Messages

Livy says that Latin infantry was traditionally heavy infantry by 217 BC, so they must have been ''legionaries'' for quite a while by then. Of course it is entirely possible that they still fought in ''native'' equipment during the First Punic War, but do we have any sources for that?

No, just Latin infantry. I need proof that the allies before they had homogenous equipment as the Romans were used like roman troops.

Your beloved Duncan Head writes in his book about the armies of the Second Punic War:


"Certainly the Latins were equipped in Roman style, but many other Italian peoples fought in their own armies in lighter equipment. Livy believed that in 217 Rome traditionally used only citizen and Latin heavy infantry (=Legionaries), which may imply that other allies retained their native lighter styles. Perhaps a gradual adoption of Roman armament took place.'' (Duncan Head 1983/2016, p. 99).


Daly (Cannae 2005) writes, that Livy's comment is ''an exaggeration'' and that other Italic socii already regularly served as heavy infantry at the time of the Second Punic War, too, but that Latin ''Legionaries'' were the most important ones. He also refers to Polyb. 2.24.10, where the author describes that, according to the census of 225 BC, the manpower pool for Latin infantry of all eligible men was 80 000 (Others write 85 000 from other sources- whatever).


Bispham (From Asculum to Actium, Oxford 2007, p. 136) underlines the importances of Latin cavalry and ''legionaries'' for the Iberian campaigns in the middle of the 2nd century BC, citing sources that indicate they made up possibly more than half of all soldiers in Spain and suffered the highest casualties- a point which is supported by Lazenby (Hannibal's War, Norman (Oklahoma) 1978/1998).

A lot from that list, never existed, was too early, or too late for our time period. I'll let Arjos elaborate on it.

The changes are actually not that great. I always said we don't need all these specific units for Lydians, Pisidians, Pamphylians etc which are basically the same- not to mention that a lot of the equipment and looks for AoR units will be educated guessing anyway.


Also, where are the Aramean Phalangites from, or the Aramean Infantry too? I never read of any of these and the former sound like Pantodapoi, who were last mentioned in the 310s and then disappeared, as the Seleucids opted not to recruit natives in the phalanx. A small number was recruited by the Seleucids, they didn't fight in a phalanx but I can't find much more on their equipment. By the same logic, Jewish troops were ONLY recruited from Diaspora Jews and seem to have been an effective force, being successfull in crashing lesser rebellions in the East. The Seleucids almost NEVER EVER employed Syrians (including Palestinian Jews), because it was their power base and they feared similar consequences as the Machimoi had caused in Egypt. Greco- Macedonian troops could still surpress uprisings in far parts of the Empire like Pamphylia or Carmania, if those troops rebelled, but Syria (and Babylonia probably, too) was too important. Only Babylonian Jews and other Diaspora Jews were recruited and formed this skilled force. Other Jews were recruited by pretenders to the throne after the Hasmonean revolt, but never by the royal central authority- and even in the service of the rivals, they were often illoyal and kept switching sides, as can be read in the sources for the Hasmonean wars.
In Ptolemaic Egypt there were far more common, Jews served as part of the Machairophoroi, for example, a guard and police force in Egypt, and were also recruited into regular troops. This is a difficult subject, but I'd suggest to have Jewish Infantry as AoR troops in Judaea and possibly some diaspora regions like Babylon. And if Seleucid recruitment in Syria would be restricted, that would be good- all this is extensively described in Griffith's Mercenaries of the Hellenistic World.


Apart from that, out of curiosity, I'd like to see the source for the Bithynian Peltasts? Pirro drew up a roster for Bithynia last year and did not have them, despite having found a pretty new paper on their army.


Then, Kardakes, seriously? You blame me for writing down early units and suggest professional troops of the ACHAEMENID Empire as AoR Troops? Maybe you meant Sparabara? They were initially Achaemenid troops as well, but at least continued to exist into 300 BC and other mods all use them, too.


We could also do with Lydian Akontistai. Those of the Psiloi that fought as javelinmen were in general called Akontistai. The Lydians are compared to the Agrianians by Griffith, so they might have been an elite (Elite Javelinmen). Bar- Kochva concluded that these can't be the Lydians in Asia Minor because Akontistai points at mountainous, incivilized people and that the Lydians were described as heavy armoured infantry already by Herodotos. Thus, he concluded they are to be identified with the Lubdu (Assyrian, Lud in Hebrew), a tribe dwelling in Western Media and Atropatene, on the Upper Tigris. We can rename them Lubdu Akontistai, but in Polybios' text they are named Lydoi and the Lubdu are obviously attested in earlier time periods.


And we should certainly have Osrhoene Archers, who are mentioned in the sources and are one of the most famous examples of actual ''AoR'' units in history. Of course they appear only in the 1st century BC, but our campaign goes that far anyway and without later units we have no source at all for factions like Pontos.


What about Arab troops? Polybios mentions 10 000 Spearmen, who Griffiths classified as ''light'', at Raphia.


Possibly xeofox knows a bit about the Dahae, since mounted archers and 2000 foot archers, recruited as mercenaries, are also mentioned fighting for the Seleucids at Raphia.

Ah, I see, that's a shame, but not really a surprise, funding is always a problem. If the next one will be in Ohio I won't be able to come 

So the Latin units are like Socii Hastati/Principes/Triarii?


Well there are countless buildings in Rome that could feature... depends how much we want to elaborate on that in terms of special buildings and their effects, and possibly creating individual city models (work was done on that before).

Did you base it on my old list on TWC?

I am not sure if we should waste units slots on specific Latin units?

How did it go and where will it be next year? 

The second is a great idea, though it might still be weird if the Parthians conquer a little town after they have already become an empire...?

I have no idea what they are saying on EB haha Can you provide a sample?

a submod of EB2.

That would be high treason. Shoot EmoDude!   

We do not shoot our comrades!

Said the Russian... 

Thank you, Gigantus    So, can everyone see them now?

a submod of EB2.

That would be high treason. Shoot EmoDude!   

Nah, I only uploaded it a few times ago. But I know the problem now- it's a restricted forum not everyone has access too- I had hoped it would work anyway since the attachment is still there under my upload menu. But then I'll need to find another way to post them here since you can't upload them on Exilian.

Great Job, I did not think all these changes were possible!