Assorted Historical Questions - Gertrude et al, ask them here!

[abou]

Quite a bit in this thread that hasn't been answered yet. Maybe if I get the energy I'll go back and take a look.

what part of central europe did the celts come from?

all i know is that they originated in central europe like around austria (coincidentally i believe that area falls in where the only Heidelbergensis bones have been found)

I believe that Celtic society began and radiated from Bohemia, which name is derived from the Celtic Boii.

Why do Hellenic officers (I mean the unit leaders, not generals) use such phalangite shields? It makes sense for the standard bearers, as these need to have their left hand free, however the others could afford to use a larger shield.

No idea - before I got here. My guess is that for EB2 that the Diadochoi officers (yet to be concepted so no guarantees) might have the Makedonian aspis, which was slightly smaller and without a rim compared to the Argive type that we are more familiar with, yet larger than the phalangite shield.

Who was the last kingdom to use the classical hoplite/phalangite stile of warfare? When did it end?

Not entirely sure, but I believe that the last conclusively Hellenistic state we hear of using phalangites was Pontos. So, theoretically it might have been them depending on when the Ptolemaioi abandoned the Makedonian phalanx. In that era the Seleukids were a complete mess and barely able to field an army of 10,000 as the dynasty weakened due to civil wars. I would be surprised if they could have fielded much of anything other than small bands of thureophoroi-like infantry for their pissing-matches against each other.

[paullus]

careful abou, the makedonian aspis didn't always lack a rim. there were apparently quite a few ways of constructing it. i'm not sure which type we'll end up using for eb2. but the makedonian aspis is very likely the shield we'll use.

[Power2the1]

what part of central europe did the celts come from?

all i know is that they originated in central europe like around austria (coincidentally i believe that area falls in where the only Heidelbergensis bones have been found)

To add further to what abou mentioned above, you had early Tumulus and Urnfield cultures in Europe around the Danube Basin. Mixes of these gave rise to what were believed to be proto Celtic peoples in the western part of that region. However, in the eastern portion is where the majority of early hill forts are found which are obvious signs of early successes and power. As power shifted to the west you can say that early Halstatt signs started to spring up in the Bohemia, Austria, and these groups spread out from there. In the decades around 500 B.C. the Celtic forges, concentrated initially in the areas between the Alps and Danube, became increasingly efficient and stated 'mass producing' La Tene iron weapons which gave advantage over the older predominately bronze weapons that are found in the Halstatt technology era. So again, that Bohemia/Danube corridor became a home for them, then Gaul, then Britain, then Ireland, then Spain, then Northern Italy, then Galatia, and almost everywhere else in between

[Ludens]

No idea - before I got here. My guess is that for EB2 that the Diadochoi officers (yet to be concepted so no guarantees) might have the Makedonian aspis, which was slightly smaller and without a rim compared to the Argive type that we are more familiar with, yet larger than the phalangite shield.

Thanks for the answer. Will the same happen to the currently shieldless captains?

[Krusader]

My question isn't really in EB's timeframe, nor do I even know if there is an Alexandrian specialist among these forums, but what the heck.

One thing I wondered recently was about the history about the non-Aegean Greek Islands (Rhodos, Crete and Cyprus). What happened to these during the conflict between Persia and Macedonia, under Alexander? How did those come within the Macedonian influence? Normally, I hear comments when Alexander captured Phoenicia and Egypt that the mighty Persian fleet, who had always threatened to cut off the supply lines, lost all it's home ports, and (I suppose) was thus forced to surrender. But what about Cyprus? Wasn't it aligned with the Persian Empire? The only part I remember seeing the island play was by reinforcing Alexander with ships during the Tyrian campaign.

And what happened in Crete throughout the Alexandrian expansion? Crete is unknown to me when it comes to interactions with the Alexandrian Empire.

If anyone knows the histories of those islands during the tiems of Alexander and wishes to tell them, I wouldn't mind hearing them! ^_^

Crete. From what I gather they were busy quarreling amongst themselves, but there were Cretans fighting for Alexander I recall and wouldnt be surprised if some fought for Darius as well.

Rhodes. They probably remained neutral until Phoenicia was destroyed, from there I suppose they supported Alexander as their main trading rivals were subjugated, that is Tyre.

Cyprus. Well reinforcing Alexander with ships shows they did side with him and openly defy the King of Kings. From what I gather the island was mostly Greek, but with a sizeable Phoenician population too.

Maybe some others can give better answers or correct me if I'm mixing it up.

[abou]

careful abou, the makedonian aspis didn't always lack a rim. there were apparently quite a few ways of constructing it. i'm not sure which type we'll end up using for eb2. but the makedonian aspis is very likely the shield we'll use.

Ah, I forgot about stuff like the Pergamon altar.

Thanks for the answer. Will the same happen to the currently shieldless captains?

No idea. We haven't even begun on them yet and they are probably a bit far off.

[Zarax]

Not entirely sure, but I believe that the last conclusively Hellenistic state we hear of using phalangites was Pontos. So, theoretically it might have been them depending on when the Ptolemaioi abandoned the Makedonian phalanx. In that era the Seleukids were a complete mess and barely able to field an army of 10,000 as the dynasty weakened due to civil wars. I would be surprised if they could have fielded much of anything other than small bands of thureophoroi-like infantry for their pissing-matches against each other.

What about the bosphorans? What kind of heavy infantry did they field?

[MeinPanzer]

What about the bosphorans? What kind of heavy infantry did they field?

The Bosporans never fielded any kind of Macedonian-style phalanx. The heaviest troops seem to have been run-of-the-mill hoplites, but they also employed thorakitai during the Hellenistic period.

[Zarax]

Well, that would be interesting to me too, sort of seeing who kept dragging the old hellenistic warfare until much later...

[Praetor Diego]

I have a question about javelins. Why the javelins dissapear in the dark/middle ages?

Note: sorry for my english

[Ibrahim]

I have a question about javelins. Why the javelins dissapear in the dark/middle ages?

Note: sorry for my english

simplest way to put it: they didn't. Peltastoi units are mentioned in Byzantine sources refering to this type of weaponry.

however, it did decline and dissapear in western Europe, as to why, I dunno....rise of Knighthood
may have had to do with it, but I dunno. I know the Saxons hurled spear and javelins at norman knights in 1066 (bayeaux tapestry). same with the early Viking

among the Arabs, the predominance of northwestern Arabian styles of combat (Islam being part of the reason) meant javelins were rare there too (Uhud's account indicates association with Ethiopians or southern arabian, with few Arabs skilled in the weapon, prefering swords, spears, and arrows). that was why Hind bint utba assigned the job of killing Abbas ibn abd al-muttalib to a Ethiopian slave named wahshiy.

also, javelins were used by several African tribes up to the 1800's

that at least what I gathered. I hope someone more expert can add or correct anything I said.

[Ludens]

however, it did decline and dissapear in western Europe, as to why, I dunno....rise of Knighthood
may have had to do with it, but I dunno. I know the Saxons hurled spear and javelins at norman knights in 1066 (bayeaux tapestry). same with the early Viking

IIRC the Norman knights hurled them right back: the Norman shield was designed to protect the horse as well as the rider when making a turn after an attack. That suggest they weren't really the shock cavalry knight later became. Spaniards also used javelins from horse back during the middle ages. AFAIK they didn't really disappear until quite late in the middle ages, although they did become increasingly rare. Perhaps the widespread availability of decent armour played a part in it?

[QuintusSertorius]

I'd have thought if anything javelins would be better against armour than arrows, even if the range wasn't as great.

I think what's more noticeable is the disappearance of the javelin as precursor weapon for heavy infantry, rather than it disappearing altogether. Is it just a logistical supply thing? As in thousands of javelins are yet more resources needed and more work for armourers?

[konny]

I think what's more noticeable is the disappearance of the javelin as precursor weapon for heavy infantry, rather than it disappearing altogether. Is it just a logistical supply thing? As in thousands of javelins are yet more resources needed and more work for armourers?

It is more a point of the heavy infantry disapearing during the middle ages. That periode was marked by the dominance of the heavy cavalry. Infantry had a mere auxiliary role, such as archers, crossbowmen and later pikemen. Mediavel battles with heavy infantry fighting were usually fought by dismounted knights, what became very common during the later MAs.

When the infantry re-appeared on the battlefields from the late 13th/early 14th Century onward it was first of all as close pike formations - no way to use javelins for these men. The "precursor infantry" was re-introduced in form of the musketeers in the 15th/16th Century, but did not become the main fighting force until the late 17th/early 18th Century.

[Krusader]

While javelins weren't that frequently used in Europe during the dark/medieval ages, the exception is Iberia. Berbers used javelins frequently and the Christian kingdoms copied the fighting styles according to some sources (do remember though that "javelin cavalry" was prominent in pre-Roman Iberia too), giving rise to the Jinetes. Then we also have the Almughavars from Aragon/Catalonia. They were very prominent in the Catalan company me thinks. And yeah the Byzantines still fielded Peltastoi, but from what I recall they were phased out in the 11th century.
The Irish & Welsh also used them, even think the Vikings too at some occasions.

[QuintusSertorius]

I'm presuming people (especially poorer ones) still used javelins to hunt with throughout the Middle Ages?

[keravnos]

Cyprus. Well reinforcing Alexander with ships shows they did side with him and openly defy the King of Kings. From what I gather the island was mostly Greek, but with a sizeable Phoenician population too.

Nope. The population was all Greek at that time. There are mentions of Cypriots in the entourage of Alexandros and even the first two Satraps of Bactria were from Kypros.

[Tellos Athenaios]

I'd have thought if anything javelins would be better against armour than arrows, even if the range wasn't as great.

Not really: cross-bow. Designed for the job.

[lobf]

Not really: cross-bow. Designed for the job.

...If you can afford and maintain a crossbow, right?

[Ibrahim]

...If you can afford and maintain a crossbow, right?

once the signeur got a hold of them and gave them to you, yep. especially the Arbelest e tour (those windlass Crossbows).
that said, if they're cost is high, it didn't stop them from becoming popular.

I have my own question: I see that the Assyrians depicted thse round shields of their's as being conical. Ospry has blindly followed suite, as well as a few others. yet, for some reason, I get the feeling that what they were aiming for was a Aspis like shield with a boss (rimmed and bowled, etc). is it true that that was artistic convention to simplyfy depiction, or is there archeological evidence (i.e a shield), that has survived, to show one way or the other?

I noticed that EB has followed my opnion, but their tukul shipri are 5 centuries after the Assyrians lost their empire...

here is a picture from the reliefs (from bible history.com):

[Tellos Athenaios]

...If you can afford and maintain a crossbow, right?

Of course. But then again: an abundant supply of javelins capable of actually piercing a decent kit of armour would not have been that cheap either. At the very least it would be time-consuming.

[azzbaz]

A little bit of topic, but I was wondering if anyone knows anything about the lusotana capital oxtraca?
Just curious because i cant find anything about it.

[QuintusSertorius]

Of course. But then again: an abundant supply of javelins capable of actually piercing a decent kit of armour would not have been that cheap either. At the very least it would be time-consuming.

Are you serious? A crossbow is an expensive bit of mechanical kit. Javelins are just a bunch of light spears, the only expensive part are the heads, which are small and probably not a lot more expensive than the heads of crossbow quarrels.

[konny]

I'm presuming people (especially poorer ones) still used javelins to hunt with throughout the Middle Ages?

Beeing a poor one, you were certainly not allowed to hunt in the Middle Ages. Armies during the MA were usually not levied from the poor classes but consisted of professionals (knights and their followers) and mercenaries. Compared to Ancient times these forces were very small, often not more than some hundred strong.

[MeinPanzer]

Nope. The population was all Greek at that time. There are mentions of Cypriots in the entourage of Alexandros and even the first two Satraps of Bactria were from Kypros.

In fact, Cyprus had had a significant Phoenician population since the early 5th c. BC and that portion remained during Alexander's reign and afterward. The primary centre of the Phoenicians on Cyprus was the city of Kition on the south coast, but it also extended to the island's fertile central plain and a much smaller settlement further inland called Idalion as well as Tamassos in the mountains. Before Alexander's eastern campaign, the Phoenician king of Kition actually controlled an area reaching all the way to the northern shore including Lapithos.

Kition was originally a Cypriot city which was then inhabited by Greeks and had a significant Phoenician merchant presence. A thoroughly Phoenician dynasty was established by the Achaemenids c. 480 BC, while brief Phoenician dynasties in Marion on the northwest coast and Salamis on the east coast are also known before the fourth century. Right before Alexander's campaigns, the Phoenicians on the island were at their most powerful under Pumyaton, who inherited a miniature kingdom including Kition and Idalion and then purchased Tamassos, a settlemed situated in the ore-bearing mountains, for fifty talents. At that time he controlled a good quarter of the entire island.

During the siege of Tyre, the kings of Cyprus, including Pumyaton, submitted to Alexander without a fight and supplied him with ships, which allowed Cyprus to survive the Alexander's advance unscathed. Alexander permitted Pumyaton to continue ruling, but he lost Tamassos for an unknown reason.

In the wars of the Diadochoi that followed, Kition was sacked and the Phoenician dynasty was removed, but the significant Phoenician population remained.

[keravnos]

A dynasty, and ruling class of Phoenicians, deffinitely. But outside of Kittion, not that many. Population wise their number was small and growing less by each generation as Hellenisation had set in. Had it not been for the Achaimenids, who used them to rule Cyprus by proxy this would have happened a long time ago. There are no Phoenician speaking Cypriots by the time Ptolemaic rule of the island ends at 30 BCE.

[MeinPanzer]

A dynasty, and ruling class of Phoenicians, deffinitely. But outside of Kittion, not that many. Population wise their number was small and growing less by each generation as Hellenisation had set in. Had it not been for the Achaimenids, who used them to rule Cyprus by proxy this would have happened a long time ago. There are no Phoenician speaking Cypriots by the time Ptolemaic rule of the island ends at 30 BCE.

The question was referring to the period of Alexander's campaign, and your response that 'the population was all Greek at that time' is wrong. Like I said, the Phoenicians controlled about a quarter of the island and traces of Phoenician inhabitance have been found at other sites. Just how much of the population was actually Phoenician is almost impossible to determine, but there definitely were settled Phoenicians around.

[Ibrahim]

can anybody care to pay attention to my quetin: its a little urgent atm. its the one about Assyrian shields up north

[Sarcasm]

A little bit of topic, but I was wondering if anyone knows anything about the lusotana capital oxtraca?
Just curious because i cant find anything about it.

Mummius took his 5,000 remaining soldiers and drilled them in camp, not daring to go out into the plain until they should have recovered their courage. While he was watching his opportunity the barbarians passed by, carrying a part of the booty they had captured. He fell upon them suddenly, slew a large number, and recaptured the plunder and the standards.

Some of the Lusitanians on the other side of the Tagus, under the leadership of Caucenus, being incensed against the Romans, invaded the Cunei, who were Roman subjects, and captured their large city, Conistorgis, and near the Pillars of Hercules they crossed over the straits, and some of them overran part of Africa, while others laid siege to the city of Ocile.

Mummius followed them with 9,000 foot and 500 horse, and slew about 15,000 of them who were engaged in plundering, and a few of the others, and raised the siege of Ocile. Falling in with a party who were carrying off booty he slew all of them, so that not one was left to bear the tidings of the disaster. All the booty that it was possible to carry he divided among the soldiers. The rest he devoted to the gods of war and burned. Having accomplished these results, Mummius returned to Rome and was awarded a triumph.

He was succeeded in the command by Marcus Atilius, who made an incursion among the Lusitanians and killed about 7000 of them and took their largest city, called Oxthracae. This so terrified the neighbouring tribes that they all made terms of surrender. Among these were some of the Vettones, a nation adjoining the Lusitanians. But when he went away into winter quarters they all forthwith revolted and besieged some of the Roman subjects.

Was it so hard?

[Jolt]

In fact, Cyprus had had a significant Phoenician population since the early 5th c. BC and that portion remained during Alexander's reign and afterward. The primary centre of the Phoenicians on Cyprus was the city of Kition on the south coast, but it also extended to the island's fertile central plain and a much smaller settlement further inland called Idalion as well as Tamassos in the mountains. Before Alexander's eastern campaign, the Phoenician king of Kition actually controlled an area reaching all the way to the northern shore including Lapithos.

Kition was originally a Cypriot city which was then inhabited by Greeks and had a significant Phoenician merchant presence. A thoroughly Phoenician dynasty was established by the Achaemenids c. 480 BC, while brief Phoenician dynasties in Marion on the northwest coast and Salamis on the east coast are also known before the fourth century. Right before Alexander's campaigns, the Phoenicians on the island were at their most powerful under Pumyaton, who inherited a miniature kingdom including Kition and Idalion and then purchased Tamassos, a settlemed situated in the ore-bearing mountains, for fifty talents. At that time he controlled a good quarter of the entire island.

During the siege of Tyre, the kings of Cyprus, including Pumyaton, submitted to Alexander without a fight and supplied him with ships, which allowed Cyprus to survive the Alexander's advance unscathed. Alexander permitted Pumyaton to continue ruling, but he lost Tamassos for an unknown reason.

In the wars of the Diadochoi that followed, Kition was sacked and the Phoenician dynasty was removed, but the significant Phoenician population remained.

Thank you! That was just the thing I looked for! Nice piece of information!