A Question for the Historians

[Ranika]

Your snideness doesn't help; further, little of it will be found in 'links', the internet is imbecile-ridden, one has to do solid research for themselves. Anyway, a good place to start; the 'testudo' is mentioned in De Bello Gallico. He mentions that the Belgae use a similar formation to near a fortified position, like a gatehouse, to set it on fire. Numerous Celtic metalworks and carvings, most notably one of the Knowth carvings of Ireland seems to depict men entering this position (though the Knowth one is confusing, since most of those etchings are about the passage of time and illustrate the Celtic calendar). There's also mention of dense ordered formations among the Helvetii, the discipline of Nervii and the Soldurii of the Aquitanes. Metalworks from the Nantes dig depict Celtic warriors rolling beneath lines of spearmen to stab them in the gut, and considering Pergamon's response to the Galatian settlement was to developed a phalanx that had a second row of pikes that were lower, it seems the Galatians did this too (probably used to credit against the Macedonians, who they'd earlier annihilated in battle).

There's also logic; Celts used standards, constantly. It's not some mystery; the sheer number of them found in digs all over Europe and the south of Britain speaks to their importance. The logic behind the use of multiple standards in a battle is to give specific groups something to follow in the hectic nature of the fight. They must then be divided into specific groups, and logic again dictates they be divided by; basic equipment (that is, equipment that serves more or less the same purpose; long shields with long shields {though of different shapes} and the like, because if they weren't, they'd serve no real purpose as a 'unit', unless it was specific equipment paired with other specific equipment {like Germanic cavalry that had a footman with their horses; same basic equipment between two types of soldiers}), experience, and probably (in Celtic as well as other societies) age. While you may be able to argue for a more disorganized force in the more tribal northeastern European tribes of Celts, and the midland Britons, who were far more based around warbands, the mid-to-late Celts of Gaul and southern Britain were clearly based around units.

Further, one can just look at Galatia. Galatian mercenaries were used constantly. While they could be outfitted by their employers, they were always just outfitted in quality versions of what they were used to fighting with. This spawned specific units of Galatians, still intended to fight in the typical Galatian manner, and they did quite well. No one would've found roving mobs so important, but everyone near them employed them because of their ability to counter Hellenic warfare (which the successors and their nearby contemporaries, and thereby enemies, generally fought in the manner of).

[jerby]

so what about field-tactics?
i heard the sweboz generally ambushed and skirmished. and that both teh aedui and sweboz (and a lot of otehr tribes/confederations) like cav-flanking..
but anything else?

[Ranika]

Sapping was apparently a part of life for many Celts; you see, directly assaulting the wall of an oppida is generally an exercise in futility. Just look at the Romans; rather than assault them unless they absolutely had to, they would siege them out. Celtic legend makes mention of sapping at different points; I'm aware it's only legend, but bare in mind that it's all generally based on actual events, passed through the lense of myth, and digging a hole under a wall to make it collapse isn't very 'mythic', so likely a leftover of the original story.

Also, when employing chariots, Celts would use them to disarray dense formations (again proof that they understood formations, or they'd not have developed methods of disorienting them; this tactic was well recorded by Romans). They would drive their chariots into dense groups of men (who would get out of the way or be crushed), to break apart the formation and create gaps that could be exploited by infantry. Just an FYI here; in EB, that is the main purpose of Celtic chariots (though they also carry javelins). They're not so much a great weapon in their own intention, but rather a primer for infantry to fill gaps in an enemy formation. In real life, they also delivered nobles to combat, and allowed them to escape quickly if the need arose, but, we can't imitate that part. However, their potential as a missile platform and their disorientation role will be in game.

Also, a lot of psychological warfare; Celts had a propensity to sing while marching or before battle (the Celtic warcry in game may include some singing, or we may use one of the other sounds for it, don't know yet), Germans would chant in a raising tone (baritus, which will also be included). Back to chariots for a moment; Celtic chariots, in a group, can make a very disturbing, disorienting noise; it's unnerving enough to men (even Romans at times admitted their men felt unnerved by the sound), but it can cause horses to simply bolt if they're unused to the sound. And it's not just psychological warfare in terms of frightening an enemy, but of getting themselves ready to fight. Celts (being what I know, I'll focus) used loud horns (carnyx), beat drums, and would sing, to both disorient the enemy, and to encourage one another. Britons (and earlier, other Celts; by this point, few others still painted themselves, except the Pictones of Gaul, and some alpine demi-Celts) painted themselves out of religious belief that the designs offered them certain protections (depending on what designs were on them, supposedly), which was, in real-world terms, translated to a belief that they were protected better from enemies.

Many barbarians were recorded as using wedge-formations (Germans particularly, but also quite a number of others, including Celts and Iberians). These weren't always the same; sometimes inverted, sometimes wider, sometimes more narrow. The concept of a forward wedge was simple; literally wedge the enemy formation into two parts, disuniting them, and making them easier to cut apart. The inverted wedge was based around a concept of trying to lead the enemy into the center, and then wheel in the edges of the wedge to their flanks.

[Reverend Joe]

Just an FYI here; in EB, that is the main purpose of Celtic chariots (though they also carry javelins). They're not so much a great weapon in their own intention, but rather a primer for infantry to fill gaps in an enemy formation. In real life, they also delivered nobles to combat, and allowed them to escape quickly if the need arose, but, we can't imitate that part. However, their potential as a missile platform and their disorientation role will be in game.

This is not a question regerding history, but since it came up: will the chariots in EB be vulnerable to cavalry, or is that ability hardcoded? I remember that, for a while, I experimented with trying to make them vulnerable to cavalry, but all I knew how to do was adjust attack and defense values; even with their attack reduced to 1, they still dominated the battlefield when pitted against cavalry.

Actually, were chariots vulnerable to cavalry, or is that a myth too?

[Ranika]

Chariots are quite vulnerable at their flanks from cavalry, but the true bane of a chariot is light infantry; light infantry can overwhelm them. This can be imitated by giving light infantry a bonus against chariots (one can give penalties and bonuses versus certain types of mounts), representing their ability to use their ability to use their agility to essentially jump at the chariots and yank the riders down, and kill them. Of course, chariots are also vulnerable to missiles and longspears, like most cavalry.

[the_handsome_viking]

Your snideness doesn't help; further, little of it will be found in 'links', the internet is imbecile-ridden, one has to do solid research for themselves.

My snideness? I was just asking for links on a subject that im genuinely interested in and so that I can read the information for myself. whats snide about that?

theres no doubt in my mind that the celts used the above mentioned tactics in battle, it would really surprise me if warrior cultures didnt produce such things.

however that said, your general attitude is (unfortunatly) similar to the attitudes of people that claim the pyramids were built by aliens.

person1" dont you know that aliens built the pyramids?"

person2" really? can i see some links or something that confirms that?"

person1" STOP BEING SNIDE YOU ASSHOLE, THE INTERNET IS FULL OF LIES ANYWAY"

"person2"um ok"

P.S. if you thought I was being snide souly on the use of the word "magical" in my previous post, I used the word MAGICAL because I was actually quite excited to learn of these formations and tactics used by the celts.

[Ranika]

My snideness? I was just asking for links on a subject that im genuinely interested in and so that I can read the information for myself. whats snide about that?

theres no doubt in my mind that the celts used the above mentioned tactics in battle, it would really surprise me if warrior cultures didnt produce such things.

however that said, your general attitude is (unfortunatly) similar to the attitudes of people that claim the pyramids were built by aliens.

person1" dont you know that aliens built the pyramids?"

person2" really? can i see some links or something that confirms that?"

person1" STOP BEING SNIDE YOU ASSHOLE, THE INTERNET IS FULL OF LIES ANYWAY"

"person2"um ok"

P.S. if you thought I was being snide souly on the use of the word "magical" in my previous post, I used the word MAGICAL because I was actually quite excited to learn of these formations and tactics used by the celts.

Yes, it was the use of 'magical', it's not a very serious sounding word. It sounds more that of some snarky individual who thinks everyone else is an idiot. So yes, you sounded snide, and your reply more so; I apologize for not being able to tell the difference though, as English is not my first language. As far as my understanding, your wording was very rude, and your reply substantially more. Also, to be a contrarian, the internet IS full of lies (just look at how many sites claim the Celts came from Ireland; that'd sure surprise the original Keltoi, in central and eastern Europe). But my point was not about lies, but lack of information. All Celtic sites tend to regurgitate the same information, a lot of which is unsupplemented by recent data or flatly out of date by as much as a few decades. The internet is horrendous for proper information beyond the utter basics of what one needs. At best, you can find reports and the like on recent finds, but hardly ever decent examination of the objects within (and 'they found chunks of carnyxes, swords, and shields' in a report is not that illuminating).

[the_handsome_viking]

Yes, it was the use of 'magical', it's not a very serious sounding word. It sounds more that of some snarky individual who thinks everyone else is an idiot. So yes, you sounded snide, and your reply more so; I apologize for not being able to tell the difference though, as English is not my first language. As far as my understanding, your wording was very rude, and your reply substantially more. Also, to be a contrarian, the internet IS full of lies (just look at how many sites claim the Celts came from Ireland; that'd sure surprise the original Keltoi, in central and eastern Europe). But my point was not about lies, but lack of information. All Celtic sites tend to regurgitate the same information, a lot of which is unsupplemented by recent data or flatly out of date by as much as a few decades. The internet is horrendous for proper information beyond the utter basics of what one needs. At best, you can find reports and the like on recent finds, but hardly ever decent examination of the objects within (and 'they found chunks of carnyxes, swords, and shields' in a report is not that illuminating).

I too appologize for my snide second comment and original comment.
I should have looked over my first comment and seen that it could be interprited as a rude comment, so yeah , im sorry =)

and yes, It does appear that there is a lot of misinformation about the celts in particular on the net, which is a pitty. however this doesnt stop me looking for accurate information on the celts, and with things like wikipedia rapidly on the rise, I have a lot of faith that the truth will prevail in the end.

perhaps someone with your education could contribute to wikipedia.com or some other encyclopedia site once EB has been completed, I would enjoy reading it

[Kikosemmek]

Aye, I always love reading Ranika's mini - lectures about Celts. I'm saddened they don't have an AP history class for the classical age. Should it not at least be noted that it wasn't Voltaire that invented checks and balances? The Aedui had such a system running with their government, that was more efficient and democratic than even the Carthaginian or Roman "republics," which were completely dominated by the wealthiest of the wealthy, the scum of the human race.

The ancient times - dark ages have got to be my favourite times in history to study and read about. I'm already thinking about minoring in history, and that was inspired by EB. Thanks guys :)

[jerby]

Celts forming "testudo's"? wow...
were they trained to be able to do it? or was it just an occasional happening?
weasn't it reasoanbly ineffective with those ovular shields?

[Angadil]

It seems it is by no means impossible to form a testudo with oval shields. Perhaps, you just need to huddle closer. You might want to check this pic (and a few ohers) in Fectio's re-enactment site.

And here is a pdf of the scholarly paper on the formation that the re-enactors were replicating. The Internet is indeed, as Ranika says, full of bs., but now and then you do find useful stuff.

[Ranika]

Celts forming "testudo's"? wow...
were they trained to be able to do it? or was it just an occasional happening?
weasn't it reasoanbly ineffective with those ovular shields?

It wasn't a 'testudo', perse, but a similar formation. And one could logically close gaps with such a form, but it's mainly mentioned in relation to Belgae, and Belgae didn't use oval shields near as often (save cavalry); they used hexagonal shields, which can more easily form a very well sealed position; makes sense, the Belgae probably engaged in more sapping and other such work than other Celts, and likely had more of a reason to use equipment better suited to keep them covered.

Other Celts, however, do show such things in metalwork and stonework, and it likely served the same, or a similar purpose. It would hardly be ineffective, a Celtic oval shield overlapping additional shields could form quite a well defended 'shell' from arrows, and would be useful for nearing fortified positions, like, perhaps, the gate of a fortress (and Gallic forts were very well-fortified; it seems likely such a manuever developed in response to fortifications and the necessity to get close and set gates and gatehouses aflame). Now, would it be effective as the Roman testudo? Unlikely; their shields still wouldn't form as tight a seal, except for the Belgae, probably, but that doesn't mean it'd be 'ineffective'; it would surely stop many projectiles.

[the_handsome_viking]

http://digilander.libero.it/jackdani...ico/book_2.htm

"caes.gal.2.6": [2.6] There was a town of the Remi, by name Bibrax, eight miles distant from this camp. This the Belgae on their march began to attack
with great vigor. [The assault] was with difficulty sustained for that day. The Gauls' mode of besieging is the same as that of the Belgae: when after having
drawn a large number of men around the whole of the fortifications, stones have begun to be cast against the wall on all sides, and the wall has been
stripped of its defenders, [then], forming a testudo, they advance to the gates and undermine the wall: which was easily effected on this occasion; for while
so large a number were casting stones and darts, no one was able to maintain his position upon the wall. When night had put an end to the assault, Iccius,
who was then in command of the town, one of the Remi, a man of the highest rank and influence among his people, and one of those who had come to
Caesar as embassador [to sue] for peace, sends messengers to him, [to report] "That, unless assistance were sent to him he could not hold out any
longer."