Factions and units - info and descriptions

[Urnamma]

Can you quote them on the sarissa? Preferably with reliable PRIMARY sources... for some reason I find modern scholars making up or assuming quite often to have sth new to write their own 'historical' books...Till today I haven't found a reliable primary source quoting who mentions sarissas or any pikes among the carthaginian phalanxes, only assumptions.

In the first Punic war, a Spartan general reorganized the Carthaginian army and itroduced the Sarissa. I forget which text I read it in... I don't think it's in English. I am absolutely sure they were pikemen though. Mommsen can almost be considered a primary source. He is THE God of Roman history. Besides that, he died before a book on history would have really made you much money. He did it for his love of classical antiquity.

Also known, and probably more apropriate, as Iberian Caetrati (Caetra was the name of the small round shield). Agree with the white tunic with purple trim... but why the red in the crest? Their helmets varied a LOT and oftenly didn't even have a crest. Those who had a red one were probably captured from a dead roman . For protection, they very usually had a circular bronze/metal plate for the chest (where the draws in it varied a lot), and when affordable bronze/metal greaves and a bronze/metal belt... here CA depicted them quite well with exception for the obvious need of a falcata instead of the gladius and the need of a throwing javelin. Here's a nice pic:

We'll go with your info, it's more informed than mine on this. The red crest was to differentiate them as Carthaginian troops. Don't remember where I heard that.

Where's scutum I hope you don't mean the rectangular roman one but a oval one like the celts' common shields. Same doubts with the crest. Imo, MAJOR POINTS: Overall less charge and speed than the Caetrati but more defense and discipline. Very important is changing their primary weapon to a spear, that they combined with the soliferra (all metal javelin) to pin the enemy's main battle line. The feared falcatas (most of them used these but some used more straight swords like the gladius) were used for close (disordered) combat afterwards or on ambushes. Finally, why distinguish them from the Iberian Scutari? They were one and the same, drawed exactly from the same locations.

Aymar said they should be differentiated somewhat. I was thinking along that line, and that Carthaginian officers would 'whip them into shape' so to speak when it comes to discipline and battle order.

Well, I have presented before my LARGE doubts of their changing of primary weapon to the sword since Polybius, the only existing main source of those days never mentions it when describing the armies at Cannae, only refering to the armor as being captured from the romans. Honestly I don't see how he would 'forget' that mention while he was talking about that exact subject. Don't misundertand me though since those african troops always carried with them a short sword from the start that became their primary weapon for the ambushes and for close/disordered combat.... But since you insist I can go on with you in this one, on the condition you remove the roman helmets! That was a blasphemy!

Roman helmets removed, sword kept. Give and take.

There's no description details, afaik, on what they really looked like so where did you based your changes on? To be honest I find them pretty cool with those helmets and large shields .

There aren't any descriptions, granted. But... The Corinthian helmet was out of general use in the timeperiod. Since they were pikemen, and not spearmen, they would have used the smaller shields. I like the way they look too, but not at the expense of them being somewhat realistic. I was tempted to call them Elite Citizen Infantry, but decided Sacred Band sounded cooler, and since we have no way of knowing either way, could stay. Aymar has the final say on this though...

And for the 3rd level comes my MAIN suggestion in units. Iberian Heavy Cav. It's an obvious blunder by CA since Long shield cav is ultimately a light cav. The suposedly 'Sacred Band Cavalry' units CA brags about that subsisted with Hannibal in his iberian/gaul/italian campaign for 17 years ... were Iberian. There are no records of 'Sacred Band Cavalry' crossing the Alps (aparts probably from the officer corps). All ancient descriptions mention of Iberian Heavy Cavalry and Numidian light cav doing so, to the total number of 6000 (which were what varies but it is common to say 4000 were Numidian). It were those 2000 Heavy Iberian Cav that at Cannae (virtually with no losses till there) deployed as the first line of Hannibal's left flank. The other Gallic medium/heavy cav deployed behind them. Considering the almost immediate routing/crush effect they performed on the roman flank, and later in the roman rear, one has no doubts of their high efficiency. I even dare to add that these cav units were Hannibal's favourite force. Till the day Hasdrubal (his brother in law) died and Hannibal took command in Iberia as general.... Hannibal was the cav commander and with extraordinary reputation.

Then lets get rid of the burghers and give them Iberian Cavalry! Describe them, man!

Nice description. Those should look a beauty . Is there any way to restrain the Sacred Band units to be buildable only in Carthage? That would be great to avoid high numbers of them in the fields. After all, as you said, they were "elite within an elite" ... and from the carthaginian homeland higher nobility I might add.

I think there is a way to make them only available in Carthage. Thanks for the compliment

I have a suggestion though to avoid overcrowding. We could mix this Balearic Light Infantry and the Iberian Caetrati since both were the top light infantry/skirmishers and both were 'Iberians'. Add the javelin(s) to the Caetrati, as they should, and we have a pretty similar unit.

I don't know about this... The Balearics were a seperate culture from the Iberians... And they were better skirmishers per se (insofar as we are only describing javelin throwing and skirmishing). This is probably our only contention..

[[cF]HanBaal]

In the first Punic war, a Spartan general reorganized the Carthaginian army and itroduced the Sarissa. I forget which text I read it in...

Don't bother searching mate. Go to the primary source (Polybius, the single existing main source of those times) that the other 'historians' base their assumptions from:

from: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...lybius/1*.html

"Just about this time there arrived at Carthage one of the recruiting-officers they had formerly dispatched to Greece, bringing a considerable number of soldiers and among them a certain Xanthippus of Lacedaemon, a man who had been brought up in the Spartan discipline, and had had a fair amount of military experience.
...
Acting on this authority, he sent the elephants forward and drew them up in a single line in front of the whole force, placing the Carthaginian phalanx at a suitable distance behind them. Some of the mercenaries he stationed on the right wing, while the most active he placed together with the cavalry in front of both wings."

According to the main sources, they formed a phalanx. Period. One could assume they were pike phalanxes but then I ask you to reflect on this:

"The evidence for the shields of Carthaginian citizen troops is summarised in "Armies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars", by Duncan Head:

It depends on the date of your army. The Sacred Band at Krimisos in 341 BC are described (in Plutarch's "Life of Timoleon") as wearing iron cuirasses and bronze helmets, with huge round white leather shields - probably plain white, with no blazons. Then there is a big gap lacking in reliable evidence, until the Third Roman-Punic War.

Between these points, Greek-style hoplite-shields do appear in Carthaginian art, so it is probable that the citizen troops carried these.

For Carthaginian citizen troops of the first and second Roman-Punic wars, I would be inclined to use hoplite shields, painted white, with individual blazons mixing Greek emblems and motifs taken from Carthaginian art such as horses, palm-trees, the "Hand of Baal" and the "Sign of Tanit"."


One thing seems to be sure, the 'Sacred Band' Inf had large shields which suggests the use of hoplites and not pikes since as you personally and correctly suggested, using pikes meant using smaller shields.

---

The red crest was to differentiate them as Carthaginian troops. Don't remember where I heard that.

Could be... but I would apreciate having something confirming it as historical. If not, I think a white or black crest would be more advisable to keep them in touch with the rest of the carthaginian army colours.

---

Aymar said they should be differentiated somewhat. I was thinking along that line, and that Carthaginian officers would 'whip them into shape' so to speak when it comes to discipline and battle order.

I tend to disagree. The Iberian (and Numidian, greek, gallic etc) batallions were hired/recruited along with their original 'field commanders'. The carthaginian officer corps would command above these 'field commanders' but not directly with the troops in most cases. Comprehensible regarding also the different languages that all these people had. I agree that the recruited ones could be forced to an higher degree of "discipline and battle order" but also remember that that would be compensated by the fact that they were fighting for another country. Concluding, trying to avoid overcrowding of similar units which obviously means more work.


---

Then lets get rid of the burghers and give them Iberian Cavalry! Describe them, man!

Lol... man ! I think we should keep both since there was a punic civic cavalry that is missing in the game. Something alongside the 'Long Shield Cav' but with perhaps more morale. About the Heavy Iberian Cav I will have to do some more research since their description is varied. Some even say they were heavily armoured so I'll have to look better into that.

---

I think there is a way to make them [SB units] only available in Carthage.
...
The suggestion about the temples producing both sacred bands... Remember, each sacred band was 'of a particular God'. Cavalry belonged to Astarte, Infantry belonged to Baal, essentially.

This is a problem then. If one makes as you say, it won't be able to train both types of units since we can only build one type of temple per city... and since the SB units should be only buildable in Carthage we have a problem. As I asked before... is it possible to allow building more than one temple per city? If not we should reconsider about puting both types of SB units trainable for the same temple.

---

I don't know about this... The Balearics were a seperate culture from the Iberians... And they were better skirmishers per se (insofar as we are only describing javelin throwing and skirmishing). This is probably our only contention..

Ok, we can put in the Balearic skirmishers. These would have slightly more skirmishing qualities like speed, stamina and ammo (javelins) than the Iberian Caetrati (aka 'Iberian Infantry') who would have better charge and melee attack/defense stats. The Lybian javelineers would remain the lower quality skirmishers.


===================

Yes, I'm suggesting four deities.

If possible, I'm with you then.

---

Well, I know the mainland Phoenicians had the sacrifices... I know they did happen at some point in Carthage too

The only somewhat suspicious evidence some people base their assertions on regarding the phoenicians are the quotes from the Bible:

"He [the late- seventh-century B.C. Judahite king Josiah] defiled Tophet, which is in the valley of Ben-hinnom, so that no one would make a son or a daughter pass through fire as an offering to Moloch" (2 Kings 23:10)."

So strong a connection has been presumed between such biblical passages and the Punic sanctuaries that these sacred grounds in Carthage and elsewhere are now called Tophets. The fact is, however, that the biblical passages do not mention sacrifice. They only refer to passing children through fire. And the fact is that during the early 1st millennium, cremation was introduced in Phoenicia and had spread to the colonies by the beginning of the 8th century (including Carthage). This continued for three centuries (alongside burial) and then burial started to be the main way, especially amongst the upper-classes who were quite exquisite during this ceremonies. Archaeology suggests that a ceremonial meal took place over the grave. Incense may have been burnt as well. The body was washed, perfumed and wrapped in cloth bandages. The wealthy were elaborately dressed and their clothes fastened with clothing pins (fibulae). Embalming was only used occasionally. Possessions were also buried, such as useful items of pottery, e.g. jugs, bottles, plates and cups. The dead wore jewellery - earrings, bracelets, rings and beads and rich luxury items, for example imports from Etruria. Sometimes were placed magic items such as ritual razors in the tomb, and also painted ostrich eggs to protect the dead during their journey to the afterlife. Also buried were items which the dead could use in the afterlife, so toys were buried with children, iron weapons and armour with men and cosmetic containers and weaving implements with women. Cemeteries were usually placed well away from settlements and with a natural barrier, such as water, in between. Children were usually buried in their own cemetery away from adult cemeteries.


If you read my conclusions from the other post, adding to these ceremonial burial rituals, which involved for sometime cremation (especially between the 8th century BC and the 5th century BC) what I see is children having their own special cemeteries due to their 'early recallings' by the Gods.

[Urnamma]

One thing seems to be sure, the 'Sacred Band' Inf had large shields which suggests the use of hoplites and not pikes since as you personally and correctly suggested, using pikes meant using smaller shields.

You're right. They did indeed use long spears, not pikes. My misreading came from my mistranslation of a particular passage last year. I got the case of the nouns wrong. One was in nominative, the other in accusative, you know the story with such things... There are Greek sources other than Polybius though. Most of them are fragmentary.

Lol... man ! I think we should keep both since there was a punic civic cavalry that is missing in the game. Something alongside the 'Long Shield Cav' but with perhaps more morale. About the Heavy Iberian Cav I will have to do some more research since their description is varied. Some even say they were heavily armoured so I'll have to look better into that.

Sweet. Maybe we should get rid of long shields?

This is a problem then. If one makes as you say, it won't be able to train both types of units since we can only build one type of temple per city... and since the SB units should be only buildable in Carthage we have a problem. As I asked before... is it possible to allow building more than one temple per city? If not we should reconsider about puting both types of SB units trainable for the same temple.

We could just have the sacred band infantry trainable by barracks. That'd eliminate the problem

Ok, we can put in the Balearic skirmishers. These would have slightly more skirmishing qualities like speed, stamina and ammo (javelins) than the Iberian Caetrati (aka 'Iberian Infantry') who would have better charge and melee attack/defense stats. The Lybian javelineers would remain the lower quality skirmishers.

Indeed.

The only somewhat suspicious evidence some people base their assertions on regarding the phoenicians are the quotes from the Bible:

Nope... There are some primary texts that support it. I really don't see why sacrificial sites would increase law and order though.. In any case, it doesn't matter. Let's find something to redo the secret police crap. Who ever heard of Punic Secret Police?

I tend to disagree. The Iberian (and Numidian, greek, gallic etc) batallions were hired/recruited along with their original 'field commanders'. The carthaginian officer corps would command above these 'field commanders' but not directly with the troops in most cases. Comprehensible regarding also the different languages that all these people had. I agree that the recruited ones could be forced to an higher degree of "discipline and battle order" but also remember that that would be compensated by the fact that they were fighting for another country. Concluding, trying to avoid overcrowding of similar units which obviously means more work.

So lower morale but better discipline?

[Ranika]

Is it possible for a temple to provide a bonus to only a single troop type, but not allow the building of that soldier? That way, you could make the Carthaginian sacred bands buildable by a regular barracks, but have the proper temple provide a bonus to the bands that would be trained for it? Or perhaps, a weapon bonus for the type of weapon the band would be using (do they all use heavy?)

[The_Emperor]

Some of the current units can be alter to fit since locals would have been used to fill out the ranks.

That is not true, the locals were so terrible and unreliable the Ptolemaic Dynasty never depended on them. With regard to the army, the greater bulk of troops were from the Macedonian land-owning classes, with very, very few natives in the Ptolemaic army, if there at all.

For all intensive purposes Egypt was an occupied naton, ruled over by Macedonians who made up the core of its army to prevent the temptation of rebellion.

[chemchok]

On the topic of the Ptolemies using local Egyptians in their army, I had posted this earlier in the "lost" thread in the Colosseum, the info is from the Encylopaedia Britannica...

-under Ptolemy IV

"Following the defection of one of Ptolemy's best commanders, Egypt's Syro-Palestinian territory, Coele Syria, was seriously threatened by Antiochus III, the Syrian Seleucid ruler. In 219, when the Seleucid ruler captured some of the coastal cities, Sosibius and the Ptolemaic court entered into delaying negotiations with the enemy, while the Ptolemaic army was reorganized and intensively drilled. So grave was the threat that for the first time under the Ptolemaic regime native Egyptians were enrolled into the infantry and cavalry and trained in phalanx tactics. In 218 the negotiations collapsed, and Antiochus renewed his advance, overrunning Ptolemy's forward defenses. In the spring of 217, however, Ptolemy's new army met the Seleucid forces near Raphia in southern Palestine, and with the help of the Egyptian phalanx Ptolemy was victorious. Although holding the initiative, the Egyptian king, on Sosibius' advice, negotiated a peace, and the Seleucid army withdrew from Coele Syria."

And under "The Ptolemies" on EB

"Native revolts in the south, which had been sporadic in the second half of the 3rd century, became serious and weakened the hold of the monarch on a vital part of the kingdom. These revolts, which produced native claimants to the kingship, are generally attributed to the native Egyptians' realization, after their contribution to the victory at Raphia, of their potential power."

Another interesting tidbit- after the revolts the Ptolemies began recieving their kingship in Thebes, the traditional seat of power of Egyptian royalty, rather than Alexandria.

[The_Emperor]

If what you say is true then the Ptolemies only ever pressed natives into the army when the situation was desperate and the Macedonian part of the army did not provide enough men...

As you say this only happened at a time of grave threat, and once it was over they soon regretted it with the ensuing rebellions.

it was the exception rather than the norm.

[chemchok]

If what you say is true

See Polybius 5.65; they raised and trained a force of 20,000 native Egyptian phalangites.

then the Ptolemies only ever pressed natives into the army when the situation was desperate and the Macedonian part of the army did not provide enough men...

As you say this only happened at a time of grave threat, and once it was over they soon regretted it with the ensuing rebellions.

it was the exception rather than the norm.

The point was that the Egyptians weren't so terrible and unreliable as to be completely useless. I'm sure the Ptolemies did regret their use after 217 BC, but I'd be extremely interested in any detailed and historical description of a Ptolemaic army's composition post-Raphia; to my knowledge one doesn't exist.

I don't see why it would be unreasonable to include an Egyptian phalanx unit for the Ptolemies, simply link them to one of the huge city buildings to reflect their late adoption. Their benefit would not be amazing stats, but a lower unit build cost and upkeep cost than the comparative Hellenic units availabe to the Ptolemies.

[Nestor]

I suspect, might be wrong but couldn't find anything else, that for the Seleucid Factions you are using these descriptions from Sharrukin:

THE SELEUCID EMPIRE

LEVY PIKEMEN; Pantodapoi
PHALANX PIKEMEN; Phalangite
SILVER SHIELD PIKEMEN;Argyraspides-Faction Ptolemy, Seleucid, Macedon, Pontus
SILVER SHIELD LEGIONARIES;Thureophoroi; Faction-Ptolemy, Seluecid, Macedon
CATAPHRACTS; (GOOD IF WE CAN USE THE SAME UNITS WITH DIFFERENT FACTION) as Parthian Lance Cataphract (no bow) Selucid's copied these from Sarmato-Persians. Long spear, sword worn over the right shoulder. Muscled iron cuirass with metal (iron) pteruges, laminated tubular arm and leg armor (iron) covering the feet but not the hands, helmet (iron) with metal mask in the form of a bearded face (the helmet could also have hair carved on to its top). The helmet could be crested with a tuft of black hair. Leather gauntlets could be worn over hands. Horse was draped in full iron armor with a brown leather strap running along the spine. Belting, bridle and straps would be brown leather decorated with bronze or silver fittings. The sword sheath and belt could have iron or bronze fittings as designs.
COMPANION CAVALRY; Heterairoi Cavalry
SCYTHED CHARIOTS; The wood would be a greyish-brown, with bands of red ornamentation, edged in white. The horses would be armored with headpiece (iron), poitrail (chest armor) in iron, and a large saddle blanket of leather or cloth (red?). The headpiece was topped by a tufted of hair. Collar and leather straps would be red, perhaps with white decorations to match the chariot body. The single crewmen was dressed similar to a Companion cavalryman except would wear a normal bronze helmet (ie, without the face mask) and might wear pant under tunic. The cuirass might be scale. Clothing colors as for infantry phalanx.

Well, from my Greek sources I cannot find anything that can support most of these units:

In peace time and war time the seleucids had a Royal Guard that was made from both cavalry and infantry.
Part of the Royal guards Cavalry were the "Hetairoi" meaning Companions (same name as the original Macedons). Another part was a unit of Syrrians, Frygians and Lydians (cavalry). Both of them or just the second part were/was called "Vasiliki Ili"=Royal Squadron.
The foot soldiers of the Royal Guard were named like the original Macedons "Hypaspistai".
There were also city guards (Macedons, Cretans, Myssians and others).

In war time there were

HEAVY INFANTRY
--"Phalanx" or "Macedons" exactly like the Macedonian phalanx.
At first all the soldiers were of Macedonian origin, later they included asians still fighting in the Macedonian way.
--Heavy mercenaries (Greeks, Galatians and may be others)

LIGHT INFANTRY ("evzonoi" as a generic name)
--Peltasts
--Javelinmen
--Archers
--Slingers

Part of them were Thracians (peltasts), Agrianes (javelinmen), Cretans (archers), Cypriots (slingers). These ethnic names were also used as technical terms: saying "thracians" you were actually refering to "peltasts".

Another part was made of various citizens of the Empire from different nations, that were forming separate units and were fighting according to each one's military tradition.

HEAVY CAVALRY
--"Agema" or "Agemata" ("agemata" is the plural of "agema") If they were one unit they should be called "Agema", if more than one "Agemata". They were men of Macedonian or Thessalian origin.
--"Cataphractoi" (meaning cataphracts in greek). They were Greek and Galatian mercenaries.
--(probably) "Nyssaioi" from the country of Margiani in between Parthia and Bactria (could be Nyssians in english, I'm not sure)

LIGHT CAVALRY
--"Tarantinoi" horse-javelinmen, meaning from Taras=Tarentum in latin (they weren't always from Taras but they kept the name).
--Thracians (not sure what exactly)
--Horse archers from various nations of the Empire.

They also used "scythed chariots" and indian elephants.

They had various kinds of siege equipment, ballistas, stone-throwers and units of engineers.

When we are talking about Macedons in the Royal Guard, the phalanx and the heavy cavalry they were not always from Macedonian origin. They were "clerouchoi" meaning in Greek that they were given a piece of land, royal land in this case ("clerouchoi" is not a military term). This was the way for the Seleucids to attract Macedons but if they couldn't get enough, "clerouchoi" could be other Greeks, may be even aborigines.

I have information about the other successor states but I'm afraid it's contradicting what I've seen in the thread.
Do you think this info can help?

EDIT: "Scythed chariots" not Scythian

[sharrukin]

I suspect, might be wrong but couldn't find anything else, that for the Seleucid Factions you are using these descriptions from Sharrukin:


Well, from my Greek sources I cannot find anything that can support most of these units:

In peace time and war time the seleucids had a Royal Guard that was made from both cavalry and infantry.
Part of the Royal guards Cavalry were the "Hetairoi" meaning Companions (same name as the original Macedons). Another part was a unit of Syrrians, Frygians and Lydians (cavalry). Both of them or just the second part were/was called "Vasiliki Ili"=Royal Squadron.
The foot soldiers of the Royal Guard were named like the original Macedons "Hypaspistai".
There were also city guards (Macedons, Cretans, Myssians and others).

In war time there were

HEAVY INFANTRY
--"Phalanx" or "Macedons" exactly like the Macedonian phalanx.
At first all the soldiers were of Macedonian origin, later they included asians still fighting in the Macedonian way.
--Heavy mercenaries (Greeks, Galatians and may be others)

LIGHT INFANTRY ("evzonoi" as a generic name)
--Peltasts
--Javelinmen
--Archers
--Slingers

Part of them were Thracians (peltasts), Agrianes (javelinmen), Cretans (archers), Cypriots (slingers). These ethnic names were also used as technical terms: saying "thracians" you were actually refering to "peltasts".

Another part was made of various citizens of the Empire from different nations, that were forming separate units and were fighting according to each one's military tradition.

HEAVY CAVALRY
--"Agema" or "Agemata" ("agemata" is the plural of "agema") If they were one unit they should be called "Agema", if more than one "Agemata". They were men of Macedonian or Thessalian origin.
--"Cataphractoi" (meaning cataphracts in greek). They were Greek and Galatian mercenaries.
--(probably) "Nyssaioi" from the country of Margiani in between Parthia and Bactria (could be Nyssians in english, I'm not sure)

LIGHT CAVALRY
--"Tarantinoi" horse-javelinmen, meaning from Taras=Tarentum in latin (they weren't always from Taras but they kept the name).
--Thracians (not sure what exactly)
--Horse archers from various nations of the Empire.

They also used "scythed chariots" and indian elephants.

They had various kinds of siege equipment, ballistas, stone-throwers and units of engineers.

When we are talking about Macedons in the Royal Guard, the phalanx and the heavy cavalry they were not always from Macedonian origin. They were "clerouchoi" meaning in Greek that they were given a piece of land, royal land in this case ("clerouchoi" is not a military term). This was the way for the Seleucids to attract Macedons but if they couldn't get enough, "clerouchoi" could be other Greeks, may be even aborigines.

I have information about the other successor states but I'm afraid it's contradicting what I've seen in the thread.
Do you think this info can help?

EDIT: "Scythed chariots" not Scythian

Unless I need new glasses most of what you have posted DOES support exactly what I posted!

Basilikon Agema;"Both of them or just the second part were/was called "Vasiliki Ili"=Royal Squadron."

Agema Foot Guards;"In peace time and war time the seleucids had a Royal Guard that was made from both cavalry and infantry."

Heteroi Cavalry; This was the new name of Companion Cavalry not Agema Royal Guards.

Hypaspistai-Argyraspides;"In addition to the pezhetairoi existed an elite formation of hypaspistai or shieldbearers. These men can almost certainly be identified with the socalled argyraspides or silvershields from the later part of Alexander's reign." Hypapists is the older term for these troops.


"later they included asians still fighting in the Macedonian way." These were called Pantodopoi. Levy Greeks were later called this as well.

"--"Cataphractoi" (meaning cataphracts in greek). They were Greek and Galatian mercenaries." Eastern heavy cavalry not Galatian mercenaries.

"("evzonoi" as a generic name)" Euzonoi-This may have meant light infantry or it may have meant a Thuroephoroi acting in a Peltast style of fighting as the term Peltast becomes rarer after the Alexandrian period when Agrianian(not the ethnic definition) tends to replace the term.

"--(probably) "Nyssaioi" from the country of Margiani in between Parthia and Bactria (could be Nyssians in english, I'm not sure)" The book may be refering to the Nisean breed of horse and by extention a heavy cavalry unit?

"("clerouchoi" is not a military term)." This was land granted for the express purpose of raising a regional army reserve and the troops so raised were called Cleruch Cavalry and Cleruch Infantry. How this is not to be considered a military term escapes me.

You and the information you have can certainly be helpful; But maybe a little less quick on the draw!

[Urnamma]

Maybe I can be of some help here

Vasiliki Ili

What language is this? Basilikoi Illoi would be the Greek.

"("clerouchoi" is not a military term)." This was land granted for the express purpose of raising a regional army reserve and the troops so raised were called Cleruch Cavalry and Cleruch Infantry. How this is not to be considered a military term escapes me.

Well, strictly speaking, Kleruchoi is not a military term at all. Kleros is a something drawn by lot, and echo is a verb meaning have. 'Having been aportioned by lot' is the strict meaning of Kleruchoi. In Ptolemaic Egypt or Selucid Syria it would mean that the men were given land by lot in reward for service. It was used in Athens for something entirely different.

Heteroi Cavalry

Should be Hetairoi. Interestingly enough a Hetairos could also be a homosexual prostitute. 'Companion' is diverse in its meaning.

Agema Foot Guards;"In peace time and war time the seleucids had a Royal Guard that was made from both cavalry and infantry."

He's right, it should be Agemata.

There is no 'C' in Greek. Kataphraktoi, please.

The Kataphraktoi were certainly not Gallatian. Greeks probably, but not Gallatians.

Euzonoi

Generally means light infantry. It's a fine and all encompasing term. Worthy of note, there may not have been Thracians at all in the Selucid army. Anyone who was a peltast could have been called a Thracian, just as anyone who was an archer in the Cretan style could be called a Cretan Archer.

"later they included asians still fighting in the Macedonian way." These were called Pantodopoi. Levy Greeks were later called this as well.

Perfectly correct. Pantodopoi is a great term. The Asiatic troops were never of good quality.

Nestor, if your sources are in Greek, I'd be delighted to sink my teeth into them. Are they online? If not, can you give me book titles?

[Nestor]

You and the information you have can certainly be helpful; But maybe a little less quick on the draw!

Sorry about the impression I gave to you, it wasn't my intention
I shall try first to clarify what I have found about the Selucid army. Bear in mind that I am translating from Greek into English while Greek is my native language. I will give the names also in Greek so that you can search about them.

PART ONE
ROYAL GUARDS
--"Βασιλική Ίλη"=?"Royal Ala/Squadron, Vasiliki Ili" cavalry (cannot really translate this, sorry ). Greek Historians think that it is not certain if this name could specify only the Syrrians, Phrygians, Lydians in the royal guard cavalry or it is more generic and covers all of the cavalry in the royal guard, including "Hetairoi" cavalry. This was actually the use of the term before the campaigns of Alexander the Great.
--"Εταίροι"="Hetairoi" cavalry. This was the new name for part of the Royal .......(?) cavalry.
--"Υπασπισταί"="Hypaspistai" infantry. I cannot find the term "argyraspidai" (I would be grateful if you can guide me). I read that Alexander the Great in 326 BC received golden and silver coated "panoplies" for 25000 men. The "Hypaspistai" were just 2000 so they couldn't be the only ones that used them and I didn't find any mention of a new infantry unit using them.

PART TWO
CAVALRY
i) HEAVY CAVALRY
--"Αγήματα"="Agemata" of Macedonian or Thessalian origin
--"Κατάφρακτοι"="Kataphraktoi" (thanx URNAMMA ) Greeks and Galatians (I could easily forget about the Galatians )
--"Νυσαίοι" from Margiani. They were riding big horses. Greek Historians are not certain about them. (They were from the city "Νύσα" in Margiani. Their name and the name of their city looks suspiciously like "Διόνυσος"="Dionysus". In their tradition they were descendants of his army from the time the Greek god campaigned in Asia).

ii) LIGHT CAVALRY
--"Ταραντίνοι"="Tarantinoi" horse-javelinmen, not all of them actually from "Τάρας"="Taras"="Tarentum"
--"Ιπποτοξόται"="Hippotoxotai(?)"="Horse Archers" from various nations of the empire.
--"Θράκαι"="Thracians" probably "prodromoi" armed with a "sarissa". "Πρόδρομοι"="Prodromoi" was just a pronoun in Greek for the cavalry that was "in front" of the main cavalry forces.

PART THREE
INFANTRY
i) HEAVY INFANTRY
--"Φάλαγξ"="Phalanx" or "Μακεδόνες"="Macedons". It's a unit exactly like the "Φάλαγξ Πεζεταίρων"="Phalanx of Pezhetairoi" of Macedon (could it be "pezetairoi"? looks more like the Greek word) They were refering to them just with a shortened name ("Phalanx") or with the ethnic name ("Macedons").
--Mercenary "Οπλίται"="Hoplites" Greeks, Galatians and others (I can again forget I have ever read about Galatians )

ii) LIGHT INFANTRY ("evzonoi")
--"Θράκαι"="Thracians"="Peltasts"
--"Κρήται"="Cretans"="Archers"
--"Αγριάναι"="Agrianes"="Javelinmen"
--"Κύπριοι"="Cypriots"="Slingers"
They were using the ethnic name to express the way they were fighting. Probably the original units where from those regions but they would still call the "Archers" in their army: "Cretans" even if they were from other regions.

PART FOUR
VARIOUS
--Indian elephants
--Scythed chariots ("Δρεπανηφόρα άρματα")
---------------------------------------------------------------
Now, about some specific differences I see in the naming of some units, or misunderstandings (Please, don't burn me, it's just a discussion )

Agema Foot Guards

Didn't find anything about an "agema" on foot

Heteroi Cavalry; This was the new name of Companion Cavalry not Agema Royal Guards

Didn't find anything about "Agema Royal Guards". In my readings they are two different things: "agemata"=ordinary heavy cavalry made of Macedons and Thracians AND "Royal Guards" cavalry="Vasiliki or Basiliki Ili" if it was a generic term or "Royal Guards" cavalry="Vasiliki Ili"+"Hetairoi" if the term is specific.
"Companions" is just a translation of the word "Hetairoi", it doesn't exist in Greek.

Hypaspistai-Argyraspides;"In addition to the pezhetairoi existed an elite formation of hypaspistai or shieldbearers. These men can almost certainly be identified with the socalled argyraspides or silvershields from the later part of Alexander's reign." Hypapists is the older term for these troops

I wrote a few things about them but I suspect that we have a misunderstanding because in Greek we can use the word "argyraspides" as a pronoun for "Hypaspistai". Then, we can shorten our phrase by using the same word as a noun if everybody knows who we are refering to.

"("clerouchoi" is not a military term)." This was land granted for the express purpose of raising a regional army reserve and the troops so raised were called Cleruch Cavalry and Cleruch Infantry. How this is not to be considered a military term escapes me.

"Clerouchoi" could be soldiers in the "Vasiliki Ili-Hetairoi" cavalry OR in the "Agemata" OR in the "Phalanx". I didn't say they are not in the army, I'm just saying that they are not a specific unit.

What language is this? Basilikoi Illoi would be the Greek

Βασιλική Ίλη

Should be Hetairoi. Interestingly enough a Hetairos could also be a homosexual prostitute. 'Companion' is diverse in its meaning

I think I wrote "Hetairoi" in the first place, but anyway, there's something else I would like to point out: "Hetaira" was an heterosexual prostitute much like a geisha in Japan. They were educated women. One of them was "Aspasia", the wife of Pericles, the leader of the Athenians in the Golden Era of Athens, when Acropolis was built

There is no 'C' in Greek. Kataphraktoi, please

There was actually a "c" in Greek. It was the "sigma". Originally they were writing it as "c", it was used by the Byzantines and you can still, rarely, find it in modern greek writing. "Kataphraktoi" looks much better though!

Generally means light infantry. It's a fine and all encompasing term. Worthy of note, there may not have been Thracians at all in the Selucid army. Anyone who was a peltast could have been called a Thracian, just as anyone who was an archer in the Cretan style could be called a Cretan Archer.

No difference there. Could make the modificatition easier by using units that can exist in other factions.

Perfectly correct. Pantodopoi is a great term. The Asiatic troops were never of good quality

Pantodapoi actually means "from everywhere". I didn't find the term, sorry. It's also a pronoun and this could again cause problems. I suspect the original phrase was "pantodapoi Hoplitai"=Hoplites from everywhere.

Nestor, if your sources are in Greek, I'd be delighted to sink my teeth into them. Are they online? If not, can you give me book titles?

My sources are Greek History books about Alexander the Great and the successor states. They mostly use Arriano, Diodoro, Curtius and others trying to explain the inconsistencies. What I found on the Internet is just confusing.

No hard feelings I hope. I cannot oblige anyone to accept my suggestions and I wouldn't want to. They are posted here just because I find the forums more interesting than the game.

EDIT: "Thureophoroi", soldiers using a shield that looks like a door ("Θύρα"-"Thura") The common use was to describe the roman legionaries. Noone would like the name for them, don't you think so?

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Hey, Nestor!!! Care to join EB?

[DeadRunner]

I found a web pag with several info about greek ,persian army
http://monolith.dnsalias.org/~marsar...ory/index.html

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I found a web pag with several info about greek ,persian army
http://monolith.dnsalias.org/~marsar...ory/index.html

Great link, DeadRunner!!

[DeadRunner]

thx m8

http://members.tripod.com/~S_van_Dorst/Alexander.html

there is another with roman like to this one have some kind of army termology of greek and roman army´s

[DeadRunner]

http://www.redrampant.com/

this one looks like nice and is roman
and have maps

[Somerled]

For those who are interested, below is a link to an excellent monograph on the Celt-Iberians and their martial culture.

http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/celtic/ekelt...lorrio_6_2.pdf

[Stormy]

More Here

[iberian]

just so you know the iberian light infantry wore a white tunic, with SCARLET borders, and a pectoral, greaves.
Then either a linen hood with a red creast (usually) or a bronze thracian helmet.

[Spoofa]

wowzah what a thread revival... lol

[Sarcasm]

just so you know the iberian light infantry wore a white tunic, with SCARLET borders, and a pectoral, greaves.
Then either a linen hood with a red creast (usually) or a bronze thracian helmet.

Though I admire your necromantic skills, what in heaven's name are you going on about? Have you even played the mod to see if there are any men that look like that description?