Armenians

[Marku]

Could we sticky a thread for armenians please :-)

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...RARM/home.html

http://www.armeniapedia.org/index.php?title=Main_Page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_armenia

http://armenianhighland.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orontid_Dynasty

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...URARM/13*.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar...enia#Antiquity

http://www.armeniapedia.org/index.ph...n_Of_Armenians

[removeduser_426582376423734]

I don't mean to be rude but links don't help anyone, unless they are fervent in the way that they'll look through all of them. So post any useful stuff, not just links. I'll edit this with stuff in a sec.

[Marku]

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/luke/ueda-sar...ranocerta.html

Heres one about a battle, what units were used etc

can we see about getting armenian imitation legionaires earlier on in Roma surrectum?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tigranocerta

[dvk901]

Armenian army make up 85bc----one could suppose from the narrative that Pontus also had Imitation legions, since Mithadrates organized Tigranes army that way..................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appian (MW 85) records 250000 foot and 50000 horse. Plutarch (Luc. 26.6) records 55000 horse, of which 17000 were catafracts; 20000 slingers and archers; 150000 heavy infantry, and 35000 pioneers and other labourers brought along to swell the apparent size of the army. The 150000 heavy foot were said to be partly organized into phalanxes, and partly into cohorts; Appian however says (MW 87) that it was only after this battle that Mithradates organized Tigranes' forces into squadrons (ilas) and cohorts (speiras) 'as nearly as possible in the Italian manner'.
He also ordered Hadrian to make war against Mithradates, who was defeated... In the fourth year of this Olympiad Tigranes and Mithradates, having collected an army of 40,000 foot and 30,000 horse, who were drawn up in the Roman order of battle, engaged Lucullus and were defeated; Tigranes lost 5000 killed, a large number of prisoners, besides a promiscuous rabble".
The notice about being drawn up in the Roman order (and I have not been able to locate a Greek original to check the exact wording here) would seem to disagree with Appian regarding the post-battle institution of Roman military practice in Tigranes' forces, and confirm Plutarch. Perhaps the truth lies in a mixture of all three: the battle formation was Roman, but only a portion of the men were (as yet) organised in Roman-style units. Incidentally, Frontinus (2.1.14) has Lucullus attacking before the Armenians had actually drawn up their order of battle properly.

[tone]

Pontus certainly had Armenian style cataphracts....and everyone seems to give them scythed chariots as well - can't remember whether we've given them chariots or not - I know they don't yet have cataphracts.

[Marku]

chariots are evil and should of never been in RTW. they have terrible Waypoint control and die too easily. please dont give them to armenians

[removeduser_426582376423734]

Marku, in my experience, chariots can be VERY deadly. So, they make up for their low def.

[Marku]

hmmm well at long as you dont make generals chariots ill be happy

[Drtad]

I know that the Armenians have access to imitation legionaries, but I think that is most of the diversity of the Eastern factions. I believe that each Eastern faction should have its own unique set of units, instead ofall of them just being "Eastern". For example, I am sure that Parthians were adept at desert combat, but Armenians most certainly were not, and yet they have access to the same "Eastern" units which all get desert combat bonuses. I believe that the following changes should be made.

Cavalry: According to Strabo, there was a major difference between the cavalry of Armenia and Parthia. Armenian horses were smaller than Parthian ones, but they were more "fiery" than those of the Parthians. So, all of the cavalry that those two share, "Eastern" cavalry, should be split into Armenian and Parthian cavalry, with the desert bonus being taken from the Armenian units. Armenian cavalry should be adept at mountainous and flat, grassy terrain, should have slightly less defense then a Parthian cavalry, but should have a slightly higher charge bonus due to it being more "fiery" according to Strabo.

Infantry: They should be split into Armenian and Parthian once again, with the desert bonus being taken away from the Armenian troops, but their attack being slightly higher than their Parthian counterparts, due to the fact that Parthians rarely used any infantry whatsoever, while Armenian armies, especially during Armenia's "Imperial" era under Tigranes II used extensive and highly effective infantry battalions to beat the Parthians in the Armenian-Parthian War. He also used them to defeat the Romans at Artaxata, and to invade and conquer the Seleucids, Cappadocia, Caucasian Iberia, Phoenicia, and the Hasmonean Jewish kingdom.

Anyway, this is my proposal.

[dvk901]

From what I've been reading, I think Pontus is mis-represented in RTW as well. They have one phalax unit....but weren't they really a 'successor state' as well? I tend to agree they should be Hellenistic with a Persian\Eastern cavalry twist.

[Drtad]

Alright. I think that all factions should have unique names for their faction heir and king. For Armenia, these would be:

King= Arkah
Crown Prince= Avag Sepuh

Also, if one man emerges as the best commander of a faction, he should get a special trait, supreme commander of the army, that improves his influence and command.

Supreme Commander of the Army= Sparapet (Armenian)

Do not confuse this with the Armenian word for general, zoravar, which should only be used for the general's bodyguard cavalry. Soon, I will try out patch 10 and I will report on the map locations and what changes should be made to make Armenia as historical as possible. I believe Armenia should be one of the most powerful factions due to its unit diversity with the legionaries, mountain infantry, horse archers, cataphracts, etc, but it should just be hindered by its very crappy position right next to the Seleucid monster.

[dvk901]

I will change these like this, if it's OK:

Arkah (King)
Avag Sepuh (Heir)

As for the Bodyguard, I can name them that, but when you recruit it, you get a General along with them. So would 'Bodyguard of the Zoravar' be appropriate?

[Drtad]

Yup, Bodyguard of the Zoravar would be correct.

[Drtad]

I took a look at the Mundus map and liked it (Patch 10). However, the Big map nearly made me have a heart attack. The entire east needs to be overhauled. Completely. I will do it if you want (make the new regions correctly) but you would have to go in and edit the population, buildings, garrison, etc. Here is a screenie of some changes I think should be made.

I understand it might be kind of jumbled, but here is what I saw.

1. Pontus has three provinces, while Armenia only has one!!?? Very unbalanced, considering that Armenia was more powerful than Pontus. I think that a few provinces should be taken from Greece, which has too many, and maybe one from Britain, to make room for two more privinces for Armenia. The first one is Van province, with Van as the city, Mudus Magnus map has it, and it is a good province. Also should be added is Persarmenia province, near Lake Urmia, with the city as Urmia. This shouldbalance the area more than just having one enormous Armenia province.

2. The province you have named "Lower Colchis" should be called, Lesser Armenia.

3. Assyria has got to be taken from East of Babylonia, the land part of that province given to Elymais, which should be under Seleucid control. Rather than Assyria, an Assyrian province called Osroene did exist with its capital at Edessa, which I am sure you know were it is.

4. Sophene, as well as Commagene and Cappadocia, need to be moved farther West. Sophene was on the southwest side of Armenia, not the southeast side, Commagene also should be moved, and Cappadocia did not even share a border with Greater Armenia, it was conquered by Tigranes only after he conquered another tract of territory, Commagene, to reach Cappadocia.

5. Cilicia needs to be under Ptolemaic control, for both maps!

6. The Eastern interface, the Zoroastrian Persian stuff, should be scrapped for Armenia, which was never Zoroastrian. Perhaps an early Armenian temple such as Garni?



You know that it was Armenians who developed the Doric column since the first depictions of one was an Assyrian depiction of an ancient Urartian/Armenian temple which used Doric columns. Just change the interface from the Zoro symbol.

I hope these suggestions help.

[dvk901]

I took a look at the Mundus map and liked it (Patch 10). However, the Big map nearly made me have a heart attack. The entire east needs to be overhauled. Completely. I will do it if you want (make the new regions correctly) but you would have to go in and edit the population, buildings, garrison, etc. Here is a screenie of some changes I think should be made.

I understand it might be kind of jumbled, but here is what I saw.

1. Pontus has three provinces, while Armenia only has one!!?? Very unbalanced, considering that Armenia was more powerful than Pontus. I think that a few provinces should be taken from Greece, which has too many, and maybe one from Britain, to make room for two more privinces for Armenia. The first one is Van province, with Van as the city, Mudus Magnus map has it, and it is a good province. Also should be added is Persarmenia province, near Lake Urmia, with the city as Urmia. This shouldbalance the area more than just having one enormous Armenia province.

2. The province you have named "Lower Colchis" should be called, Lesser Armenia.

3. Assyria has got to be taken from East of Babylonia, the land part of that province given to Elymais, which should be under Seleucid control. Rather than Assyria, an Assyrian province called Osroene did exist with its capital at Edessa, which I am sure you know were it is.

4. Sophene, as well as Commagene and Cappadocia, need to be moved farther West. Sophene was on the southwest side of Armenia, not the southeast side, Commagene also should be moved, and Cappadocia did not even share a border with Greater Armenia, it was conquered by Tigranes only after he conquered another tract of territory, Commagene, to reach Cappadocia.

5. Cilicia needs to be under Ptolemaic control, for both maps!

6. The Eastern interface, the Zoroastrian Persian stuff, should be scrapped for Armenia, which was never Zoroastrian. Perhaps an early Armenian temple such as Garni?



You know that it was Armenians who developed the Doric column since the first depictions of one was an Assyrian depiction of an ancient Urartian/Armenian temple which used Doric columns. Just change the interface from the Zoro symbol.

I hope these suggestions help.

Drtad, can I have some more details on this temple, or the one you suggested I add as a historic building a while ago. I'm working on this and I forgot where it was.?

[removeduser_426582376423734]

That temple - the temple of Garni - was built during the first century AD.

[dvk901]

Well this is good timing, because we are totally reworking the Mundus Map at this time, making the scale bigger, and better coverage in the east. Could you perhaps find a map with those provinces you mentioned on it, or, in the (rtw)\data\_important_stuff folder, you will find several Mundus Map .gif files in there. I think there's one call a 'template'. Take that and draw on it what you talked about, and then we'll pass it on to our map maker guys and they can change it.

We may not even use the Big Map anymore....not sure, unless Northern Ranger can translate the same changes to both maps.

Thanks, and keep the info coming. I appreciate it.

As for the Interface...that's a problem. You see, the interface for the Eastern factions is shared by all of them. So maybe I would have to make it more generic than it is, or more representative of both Parthia and Armenia.

[cherryfunk]

Drtad, thank goodness you're on the team! I knew that things were 'off' with the way the east is represented on the map, but don't know enough about it to know how to fix it. Since we're reworking the map right now, this is perfect timing.

The discussion on Pontus is interesting, they seem to have been a mix of Persian and Greek influence.

I found an interesting thread on a wargaming site about how to recreate a Pontic army from 87BC (the '15mm' etc. are refering to lead figures):

------------------------------

What figures would best represent this army? Macedonian, Eastern Successor, Sellucid, Persian, Carthage-ish or would it best be a mix of troop tryes?

I was considering a mix of Macedonian and Early Sellucid for the slave phalanx units with a few Carthage Citizen infantry mixed in for good measure, Tarentian light horse, Skythian or Parthian horse archers, Persian scythed chariots, Alexandrian peltasts and I am not sure about other skirmishers and the heavier horse. Any suggestions?

------------------------------

Just about any Successor / Macedonian troops would fit.
Seleucid Phalangites with trousers would be a good fit.
Pontic Heavy Cavalry could be done using later Macedonian Heavy Cavalry with trousers. They had a wide assortment of troop types.

------------------------------

In 15mm, I am planning on using the Xyston unarmoured phalangites for the slave phalanx. Even though many of the slaves were probably of Black Sea origin where trousers were preferred, I'm not sure that a priority would have been for them to obtain trousers after being freed to become part of the phalanx. I use trousered phalangites for the Brazn shields, though they may possibly have been raised form Seleucid colonists who woul have been trouserless. I like th figures though! Kappadokians should suit for the majority of the Pontic foot – the Ax probably with thureos. Paphlagonians should fit too.

I haven't found a Rhoxolano Sarmatian that I'm happy with. The ones from OG15s have the round shield shown in AMPW, but I think a rectangular or crescent shield would be better. I shall probably use OG for the other Sarmatians. My Donnington ones are a bit long in the tooth.

I think the noble cavalry should probably be trousered, long sleeved, linen cuirass, shield (probably) and wearing a low Thracian helmet (I think that is the right name). These seem to be common(ish) finds in the Black Sea region covered by the Pontic Kingdom.

------------------------------

The pictorial evidence is non-existent, though that Sullan victory monument found in Greece recently seems to show what looks like a standard Successor Thureophoroi.

The pike seem to have been mercenaries, so standard seleucid trousered pike are good. The sources describe the army as particularly richly equipped, though this reads to me to imply maybe loaded down with booty..

Imitation Legionaries; for this the world is your lobster. I used Navigator Carthaginians, who are wearing Linen Cuirass, tunic, and wearing a Punic version of the Phrygian helm, which is close enough IMHO, and equipped them with clipped oval shields and Scuta (Because I want to, Becasue I want to, as Rose Tyler would say).

For the various merc Barbarians it gets harder. No one makes an Iberi for example, so I have used generic Levy eastern Barbarians and equipped them with simple celtic and wicker shields. I also use Cappadocians with their odd hats. Pontus WAS really called Northern Cappadocia. For this reason my light javelin / medium cavalry are also Cappadocians.

Light Scythian cavlry are played by… Scythians, and I bought some rather nice Scythian / Sarmatian nobles with cased bows and spears to play the heavy mob. I mix them in units depending on how I feel. The Sarmatians are from Old Glory.

For archers i used pretty generic eastern types. The Armenian archers and cavalry are specifically referred to, and there are plenty of manufacturers that make them, ditto Thureophoroi.

The real issue I have is the Heavy Pontic Noble Cavalry. Were they Persans with Hellenic shading, Greeks with Persian attitudes, or some Cappadocian speciality? I bit the bullet and went with very Persian looking types. I decided to follow the way I was educated, and go for Eupator as an all-out Persian Monarch, who just happened to speak Greek. Looking at the figures I bought I regret this, but there you go.

My main source of figures was Navigator. I also regret this, as they DO NOT morph well with my existing Macedonian army, being much slighter figures. Also, while their 'Imitation Legionaries' are a dream come true, i think their Pikemen are disappointingly static, when compared to my Foundry Pike. Its quite a patchy range, some are lovely, some only very ordinary. The figures from their Parthian and Persian range are all lovely, my only real issue is with their Pikemen, who LOOK like toy soldiers to me.

Scythed Chariots – everyone seems to make these. I hate mine personally, since I am sick of spending 150 points that could have gone on archers for a troop type that is only for comic effect. This is historical accuracy taken to its ultimate conclusion.

I guess the point is no-one knows, and if you were to design a Pontic army of your own there is not much anyone could argue with. Think later rather than earlier – it was the last army to fight in the Hellenistic way that the west fought against. So Thureos rather than Pelta, Seleucid helmets and armour rather than Greek or Alexandrian.

------------------------------

Actually the ex-slave phalanx in Greece was not of Bosphoran origins, and would be made up of troops from the former Bithynian army, and other Asian states, as well as Greeks. The seclusion of the ex-slave phalanx from the brazen shields in sources causes some confusion, but they both seem to be phalanxes, and rather heavily armored.

Mithridates' Pontic kingdom was a fusion of Greek and Persian influnces so a Pontic army would have plenty of fusion there as well. Does this mean a Pontic phalanx must be shown wearing trousers? I doubt that.

Sekunda's work on the Seleucid army depicts phalangites wearing Greek style kit, with no depiction of 'pantodapoi' or levies in trousers.
The later Bosphoran army of Mithridates' last attempt to attack Rome was organized in cohorts and included his veterans, levied Bosphorans, and Roman expatriots. No phalanxes are mentioned at this time as it seems that Mithridates had decided their time had come and gone.

As for using the Foundry 'Carthaginian' pikemen as Pontics, that would make little sense since when Mithridates began emulating the legion and its equipment, his troops seem to have dropped the gem encrusted and bejewelled kit of the phalanx basd army. I would suspect that expensive mail armors woudl go to the elite troops forming the new mock legions, before these would be doled out to the phalanx.

------------------------------

The description of the phalanx including the ex-slaves certainly sounds like a pike phalanx. I'd like to look at the greek words used by Plutarch which are translated as 'pike' though. Frontinus does specifically describe the first line at one of the battles (which may be Orchomenus) as armed in the Macedonian fashion. Whether he is to be trusted with the whole description of the battle lines is another matter – he also mentions the presence of a Roman style trained line which is possible but pretty unlikely I think at this stage. Dio mentions how Mith trained his troops in the Roman style (though it is in one of the lost chapters 8-( ) We know about it because he mentions it himself later. However, I guess this rearming would be more likely following the arrival of Sertorius' chaps.

------------------------------

I read somewhere, in either Plutarch or Appian that Mithridates freed the slaves who fought in his phalanx. The army was reformed to replace the phalanx with imitation legionaries at the end of the First Mithridatic War in 84BC. One assumes he thought pikemen were outdated. Would these "imitation legions" consist of the same Freed Slaves that were formerly pikemen?

------------------------------

The usual rule in most systems is that the 1st Mithridatic wars army were all pike, from then all all imitation legionaries. I have insufficient faith in the logistic and organisational skill of Late Successor kingdoms to believe that, and would expect it to have been more gradual than that. Significantly at Zela there were still pike in the army.

The 36,000 freedmen and slaves Mithridates raised while skulking in Southern Russia will have been a completely different bunch of lads. By then Mith had lost his original army half a dozen times over. Anyhow, they never got to fight.Eupators plan to march to italy via the danube valley and then lead his army across the alps was, understandably, received by his subjects with a great cry of 'Next King Please'[/i]

------------------------------

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=55024

[Drtad]

Unfortunately I am not very good with Pontic army composition. I can use circumstantial evidence though. Pontus was heavily defeated in the firs Mithridatic war, so I would assume that they were using phalanxes. However, Mithridates was very good at organizing troops, so I wouldn't be surprised if he quickly changed to using imitation legionaries, leading Mithridates to victory in the second Mithridatic war. However, Mithridates ouldn't match the tactical genius of Lucullus, leading him to a final defeat. Tigranes II, after his defeat at Tigranocerta, gave Mithridates an Armenian army of 8,000, and together they rallied against Lucullus, destroying the Romans at Artaxata mainly due to the very effectiveness of Armenian legionaries and cataphracts in flanking the Romans. Then, Mithridates took the Armenian army and reconquered Pontus, only to lose once again to Pompey. I think that Pontus should have imitation legionaries, but less powerful than those of both Rome and Armenia. Also, I think that Pontus should be able to recruit Armenian forces in Trebizond, since it was called Lesser Armenia. Still, this is all assumtion, I truly have no idea, RS needs a Pontus historian.

About the Big Map, yes, Ithink that it should be scrapped from the mod download until it can be overhauled, it is very unbalanced. A larger Mundus Magnus would be great, especially with Bactria.

[DR. Hobo. PHD.]

if i may propose a basic unit list for all eastern factions?

armenia:
horse archers
azat nobles(would use current early bodyguard model. its perfect actually.)
cataphracts
skirmisher cavalry
median cavalry

infantry:
(id have two basic spearmen, one with a square shield, it would be more eastern type unit, and the other with a thureos, they were really popular around the black sea due to the celtic migrations there)
imintation legionaries
a heavy spearmen, sort of a royal guard

missile:
an eastern peltast
slingers
archers

parthia:
cavalry:
horse archers
cataphracts
nobles(be a half way between, i think they should be armed with a lance and bow to show the transition between steppe nomadisim and the growing empire of the parthians)
dahae horse archers
dahae nobles

infantry:
basic eastern spearmen(shared with armenian one)

missiles:
archers
slingers

pontus:
cavalry:
cappadocian cav
hetairoi
pahplagonian horsemen.
scythed chariots

infantry:
pandotapoi
levy pikemen
pandotaipoi pikemen
chalkispidai
galatian infantry
galatian nobles

missiles:
akontistai
slingers
thurephoroi
thorakitai


like i said these are just suggestions, i dont clame to be an expert, but i have done alot of reading in the dev archives of RTR and EB and none of the units listed would be objected to by either team.