Background information about ancient armies

[Zonac]

Hey guys! I recently found a nice book about armies of the macedonian and punic wars between 359bc to 146 bc.
If anyone wants to go deeper into his/her general knowledge about ancient armies you should take a look into this!
Have a nice read!

So here comes the link : http://de.scribd.com/doc/29391428/Armies-of-the-Macedonian-and-Punic-Wars-359-BC-to-146-BC

[ptagi]

dang it, 195 pages

[Maetharin]

First of all, thx for sharing this^^

Then a question for everyone:
Do you guys know where I can read about hellenic mercenaries? The most recent book I read was G.T. Griffith´s "Mercenaries of the Hellenistic World", which shows its age in various places.

I´d like to know what kind of mercenaries there were, which kind of troop types were common, such things.
Most authors I know write that unless otherwise mentioned they were peltasts, which I just can´t believe, at least not in the original meaning of the word.

Maybe peltast became another word for mercenary after the greek city states hired them en masse to have the other citizenry available for their respective phalanx?

But I just can´t imagine the awesome staying power of the hoplite to be replaced by missile units!
Especially since hoplites are, if properly led and trained, tactically more flexible than pikemen!

Best regards

[JCB206]

For which kingdom in particular? I have most of my information on the Greeks and Successors. Most mercenaries were not peltasts. But most peltasts were mercenaries. Most javelin men for core troops were poor militia psilos ( or however it's spelled)

[Maetharin]

F.e. for the battle of Raphia sources place Ptolemy IV´s greek mercenary forces opposite to Arab levies of Antiochos III, who quickly rout those.

I can´t imagine 6000 traditional peltasts having that much of an impact upon ten thousand(!) men of any caliber, just by frontally charging.

As they are not part of the proper phalanx, they have to be Hoplitai, Thorakitai or other forces of similar staying power.

[Aeimnestus]

F.e. for the battle of Raphia sources place Ptolemy IV´s greek mercenary forces opposite to Arab levies of Antiochos III, who quickly rout those.

I can´t imagine 6000 traditional peltasts having that much of an impact upon ten thousand(!) men of any caliber, just by frontally charging.

As they are not part of the proper phalanx, they have to be Hoplitai, Thorakitai or other forces of similar staying power.

It's not so much of a stretch, those mercenary peltasts are probably better seen as warriors that also use javelins rather than pure missile troops. They were likely far better equipped than the Arabian levies (if you were soldiering for a living, wouldn't you invest in good equipment?) and more importantly had prior experience in warfare, likely with some of the same men. Training, morale and confidence in your fellow soldiers in ancient battles were much more important than raw numbers, there are tons of examples of small elite forces annihilating much larger ones. The individual soldier had very little knowledge of the flow of the battle, and would probably not be so aware that his side had numerical superiority on the flank he happened to be positioned on, especially not mid fight when he doesn't know how many casualties have been suffered by either side.

[Maetharin]

It's not so much of a stretch, those mercenary peltasts are probably better seen as warriors that also use javelins rather than pure missile troops. They were likely far better equipped than the Arabian levies (if you were soldiering for a living, wouldn't you invest in good equipment?) and more importantly had prior experience in warfare, likely with some of the same men. Training, morale and confidence in your fellow soldiers in ancient battles were much more important than raw numbers, there are tons of examples of small elite forces annihilating much larger ones. The individual soldier had very little knowledge of the flow of the battle, and would probably not be so aware that his side had numerical superiority on the flank he happened to be positioned on, especially not mid fight when he doesn't know how many casualties have been suffered by either side.

Oh I absolutely concur on the latter part of your post, but I´m still puzzled about them being peltasts.
If they were as armoured as you wrote, wouldn´t that make them what in the mod are Thorakitai?

I know there´s much confusion about the terms Thorakitai, Thureophoroi and Peltast, as writers normally tended to use most terms interchangeably.
F.e. the only ever historian to use the term Thorakitai was Polybios, who only used it in context of them fighting together with Thureophoroi.
I have theorised that, general that he was, when using that term he wanted to distinguish them from Thureophoroi, but in other context referred to that kind of troops in a different way.

So Peltast could f.e. just simply mean mercenary too
Maybe peltast by that age had become to mean those mercenaries which weren´t employed temporarily for one specific campaign, but those that were on a regular basis?
Like the royal peltasts of the Antigonids^^ Does that sound plausible to you?

To conclude, either CA grossly misinterpreted peltasts (wouldn´t wonder about that one) and we just kin of went along with it,
or the troops on the right flanks of Ptolemy IV´s phalanx were not peltasts, and there were other greek mercenary troop types(doesn´t sound too implausible either IMO).

Btw would it be possible to give peltasts a "close ranks" button without making them melee troops?

Best regards

[JCB206]

By this time, the biggest difference between Peltasts anThureophoroi were the shields they used. Both were lightly armored and used javelins. Same amount and typically same style and tactics. Of course Thureophoroi had spears, though some peltasts did too. Thureophoroi were very very common mercenaries used as garrison troops. Peltasts generally came from Thrace and Anatolia.

So Peltasts or Thureophoroi defeating levies would not be uncommon. Both were trained specialized troops were as levies would be not much more than fodder.

Peltasts came on the scene before the Pelopenesian War and were highly skilled compared to citizen javelin men. Peltasts were by far the most common mercenaries employed by the Greeks. Even Phillip II employed many to support his phalanx. Thureophoroi being the more and more common troop type in Greece by the time of the Successor Wars, they became the most common mercenaries of the Successor Armies.

Due i.e. to the spear and shield, the Thureophoroi were a bit better than Peltasts in hand to hand combat but not by a wide margin. The deciding factor in which to hire would have been availability and for the Successor's, the need for as many Greek troops as possible to settle.

Hope this was detailed enough. Writing from my phone and lacking time.

[KAM 2150]

Due i.e. to the spear and shield, the Thureophoroi were a bit better than Peltasts in hand to hand combat but not by a wide margin.

Peltasts also used spears, even before Philip II was born. Plus Peltast was a veeeery wide term in ancient times. Also peltasts were used for storming the walls and breaches in them in later periods.

[Zonac]

Your welcome Maetharin
I agree with Aeimnestus about your mercenary problem. However I have no available source ready. I remember reading about similary stuff in a book of post-alexander macedonian armies or so..

[Maetharin]

So in the case of greek mercenaries they were most likely either Thureophoroi or Thorakitai.
Since Thorakitai literaly just means one who wears armour and only was used by Polybius, and always in the context of supporting Thureophoroi,
I´d say we can with some measure assume that under other circumstances Thorakitai would just simply have been called Thureophoroi or Thorakitai Thureophoroi.

Wouldn´t that justify calling Thureophoroi Hoplitai just simply Thorakitai Thureophoroi??

[JCB206]

There definitely isn't a big difference between them all. They are all a class between javelin men, with no armor, no shield, no sword and the heavier type troops of hoplites and phalanges.

Thorakatai would be just wearing mail armor instead of linen armor or none at all. Were they separate units or just the more wealthy members is open to interpretation. They would spears and swords or course. They would not really be imitation legionnaires.

[Zonac]

I really appreciate the attention to a historical discussion/ will to get information on these things!

In the OP link there is actually a paragraph about greek mercenary peltasts on page 97 i think. and 114.

In generall we should reconsider to give some units a tiny bit different role in the game. like giving hyspaspidai some javelins and or to give thureos spears more javelins so they can replace "peltasts" in the 3rd century bc.^^ also some unit spacing could we rethinked concerning the different approaches in the formation for different purposes... f.e. the thuros would have the more "open" formation during ther "peltats-like" skirmishing phase and then would form a close formation (don't remember the correct term... it was the 2 feet wide one...).
another think is that we could rename some units, however I guess that the many prefere the "more vanilla" linke nameing. f.e. the antigonidai elite pikemen are currently named pezhetairoi even though pezhetairoi would rather resemble the "standard" macedonian pikemen. the "elite" one for antigonidai would rather be asthetairoi. (I guess..^^) and there a many examples like this. However this would mean a lot of work, sso it won't be a submod I guess, and i am not sure if the main mod would want this approach...
however if KAM would appreciate that I may be able to provide a list of some units , what should be changed, and he could decide what could be changed

[KAM 2150]

At Magnesia, Pergamon supplied Roman army with Peltasts so I do not see why Thureos spears should replace them. It would also make Thureos Spears very OP if they would have as many javelins as Peltasts and 300 men per squad. Different spacing is not possible in single unit, they can use only one.

[JCB206]

At Magnesia, Pergamon supplied Roman army with Peltasts so I do not see why Thureos spears should replace them. It would also make Thureos Spears very OP if they would have as many javelins as Peltasts and 300 men per squad. Different spacing is not possible in single unit, they can use only one.

Peltasts and Thuros spears were still used in the same time period. Thureophoroi did skirmish before battles but could form phalanx and assist the infantry line. I know this formation was removed, so that could be hard to replicate. They were very versatile, which is why they came into being. Some city states/leagues replaced their hoplites with them for this very reason.

I agree with you that in no way should they be given more javelins than 3. I also have had the discussion here that Peltasts shouldn't have more than 3 also. It was only on very rare occasions that Peltasts would be able to carry more than 2-3 javelins.

The smaller shield made Peltasts more effective as skirmishers and there for more effective than Thuros at skirmishing. But they couldn't hold a line like Thureophoroi in a battle line. Each troop type had their role.

[JCB206]

At Magnesia, Pergamon supplied Roman army with Peltasts so I do not see why Thureos spears should replace them. It would also make Thureos Spears very OP if they would have as many javelins as Peltasts and 300 men per squad. Different spacing is not possible in single unit, they can use only one.

Can you point me to where you read about the Pergamon Peltasts? I have seen where they had 2,000 Achaean Peltasts that Eumenes brought with him. I'm trying to find out what troops these were. The Achaean army at this time had been reformed into Macedonian pike formations but they did keep 8,000 mercenaries under arms also. Trying to find if these "peltasts" were true skirmishers or Pike units that could fight with javelins when not using the pike like the other kingdoms at this time.

Thanks KAM.

[Zonac]

By replacing I do not mean like a reform unit (early hastati to polybian hastati) I meant that the player/AI should have the option to recruit peltasts, however it should be more viable to recruit (as core troups) thuros spears then peltasts. For me it makes more sense that I recruit them as cheep mercenaries/aor troops for their purposes (mercenary as fast recruitable skirmisher in forain land, and aor due to beeing cheep and always available even without culture..) but If I recruit a army in my "home land" I should get thuros instead because they are more viable then "peltats".

I also did not say to give them as many javelins then peltasts... thuros get 1 or 2? atm but peltats 6-7 ? Therfore if they would have f.e. 3-4 javelins I think they could be an alternative considering 300 men but not better in the skirmishing part... however they would have spears and therfore would be more useful to recruit..
As it is now I rather recruit spartacus style peltasts rather then thureophoroi....

Damn it on your last part... I hoped that we could bind a special ability like "head hunt" which was earlier used for hoplite animation to such a unit and set there that if the unit gets out of missiles then it activates this ability which forms a closer spacing... :/

[JCB206]

When discussing the elite pikes of the day, they were versatile troop that could fight with javelins, spear, sword, and pike. They were usually the only professional troops under arms at all time, except mercenaries. Even Alexander's elite guard fought with javelins, spear, sword, and pike. They could be used to storm mountain fortresses, hold the line, or attack a city wall.

There is no way that I know of to replicate this in game. If there was, they would be OPd and have to a limit of 2 per army or something. The thing is they were versatile depending on their mission but they only performed ONE role during battles. They didn't skirmish, then run back and pick up pikes. If they were needed to act as pikemen, then they carried no javelins.

Again, really enjoying this discussion.

[Maetharin]

There´s a relatively interesting article about how many elite troops of hellenic nations could be rearmed for their appropriate tasks, f.e. the royal peltasts of Philip V.
They might have been able to fight both in phalanx and as elite skirmishers for rocky terrain. Maybe the same applied to the silver shields.

http://lukeuedasarson.com/Iphikrates1.html
http://lukeuedasarson.com/Iphikrates2.html

There might be some inaccuracies in there, but it´s an intresting enough read

Best regards

[KAM 2150]

I think it was in Krzysztof Kęcik "Battle of Magnesia", but the book is in polish Funny thing is that depending on the source I saw either that Pergamon supported Romans with Peltasts and in other sources that they supported Romans with...hoplites. From what I remember those Peltasts were also partly responsible for turning Seleucid chariots around.