this “trivia” ~D :devilish: lol, what about da big kahuna, da big mofo “ARCHE” is he still Da Man or should I say Da Woman since its fem... ~D :whip: :grin2: lol

O_Stratigos :bow:

PS: O_Megas is my nephew and he used my email address to register here some time ago, so I post using my TWC nick. Since he never posted and he is now in Greece, is there a way to change the registration from O_Megas to O_Stratigos? Thank you. ~:)

Ok... one last time...

Seleukeia is an adjective. Therefore it does not need to be possessive and therefore your request for a possessive form (genitivus) is void.

And regarding the thing about your proposition not referring to their entire realm; Teleklos is right. Your suggestion only refers to the area around the Seleukid capital of Seleukeia, in Mesopotamia. What we use refers to their entire realm.



~Wiz

Quote:“Seleukeia is an adjective. Therefore it does not need to be possessive and therefore your request for a possessive form (genitivus) is void.”

I submit that the syntax is correct – even if in meaning is slightly off – and humbly stand corrected. :2thumbsup: :bow:

Quote:“And regarding the thing about your proposition not referring to their entire realm; Teleklos is right. Your suggestion only refers to the area around the Seleukid capital of Seleukeia, in Mesopotamia. What we use refers to their entire realm.” ~:confused:

This one, I don’t know.. why does Arche Seleukeia refers to the whole realm, whereas Arche Seleukeias- ending with S- would refer only to a particular (small?) place? If you could elaborate on this- if is not too much trouble- I will be really grateful :charming: ~:)

Quote:“Ok... one last time...”

Maybe a bit more tolerance towards us-non-scholars-laymen-just-trying-to-understand-better-learn-something-and-if-posible-help-in-a-tiny-mini-lil-way-hoping-not-to-encounter-omnipotence, would be a good thing.. :sad: :disappointed:

O_Stratigos :bow:

ok, i think what teleklos and the wizard are trying to say is that "arche seleukeias" would refer to a small area, specifically the area around the city of seleukeia, whereas "arche seleukeia" is referring to the group of people (the seleukids).

a hypothetical analogy: let's say the australia is an empire. the suggestion of "arche seleukeias" is would be like calling australia "The Empire of Canberra", whereas "arche seleukeia" is akin to "The Australian Empire". don't know if that's accurate, because i don't speak or read a lick of greek, but i think that's what teleklos and the wizard are saying.. i think..


hmm.. that's probably more confusing than anything else.. nevermind. :no: :shrug: