Did Pyrhos really use Catapratchs?

[The Persian Cataphract]

As in so many cases dealing with archaic military terminology, we're confronted with the ugly fact people back then simply didn't have the same urge to classify everything into neat well-defined categories we have. Instead we often enough get lexigraphers scratching their heads over a term which meant something quite different a few hundred years ago, and wasn't exactly employed in a very consistent fashion during his day either...

You bet. I personally think it's the result of the relatively "elite" intellectual status ascribed to popular historians during the the course of modern history. They relied a lot on abstractions, as was typical of scholars who sought to summarize poorly understood cultures (E.g. George Rawlinson and his "The Seven Great Monarchies"), and it is not until past the age of Max Weber when we finally see social studies continuously reaching new heights and acquiring a somewhat more empirical method, not completely unlike the "Scientific Method". During this age, we begin to see entire circles of studies grow large and influential enough to propel research and maintain scholastics. This is where we usually observe the first signs of conflict. Deprecated, archaic, inaccurate or over-abstracted terminology, most likely firmly established during a long period of published scholastics. Trying to change the order of the day... It's like surfing towards a huge wave, it will end in a lesson of futility.

[Watchman]

Still, it's usually a good idea to establish a decent definition of what exactly you mean by the funny words you're using for referring to various obscure things. Or that's what they teach in my uni anyway.

...and yeah, even proper academicians used to be really lax about that.

[barabinni]

Are these heavily armored tarantine cavalry untis in EB ? I'm curious.

And i think it's entierly understandable that people would get confused over the whole naming of these units. But now today i'd be interested what makes a easter cat. a cat. but a wester heavily armored cavalry not cat.

cat. = Cataphract

[konny]

Are these heavily armored tarantine cavalry untis in EB ? I'm curious.

Yes

[Kongeslask]

I've seen it claimed that if Pyrrhos used cataphracts, they were probably Sarmatian mercenaries. EB includes a Sarmatian cavalry unit in which both the rider and the horse is heavily armoured.

[Watchman]

Pretty sure Sarmatians weren't yet anywhere near Hellas those days though. Scythians would be a better bet, but you'd imagine that kind of thing got mentioned somewhere...

[The General]

Are these heavily armored tarantine cavalry untis in EB ? I'm curious.

And i think it's entierly understandable that people would get confused over the whole naming of these units. But now today i'd be interested what makes a easter cat. a cat. but a wester heavily armored cavalry not cat.

cat. = Cataphract

Now how much time did you save by abbreviating 'cataphract', and how much time did you lose by explaining your abbreviation?

Silly people, trying to save two seconds of their time with silly, unnecessary abbreviations, bleh.

As for the subject itself, I myself, as a person with little actual information about the composition of Pyrrhus' invading force, greatly doubt the claims of Pyrrhus using cataphracts, as we tend these days to use the word, in his army, but that , rather, he simply indeed employed some perhaps more-armoured-than-usual cavalry, which lead to the use of word to describe these units.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

Now how much time did you save by abbreviating 'cataphract', and how much time did you lose by explaining your abbreviation?

Silly people, trying to save two seconds of their time with silly, unnecessary abbreviations, bleh.

Well said. Think of "w/" for "with" or "T7" instead of "777". Ridiculous.