Gaesatae Question

[lobf]

This was brought up briefly at the end of the Ugly unit topic, but that was closed for other reasons before anyone could shed any light.

Anyways, I was wondering if anyone currently on the EB team knew where the claim for the Gaesatae's drugs use comes from? I'm certainly not questioning that there were naked badasses in that day, I was just curious as to that particular feature of the unit. Thanks for your time.

[abou]

Please use the search function. This topic has been answered several times before and the information is easily found.

[Metalstrm]

Thing is as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) only Polybius mentions the Gaesatae. And I've looked at what he wrote. Nowhere does he mention drugs, so the information must come from another source, if it exists at all. And the search function does not help with this question either.

[lobf]

I searched here and Google.

[General Appo]

Then you are inept at searching. And please, let it stop at that, don´t take these... investigations any further, or we may have to take action to... prevent unwanted facts from surfacing. *shifty eyes* *tries to wink to Hax, but can´t stop the shifting* Ah, it´s happening already!!

[abou]

I searched here and Google.

I didn't know that something had to appear on Google in order for it to exist.

[lobf]

Me neither. My point is just that normal methods of obtaining this information have failed, so I figured I'd ask you guys.

[Hax]

*shifty eyes* *tries to wink to Hax, but can´t stop the shifting*

Ah..yes..


=====

Did you know that with some spiders, the penis is located on one of their legs?

[Elmetiacos]

I didn't know that something had to appear on Google in order for it to exist.

Nothing is "on Google". Google searches the web, it isn't a collection of registered sites like you used to get in the mid 1990s.

[Midnj]

You could, you know, point him to the "Celtic Overpowered!" thread rather than being a douche about it.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=1825398

Link probably won't load. It wouldn't load for me and I had to view it in Google cache.

EDIT: of course, in the end that thread doesn't seem to answer the specific question asked by the OP in this thread... nor did any of the other search results I perused.

[General Appo]

Ah..yes..

Dammit Hax, havn´t you read the New Faction thread lately. I suggest you go and so right now, or else... *shifty eyes*

[Primative1]

Loads fo me ok using Opera, and Frostwulf makes some good points.

[lobf]

Did you miss the part in the description of the Greeks vs. Celts bout in Thermopylae ? The part where some Celts are claimed to have pulled out javelins from their own wounds and thrown them back ? For that matter, IIRC the description also seemed to suggest they were rather difficult to convince to lie down and die of their wounds too, and seemed to fight in some sort of berserk fury... and the way the account flows sort of associates this stuff with the naked warriors.

So this seems to be the basis. Can anyone tell me which account this is?

[Frostwulf]

So this seems to be the basis. Can anyone tell me which account this is?

This is from the battle of Thermopylae when the 'Celts' invaded Greece. Brief description of the battle from wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_...e_%28279_BC%29

The part Watchman is bringing up is from here:
http://www.theoi.com/Text/Pausanias10B.html

You will not find any sources,citations or any other form of information as to the basis of the EB Gaesatae.

Here is one thread with Ranika on the Gaesatae:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/archi...p/t-58846.html

He talks of the Gaesatae but no where mentions the sources.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Nothing is "on Google". Google searches the web, it isn't a collection of registered sites like you used to get in the mid 1990s.

Still to appear on means something different from to be on. In any case if you want to search for something like that you might be better off by a combinating of a meta-crawler and regexp searches?

[Fenrhyl]

I searched too for the source, because this "magic potion stuff" also appears in a french "comic strip" series Called "Alix" which setting is the Caesar/pompeius war. In one of those, vercingetorix escapes from his jail and has a shot of this potion in an attempt to kill caesar.
It is commonly rfered to in Gaul history but i can't find any indication about it, be it in french or english.

[NeoSpartan]

[Metalstrm]

Yes the question was pure and simple: On which sources did the team base the claim? Nobody needs to hear something like "use the search button", especially when the reply is not there. Furthermore, we are not out to hurt anybody's feelings. Moreover, if one wants to be scientific about it, he would immediately reply with the proper proof if someone doubts his claim, and not act all pissed off. Even if it has to be done a thousand times. Or well, if it's bugging me that much I would sticky it to be visible by everyone.

Ok, maybe I got a bit carried off there, and I'm not referring to anyone in the EB team (I don't even know who all the EB members are), but to those persons that answered curtly with the typical search reply. The answer is not in the previous posts.

[Fenrhyl]

The "brew" used by gaesatae is used in Asteric & Obélix, Alix, EB and other creative work. I can't imagine all those creators took the idea from nowhere. There IS a source.

Where ?

...

[Metalstrm]

The "brew" used by gaesatae is used in Asteric & Obélix, Alix, EB and other creative work. I can't imagine all those creators took the idea from nowhere. There IS a source.

Where ?

...

Probably old wives' tales. I repeat, as far as I know, only Polybius talks of the Gaesatae. And neither does he mention any drug, nor that they fought with the others at Thermopylae. I have the impression from reading the last bit of that 20 page long thread that this double hitpoint/berserk drug thing is based on some Galatians (not Gaesatae) who would continue fighting after being struck by javelins. There are two false conclusions there..

Edit: I found a mention in Plutarch. But it's only a tale of Roman success and the physical attributes of the Gaesatae are not mentioned, except that they were tall.

Polybius says "Very terrifying too were the appearance and the gestures of the naked warriors in front, all in the prime of life, and finely built men." That they frightened the enemy is a given.

But look here: "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."

And to top it all off, "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."

This implies that the Gaesatae reacted as expected to a volley of javelins: they simply died. You could say that maybe Polybious is twisting the facts, but there are no other facts to go by. This is the only direct mention of the Gaesatae behaviour in battle.

[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.

[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.

[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).