Seleucid and Ptolemaic recruitment in the Levant, Roman req. in Hellas/Makedonia

[Kongeslask]

Something strange I noticed after taking the main egyptian provinces from the Ptolemids: I was able to use their MIC immediately, which is apparently intended, but the recruitment options are a bit puzzling. Firstly there is the fact that I can recruit "Kleruchoi Phalangitai" in Memhpis, their description suggesting that soldiers of this particular class were found primarily in Egypt and Syria, and were more numerous than the Pezhetairoi. So why is this unit not available in Syria? And why can't the Seleucids recruit the other types of kleruchoi units or machimoi for that matter? It seems reasonable that if they managed to seize Egypt the Seleucids would incorporate the ptolemaic military system into their own and recruit cavalry and shock infantry from the hellenic and galatian populations, not merely hellenic phalangites from a lower class than the pezhetairoi.

Installing type II government in Salamis and Tarsos as the Ptolemids and building level 5 factional MIC grants three kinds of elite Kleurochoi: galatians, agema phalanx and agema cavalry. Is this intentional?

As for the romans, it seems that installing type IV government and building the highest regional MIC never yields anything more potent than Hoplitai Haploi and Hippeis, in Athinai, Demetrias and Pella at least. A client state with a professional military should be able to field more potent infantry, Thureophoroi and Hoplitai Iphikratides at the very least, and preferably Thorakitai. Thessalia and Makedonia should grant access to heavy cavalry like Xystophoroi under such circumstances.

[russia almighty]

Before Marian reforms weren't what the greek client states sent to support the Romans be what was considered Thorikati anyway?

[MeinPanzer]

Something strange I noticed after taking the main egyptian provinces from the Ptolemids: I was able to use their MIC immediately, which is apparently intended, but the recruitment options are a bit puzzling. Firstly there is the fact that I can recruit "Kleruchoi Phalangitai" in Memhpis, their description suggesting that soldiers of this particular class were found primarily in Egypt and Syria, and were more numerous than the Pezhetairoi.

Here's the historical situation: Egypt had a system set up where they took Greeks and Macedonians and other peoples (Thracians, Galatians, etc.) and settled them on royal land for free on the terms that they would pay taxes, serve in the military when called up to train or campaign, and that as long as they stayed on the land their sons would continue the first two points as well. These were called klerouchoi (cleruchs).

The Seleucids had a program that was very similar, but there is less evidence for it, where they established men in settlements called katoikai where they paid taxes and agreed to serve when called up and they passed this on to their sons. These were called katoikoi.

The Seleucid phalanx unit representing the latter is the Pezhetairoi. The Ptolemaic phalanx units representing the former are the Pezhetairoi and the Klerouchoi units. The Pezhetairoi and the Klerouchoi non-Agema phalanx units were, historically speaking, one and the same.

So why is this unit not available in Syria? And why can't the Seleucids recruit the other types of kleruchoi units or machimoi for that matter?

The Seleucid equivalent is the Pezhetairoi, who were kaitoikoi that fought in the phalanx. The Seleucid equivalent of machimoi is the pantodapai phalangitai, who were the native peoples of their empires recruited into the phalanx (obviously the Seleucids had no native Egyptians to levy).

It seems reasonable that if they managed to seize Egypt the Seleucids would incorporate the ptolemaic military system into their own and recruit cavalry and shock infantry from the hellenic and galatian populations, not merely hellenic phalangites from a lower class than the pezhetairoi.

As I've said, I don't know why BE makes a distinction as far as battlefield quality between Klerouchoi Phalangitai and Pezhetairoi, but they shouldn't. And you're right that they would definitely drawn on the full military power.

[Kongeslask]

The Seleucid phalanx unit representing the latter is the Pezhetairoi. The Ptolemaic phalanx units representing the former are the Pezhetairoi and the Klerouchoi units. The Pezhetairoi and the Klerouchoi non-Agema phalanx units were, historically speaking, one and the same.

I suspected as much, but the description of the Kleruchoi Phalangitai indicate that they were considered to be lower in society than the Pezhetairoi, the difference being that the latter had voting rights. In some sense it does seem superfluous to have two variants of what is essentially the same unit for the same faction. The Seleucids cannot recruit Pezhetairoi in Memphis, but they can recruit Kleruchoi. It seems reasonable that if the Seleucids had conquered the parts of Egypt where all those hellenic military settlers were found, they would be redesignated along the lines of Seleucid practice. This could be represented by having Pezhetairoi and Argyraspidai available for recruitment in a Seleucid-held Egypt, these being soldiers that would have been Kleruchoi and Kleruchoi Agema under the Ptolemids. And correspondingly having Kleruchoi for the Ptolemids in Syria and such places.

The Seleucid equivalent of machimoi is the pantodapai phalangitai, who were the native peoples of their empires recruited into the phalanx (obviously the Seleucids had no native Egyptians to levy).

Sure they are, but currently Pantopadoi Phalangitai are unavailable to the Seleucids in Egypt, even though those levy Pantopadoi are available. Either Pantopadoi Phalangitai OR Machimoi Phalangitai should be available even there, and it would be nice to have access to Machimoi Hippeis too.

[MeinPanzer]

I suspected as much, but the description of the Kleruchoi Phalangitai indicate that they were considered to be lower in society than the Pezhetairoi, the difference being that the latter had voting rights.

If the EB team could provide evidence for that, I'd love to see it. And if they don't think that the Pezhetairoi were drawn from the klerouchoi, I'd be very interested to hear where they think they were drawn from.

In some sense it does seem superfluous to have two variants of what is essentially the same unit for the same faction. The Seleucids cannot recruit Pezhetairoi in Memphis, but they can recruit Kleruchoi.

Well... that part kind of makes sense. The Seleucids would have not have been recruiting Seleucid Pezhetairoi but Ptolemaic klerouchoi Pezhetairoi. The problem is that we don't know if they were differently equipped at all, thought I'd suspect that they were not especially differently equipped.

It seems reasonable that if the Seleucids had conquered the parts of Egypt where all those hellenic military settlers were found, they would be redesignated along the lines of Seleucid practice. This could be represented by having Pezhetairoi and Argyraspidai available for recruitment in a Seleucid-held Egypt, these being soldiers that would have been Kleruchoi and Kleruchoi Agema under the Ptolemids. And correspondingly having Kleruchoi for the Ptolemids in Syria and such places.

I don't know if this would be the case because, frankly, we have no historical precedent for this. The Seleucids never conquered a major area that had a well-established military settler program in place for long enough to make major use of it, and even if they did we probably would have very little evidence concerning it (and no, they didn't conquer the Achaemenid empire). They seem to have preserved the system of military settlers established in Babylonia by the Achaemenids, but that's a whole different thing. I'd support having the Seleucids "recruit" from the klerouchoi by allowing them to recruit Pezhetairoi from Egypt.

Sure they are, but currently Pantopadoi Phalangitai are unavailable to the Seleucids in Egypt, even though those levy Pantopadoi are available. Either Pantopadoi Phalangitai OR Machimoi Phalangitai should be available even there, and it would be nice to have access to Machimoi Hippeis too.

I agree that machimoi of all kinds should be available to Seleucid conquerors.

BTW, it should be noted that the Seleucids and, to a lesser extent, the Ptolemies were hesitant to establish military settlers in the Levant because of the risk of having them taken over by one side or the other, so they very easily could have switched teams.

[Kongeslask]

I checked the recruitment options again, and in Memphis both Kleruchoi Phalangitai AND Pezhetairoi are available for recruitment, which makes little sense for the reasons mentioned above. I suppose it is a bug, but I would like to know what the EB team had actually intended.

[Gazius]

Installing type II government in Salamis and Tarsos as the Ptolemids and building level 5 factional MIC grants three kinds of elite Kleurochoi: galatians, agema phalanx and agema cavalry. Is this intentional?

Are you sure you can build a level 5 faction MIC? Or is it a level 4? I think, if your able to build level 5 with a type II, that's a error.

[Kongeslask]

My mistake, it is level 4. But it is still strange that elite kleruchs are available in areas that most likely had no such settlers. Salamis at least should only give standard hellenic units.

[O'ETAIPOS]

Yes recrutment of kleruchoi Phalangitai is bugged. It should cover all middle East to represent both kleruchoi and katoikai. This unit is mainly intended to show lower-end of military settlers, those who beacame poorer and were not training properly in opposition to pedzetairoi who are settlers in status they should be(well equipped and trained).