Gaesatae Question

[paullus]

wow, that's amazing how you just twisted the account to fit your purposes. you quote two sections from a passage like its one quotation. here's the actual text, from Polybius 2.30, part left out by metalstrm in bold:

30 But when the javelineers advanced, as is their usage, from the ranks of the Roman legions and began to hurl their javelins in well-aimed volleys, the Celts in the rear ranks indeed were well protected by their trousers and cloaks, but it fell out far otherwise than they had expected with the naked men in front, and they found themselves in a very difficult and helpless predicament. For the Gaulish shield does not cover the whole body; so that their nakedness was a disadvantage, and the bigger they were the better chance had the missiles of going home. At length, unable to drive off the javelineers owing to the distance and the hail of javelins, and reduced to the utmost distress and perplexity, some of them, in their impotent rage, rushed wildly on the enemy and sacrificed their lives, while others, retreating step by step on the ranks of their comrades, threw them into disorder by their display of faint-heartedness. Thus was the spirit of the Gaesatae broken down by the javelineers; but the main body of the Insubres, Boii, and Taurisci, once the javelineers had withdrawn into the ranks and the Roman maniples attacked them, met the enemy and kept up a stubborn hand-to‑hand combat.

I wonder why you'd leave out that bit? Hmm...

A few things to notice:

1) The Romans refused to engage in hand-to-hand combat at first, but seem to have kept up a longer-than-usual period of ranged attack (see "at length"), perhaps out of hesitation to engage the gaesatae, who were, in fact, intimidating. The only other times I know of that the Romans used prolonged ranged fire to break an enemy was in Vulso's campaign against the Galatians and after denuding the Seleucid phalanx of its flanks at Magnesia.

2) not very helpful for your case to include that mention of the rage-filled Gaesatae rushing wildly and suicidally into the ranks of the Roman army. plenty of sane people do that every day. i know that when I'm in traffic jams I regularly see people leap from their cars and charge into the still-moving, oncoming lanes. yeah...anyway, some of Polybius language there is traditional language for the Gauls, but let us recall that what is traditional language for us was Polybius participating in the active shaping of how the ancient Greco-Romans understand the Gauls. All the references to passion and wildness are really directed mainly at the Gaesatae in the passage, not at the Gauls in general.

3) Also worth noting that, while Polybius says that many of the javelins struck home, he doesn't really talk about Gaesatae dying, he talks about them spending a looong time trying to run down the skirmishers, failing, returning to the ranks, taking more and more fire, and then eventually retiring into the other ranks or charging into the front lines of the waiting legions.

As far as being upset about no mentions of Gaesatae among the Galatians, get over it. Many of the leading Galatian warriors were, as far as we can tell, of the sort that we might label Gaesatae: powerful, wild warriors who preferred to fight nude and showed little regard for their own safety. There's no reason the Greeks should have known whether the front-line troops of the Galatian armies may or may not have been Gaesatae--how would they? What they did know is what they looked like and how they behaved in battle, and lo and behold, it matches really really well with what we know of the Gaesatae at Telamon. Our best depictions of what the Gaesatae might have looked like come from Egypt and Asia Minor, after all.

[Primative1]

The Gaesatae are EB's fantasy unit. Pretend supermen that never existed.

[Tellos Athenaios]

To begin with they aren't really supermen in battle, you know. True they do nicely in melee - but not exactly exceptional. One gets faaar better bang for the buck in Thrakia or India. Or just stick with about every (elite) phalanx unit...

EDIT: In any case they are outclassed by Kuarothoroi or Solduros or various Champion units from the Casse also.

[Primative1]

They trounced my Hastati 1:4 like supermen.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

They trounced my Hastati 1:4 like supermen.

Hastati are a very weak unit. They are young relatively untrained concripted men.

[Primative1]

Hastati are a very weak unit. They are young relatively untrained concripted men.

I dont buy it tho'. I read the thread about this and thought that the guy challenging the celt's stats won the arguement (Frostwulf?).

The only historical docs that mention the G's note that they lost. Telemon etc

ps I am of Celtic origin so would like it to have been different.

[cmacq]

Please, this is from another thread...

--------------------------------------
Not to draw too fine a point, but overall the Med types did appear to have used that term, Gaesatae, as an umbrella to denote all large groups of Keltic warriors employed by local states, paid in land and/or swag and bound by feudal obligations. Technically, after the 4tn century they appear to have been the engine or physical expression of Keltic cultural expansion in Spain, Italy, the Balkans, and Anatolia. Now, when I write Gaesatae I'm not implying the near 'Naked Fanatics (shock troops).' While the fanatics appear as companies among the ranks of Gaesatae, they did not define the Order or Class, per se.

As far as EB is concerned, the game seems to have it right, as only a relatively small element of most Keltic field formations consist of the 'Naked Fanatics.' To me its a case of the Rose by another name; or the numbers are right so it doesn't matter.

----------------------------------------

I don't understand why this topic returns so often? Also, the translations of Polybius used above are actually not all that good. And I will not address the drug issue as I do not deal well with fantasy.

[Primative1]

Do the Casse have a naked, Blue woad fanatic?

[Metalstrm]

Please, this is from another thread...

--------------------------------------
Not to draw too fine a point, but overall the Med types did appear to have used that term, Gaesatae, as an umbrella to denote all large groups of Keltic warriors employed by local states, paid in land and/or swag and bound by feudal obligations. Technically, after the 4tn century they appear to have been the engine or physical expression of Keltic cultural expansion in Spain, Italy, the Balkans, and Anatolia. Now, when I write Gaesatae I'm not implying the near 'Naked Fanatics (shock troops).' While the fanatics appear as companies among the ranks of Gaesatae, they did not define the Order or Class, per se.

As far as EB is concerned, the game seems to have it right, as only a relatively small element of most Keltic field formations consist of the 'Naked Fanatics.' To me its a case of the Rose by another name; or the numbers are right so it doesn't matter.

----------------------------------------

I don't understand why this topic returns so often? Also, the translations of Polybius used above are actually not all that good. And I will not address the drug issue as I do not deal well with fantasy.

I guess because the unit as a whole is quite esoteric in nature and the fact that the drug claim is unsubstantiated does not help it... Especially for inquisitive people (who happen to gravitate towards mods like these).

[paullus]

Hey listen Metalstrm, you're the one that brought up that passage and gaesatae behavior in battle, don't start acting like I'm diverting the purpose of the thread.

You said "they reacted as expected to a volley of javelins: they simply died" which we can all see from looking at the passage is the exact opposite of the truth. What is remarkable is that they didn't die. And whether part of them eventually retreated into the main body of troops or not, they apparently spent quite a while exposed to fire (like an afternoon at the park right? how long would you last butt naked under javelin fire?) and a good many of them rushed wildly into the Romans. Forgive me for correcting your mistake and including a very important part of the passage which you saw fit to omit.

You also said that rushing madly upon the enemy is a common Celtic action. But you don't really get that sort of essentialization of Celtic behavior by the Greeks until later than Telamon and Polybius. Celts/Galatai are supposed to be less organized, ferocious fighters, but you're essentializing the Celts in a way that even the ancients didn't do, not in histories at least.

edit: sheesh y'all post quickly. Lobf, I don't see why I have to deal with the drugs issue, I was addressing a particular post. I'm not a Celtic expert, someone has already noted that the use of drugs of some sort is a very common part of contemporary discourse about the Celts, so it likely has a basis in something (though of what era I don't know). That's all I know.

[lobf]

Hey listen Metalstrm, you're the one that brought up that passage and gaesatae behavior in battle, don't start acting like I'm diverting the purpose of the thread.

You said "they reacted as expected to a volley of javelins: they simply died" which we can all see from looking at the passage is the exact opposite of the truth. What is remarkable is that they didn't die. And whether part of them eventually retreated into the main body of troops or not, they apparently spent quite a while exposed to fire (like an afternoon at the park right? how long would you last butt naked under javelin fire?) and a good many of them rushed wildly into the Romans. Forgive me for correcting your mistake and including a very important part of the passage which you saw fit to omit.

You also said that rushing madly upon the enemy is a common Celtic action. But you don't really get that sort of essentialization of Celtic behavior by the Greeks until later than Telamon and Polybius. Celts/Galatai are supposed to be less organized, ferocious fighters, but you're essentializing the Celts in a way that even the ancients didn't do, not in histories at least.

Again, this is all irrelevant to the original question.

[Metalstrm]

Ok Paullus, first of all don't take it personally.

Secondly, I honestly did not include that part of the text for the reason you claimed before.

And I did not say I believed that Celts were a disorderly mass. I think I made it clear enough when I said that many of the writers (Romans) tried their best to give the Celts a barbaric nature. I'm not a Roman writer

Now, it's physically impossible not to die if struck by a javelin in the correct place. Drugs or no drugs. Arms and legs can do with some abuse, but not the chest. I would even go as far as saying a gut wound would immediately incapacitate you. And technically, in that part Polybius mentions neither that they died after being hit, nor that they lived. We can safely assume that those that remained alive only did so by hiding behind their large shields. I think that's plausible enough, isn't it?

[Digby Tatham Warter]

Hastati are a very weak unit. They are young relatively untrained concripted men.

I like to have an exotic inf unit in my Seleukid armies, originally I was planning on one of those Elite Thraikon Rhomba wielding noblemen units(I thought the 2 handed weapon was the Falx though?). But now I have tried a custom battle with these against the Galatian Wild Men that I can also now build.

On huge setting, medium difficulty, the 120 Galations wooped the 160 well armoured Elite Thraikons. I only let the Galations I was controlling get off 1 volley of Javs. The ground was flat, straight fight, no flanking, equal chevrons and upgrades.

Does this suggest that the armoured Elite Thraikons(with the double handed nasty weapon) are weaklings, or that the 2hit points of the Naked Galations gives an unfair advantage?

Anyway after the results, the Elite Thraikons are going to be replaced when I can get a few silver chevrons on my Galatian Wild Men, before they join my strongest army.

[Ludens]

Does this suggest that the armoured Elite Thraikons(with the double handed nasty weapon) are weaklings, or that the 2hit points of the Naked Galations gives an unfair advantage?

Thracian Rhomphaiaphoroi are a specialist anti-armour unit. Their huge blades are meant to smash armour, but cumbersome to wield so they are easily dodged (relatively speaking), especially when you are not weighed down by armour. Hence they don't perform well against unarmoured units, let along elite ones like the gaesatae.

[Metalstrm]

wow, that's amazing how you just twisted the account to fit your purposes. you quote two sections from a passage like its one quotation. here's the actual text, from Polybius 2.30, part left out by metalstrm in bold:

I wonder why you'd leave out that bit? Hmm...

No. I did separate them, and I had no intention of twisting anything, like you are saying, both directly and by implication. Read below.

A few things to notice:

1) The Romans refused to engage in hand-to-hand combat at first, but seem to have kept up a longer-than-usual period of ranged attack (see "at length"), perhaps out of hesitation to engage the gaesatae, who were, in fact, intimidating. The only other times I know of that the Romans used prolonged ranged fire to break an enemy was in Vulso's campaign against the Galatians and after denuding the Seleucid phalanx of its flanks at Magnesia.

2) not very helpful for your case to include that mention of the rage-filled Gaesatae rushing wildly and suicidally into the ranks of the Roman army. plenty of sane people do that every day. i know that when I'm in traffic jams I regularly see people leap from their cars and charge into the still-moving, oncoming lanes. yeah...anyway, some of Polybius language there is traditional language for the Gauls, but let us recall that what is traditional language for us was Polybius participating in the active shaping of how the ancient Greco-Romans understand the Gauls. All the references to passion and wildness are really directed mainly at the Gaesatae in the passage, not at the Gauls in general.

3) Also worth noting that, while Polybius says that many of the javelins struck home, he doesn't really talk about Gaesatae dying, he talks about them spending a looong time trying to run down the skirmishers, failing, returning to the ranks, taking more and more fire, and then eventually retiring into the other ranks or charging into the front lines of the waiting legions.

As far as being upset about no mentions of Gaesatae among the Galatians, get over it. Many of the leading Galatian warriors were, as far as we can tell, of the sort that we might label Gaesatae: powerful, wild warriors who preferred to fight nude and showed little regard for their own safety. There's no reason the Greeks should have known whether the front-line troops of the Galatian armies may or may not have been Gaesatae--how would they? What they did know is what they looked like and how they behaved in battle, and lo and behold, it matches really really well with what we know of the Gaesatae at Telamon. Our best depictions of what the Gaesatae might have looked like come from Egypt and Asia Minor, after all.

The part that I left out only leans towards my case, if anything. It mentions several things: 1) Some rushed the enemy madly. Something that we both know and was implied by ancient writers to be common to all Celts, but maybe especially so with the Gaesatae. I don't see how it helps your case because my case is not about them not going berserk. 2) Some retreated "faint-heartedly" (oh, where's the huge morale), even disturbing their comrades. 3) Their nakedness was a disadvantage against missiles, as common sense tells you.

As for the claim that Polybious does not mention them dying, you can safely assume that if you take a javelin to the carotid artery you will be down in a matter of seconds. The neck, upper chest, and head too for that matter. As for the other parts, I don't think (correct me if I'm wrong) that there exists a drug that will allow you to both fight effectively and energetically, and at the same time not feel the bite of a javelin as you tear it out of your gut with half of your abdomen hanging out. By the way, I'd expect someone like Polybious to mention it if something of the sort actually happened. It would only have added to the general Roman depiction of how barbaric a people the Celts were. The fact that he doesn't, only serves as evidence that they were nothing but ordinary men.

Back to the three points I mentioned above with respect to the part which I left out, all I can say is that I'm seeing this image of their almost-superhuman power of invincibility being worn away. Finally, my case has nothing to do with who and what the fighters at Telamon were. All I care about is the question that was posted initially, that is, where was the drug information obtained from. Hell, I'd accept it, even if you told me you were fantastically extrapolating between the gaps, but to present it as fact is something else.

[lobf]

wow, that's amazing how you just twisted the account to fit your purposes. you quote two sections from a passage like its one quotation. here's the actual text, from Polybius 2.30, part left out by metalstrm in bold

snip

You didn't address the drugs issue.

[Flying Pig]

The Romans refused to engage in hand-to-hand combat at first, but seem to have kept up a longer-than-usual period of ranged attack (see "at length"), perhaps out of hesitation to engage the gaesatae, who were, in fact, intimidating.

Didn't want to close in? After seeing the proud sons of Italia massacred by the...gaesatae, I don't wonder why. 3:1, historical composition of the romani for camillan era, and 4 gaesatae. As for Thermopylae, the Achmeniad (sp?) persians used them in 480, Herodotus says that some of the persians were naked, and while Proffessor Tom Holland calls that a metaphor for their light armour I believe that the force included Galatian gaesatae, and they, when called in, won the battle. The first two days of the battle were given to the Immortals and the medians., but on the third day Xerxes ordered the 'general advance'. Also, a wall of bronze death in a pass is not much fun to charge at. And we don't know the greek motives, the Hellenes SAY that they went out bbecause they were worried about a flank attack, but perhaps they were afraid of the Galatikoi. We don't know that the Telemon 'Gaesatae' were the real McCoy, but that they fought naked. Many Keltoi words have also degenerated for war units, take Ríglach (irish Gaelic), originally Hippeis, Machimoi etc, later veterans, now old people. If you say that the Ríglach at Stoke (150~) prove the superiority of the English, in fat they are not the Ríglach we know. Same for Gaesatae, in my opinion. I think the romans misinterpreted the word.

Gaesatae as I know it means a group of warriors, from a caste, that fought with just a large shield and a helmet (sometimes). They acted as heroic berserkers, but had discipline: Hannibal (the great discipline-worshipper) took them as bodyguards. They had a ceremonial drink made of some kind of drug (Polybius) and at least most of them used spears. They were the masterless (alliance in Keltoi implies servitude). Some warriors may have imitated them for psychological reasons. The analogy with Fiánna is a good one. I am even unsure if they had tribes, or were a military cult, though maybe godless.

This may have later degenerated, but that, I think, is EB's understanding as well.

[Elmetiacos]

Didn't want to close in? After seeing the proud sons of Italia massacred by the...gaesatae, I don't wonder why. 3:1, historical composition of the romani for camillan era, and 4 gaesatae. As for Thermopylae, the Achmeniad (sp?) persians used them in 480, Herodotus says that some of the persians were naked, and while Proffessor Tom Holland calls that a metaphor for their light armour I believe that the force included Galatian gaesatae, and they, when called in, won the battle.

Impossible: there were no Galatians in 480BCE. This was the late Halstatt era and no Celts had ventured East of Austria in significant numbers.

[Flying Pig]

Impossible: there were no Galatians in 480BCE. This was the late Halstatt era and no Celts had ventured East of Austria in significant numbers.

Probably not then! But there must have been some similar subcultures somewhere in Asia, no? Or mercs from Austria that had travlled through Hellas?