[Shogun's got his own blog]

Hello everyone,

Sorry for the shameless plugging but I just opened my first blog today, which I am calling Tactica Guerilla. I don't have anything up yet beyond the introduction but I still want everyone to know about it so they can check it out later. This is very exciting!

Tactica Guerilla

[Romans: The Imitation Legionaries]

Roman generals and historians gave the name imitation legionaries primarily to the assault troops of the Hellenistic powers they encountered in the 2nd and 1st Centuries BC. They assumed these troops were copies of their own, and so the name stuck

In the aftermath of the Celtic migrations of the 280s and 270s a new troop type emerged known as the thureophoroi, so called because of the Celtic oval convex shield they carried, called a thureos by the Hellenes. The thureophoros (the singular of thureophoroi) was a multi-purpose soldier that could function both as a heavy skirmisher and as melee infantry in a pinch depending on armament. Since they did not wear armor, a detachment of thureophoroi was very mobile on the field, which fit their purposes. Both the Seleukids and the Hellenic city-states were the greatest users of the thureophoroi and illustrated what that purpose was. The first purpose appears to be similar in nature to that of the so-called ‘assault peltasts’ of Alexander the Great, a fast infantry unit light enough to keep up with the missile troops but heavy enough to be able to hold their own in melee. The second usage was that of flank troops able to effectively get around a phalangitai battalion and harry them. The Hellenic city-states were fond of using their own phalangitai battalions to tie down Makedonian battalions long enough for the thureophoroi to hit them in the sides and rear, engaging at short range with their swords and effectively disrupting unit cohesion. Surprisingly the actual number of such troops was low, even though they could achieve startling success, as the armies of the Achaian League prior to 208 and the ascendancy of Philopoimen proved.

However battlefield experience dictated that in some cases the thureophoros was too lightly armed, leading to a new, heavier, troop type. The thorakitai were a more heavily armed and armored version of their lighter cousin, equipped with a mail shirt and a ‘heavy javelin’ in addition to spear and sword. While some Roman influence is probable, on a whole the thorakitai were very much a native innovation. Because they were armored, thorakitai formations were stationed on the wings of the phalangitai battalions. In this role they acted much like their predecessors as flank troops but because they were heavier armed they could also act as assault troops, breaking the opposing line. On occasion it is recorded in the historical record that thorakitai could, and did, tie down a phalangitai battalion frontally long enough for more mobile troops to out flank it. Only the Seleukids really used these troops in large numbers. In Hellas the usage of thorakitai remained rare until the Romans annexed the region. They then used the thorakites (singular of thorakitai) kit to outfit their own legions raised in the area.

The Seleukids in turn took this principle to its most heavily armored extreme. The hypaspistai were the elite infantry soldiers and bodyguards of the royal house of the Argiadai in Makedon in their original form and remain a subject of some controversy. When the Seleukids invented their own version of this troop the Romans saw them as ‘imitation legionaries’. Roman influence in the design and organization of the Seleukid hypaspistai is undeniable. But they remained a firmly Hellenistic institution in tactics and equipment. As some of the most heavily armed and armored infantry ever seen in the ancient world the Seleukid hypaspistai were primarily vanguard troops at the head of the formation. However the Seleukid state was not able to maintain them for long, but whether the unit was destroyed in battle or just faded away with the Seleukid monarchy in the late 1st Century BC is unclear.

We now examine other troops in the Hellenistic east that were called ‘imitation legionaries’ by the Romans. One such example was the Mardig swordsmen of the Armenian Artaxiad dynasty encountered during the Mithridatic Wars. It is not clear whether these troops were a native Armenian innovation or the result of Hellenistic influence. Nevertheless we do know the Mardig were formed from the middle and lower nobility (the Azats) who made the choice not to go to war mounted, the usual method of the Armenian upper class. Prior to conflict with Rome the primary mission of the Mardig swordsmen was to attack phalangitai formations frontally, using their javelins to disrupt the battalion long enough for them to charge through. After the beginning of the Mithridatic Wars the purpose changed to engaging the Roman legions, which they did well. Ultimately Tigran II, the Armenian monarch, surrendered in 66 BC, but more because of his advanced age than any battlefield failure. The Mardig swordsmen apparently fell out of use not long after, displaced by Roman influence.

Mithridates VI, the primary enemy of Rome in the Mithridatic Wars, also used troops the Romans called ‘imitation legionaries’. Battlefield failure against the armies of Rome in the Second Mithridatic War prompted the Pontic monarch to radically change his army. His phalangitai battalions were relegated to a lesser position, their place taken by Pontic thorakitai. Roman authors took this to mean that Mithridates was copying the Roman method. While Rome’s success did spark the almost total replacement of the phalangitai as Pontos’ primary line infantry the actual troops themselves already existed prior to contact with Rome. Mithridates’ primary reforms increased their numbers and the quality of their training (including possibly the adoption of scale armor) but it proved for naught. The Pontic thorakitai, while giving a good account in battle, ultimately were defeated by Rome.

Finally we shall cover some instances of actual imitation legionaries. Two good examples are Parthia and Numidia. The Parthian Ashkanian dynasty replaced the Seleukids as the predominant power in the east starting in 139 BC. As their empire grew and settled they began to use the local population and their military traditions to augment their own. The thureophoroi tradition was especially valued by the Parthians. Contact and frequent wars with Rome soon saw the number of these troops increase. They were equipped and trained in the Roman fashion as legionaries (often by Romans who had defected), but with regional modifications like linen armor. These Parthian imitation legionaries would remain popular all the way until the Ashkanian dynasty’s demise in 226 AD. In the case of Numidia their imitation legionaries were the result of long contact with Rome. Much is unknown about them, but we do know that in some cases these troops were trained by Rome directly and in others it was a close attempt to copy them. The best known example is that of Tacfarinas, who used his imitation legionaries to wage a rebellion against the Emperor Tiberius in AD 17-AD 24.

In conclusion the imitation legionaries are an interesting example of both the Roman state’s arrogance in believing that everyone wanted to copy it and its army and the Roman people’s own ability to be able to successfully catch the changing tide of war. Both Rome and the Hellenistic states saw the decline of the Makedonian system, but only Rome fully grasped it and destroyed the heirs of Alexander.

[Battles: The Sack of Rome]

Michael,

Not really, the Forum Romanum bore the brunt of the damage but actually was mostly rebuilt in later centuries. Some of the buildings were allowed to collapse or was never repaired, as was the case of the Basilica Aemilia. As for the Forum Caesaris, it was already abandoned prior to the Sack of Rome, the Senate having been moved out of the Curia Julia centuries previous by Domitian. The Forum Traiani went untouched as far as I know, and didn't start to decay until the Age of Charlemagne when people started to remove the limestone from the buildings.

[Other: The Foundation of the Kushan Empire 126 BC-AD 100]

The foundation of the Kushan state in the last years of the BC era and the first years of the AD era was an important development in the history of Central Asia and India. Sitting on the central nexus of the Silk Road, the Kushans were the primary vehicle of contact between East and West.

The Yuezhi migration and the chaos in which they came provided the backdrop for these events. In 130 – 126 BC the Indo-European Yuezhi arrived in the former Hellenic eastern frontier and overran the region, absorbing the last remnants of the Baktrian Kingdom and putting themselves in place as the new power brokers. The five separate kingdoms of the Yuezhi formed from the leading clans of the confederation then went their own way. Gaofu, the westernmost kingdom, began to raid into Ashkanian Iran (Parthia) around 124.

But this did not go on long before the Ashkanians struck back. Shahanshah Mithridates II fought back against the Yuezhi after the death of his predecessor (Artabanus I) at their hands. In 80 BC he successfully fought them off, and Gaofu fell under on and off Parthian influence for the next several decades. Meanwhile the other kingdoms were trying to advance south but where held back by the Indo-Saka. The descendants of the same Saka the Yuezhi had driven before them on their way west.

Nevertheless they still made inroads. In 70 BC Hermaios, the Indo-Hellene king of the Paropamisadai (modern eastern Afghanistan) died and control passed to the Yuezhi. Hinting at the possibility a marriage alliance had been made between the two powers. After this the record becomes confused and fuzzy between the warring states. However starting with the reign of Phraates IV in 38 BC in Parthia the Parthians became involved in the power struggle in India and pushed the Indo-Saka out. Gaofu now became a Parthian satellite state so thoroughly the historians of Han China cut them out of the list of Yuezhi states, and replaced them with another clan kingdom that had risen in that time.

In the first years of the new century the first move to unification was made. At the beginning of the 1st Century AD a new ruler arose in the kingdom of the Guishuang, Heraios. His greatest fame in the historical record is his claim to descend from the Indo-Hellene King Hermaios. We do not know much more about Heraios other than this. However it is certain that Heraios would have been witness to the loss of the Indian territories to the Parthian forces of the Ashkanian prince Gondophares around AD 20. Gondophares then broke off from Parthia to create his own kingdom in India. We are also aware the Guishuang had become the chief clan kingdom among the Yuezhi by this time. Whether or not Heraios was responsible for this or if he inherited this status is unknown. Heraios died around AD 30 and control passed to a man known as Kujula Kadphises, probably his son.

Kujula was the father of the Kushan Empire. Coming to power amid such circumstances, Kujula Kadphises was the outstanding figure of the times. While not much is known of him for certain we do know that Kujula was ambitious and not content to merely be the prince of one of five kingdoms. He desired a more centralized state and embarked on a campaign of unification. From the coinage record and other evidence it appears that this campaign covered about ten years, from 30 to 40. In the course of this war the Yuezhi under Kujula became embroiled in a conflict with Parthia over Gaofu. This ended with the conquest of the wayward kingdom. His new empire was named ‘Kushan’ by its Hellenic subjects as Kujula called himself Kushana on his coins in the Greek script. To which he added a new letter, Sho, to produce the ‘Sh’ in Kushana.

Like his father, Kujula made extensive efforts to tie himself to Hermaios, which endeared him to the Hellenes who lived under his rule. In AD 45 the Indo-Parthian king Gondophares died and Kujula Kadphises took advantage of the incompetence of his sons to seize Gondophares’ kingdom. This provided an effective launching board for future invasions.

As a result of these conquests Kujula added steadily more grandiose titles to his name. In new coinage modeled after the Roman silver standards of Caesar Augustus, Kujula Kadphises took the Iranian title of Shahanshah (Great King) and the Greek title of Megas Basileos (the same but in Koine Greek). Later kings following Kujula added a third form of the title in Kharosthi (a writing script derived from Aramaic used for several Indian languages), Maharajasa. When he died in AD 80 at over 80 years old the first Kushan Emperor had already created a strong state poised to control ‘the crossroads of the world’.

The second Kushan ruler was the son the first, Vima Takto. Much is still unclear about Vima Takto and his reign. In fact until the discovery of the Rabatak Inscription in modern Afghanistan not even his name was known. Just his two most popular titles: Shahanshah Megas Sotiros (The Great King, great Savior). Nevertheless we do know several important happenings that occurred under Vima Takto’s reign. The Chinese provide the most information about these happenings.

According to the Book of Later Han the son of Kujula Kadphises, whom they called Yan Gaozhen, conquered Tianzhu. This name was the title used by the Han by which they referred to the Indian northwest. This indicates that Vima Takto completed the conquest of the Indo-Parthian remnants, expanding beyond Gandhara. The Indo-Saka Western Satraps were possibly an invention of Vima Takto, to expand his control even further. This is considered because the Book of Later Han records the use of governor-generals in Tianzhu by the Kushans, and the Iranian satrapal institution could have been what they saw.

We are also aware from Chinese sources that in AD 84 the Han Court sent forth their general, Ban Chao to subdue the rebellion of the Han client king of Kashgar in the Tarim Basin. The Kushans, and before them the Yuezhi, had always maintained ties with China. Vima Takto provided both military and material aid to Ban Chao in his operations. Their greatest contribution was in checking the kingdoms of Sogdiana from interfering in the Tarim with the aid of their old allies, the city-state of Kangju. By 86 all of the Tarim Basin was under Han control, which provided much needed stability to the region and great benefits to the Kushans by trade.

In AD 90 Vima Takto died, and was succeeded by his son (or nephew) in turn, Vima Kadphises. Right off from the start of his reign the new Kushan ruler intended to capitalize on his father’s good relations with the Han by asking for a Han princess to wife under the heqin system of political peace marriages. When the Han refused Vima Kadphises turned on them and attacked Ban Chao. While the Kushans were defeated by the Han general they began to contest Han control of the Tarim Basin. Vima Kadphises’ actions began a long struggle for control between the empires that ended only with the eventual victory of the Kushans, but that is outside the scope of this article. Other military exploits under Vima Kadphises involve the Kushan conquest of Ferghana, bringing the Saka-Hellenic city-states of the region under his control. In India, Vima Kadphises expanded further south and west into the subcontinent and possibly went as far as Mathura, but this is unclear.

But Vima Kadphises’ most impressive accomplishments were civil, not military. In Central Asian and Indian history the reign of Vima Kadphises stands out for its economic prosperity and that it marks the beginning of the great melting pot of cultures that made the Kushan Empire what it was. Gold coinage, brought to the Kushans by Roman traders, first appeared under Vima Kadphises. These coins present a true to life portrait of the Kushan ruler, depicting him as a man with a face dominated by a large nose and a mole on one cheek. The Romans came to trade primarily by sea to the Indian ports of Barygaza and Barbarikon. This trade was vital to the Kushans as it sustained their predominantly Hellene urban population, which continued to produce exquisite artwork and other artifacts. This is turn fed into the already flourishing Silk Road trade from Han China, of which the Kushan Empire was the central hub.

This in turn led to the remarkable religious toleration of the Kushans. Ruling a large multi-ethnic empire required a measure of toleration by the Yuezhi nobility, but the Kushan dynasty took it to a new level. Not only were the Kushan Emperors personally tolerant but they encouraged religious diversity. Hinduism, Buddhism (predominately in Greek form), traditional Hellenic religion, Zoroastrianism and other older Iranian faiths all found fertile ground under the Kushans. This blending of religions contributed the Kushans’ great cultural wealth, which is still being unearthed in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and modern India.

In conclusion the founding years of the Kushan Empire are, while still mostly unknown, a fascinating time in Central Asian and Indian history. Vima Kadphises’ reign ended in around AD 100 and on that note we will close the article. The reign and life of his son, Kanishka, is the golden age of the Kushan Empire, marking the end of the first phase of its existence.

[Biographies: Brennos]

"In the ensuing battle the Romans were massacred by the angry Gauls, mostly because except for the envoys no Roman had ever seen anyone as tall as a Celt (6 foot and above) before."

What? The Romans lost because they never saw 6 ft tall men before? This is kinda bad scholarship here. Most archaeologist findings show no real difference in the heights of Gauls and Romans, even though the Greeks and Romans commonly commented on Celtic height. There were obviously other reasons: poor moral, inflexible/bad tactics, the ineptitude of the consul or skill of Brennus, troop numbers, etc.

Cassador_Chris,

Yeah, that part of the article is pretty much embarrassing for me today. When I wrote that I was just starting out on the Celts, and had no idea about the deeper causes of the Roman defeat at Allia. One of which was the excellent tactics of the Celts. Which the Romans later copied.

[Other: The Yuezhi Migration 162-126 BC]

The gradual migration of the Indo-European Yuezhi from their home in Central Asia to the important crossroads region of Baktria and northwestern India is an important chapter in that region’s history. These people would later form the Kushan Empire, an imperial state that seriously threatened the Parthian Ashkanian dynasty in Iran and became the primary point of contact between Rome and China.

The journey began in the homelands of the Yuezhi, in the Tarim Basin. In the early 2nd Century BC the Yuezhi controlled a confederation of steppe tribes and competed for control over the Basin with another confederation further east, the Xiongnu (possibly of Turkic origin). Around 177 BC the Xiongnu Shanyu (the supreme ruler of the confederation) Maodun began to launch raids against the Yuezhi. Jizhu, Maodun’s son, became Shanyu in 174 and continued the war to its successful conclusion in 162. The Xiongnu victory was so total that Jizhu was able to make a drinking cup from the skull of the Yuezhi king.

In the outcome of the defeat the remaining Yuezhi tribal leaders split into three groups. One chose to remain in the Basin under Xiongnu control. A second migrated to the south and chose to settle among the Qiang, a Proto-Tibetan people, the Chinese called them the Minor Yuezhi. A third, larger, group under the new king also opted to leave but went west instead and settled in the modern Ili Valley, north of the Tianshan mountain range.

Here the Yuezhi made their new home. Not long after arrival the Yuezhi met a nomadic confederation already living in the region, which the Chinese called the Sai. A loose alliance of Scythians and their Sakae cousins the Sai tried to keep the Yuezhi out of the valley. But they were pushed aside easily and forced southwest, colliding with the Hellenic Baktrian state. The Yuezhi settled down again and from archeological evidence enjoyed a prosperous and mostly peaceful life. It was during this time the Yuezhi began to adopt the use of heavily armored cavalry, borrowed from the Sakae. Under the Kushan Empire such cavalry would become central to their style of warfare. But the illusion of peace was shattered in 132. The Wusun, a Turkic people, launched an assault on the Yuezhi.

The Wusun and the Yuezhi, back in the Tarim Basin, had long been neighbors. But at the start of the war with the Xiongnu the Wusun had been attacked and driven west by the Yuezhi, who killed their leader or Kunmo, Nandoumi. Now Nandoumi’s son, Liejiaomi, intended to take revenge. After gaining permission from the Xiongnu, who were the nominal overlords of the Wusun, they rode south in to the Ili Valley. The fury of Liejiaomi caught the Yuezhi by surprise and drove them west.

From there they came onto the independent kingdoms of Ferghana and Sogdiana. For the second time the Yuezhi came into hostile contact with the Sakae, who had settled in the region after being evicted from the Ili Valley. Again the Yuezhi pushed them out and this time the Sakae went into India and Ashkanian Iran. In Ferghana, which the Chinese called Dayuan, the Yuezhi found little welcome from the mixed Hellenic natives or the Sakae nobility, but to the north in Sogdiana they found willing allies in the city-state of Kangju. The nobility of the two peoples intermarried and sparked off a relationship that lasted centuries.

From these fertile valleys and farmland the Yuezhi made their way southwest. After wintering in the region the Yuezhi, led by guides from Kangju, settled down on the northern banks of the Oxus River. From here they spread out into five major tribes, each ruled by a yabgu (Prince): Xiumi, Guishuang, Shuangmi, Xidun, and Dumi. The royal court was yearly held on the banks of the Oxus.

Now settled securely the Yuezhi began to build their power base. With Kangju allied to them the Yuezhi saw little reason to attack Ferghana but they still made such a show of force to convince them to pay tribute, making them nominal vassals while still independent. It was then that they turned to Baktria. A shattered and broken kingdom in the wake of almost continual civil wars since 180 the Baktrians were unable to put up much resistance to the Yuezhi and in 130 they killed the nominal King of Baktria, Heliokles.

This marked the last stage of the migrations. With the fall of the Hellenic states the Yuezhi began to cross the Oxus in force and resettled in Baktria, exacting tribute from the fortified towns. Baktra was made into the royal seat (which the Chinese called Lanshi), and the other tribes moved in to take advantage of the grazing land. Only the Guishuang kept significant territories on the northern side of the Oxus. In 127 an interesting event occurred.

Zhang Qian had arrived. Back east, in China, the Han Emperor Wu had desired allies for his planned war to destroy the Xiongnu and stop their depredations against the Han. When news of the Yuezhi and their long struggle reached his ears, the Emperor knew he had found that ally. He sent Zhang Qian, an official with military experience attached to the palace, to find them in 138. After a long and perilous journey, including spending ten years in Xiongnu captivity, Zhang found the Yuezhi.

He spent a year in Baktra and the countryside recording what he saw, writing a detailed account of the region and its people. This account is still studied today. But Zhang found the Yuezhi unwilling to agree to a military alliance, thinking the Han to far away to be of any help fighting the Xiongnu. Zhang Qian made his way back home in 126, leaving behind the seeds for the Silk Road trade.

In conclusion the migration of the Yuezhi into Baktria and their settlement of the region was the important first step to the creation of the Kushan Empire. While not yet the major power that they would become, the Yuezhi had already gained infamy with the Hellenes and Zhang Qian’s embassy marked the beginning of the Silk Road.

[The Siege of Vienna, 1683]

Hey everyone,

Well I have decided to post this little article I wrote to commemorate the breaking of the Ottoman siege of Vienna in 1683 on September 12. The Christian victory here was the harbinger of the future and the Treaty of Karlowitz which ended the Great Turkish War over a decade later changed the entire dynamic of relations between the Ottomans and Europe.

Venimus, Vidimus, Deus Vicit

The Ottoman Siege of Vienna

On September 12th, 1683 a date 325 years in the past from yesterday, the armies of the Ottoman Empire under the command of Grand Vizier Merzifonlu Kara Mustafa Pasha were defeated before the walls of Vienna. This was the second and last time that the Ottomans, the greatest Islamic empire in recent memory, would lay siege to Vienna and seriously threaten Europe.

In recent years the Ottomans had already begun to experience a revival. Starting 1656 the leadership of the Ottoman state had fallen into the hands of the new grandee dynasty of Koprulu, an Albanian family of previously little importance. Starting with the patriarch Koprulu Mehmed the family led a reversal of Ottoman fortunes across the board.

However this did not yet become a cause for concern until the next round of the Ottoman-Polish Wars saw the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth actually lose control of a significant chunk of its territory in the south. This included the Right Bank Cossack Hetmanate in 1672 to the forces of Grand Vizier Fazil Ahmed Pasha. While the war ultimately ended on far less severe terms in 1676 the sudden revival of the Ottoman military machine in the east was worrisome.

The same year that the war against the Commonwealth ended saw the ascension of the third Koprulu Grand Vizier, Merzifonlu Kara Mustafa. Ambitious and talented Kara Mustafa intended to build on his adopted family’s accomplishments. From the beginning the new administration was plunged into war with the growing power of the Tsardom of Russia. This war ended in 1681 in the Ottomans’ favor and allowed them to turn to Europe.

There the Ottomans were faced by their most enduring foe, the Catholic Habsburg dynasty. By that time the whole of the Holy Roman Empire was the throes of the Counter-Reformation, the Catholic answer to the Protestant and Reformed movements of the previous century. The current Emperor, Leopold I, seemed to have two great goals in life: The end of the Protestants, and the containment of Louis XIV, the Sun King of France.

Thus it was that the Habsburgs found themselves fighting a losing war with the Calvinist Hungarian leader Imre Thokoly, Prince of Transylvania. The success of the anti-Catholic cause attracted Ottoman attention, especially when Thokoly wrestled a considerable part of Northern Hungary from the Habsburgs. In 1682 the Grand Vizier negotiated the acceptance of Thokoly as an Ottoman vassal state as King of Central Hungary. Louis XIV saw the inevitable result of Kara Mustafa’s policy and sent word to his embassy in Konstantiniyye to let the Ottomans know he did not plan to interfere if the affair came to blows.

This proved to be just what Kara Mustafa needed. With the French King’s promise the Grand Vizier felt confidant enough to begin to convince the Sultan, Mehmed IV, to declare war. As it turned out the Sultan needed more convincing and Kara Mustafa went as far as to falsify documents and manipulate the Habsburg desire for peace at all costs, to his advantage. On August 26th Mehmed IV finally agreed to war and sent a message to Vienna telling the Emperor to stay where he was until the Sultan could arrive to take his head personally. Mehmed also let Leopold know his intention to wipe the population out in its entirety unless they accepted Islam.

However because of the lateness of the season the Ottoman army could not depart from Edirne. They had gathered there to await the Sultan’s blessing as supreme leader of Islam, and the invasion was pushed back to the following year.

This allowed the Christians time to recover from the shock of the Ottoman declaration of war and prepare. Leopold called on the Pope, Innocentius XI, to help out with the diplomatic offensive. The Pope responded whole-heartedly but found his efforts to unite Christendom blocked by Louis XIV, who believed that an Ottoman victory would ensure France’s supremacy over Europe. The main battleground of the diplomatic war was the Sejm (Parliament) of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

The King of the Commonwealth, Jan III Sobieski, was more then willing personally to ride to war. But the law of the Commonwealth dictated that the unanimous approval of the Sejm was needed first. For the rest of 1682 and into 1683 the embassies of France and the Papacy fought to out-bid each other for the votes of the individual delegates in the Sejm. This became particularly frustrating as the matter continued over several sessions.

In the meanwhile the Ottoman war machine rumbled forward. On March 30th, 1683 the Ottoman Army left Edirne and marched north into Hungary. By May 3rd they had reached Belgrade and were joined by the vassal armies of Imre Thokoly and the Chinggisid Khan of the Crimean Tatars, Murad I. At a war council in Belgrade the Grand Vizier decided on a change of plans, rather then advance and besiege the Habsburg fortress at Gyor he opted to advance directly on the capital at Vienna. The Sultan had no objections and gave the go ahead on the plan, though he personally stayed behind in Belgrade. On July 7th Ottoman intentions became clear to the Habsburg court and the Emperor, together with his nobles, the majority of his army, and some 60,000 civilians abandoned Vienna. Only a skeleton garrison of 11,000 under Ernst Rudiger, Graf von Starhemberg, and 5,000 civilians remained when the Ottoman army finally arrived on July 14th. Their army totaled 120,000 men, with an extensive siege train.

Upon arrival the Grand Vizier set up one of the most splendid siege camps in history and ordered his men to begin to construct siege trenches and bring up the artillery. Before the firing began Kara Mustafa sent forth an emissary to the walls, telling the garrison that if they laid down their arms and became Muslims they and the population would be spared. A resounding roar of defiance answered him, and the siege began.

This turned out to be the key element to sway the Sejm. With reports from Hungary and Austria coming in and one last massive bribe from Rome, the Sejm gave the unanimous decision to declare war on the Ottoman Empire. King Jan was already resolved to go to war anyway from the previous winter. Now with official sanction the King of the Commonwealth moved his forces ever closer to the western border.

On August 15th he crossed into the Holy Roman Empire and towards the end of the month his army, composed of the finest forces he had to offer, met up with an Imperial army commanded by Leopold’s brother-in-law: Karl V of Lorraine. A combination of Austrian, Bavarian, Swabian, Franconian, and Protestant Saxon troops the ragtag forces had been steadily harassing the Ottomans for some time. With the arrival of the Commonwealth forces the Christian leadership felt that they could now relieve Vienna. The allied troops numbered 75,000 in total. Of those 50,000 were Austrian and German and the remaining 24,000 being Commonwealth.

Meanwhile the siege was not going well for the defenders. Merzifonlu Kara Mustafa Pasha was not an impatient or hot-headed man and as far as he knew he had all the time in the world to conduct the siege. His actions were methodical and steady. When the Ottoman cannons, 300 in all, proved to be too light to breach Vienna’s walls he adopted tunneling instead. This proved more successful, but Vienna’s walls were some of the most advanced in Europe and taking them down was slow going. But most important of all was the defender’s spirit, for every dent the Ottomans made the garrison would sandbag it back up. Ottoman tunnels were met by answering tunnels from Vienna, planting and defusing bombs back and forth steadily.

But the Ottomans knew they were winning. On September 8th the Ottoman sapper corps blew a massive chunk out of Vienna’s walls when they destroyed the Burg ravelin and the nearby Nieder wall. As the Ottoman infantry stormed the fortifications the defenders, now whittled down to 4,000 continued to hold grimly despite the damage. They were prepared to fight the Ottomans in the streets if needed.

However help was coming. Two days earlier the Imperial/Commonwealth forces had crossed the Danube at Tulln and were marching with all speed to Vienna, working out a solid command structure along the way. News of the breach caused them to move even faster. The King soon led the combined armies through the dense and mountainous forest region of the Wienerwald. On September 11th Christian forces arrived on a small hill overlooking Vienna known as Kahlenberg and drove off an Ottoman observation force. They then lit up 3 large torches to let the Ottomans and the defenders know of their arrival.

The Ottoman response was lackluster. Kara Mustafa was convinced that the natural terrain of the Wienerwald would prevent any force significant enough to threaten him from coming through and had fatally underestimated the Christian resolve to defeat him. Even as his staff urged the Grand Vizier to break camp and wheel about to face the Imperial/Commonwealth forces he refused. Instead he moved a small force of 30,000 infantry and cavalry to his rear supported by cannons and the Crimean cavalry while shifting the majority of his forces for one final attack on Vienna the next day on September 12th.

Meanwhile in the Christian camp the allied forces were preparing for battle. Jan III was careful in his deployment, putting the Austrians on the left flank, the majority of the German troops in the center, and the Commonwealth troops augmented by German infantry on the right.

In the early morning dawn of the next day the Catholic troops held Mass while the Protestants held their own service, both prayed for victory. At 5:30 AM the Ottomans moved to dislodge them. But not the Crimean cavalry whom in a fit of anger at the Grand Vizier’s treatment had chosen to peal off and raid the suburbs of Vienna, abandoning their positions.

Duke Karl reacted quickly and led his own troops forward, joined by the Imperial infantry in the center. The resulting battle would soon dissolve into a steady concerted effort to push back the Ottoman line. However it was slow going as the heavy woods made the fighting and advance difficult on both sides. The whirling battle soon began to drag more Ottoman troops into the fray but Kara Mustafa kept his best troops, the crack Janissaries and the heavy cavalry out of the fighting and in the trenches before Vienna.

Even as the Christians attempted to break the siege the Ottomans were attempting to create a second large hole in the walls, rendering the relief effort and the defense futile. But the defenders, already suspicious of another mining attempt like that of September 8th, discovered a massive bomb under the Lobel bastion just in time. The last ditch chance for victory had effectively gone up in smoke in the early afternoon around 1:00.

At the same time as the bomb was diffused the Commonwealth forces had finally managed to make their way onto the battlefield proper and held position on the ridge. King Jan then detached his infantry to aid the Imperial center in turning the Ottoman lines. The remaining 14,000 cavalry then departed back into the woods accompanied by a unit of Imperial cavalry.

At 2:30 PM the Christian cavalry, led by Poland’s winged hussars, burst from cover on the far right of the Ottoman lines. The impact of some of the best cavalry in Europe head on was too much for the stressed siege lines to bear and they broke nearly on contact. Within another 3 hours the rest of the besiegers broke and fled as well under pressure from the Austrian left. The last element to resist was the 20,000 man Janissary corps, but even they were overrun under the press of the Christian advance and fled.

The Grand Vizier then ordered the withdrawal to Belgrade, which turned into a rout. Leaving their whole camp and its riches behind, which greatly benefited the victors. Jan III was the first to reach the Grand Vizier’s tent from which he received the delirious and joyful cheers of his army and the defenders of Vienna as the savior of Europe. The city was saved.

As the allied troops plundered the camps Jan III took the time to dictate a letter to the Pope by which he would report his victory to the whole of Europe. In this letter he made his famous paraphrase of Julius Caesar’s dispatch from the battle of Zela in 47 BC:

“Venimus, Vidimus, Deus Vicit” We Came, We Saw, God Conquered.

[Other: Mauryan-Hellenic Relations]

Elephants are usually the stereotype as far as warfare goes, but the Indians had so much more in terms of military practice. They would definitely be interesting- perhaps in an 'eastern empires' mod?

Well I usually don't post on my own articles but I felt like I needed to reply to this last point.

That is true in that elephants are the stereotype as far as Indian warfare is involved, even if they were important. Like for example longbows re-enforced with iron (and centuries later under the Guptas, steel) or their magnificent broadswords. But to be blunt the elephants was the only thing the Hellenes were really interested in, militarily.

Except for the Indo-Hellenic states, who used the full spectrum of Indian warfare.

Hope this clears some things up.

-Shogun 144

[Other: Mauryan-Hellenic Relations]

From the earliest phase of its existence the Mauryan Empire of India had close relations and ties to the Hellenic world beyond it. The Seleukids, Egyptians, Baktrians, and even distant Makedon itself all interacted with the Mauryans at some point. Here we will look at that contact.

Under Chandragupta

Relations began with the foundation of the empire under its first Emperor, Chandragupta Maurya whom the Hellenes called Sandrakottos. This is a corruption of an attempt to pronounce Chandragupta in Koine Greek.

The first mention we have dates from 317 BC when Chandragupta entered the Indus River valley with an army and expelled the Makedonian satraps set in place by Alexander the Great. The Hellenes treated this with suspicion and wondered what ‘Sandrakottos’ was up to but left him alone.

It wasn’t until years later that events would pick up again. In 305 BC the new self-proclaimed King of Babylon Seleukos Nikator marched east to India to reclaim the Indus valley from the Mauryans and possibly even expand on Alexander’s conquests. But Chandragupta had advance word and blocked Seleukos from crossing the Indus. For several years the two men wrestled for control until 303 when they came to an agreement. This treaty set the tone and tempo for all future relations between the two dynasties.

Both Seleukos and Chandragupta agreed to recognize the other’s regime as legitimate. This entailed Seleukos recognizing the loss of Gandhara and Arachosia to the Mauryans and exchanging gifts. For his part Chandragupta gifted Seleukos with 500 war elephants. For his part Seleukos gifted Chandragupta with an epigamia or a contract to recognize the legality of marriages between Indians and Hellenes from the national level down. This was solidified with the offer of Seleukos’ daughter Helen to Chandragupta, who being too old offered her to his son Bindusara who accepted.

After this the opinion of Chandragupta in both Indian and Hellenic histories improved, as he had proved himself both as a warrior and a statesman to both sides satisfaction. Some years after the treaty Seleukos, now ruler over much of Alexander’s former empire, sent the geographer Megasthenes to the Mauryan court at Pataliputra. The Hellenes called the city Palimbothra.

Megasthenes went on to spend some time in India and wrote down a book of his experiences (the Indika), which today only exists in fragments. Chandragupta sent sweet smelling charms to the Seleukid court at Seleukeia in return. According to one account (the Deipnosophistai or ‘Banquet of the Learned’) the smell could attract love or repel it depending on the charm.

Under Bindusara

The second Emperor of the Mauryan Empire, Bindusara, continued to deal with the Hellenes much as his father did following the formers’ death in 297 either due to voluntary starvation or old age. The Hellenes called him Amitrochates or Allitrochades, after his Sanskrit title of Amitraghata, ‘The Slayer of Enemies’. A name he received for his energetic expansion of the empire.

Relations started with the sending of a second embassy from the Seleukids after the death of Megasthenes in 290. This man was Deimachos, and like his predecessor he wrote extensively on India. But his works have been lost although we do have some commentary on them from the historian Strabo.

We also know that Ptolemaic Egypt sent an ambassador to Pataliputra, named Dionysios, who was sent by Ptolemaios II Philadelphos (date unknown). The length of his mission is unknown, but lasted well beyond Bindusara’s reign.

By far the most well-known exchange between Bindusara and the Hellenes occurred some years later, possibly in the early years of the 270s. In this incident an embassy from India arrived in Seleukeia to deal with the new monarch, Antiochos I Soter (who has succeeded following his father’s assassination in 281). Bindusara asked for some famous dried figs from Attika, some wine, and a Sophist. Antiochos famously replied (as recorded in the Deipnosophistai) “The dried figs and sweet wine we will send you; but is not lawful for a Sophist to be sold in Hellas”.

Under Ashoka

The third Emperor of the Mauryan Empire, Ashoka, is without a doubt the most famous of the entire line. Interestingly Ashoka may have been the product of Bindusara’s diplomatic marriage to the Seleukid Princess Helen. But this theory is under heavy dispute.

In his own relations with the Hellenes, Ashoka was more active then any other member of his dynasty. Ashoka himself chose his Greek name, Piodasses, drawn from Piyadasi, the short form of his full regnal title which appears on most on his Edicts.

Ashoka first enters the Hellenic record after 264 in the aftermath of the conquest of Kalinga and Ashoka’s famous conversion to Buddhism and his commitment to the doctrine of Ahimsa, or nonviolence. This led him to send Buddhist teachers across his empire to try to spread the religion among them.

According to the 13th Rock Edict Ashoka spread the Dhamma (Buddhist teachings) among the Hellenic population of the Indus valley and the greater northwest. To celebrate he erected a stele written in Koine Greek and Imperial Standard Aramaic in Alexandropolis in Arachosia.

This success further encouraged Ashoka and with in a few years he began to send out even more teachers further west. Again in the 13th Rock Edict he names the Hellenic rulers to whom he sent these teachers:

Antiochos II Theos of the Seleukid Empire, Ptolemaios II Philadelphos of the Ptolemaic Empire, and Antigonos II Gonatas of Makedon, Magas of Kyrene, and Alexandros II of Epeiros. No record of these Buddhist missions exists in Hellenic records. However evidence does suggest that they did make an impact.

Outside of religious activities Ashoka did make regular envoy and gift exchanges with both Antiochos II and Ptolemaios II. In fact in one such exchange Ashoka give Antiochos medical texts and the herbs to go with them. Just in case the needed plants could not be grown locally according to the 2nd Rock Edict.

Ptolemaic Egypt did not keep up such vigorous contact, but Ptolemaios II did confirm the mission of his ambassador to Pataliputra after Ashoka’s succession. He also appeared to have fostered some of the Buddhist derived monastic movements. But this is uncertain.

One last note is of interest. No significant record remains of relations between Ashoka and the Baktrian kingdom after its foundation in 255. However it appears the two kingdoms had some relations and certainly engaged in trade, if not out-and-out diplomatic and religious ties.

Under the Later Mauryans

Following the death of Ashoka in 232 BC the Mauryan Empire fell into a long period of decline when no strong Emperor rose to succeed among his children. The Hellenic and Indian accounts go silent except for the occasional exchange of gifts and ambassadors between Pataliputra and Seleukeia.

The next major point of contact came in 206 BC. That year the Seleukid ruler Antiochos III the Great came into India after the Battle of the River Arius against the Baktrians under the new Euthydemid dynasty.

Antiochos sought to copy Alexander and crossed the Hindu Kush into India. Once there the Seleukid king met with the local ruler of Gandhara, Prince Subhagsena. The Hellenes pronounced his name as Sophagasenos. Unfortunately much is not known about this prince or even about his prior relations to the Seleukids. As it is clear from the source account of their meeting (Polybios’ Histories) Subhagsena and Antiochos III knew each other previously.

Anyway according to Polybios on the renewal of relations Subhagsena gifted Antiochos with 150 elephants and much treasure, but what Antiochos gave in return if anything is unknown. Satisfied with this the Seleukid king went back to Seleukeia and his Indian ally slipped back into obscurity.

The Collapse of the Mauryans

In 185 BC the Brahman (Hindu religious caste) commander in chief of the Mauryan army, Pusyamitra Sunga, assassinated the 9th Mauryan Emperor, Brhadrata. Sunga then seized Pataliputra and proclaimed his own dynasty, marking the end of the Mauryan Empire.

But the Hellenes had one last role to play. In Baktria the new king Demetrios I mobilized for war on the pretext of honoring an alliance with the Mauryans. When the invasion came it was through the Khyber Pass. Within five years the Sungas had lost the entire northwest of the country, Demetrios having conquered the Indus valley, Arachosia, Gandhara, and Taxila.

Soon afterward the self-proclaimed Hellenic successor of the Mauryans was dead under mysterious circumstances, and his successors divided his kingdom among them. This sequence of events was eerily similar to the death of Alexander the Great and the division of his empire.

In conclusion the ties between the Hellenic world and the Mauryan Empire were strong and both sides profited equally well from it. India benefited from Hellenic ideas and tradition, both in obvious and not so obvious contributions. The Hellenes also benefited from Indian knowledge and goods, as well as their elephants. In all a relationship that truly made its mark on the Ancient East.

[Check this out!]

Well everybody I just got an article I wrote put up on the website of the magazine Armchair General. As it turns out they have a new feature called POV or Point Of View in which the writer writes the situation and asks two questions. The readers then post their answers and in two weeks the author's gives his answer. All very cool.

Well I managed to write something up about the Battle of Nicopolis in 1396 and it got accepted and put up. As part of the short bio of myself I had to write, I mentioned 0 AD. The editors at AG made that mention into a link to the game's homepage.

Check. It. Out!

Nicopolis!

[Battles: The Cimbrian War]

The Cimbrian War, fought roughly from 113-101 BC was one of the defining events of Roman history. In this war the Republic faced the greatest external threat to its existence, even greater then Hannibal.

The exact causes for the Proto-Germanic migration are unknown. Around 120 BC a tribe known to the Romans as the Cimbri was forced to leave their homes in the modern day province of Himmerland on the Jutland Peninsula by unclear circumstances. It is commonly thought a drastic climate shift made the land too cold. As they moved south the Cimbri convinced their cousins living in the modern province of Thy, known as the Teutones, to join them. In tow, the Teutones brought the Ambrones who had been heavily influenced by the Celts.

Moving south the migration faced its first resistance. The Proto-Germanic tribes encountered the Eastern Celts living along the Danube early in their move, probably about 116-115. While the exact circumstances behind what happened are unknown it is clear the Eastern Celts were able to throw the Cimbri and Teutones back. However they were also clearly impressed by the fighting ability of the invaders. Several tribes joined the Germanic force from among the Scordisci, Boii, Lugiae, and Bononians.

Reinvigorated the invaders reentered the Danube and this time forced their way through. In 113 they entered Noricum and encountered the Noricene Celts (Celtic inhabitants of Noricum who had been heavily influenced by the Hellenes) of the Taurisci, clients of the Roman Republic.

Now Rome became involved. The Taurisci quickly realized they could not hold back a host of this size and sent word to Rome. The Senate responded quickly by dispatching Junior Consul Cn. Papirius Carbo to take an army to the Carnian Alps and block the route to Italia. Carbo soon entered into negotiations with the Cimbri and Teutones and ordered them to leave Noricum and to not threaten Roman territory. The Germanic tribes, who had heard stories of Roman power from their Eastern Celtic allies, were inclined to agree. Carbo promised them safe passage to other lands and assigned some scouts for this purpose.

But the Roman Consul had no such peaceful intentions. He saw the opportunity to gain a Triumph and martial glory over a new foe that was unknown to Rome and took it. He laid a large ambush along the route his scouts were to lead the Cimbri and Teutones down. But the Germanic-Celtic leadership discovered the trap and in a fury attacked Carbo’s army at Noreia. In the ensuing battle the migrating tribes inflicted a heavy defeat on the Romans, nearly wiping out the entire army and almost killing Carbo, who barely escaped with his life. According to Roman sources it was a sudden rainstorm that prevented the disaster from turning into a complete rout, and saved the Consul’s life.

Rather then follow the Roman remnants into Italia however, the Proto-Germanic tribes and their allies moved into Gaul. The great host arrived on the west bank of the Rhone River in Gallia Narbonensis after passing peacefully through the territory of the Helvetii and Sequani. In 109 BC the Romans retaliated by sending an army under Junior Consul M. Iunius Silanus. The Cimbri and Teutones first attempted to negotiate for the land with Silanus but after these fell through they thrashed Silanus’ army and sent it scurrying back to Rome.

With the defeat of two Roman Consular armies the balance of power in Gaul was upset. Germanic and Eastern Celtic success had begun to weaken the Roman presence in Gaul and many Western Celtic tribes began to flock around the new power. Most enthusiastic of all was the Helvetii, who joined as full allies. The most prominent among the Helvetii was the clan of the Tigorini. In 107 the Roman Senate decided to force the issue by dispatching yet another army, this time led by Senior Consul L. Cassius Longinus. This time the Romans were attempting to defend the primary power base of the Allobroges at Burdigala, who were important Roman allies.

The Tigorini ambushed and defeated the Roman army and killed Longinus and his senior staff. The remaining soldiers who managed to take cover in their camp would have been killed as well had not the sole surviving officer, C. Popillius Laenas, agreed to withdraw under the yoke and surrender half of his baggage train. It was a humiliating defeat for Rome, and caused the situation in Gaul to further fracture. Tolosa, one of the leading cities of Gallia Narbonensis, rose in revolt.

The following year was one of temporary respite. Following the victory at Burdigala the invading tribes dispersed to probe out the rest of Gaul, seemingly with the purpose of investigating whether or not to settle in the region. This allowed the Senate to send the new Senior Consul, Q. Servilius Caepio, into Gallia Narbonensis to calm down the chaos there. Caepio was able to do so by conquering and looting Tolosa, but allowed his greed to get the better of him. Rather then forward the gold to Rome he faked a robbery on the caravan to Massilia and blamed it on rampaging Celts.

The Senate was nevertheless impressed by Caepio’s military preparations for the return of the Cimbri and allies, and bestowed upon him Proconsular powers for 105. That year he was joined by the Junior Consul, Cn. Mallius Maximus, with a new army. The two men detested each other, as Mallius was a self made ‘novus homo’ (a plebeian who became the first in his family to achieve Senatorial rank) and Caepio was a patrician in the old mold. This infighting set the stage for the impending military disaster.

That same year, exactly as the Romans thought, the Germanic-Celtic host returned south. Under the over-all leadership of the Cimbri king Boiorix they appeared to be ready to force their way into Italia proper. The Senate immediately reacted by moving to cut them off near the military settlement at Arausio. Between them Caepio and Maximus shared joint command over the largest army ever raised in Roman history, 80,000 combat troops and tens of thousands of support personnel. But because they could not get along the two generals camped on opposite sides of the Rhone River: Caepio on the right bank, Maximus on the left.

This favored Boiorix. Aware of the split in the Roman army, the Cimbri played a patient game with the two feuding commanders. Boiorix at one point did start negotiations with Maximus, which prodded Caepio into launching an assault. The Roman force was totally destroyed in the resulting battle. The Cimbri then swung around and attacked the camp of Maximus, and destroyed the second Roman force on the banks of the Rhone. The battle of Arausio was the worst military defeat in the history of the Roman state, worse even then Cannae. More the 100,000 Roman soldiers and support personnel were slain, barely more then 200 survived including the commanders.

But strangely the Proto-Germanic and Celtic host did not invade Italia. Rather then take advantage of their world shaking victory by marching into the Roman heartlands they decided to split up their forces. After a short war against the Arverni the Cimbri and Teutones went their separate ways. The Cimbri attempted to force their way into Hispania while the Teutones choose to fight in northern Gaul. Of the Celtic allies much remains uncertain, though it seems the majority choose to go into Hispania.

This decision allowed Rome some much needed breathing room. The string of constant defeats at the hands of the invaders had shaken the Roman Republic deeply. The Senate declared a state of emergency and suspended the constitution, an act known as senatus consultum ultimum. For the protection of the state C. Marius, the hero of the Jugurthine War in Numidia and currently still there, was appointed Senior Consul and confirmed in that position for the duration of the emergency. In early 104 Marius entered Rome to begin his term, which would be revolutionary.

Marius did not intend to allow any more defeats on the field. After becoming supreme commander of the military the new Consul intended to reform it. Known today as the Marian Reforms, the total overhaul of the Roman army transformed it from what was basically a regulated part-time militia of the landowners to a full-time professional standard army open to all classes regardless of wealth. Marius also changed the unit organization as well, implementing the cohort system. In all the reforms created a new military for Rome, one which endured with modification for centuries.

With his new model army behind him, the Consul was ready for the return of the invaders, and they obliged. In 102 the Cimbri finally returned from Hispania, having found the Celt-Iberians too formidable to overcome. They moved north to join the Teutones in their assault against the Belgae Confederacy, but the Belgae proved too fierce. It was then the Cimbri and Teutones once again turned south, and this time they meant to enter Italia.

Marius reacted quickly. He moved to block the passages through the Alps that he knew the Cimbri would attempt to force with an army under his Junior Consul, Q. Lutatius Catulus, while he personally faced the Teutones. Marius was careful to make sure that he was in command of the ground and refused to give battle to the Teutones as he led them through Gallia Narbonensis. He finally stopped at a prepared site, a fortified hill near the settlement of Aquae Sextiae.

This battle was the turning point of the war. In the resulting battle Marius lured the Teutones into attacking his positions on the hill slope. Once engaged he signaled for a select force of 5 cohorts to burst from cover in the woods and attack the Teutone rear. The result was an all out rout of the invading forces and the complete destruction of the Teutone and Ambrone hosts. Theudobod, the Teutone king, was taken captive along with his senior leaders. The women and children, rather then be taken captive, killed themselves just as the Romans arrived at the Teutone camp.

With this victory the Romans could finally go on the offensive against the remaining wings of the migrating host. But Catulus was unable to hold his position in modern day Brenner Pass and was forced into a fighting retreat until he was over the Po River. Catulus had managed to successfully save his command, but at the expense of northern Italia, which was occupied by the Cimbri.

The final battle of the war was imminent. In 101 BC Marius, now on his 5th term as Consul, reached the camp of Catulus on the Po after the end of winter to reinforce the latter’s position. Not long afterwards the Cimbri surprised Marius with an open invitation to do battle at the place of his choosing. The surprised Consul chose the Raudine Plain, near the confluence of the Po and the Sesia. His reasoning was that the flat ground would favor the Roman superiority in cavalry, and allow for greater tactical maneuverability.

Despite having arranged the battle beforehand, the Cimbri were still caught off guard the day of battle. Marius struck in the early morning mists and drove the Cimbri-Celtic cavalry off the field and through their own infantry. Taking advantage of this the Roman infantry advanced and engaged. The Cimbri and their allies were destroyed and the survivors scattered to the wind. Boiorix, the mastermind of the great victory at Arausio, was slain in the fighting as were his senior leaders. The remaining Celtic allies in the rear, who had not arrived on the field in time, promptly returned home. The Cimbrian War was over.

The end of the Cimbrian War had major consequences for the Roman Republic. Marius bestowed Roman citizenship on his Italic soldiers in clear defiance of the Senate, the first time that a military leader defied them and set a dangerous precedent. Far more importantly however was that the Marian Reforms created a military machine loyal to its generals, not the government, and so paved the way for the great civil wars and the end of the Republic.

Outside Rome the migration of the Cimbri and the Teutones changed the face of Gaul. Many of the Eastern Celtic tribes choose to settle down in the west rather then return east. Some members of both peoples choose to settle down as well rather then follow the main body. C. Iulius Caesar, Marius’ nephew, notes two particular people who were legacies of the war: The Boii, who had chosen to settle near the Helvetii and shared their defeat and the Aduatuci, Cimbri and Teutones who settled in Belgae lands and were defeated in the campaign against the Belgae.

[Other: Hunting and Fishing in the Ancient World]

Two of the most important and universal skills of any group of people is the skills needed to find food, such as hunting and fishing. In this article we shall cover how each of 0 AD’s civilizations accomplished this goal, and any unique techniques which may have been practiced.

Hunting

The Persians

To the Persians hunting was an important survival skill as well as a sport and a diplomatic tool. True to the origins of the Persians as a people hunting was always carried out in mounted groups with bow and arrows and two spears, one for throwing and the other for thrusting. Popular animals to hunt were the deer, antelope, onager, boar, wild cattle, and panthers.

When not for survival the hunt took on a much grander meaning. During peacetime when the empire was not at war it was not uncommon for the Shahanshah to organize a royal hunting expedition onto specially created parks. When on a royal hunt the common kit was increased with the addition of a sword, a small pole arm, and a shield. Demonstrations of archery before the Shahanshah and his nobles were the showcase event of a royal hunt. The primary purpose for these hunts however was to hone the skills needed to fight and survive, which is why a typical hunt would include many younger men, for practical training.

One interesting side branch of the royal hunt was a Persian inheritance from Babylon, the practice of lion hunting. The Babylonians themselves inherited the practice from Assyria. Such hunts could be extremely dangerous, even from the chariots from which it was conducted with bow and arrow.

As one last note the Persians had a final primary purpose for hunting. They used it as a diplomatic maneuver. Cyrus the Great for example at one time attempted to smooth over relations with an irate ally, the Armenian (or Hai during this period) king Dikran by organizing a joint royal hunt. The hunt healed the breach between them and led to the continuation of their alliance, and subsequent Shahanshahs would use the maneuver as well.

The Celts

To the Celts the thrill of hunting was one of their greatest joys, and was primarily carried out for fun. Of course it was also necessary for survival at times, but this did not mean they could not enjoy it. Celtic hunting was primarily carried out on foot or on a chariot with throwing spears, regular spears, and slings (as well as bows). Dogs (ancestor to the modern greyhound and deerhound) were brought along as well to aid in the hunt. Popular animals to hunt were deer, birds, and boar.

Generally each animal was approached differently. Bird hunting was carried out entirely from a chariot and with slings or bows. It was not uncommon for a bird hunting expedition to quickly turn into a boasting contest, with warriors loudly counting how many birds they had downed. Deer hunting was a far more serious affair and was conducted with throwing spears and dogs on foot. The reason for this was because deer, and especially stags, were honored animals. To hunt one down and eat it was considered a great event and celebrated. It was not uncommon for large groups to take after a deer without warning.

But by far the most important animal was the boar. The boar was a creature of great religious significance and hunted in groups like deer were. For a boar the hunters would proceed on foot with thrusting spears. The ultimate honor was to spear the boar personally, not an easy task.

The Hellenes

Hunting among the Hellenes had a long and storied history. It was always a highly valued sport and passed into the legends and mythology of ancient Hellas. The great mercenary commander Xenophon stressed the importance of hunting skills, as did other authors. Hunting was primarily engaged from horse back, though it could also be on foot. Typical tools were the throwing spear, thrusting spear, axe, kopis, and nets. Like the Celts, hunting dogs were integral. The usage of bow and arrow is disputed and not clear. Popular animals to hunt were deer, gazelle, rabbits, boar, and panthers.

Among the Hellenes hunting was much more than catching food. In fact it was viewed as a synonym for courtship and marriage. Interestingly it appears that out of all of the Hellenes the most enthusiastic about hunting was Sparta and Makedon. To the Makedonians specifically hunting took on a ritual status as the ultimate test of manhood. Hunting was always done in small groups to foster bonds of friendship. The taking down of a panther was a particularly noteworthy event and sometimes involved the hunter bodily wrestling the animal and breaking its neck. Hunters who could chase and catch a gazelle were also celebrated. Dogs also joined the festivities alongside their masters, especially if they ran down a boar.

Lion hunting was a particular sport of Makedon. Totally separate of the lion hunting traditions of Assyria, Babylon, and Persia, the people of Makedon had also created a tradition of lion hunting. This was restricted to royalty and a close friend or two, as lions were considered too dangerous for dogs to come along. The most celebrated incident of lion hunting was when Alexander the Great hunted a lion with Krateros. Unlike the Persians however Makedonian lion hunting was done up close with throwing spears and a kopis. Alexander even wrestled a few lions, after they had been wounded of course.

As one final note the Hellenes first introduced a new innovation to hunting, that of traps and snares. According to Xenophon the types of dogs used by the Hellenes in hunting, the Spartan or Lakonian breed and the heavier Molossian were unable to catch some kinds of prey and frequently lost track of the scent trail. So the Hellenes would set traps and snares and other obstacles in their prey’s suspected path. This became especially popular after the beginning of the Diadochi period.

The Romans

For the Romans hunting did not hold much of an appeal until after the beginning of the Imperial period in the 1st Century BC/AD. They did not see any usage in it and only during the reign of Augustus did hunting really start to gain popularity as a gentleman’s pursuit. Roman hunting borrowed much from the Hellenes and the Celts, as well as their own innovations. Roman hunting was done primarily from horse back and occasionally on foot. Typical tools were the thrusting and throwing spears, small hunting bow and arrows, slings, and nets. Dogs were also brought along. Popular animals were basically all previously listed.

Under the Roman Empire hunting took off. During the Principate period of Roman history hunting reached its peak point as the most popular activity that the nobility could take part in. It also proved useful as a genuine survival skill in the border zones. In fact mock hunts were set up as an attraction in the Coliseum. Animals for this purpose could include exotic creatures not normally hunted. The Roman enthusiasm for hunting went so far that they introduced the fallow deer to Britain after the conquest for this purpose. The method of hunting we know most about, that of sport hunting was tightly controlled.

Roman sport hunting shares similarities with both Persian and Hellenic hunting. Usually conducted on vast wilderness reserves, a typical hunting party could range in size from a small family affair to a grand party led by the Emperor. Animals were brought to field not long before the arrival of the hunting party. Though on occasion it was considered more sporting to hunt the animals already living on the preserve. Traps and snares were also laid out before hand by slaves. Deer, gazelle, antelope, rabbits, and boar were the most popular to hunt in this fashion. Birds were also hunted, and the Romans used trained falcons for that purpose, a relatively new practice that would become wildly popular in later centuries.

This would be revolutionized in the 2nd Century AD. In that period the Romans started to use a new breed of dog, the Ventragus, to hunt. The Ventragus was in fact the old Celtic hunting dog which the Romans suddenly realized could be useful. With its great speed and sight and the Ventragus changed Roman hunting forever. It also caused the creation of the practice of coursing. Coursing was simply chasing a swift animal without intent to kill it. Since the Ventragus was so fast that it outrun a deer this quickly became popular just for the thrill of the chase.

The Iberians

Unfortunately not much is known about Iberian hunting practices or event what tools they would have used. Although with influences from many different peoples, including the Hellenes and Celts, they could have come to resemble the practices of those who influenced them. Not even the animals they hunted are known. Although almost certainly it would have included deer and wild cattle, an animal of particular importance to the Iberians. As well as birds of many different kinds.

The Carthaginians

If the Carthaginians did any hunting beyond what would have been required for substance and was necessary for survival we do not know. Guesses can be made based on what we know about the Phoenicians, the founders of Carthage and the noble class after the break with Tyre. But the Phoenicians did not really esteem hunting either. Influence from Egypt could have possibly have led to the inclusion of those hunting practices but that remains unknown.

Fishing

The Persians

Fishing in Ancient Persia was not considered as important or as glorious as hunting and received little attention. Nevertheless while we can not say anything for sure about ethnic Persian fishing we do know a lot about Egyptian fishing practices, which continued undisturbed even after the Achaemenid conquest.

Reed boats were used for this purpose and the primary fishing implements were harpoons, nets, baskets, and a simple fishing pole and hook. Fishing was also done from land on the Nile banks. Typical catches were perch, tilapia, catfish, and eels.

An additional note is the practice of pearl fishing. While not really practiced in the Achaemenid Empire, the nobility of Persia did come to value the Indian pearl trade. The chief center of the pearl trade was located in what is now southern India and parts of Sri Lanka, called the Pandya kingdoms, a collection of early Tamil states.

The Celts

For the Celts fishing was far more serious then hunting and was generally viewed as work, although fishing for play was not unheard of. There was two primary kinds of fishing boats used by the Celts, the first was coracle, which was a small semi-circular/concave boat made from wood and leather. The second was the currach, a large (up to 50 feet long) row and sail boat made from wood, band iron, and leather. Shore fishing from land was also common.

Primary fishing implements were the pole and hook, a unique double net, and harpoons. Typical catches could range far but the two most common kinds of fish were salmon and trout.

The Hellenes

In contrast to hunting, fishing was not held in high regard and Hellenic artwork is nearly devoid of fishing scenes. Nonetheless fishing was popular both as the poor man’s entertainment and as a viable alternative to farming as a major food source. There also some surviving manuals on good fishing that demonstrates that towards the end of the era of Hellenic dominion fishing enjoyed a brief upsurge in popularity. Typical fishing boats were actually quite similar to most modern boats. In fact in modern Greece it is common to see the traditional boats still sailing the Aegean with only the addition of modern equipment to really make the difference with their ancient cousins. Land based fishing was also common, and is the kind that is most displayed on artwork.

Primary fishing implements include the ever present pole and hook, several different kinds of nets for use in specific situations (like in reefs), harpoons, tridents, and other fish traps. Typical catches were mackerel, swordfish, tuna, red mullets, and eels.

A word must be said for a peculiar Hellenic innovation on the pole and hook. A wine cup dating from around the beginning of the Persian Wars displays a curious fishing implement that looks like a fishing pole but instead of a hook it has a spherical object with an opening on the top attached. This apparently was a fish trap.

The Romans

For the Romans fishing quickly became the plebs’ favorite pastime from the early days of the Roman Republic when fishing was still done on the Tiber. However towards the end of the Republic the fishing craze spread to the nobility, and hit its peak from the 2nd Century BC to the 4th Century AD. As both a livelihood and as a sport fishing actually outpaced hunting. Most Roman fishing boats were rather small and constructed from wood and marked by the extensive use of iron nails. A distinguishing feature however was the addition of a central compartment in the center of the boat that could be flooded on purpose and drained at will. Fishing from land was the preferred method of the noble class.

Primary fishing implements were various kinds of nets, harpoons, tridents, the pole and hook, various fish traps, and baskets. The typical catch would include a wide variety of fish with the most popular being the red mullet (which became the center of a culinary craze for the first 4 centuries AD), perch, swordfish, and tuna. Other popular sea life included eels, sea urchins, octopi, and cuttlefish.

A particular Roman innovation was the fishpond. Starting in the 1st Century BC the Romans became enamored with the idea of creating artificial fish preserves called piscinae within Campania in Italy, the vacation center for the wealthy. Years previous artificial clam beds had been successfully constructed using a modified variant of the balneae, the public baths that were the predecessor of the more famous thermae, the hot baths of the imperial period.

This same technology was again put into use on a larger scale to construct these new fishponds, along with new advances which saw the creation of a canal system which allowed the user to control how much salt water and fresh water entered the pond. In later centuries the piscinae became lambasted by writers as the ultimate symbol of Roman extravagance and their will to control nature.

The Iberians

Much like hunting, there is still much unknown about fishing among the Iberians. We do know that fishing was very important in Iberia, and many modern day fishing villages share the same site with ancient Iberian fishing villages.

Primary fishing implements are unknown although we can guess that nets, harpoons, and pole and hook would have been used. Typical catches included trout, salmon, gray mullet, and eels.

The Carthaginians

Fishing for the Carthaginians was much the same as it was for the Phoenicians from whom they were descended. Being primarily a sea power, fishing was one of Carthage’s primary means of food supply. Sources are scarce if the Carthaginians made any substantial changes to the manner in which they fished. So we shall use what we know about Phoenician fishing. The main fishing boat used was a medium sized (about 20 feet) row and sail boat which is still popular today. Shore fishing was also popular, and sometimes the preferred method.

Primary fishing implements were several different kinds of nets, the pole and hook, harpoons, tridents, and baskets. Typical catches were tilapia, tench, catfish, and sardines.

In conclusion it is apparent that both hunting and fishing are important skills that have not really changed much over the centuries or differed between civilizations. Many of these practices in fact have been carried to the modern day, still relevant after all this time.

[Other: The Kingdom of Kush, 671 BC - AD 350]

The Kingdom of Kush forms an important phase in the history of what is now Sudan and parts of northern Ethiopia. While much of Kush’s history is outside 0 AD’s time frame it is important as it leads into the Meroitic Period. Which stands today as among the most important of the pre-Islamic African cultures.

The Assyrian invasion of Egypt proved to be the beginning of Kush’s end. The 25th Dynasty of Kushite kings who ruled over Egypt in what has been considered one of history’s greatest ironies, was brought to an end in the mid 7th Century. Despite a spirited defense by both the Pharaoh Taharqa and his son Tanutamon the Assyrians conquered Egypt in three general invasions, the first in 671, the second in 667, and the last in 663. After 663 the 25th Dynasty retreated to Kush, taking residence at Napata. From this base the Kushites kept Egyptian culture, enshrining it. They looked up to their period of rule in the north with pride. The Egyptians however did not, and under the Saite dynasty which led Egypt to independence from Assyria, they sacked Napata in 590 at the orders of Pharaoh Necho II. The sack reinvigorated Kush which began to pour itself into a massive drive to modernize its army and retake Egypt.

The Iron Age of Nile Africa had begun. The lessons learned from Assyria and the Saitic Egyptians forced Kush to reevaluate itself and its army. Taking advantage of both Kush’s strategic position on the Red Sea and its natural iron wealth the kingdom turned into one large iron forge. This transformation coincided with developments to the north as the Satic Dynasty fell to the might of Persia in 525. As a trade kingdom Kush felt this change through the arrival of Persian merchants, whose culture began to have an impact on the kingdom. As Egypt fell, Kush became more steadily unique and less of a clone of its northern neighbor, continuing to keep elements of Egyptian culture but with their own uniquely Kushite twist. This change was gradual and the full effects would not be felt for some time. This all came to fruition centuries later after Persia itself fell and was replaced by the Hellenistic successors of Megas Alexandros, Alexander the Great.

Hellenic culture had probably first reached Kush by traders, and was reinforced by their sudden arrival in the area by force. Around the 270s (exact date unknown given the uncertainties of Kushite history) a revolution occurred in Napata. Previously the priests of Amun Re, the supreme deity of the Egyptian pantheon, would try to control the sitting Pharaoh by pretending to receive a message from the deity saying the ruler’s time on the throne was up. The Pharaoh was then expected to commit suicide and go on to the afterlife. But the sitting Pharaoh of the time, Arakamani, was educated by Hellenic tutors. This led him to reject the ritual and with a sizable body of troops he marched on Napata. Once there he entered the temple of Amun Re and ransacked it, killing the entire priesthood in the process.

Arakamani, to distance himself from Napata and the old order, then had his pyramid built not at Napata but further south at Meroe in Upper Kush. The city was already famous by this time. Meroe, besides being the central hub of several overland and over water trade routes, lay in the middle of a seasonal rain belt. This combination made Meroe one of the largest and most wealthy cities south of Egypt. It was also defensible, surrounded by rivers on three sides (the Nile, the Atbara, and the Blue Nile), causing several ancient authors to mistakenly believe Meroe to have been an island. Arakamani could not have chosen a better site to make his break with the past. The Meroitic Period had begun.

It was here then, in the Meroitic Period that Kush truly became separate of Egypt. Almost immediately following the move to Meroe and the reign of Arakamani the differences between old Kush and the new period in Meroe became steadily more pronounced. Amun Re was cast aside by the new Kushite priesthood created by Arakamani. In his place they put the native lion-headed deity, Apedemak. Other religious changes were wrought which saw the entire pantheon revamped and only a few Egyptian deities remained. But this was not the only change. The Egyptian language suddenly ceased to be the accepted language of the kingdom early in Meroitic history. In its place a new language, only now being deciphered, was created called (fittingly) Meroitic. This language was a mixture of Egyptian ‘cursive’ and a strange alphabetic script of unknown origins. Although we can identity the derivatives of Meroitic by common words shared between them. By far the most momentous changes were in the nobility and the royal family itself.

In this case the trappings of Egyptian culture were almost entirely thrown off. After the move to Meroe the upper classes gradually stopped using the old traditions borrowed from Egypt. Everything from social norms to names changed to something different. Modern historians believed the nobility may have attempted to revert to the practices of early Kush before contact with Egypt, mixed in with bits and pieces of other cultures (Egyptian, Persian, and Hellenic). One well attested example was that Meroitic nobility scarred themselves, an old Kushite practice. Accompanying these changes was the sudden newfound equality of women. Meroitic artwork shows women often equal to men standing alongside them on even terms, sometimes helping their husbands smite his foes. Occasionally the woman did the smiting.

One of the greatest changes however was that in Meroe the Pharaoh no longer reined supreme. His power was held in check by a figure known as the Kandake, corrupted into English through Latin as Candace. The Kandake was one of the most important women in the royal court and usually either the Pharaoh’s wife or some other close female relative. The office was neither hereditary or for life, since they were elected from a pool of royal candidates by the council of priests. This was similar to the practice used for the succession of the Pharaoh, who was also elected from a pool of eligible royal candidates. But his office was for life. The Kandake technically had to share power with another woman, usually an older relatived called the Qore. The Qore was the supreme authority in the household, but real power was held by the Kandake. On occasion when the Pharaoh was too young to rule or unfit the Kandake would be appointed by the priests to rule in his place.

Other changes that were not so pronounced will also be examined. In Meroitic Kush the farmers were no longer the center of the economy and were replaced by cattle herders. The cow assumed a place of importance and temples dedicated to Apedemak often were decorated with scenes of cattle, usually the breeding and caring of the animals. The ceramics, which are always important to archaeologists, also changed from the bright red of the earlier periods to a polished black for the Meroitic. Iron production however was one thing that did not change and the constant production of the metal is one of the enduring legacies of Meroe, and the catalyst for its eventual downfall.

The Kingdom of Meroe began to achieve its greatest prosperity in the last century before Christ. With Meroe itself leading the way the cities of Kush had achieved a splendid prosperity thanks to the wealth of the Red Sea trade to and from India. As well as the kingdom’s natural wealth, thanks to its rich supply of iron and gold. Ivory from elephants, a sacred animal in Meroitic Kush, was also valuable as was Ostrich feathers. All of these were in high demand to the north in the rump Ptolemaic state and more importantly their Roman overlords. This highlighted the growing threat of Rome, which successive Meroitic Pharaohs became increasingly worried. One reason was that Ptolemaic Egypt and Meroitic Kush had a specific agreement on a series of temples that both kingdoms shared by religion that sat along their borders (between Upper Egypt and Lower Kush). As long as neither power attempted to take over the area they remained at peace, even though the intermittent border wars continued in spite of it. But it was unknown if the Romans would honor the agreement. This led to tensions all along the border zone, called the Dodekaschoenos.

In 24 BC the most notable event in the history of Meroe occurred, a military confrontation with Rome. By this time Ptolemaic Egypt had been annexed by the newborn Roman Empire, and the Kingdom of Meroe, who had had limited contact with the Romans, was eager to press the limits to which they could go. In 24, while Augustus Caesar recalled Aelius Gallus after his failed invasion into Arabia, the Kandake of Meroe, Amanirenas, ordered an invasion of the north. This was in part motivated by what Amanirenas may have seen as a sacred duty. As the High Priestess of Isis, recognized by both Kushite and Egyptian alike, she may have saw it as best to annex the temples to Meroe for protection. Meroitic troops annexed the Dodekaschoenos and raided as far north as Aswan. Rome reacted quickly by sending Caius Petronius, who launched a counter invasion. But Amanirenas ordered her troops to fall back and allow the Romans to take Napata. Petronius enslaved the population and burned the town, famously remarking that Kush was not worth the effort to conquer. As the Romans went back north the Kandake launched a counterattack, surprising the Romans with their superior archery and elephant corps. Petronius was victorious in the end and Amanirenas surrendered. Negotiations with Augustus resulted in a peace treaty to return to the status quo, but markedly with the reestablishment of the Dodekaschoenos zone between Egypt and Kush, but with a Roman garrison close by. Future generations of Roman emperors were cautioned by Augustus to contain Meroe, but not to conquer it, out of respect.

These events were followed by a Meroitic golden age. The period from AD 12 to 20 is often referred to as the height of Meroitic Kush and roughly corresponds to the reign of Pharaoh Natakamani and his wife, the Kandake Amanitore. This royal couple is the best known monarchs in Meroitic history, partly because they were its greatest builders. Together Natakamani and Amanitore either restored and built over from scratch a majority of the surviving temples and monuments dating from this period in modern Sudan. Natakamani is also known to historians as the architect of a new smaller type pyramid, which he urged future generations to use. Confusingly however is that from the artwork found at the temple of Apedemak at modern Naqa it appears the two rulers led the kingdom to war and lost two of their sons to this conflict. But no record of any conflict exists elsewhere. It any case the period of their rule is still considered one of the best periods in Meroitic history.

As one last note on this phase of history we know today that Kandake Amanitore was mentioned in the Christian Bible. In the Book of Acts Philip the Evangelist converts to the still small Christian faith an ‘Ethiopian Eunuch’ who then takes his faith back to his queen, Candace of Ethiopia. The New Testament of the Bible was originally written in Koine Greek, which referred to Kush as Ethiopia. This was repeated in Roman records, as can be seen in the accounts of Amanirenas’ war with Augustus. What is today called Ethiopia was called Aksum, after the primary city and kingdom of the region during that time.

However the prosperity and glory of Meroitic Kush that was overseen by Natakamani would not outlast him. When the Pharaoh died in AD 20 his surviving son, who may have been his eldest to start with, succeeded him. But Arikaharor was not his father and the building spree that had marked Natakamani’s reign ground to a halt. This traditionally marks what historians refer to as the long decline of the Meroitic kingdom, for lack of any better evidence. Modern archeology points the pursuit of iron may have been the catalyst. As the number of iron forges increased to keep up with the demand for Kushite iron the harvesting of so much wood to feed the furnaces may have turned the lush lands around Meroe into desert. Without fertile lands agriculture and cattle herding suffered and forced them to go further and further out to find lands to grow food and feed the cows.

The death of Nero and the end of the Julio-Claudian Dynasty had effect even on Meroe. Nero had made it clear during his reign that he had designs on the southern kingdom and regardless of Augustus’ instruction intended carry it out. But at the last moment he canceled his plans, content with the information gathered for him by the military. This did not make him well liked by Kandake Amanikhatashan, who started to rule in 62. To spite Nero’s memory she backed Vespasian to become Roman emperor after he was proclaimed by his troops in July, 69. After the Senate confirmed Vespasian as emperor and he sent his son Titus to deal with the Great Jewish Revolt the Kandake took the opportunity to send a sizable cavalry force to Jerusalem to aid Titus. While the final contribution of the Meroitic squadron was slight it did boost relations and the new Flavian dynasty promised to uphold the old treaty.

In the 2nd Century AD a sudden change took place in Kush with the rise of the nomads. These nomads were divided into two groups: The Blemmyes and the Noba. Both group paid homage to the Pharaoh at Meroe and the Blemmyes especially were valued for their fighting abilities. In the late 1st Century AD the Meroitic court moved the Blemmyes as a people and settled them in Lower Kush along the border with Rome. But by the 2nd Century the Blemmyes had begun to display an increasing degree of independence from Meroe, even to the degree of having their own king. This in turn led to the Blemmyes becoming more and more settled and urban. Even as this happened however the introduction into the region of the camel allowed the Blemmyes to become much more potent militarily. While nothing is known for certain it is believed that thanks to the camel the Blemmyes transformed into a real threat to both Meroe and Rome. Both states were raided unmercifully even as the king of the Blemmyes still paid tribute to Meroe. This resulted in the tangled situation in which Meroe still commanded the loyalty of some of the Blemmyes, but most of them had turned into raiders.

The 3rd Century AD accelerated the decline of Meroitic Kush. With the Blemmyes’ newfound power now rampaging across both Upper Egypt and all Kush at will even the formidable might of Rome was shaken. With the continuing decline of arable land in the kingdom the situation grew worse, even though evidence suggests the authorities managed to avoid starvation and kept a reasonable amount of stability. However the wealthy Red Sea trade that had practically sustained the Meroitic kingdom began to shift during this time. Instead of flowing to Meroe, the routes now flowed to Aksum. The kingdom of Aksum, the forerunner of modern Ethiopia, had been founded in the late 1st Century BC. With the changing routes from India the Aksumite kingdom could now take full advantage of the great wealth offered by the trade. To protect its interests Aksum expanded militarily seizing control of Meroe’s Red Sea coast, thus severing it from maritime routes. Other Aksumite military adventures were aimed at Upper Kush, trying to sever the overland routes. When this was defeated they instead bypassed Meroitic Kush, creating a pricing war with Meroe which the latter ultimately lost. In the closing years of the century there appeared a moment of renewed hope as problems in the Roman Empire, the so called Crises of the Third Century, had lead the empire to all but abandon the Dodekaschoenos.

But this hope proved illusory. Diocletian, who had brought the Crises to an end and created the Tetrarchy, realized that with the threat of the Blemmyes that occupying the Dodekaschoenos was no longer viable. He decided to abandon the area, but rather then allow it to be occupied by Meroe, Diocletian invited the Noba to occupy the area. Still living on the western bank of the Nile, the more ‘civilized’ Noba saw their chance to break with Meroitic Kush and took it. Crossing the river in force the Noba attacked both Meroe and the Blemmyes before making it into the Dodekaschoenos, even as the Romans withdrew further back into Egypt, though they maintained control of the primary temple at Philae. With the settling of the Noba in the Dodekaschoenos the kingdom of Meroe was deprived of another major ally, which turned against them. The Noba quickly formed their own state, called Nobatia which combined elements of both Hellenic and Meroitic cultures, and went to war with the Blemmyes.

The 4th Century was the final one for Kush. By this point the end of Meroe was all but finished. The building of monuments and temples and even pyramids (small as the Kushite model was) had completely stopped. The kingdom no longer had the ability to support these projects, much less the state itself. With most of the former kingdom either annexed to the Blemmye tribes and Nobatia to the north and Aksum to the south Meroe was in pitiful condition. In the early years of the century the Aksumite King Aphilas conquered Meroe but left the city standing, instead demanding they pay homage to Aksum. Pharaoh Yesbokheamani agreed, and the kingdom had for all intents and purposes ceased to exist. However as a vassal state Meroe continued to function as the cultural predecessor of a new people just beginning to form. The Ballana culture or X-Group as it is called first appeared in the 4th Century and appears to have originated from intermarriage between the Noba and the Kushites. This new culture borrowed much from Kush and was also distinctly unique in that it took in other influences as well. The Ballana are considered the ancestors of the Nubian peoples. Strife with Aksum continued to plague Upper Kush for many years until finally in 350 AD the Aksumite King Ezana, the first Christian monarch, led his troops north and demolished Meroe. The destruction of the city marked the end of Kush as a kingdom, even though it continued to persist culturally and linguistically for at least another century.

In conclusion the kingdom of Kush left a major imprint on Africa. Because of a close proximity to the giants of Egypt and early Ethiopia the Kushite state is often overlooked in history. But its influence on the development of the region is undeniable, though still misunderstood due to both the Meroitic script itself and racial nationalism.

[Biographies: Chandragupta Maurya]

Thanks for saying that for me, Feneur. As for the disputed origins of Chandragupta Maurya, yes I am aware of that but I did not feel like I should go over it in depth. I stated that it was in dispute, pointed out two theories, and moved on to more solid ground.

Indian history can be very complicated, and I feel that while the article can be improved, I did a good job with handling it. Thanks for pointing out your own theory, and for providing a book to back it up. It is appreicated.

-Shogun 144

[Hellenes: The Birth of the Athenian Democracy]

Within historical events the creation of the Athenian democracy stands out as the first of its kind, a radical form of government never seen before. While not the shining beacon of freedom it is often made out to be, the Athenian democracy is still important as the first and only stable direct democracy in ancient history.

The Athenian democratic system had its roots in the conservative reforms of one of Athens’ most famous personalities. By the 7th Century BC the Athenian monarchy, which is still shrouded in mystery, was overthrown by the powerful aristocratic class. The new government was a hodgepodge of old and new and none too stable. A series of failed tyrants came and went in quick succession, most notably the law giver Drakon. A man whose name is still associated with harsh law (the word draconian stems from Drakon). In the early 6th Century a special commission to fix the problem was appointed, led by the distinguished law giver Solon. The Solonian Reformation was one of the most important events in Athenian history. This would leave such deep marks on the city that all future governments and laws in Athens would be measured against Solon’s model. However the reforms were still heavily conservative in nature. Solon meant to simply fix the system, not replace it with something new. Even so Solon did more then any other Athenian lawmaker in treating the common people fairly, and put safe guards into place to prevent them from being oppressed by the aristocrats within the confines of law. Unfortunately even though his new power arrangement worked it could not prevent the same strife that had brought about the need for the reforms in the first place, it could only force them into a different form. This situation continued until 546 when Peisistratos, the leader of the noble clans of eastern Attika, took over Athens with considerable foreign support and a mercenary army.

The tyranny of Peisistratos had begun. Prior to 546 Peisistratos had tried twice before to take over Athens, but had been defeated. Now with his mercenaries, foreign support, and the backing of the common hill farmers he had succeeded. As tyrant Peisistratos was content to simply stuff the government with his supporters, especially the arkhonships and by extension the Areopagos, as well as the Council of 400. Having befriended Solon (who was also his cousin) in his earlier years Peisistratos saw no reason to disturb the Solonian constitution and left it intact. His only real constitutional change was the introduction of common judges, as a concession to the poor. However for the coming democracy his most important acts were political and economic. Politically Peisistratos expelled the Alkmeonidai and their supporting families (the Alkmeonidai were a storied political dynasty that had been thrown out of Athens repeatedly) from not only Athens but from Attika on a whole. Economically Peisistratos took measures to support the hill farmers by creating a system to allow them to keep their profits. He also threw government support behind the olive oil trade, planting olive groves across Attika and effectively laying the seeds for Athens’ future domestic wealth. For twenty years Peisistratos, wielding an iron glove draped in constitutional velvet, enforced the peace and ensured economic wealth, creating the first Athenian golden age and his death in 527 was sincerely mourned.

Unfortunately for Athens the tyrants’ sons were not the man he was. The three sons of Peisistratos: Hippias, Hipparkhos, and Thettalos had been wealthy playboys before their father’s death and unprepared to inherit after him. When the Alkmeonidai attempted to return in 525 the three brothers expelled them again, but this time it proved to be the wrong move. From exile in Boeotia the Alkmeonidai formed an alliance with the radical elements of Athenian society for the purpose of creating a new government and overthrowing the tyranny. But in 514 the unexpected happened. Two young aristocrats named Harmodios and Aristogeiton, whom later tradition made into a homosexual pair, tried to assassinate Hippias and Hipparkhos at a religious festival. They killed the latter but Hippias escaped and executed the conspirators. The growing opposition to the Peisistratidai hailed the two men as tyrannicides and nearly deified them, and pushed Hippias into a steadily more repressive style of rule. The Alkmeonidai took advantage of this unexpected boon to manipulate the Oracle of Delphi, whose temple they had been contracted to refurbish, into telling the Spartans to force Hippias out of Athens. In 510 the Spartans decided to move against Hippias with an army led by Kleomenes I with the Alkmeonidai in tow. Hippias, universally despised, was driven out of Athens with minimal bloodshed and he fled with his family to Persia.

There was one last hurdle to face before the Athenian democracy could take shape. From the time they entered Athens again the Alkmeonidai had begun to solidify their radical ties with the common people of Attika and the poor. This made them unpopular with the aristocrats, and in 508 they maneuvered one of their own, a former supporter of the Peisistratidai named Isagoras to the position of Eponymous Arkhon (the de facto head-of-state in Athens). But Isagoras proved to be widely unpopular with the people, who backed Kleisthenes, the head of the Alkmeonidai. The Spartans however backed Isagoras. Being strictly conservative by nature the radical reforms proposed by Kleisthenes and his supporters alarmed the Spartans. Kleomenes returned to Athens with an army and with Isagoras’ blessing kicked the Alkmeonidai and their supporting families out of Athens yet again. Isagoras then attempted to scale back the Solonian constitution and accompanying reforms in favor of the original aristocratic form of government. But the people revolted against this attempt against a beloved system and the mass of people overwhelmed even the Spartans, forcing them and Isagoras and his supporters to lock themselves within the Akropolis for safety. The rebelling mob then called for Kleisthenes and the Alkmeonidai, still in Attika, to return to the city. This they did and Kleisthenes took command of the siege. After two days the Spartan king asked for parley, which was granted. In the following negotiations the Spartans were allowed to leave unmolested but Isagoras and his people would stay behind. While Isagoras himself snuck out with the Spartans his supporters were massacred and celebrations broke out all over Athens.

With the end of Isagoras’ failed tyranny the democratic revolution could begin. In the year 507 the Athenian government charged Kleisthenes with the momentous task of fixing Athens’ problems once and for all. While he would not hold any official public office Kleisthenes was given the chair of a special commission with a mandate to reform the government, which he did. Kleisthenes’ reforms rebuilt Athens from the ground up and took 3 years to hammer out and set up. While detailing the government structure of the new Athenian state is beyond the scope of this article and deserves an entire article devoted to that subject, here we will try to explain in short. Kleisthenes and his commission first sought to destroy the powers of the aristocracy and the regional factions which had nearly ripped Athens apart. Second they sought to give power to all free men within Attika who had completed military training, known as the ephebeia. This meant all men from age 18 and up of Athenian descent, with no property requirements. The word democracy stems from the name the commission used to describe what they were doing: demos kratos or in English ‘people power’.

To accomplishment the first objective the reformers created a new Athenian identity for all Attika by reorganizing society. The old division of people divided into the regional coalitions of ‘along the coasts’, ‘on the plains’, and ‘beyond the hills’ dating back to Solon’s day was abolished. The political classes created by Solon were also abolished and yet kept around. The actual titles were kept, but the power behind them was not. In their place the commission created a system of demes or villages led by a demarch or mayor. The demes were then organized into 30 trittyes or thirds, which were grouped into blocks of 10 based on geographical location: coastal, urban, and plains. The trittyes were then further organized into 10 phylai or tribes. Each tribe had three trittyes, one from the coast, one from the city, one from the plains. To instill civic pride in the phylai each one was named for a great hero of Athens’ past. Statues of the heroes were erected in downtown Athens, functioning as the heart of the city. As an extra countermeasure against factional differences Kleisthenes fixed each person to their deme (singular of demes) for life so they would be part of that village no matter where they moved. This organization of villages, thirds, and tribes became the building blocks of the Athenian democracy, which drew the most fire from outside observers.

In conclusion all of this together then was the foundation of the Athenian democracy. When Kleisthenes and his commission finished their work in around 505 they had succeeded in what they had set out to do. In the process they had created the most radical and uncontrolled democracy in history. Other Hellenic poleis (city-states) would set up democratic regimes, but these were more ‘tame’ then Athens. The constitution of Athens devised by Kleisthenes would endure without major change until 462, when the statesman Ephialtes led a reform movement that crippled the power of the Areopagos, an institution that Kleisthenes left untouched. This modified constitution would endure over a century, a testament to the sound foundations of the reformers’ ideals.

[Celts: Unit: Healer]

You are welcome MattSherman!

Anyway I was thinking that the raven fits more in line with its aspect as a symbol of wisdom. Remember the druids was the educated class. But druids becoming warriors was not unheard of. These warrior druids were most common in Britain where they could take the field as temple guards, or as commanders. The march of the druids to war was a fearsome event, and even brought an end to whole wars. Gaul had something similar in the form of the Carnutes, some of the most well equipped and best trained soldiers in the Celtic world. But the Carnutes were not really druids, but more of a 'sacred clan' charged by the druids to defend the Great Council, a massive diplomatic summit where the druids attempted to solve Gaul's problems peacefully.

[Celts: Unit: Healer]

Well it is bit more complicated then that where the Celts are concerned.

Yes they are an omen of death, and in fact ravens are commonly associated with Morrigan, the goddess of battle, and her sisters and other incarnations (of which there is several). But ravens are also helpers and the protectors of warriors. In this case they are most commonly associated with Lugos, the god of light and wisdom, who had two ravens which generally helped him out and reported the news of the world. Not all that unlike Wodanz or Odin, the Germanic/Norse equal to Lugos.

I think the raven is a fine choice to go along with a Druid, the Celtic class of wisdom and knowledge.

[Other: Chariots in Warfare and Entertainment]

In this article we will examine the use of the chariot during the time frame of 0 AD. While the Golden Age of Chariots had already long since passed the vehicles were still used to limited effect in warfare and for other purposes.

The Celts

Of all the users of chariots during this time period the Celts were the most famous of all. Among the Celts the Gallic tribes, Belgae, Brythonic tribes, and Goidels were the primary users of chariots. Called karros in the Gallic tongue the Celtic chariot was drawn by two horses and was a little over 6 and a half feet wide and 13 feet long. Typical building materials were iron, wood, wicker, and rope sometimes leather. A particular innovation of the Celts was the use of iron as a reinforcing agent in construction. One piece iron bands were beaten onto the wheels to act much in the same fashion of modern tire rims. The wheel hubs were also fitted with iron reinforcement, and in some examples iron was also added to the joints. There is much disagreement in the Celtic academic community on the suspension system of Celtic chariots, another innovation. It appears the Gallic chariots had an all rope or leather suspension that was hung from the main platform which held the axle. This could function as a spring suspension, making the experience of the riders on the platform more pleasant. It also appears that some Celtic chariots had a hybrid suspension in which two wooden beams were added as support to the rope or leather parts. Brythonic/Belgae and Goidelic chariots were another matter, but it is probable that they did not much differ from the continental chariots.

However there are still some specific characteristics unique to those two chariots. Brythonic and Belgae chariots were open in the front and had a curved wall behind. Seats were often added for comfort on the chariots of the wealthy. Julius Caesar records the chariots of the Catuvellauni had scythes mounted on the wheels. However this is highly unlikely, and would have been added by Caesar to make his enemies even more dreadful back in Rome. Goidelic chariots were geared for speed, and were little more then a simple platform covered with cloth and sometimes a tent, with sideboards placed on the sides as decoration and to protect the driver from the wheels.

In battle the Celtic chariot had a simple role. Unlike most other chariot users the Celts used the chariot as a battle platform, not as a charging weapon. Typically a Celtic warrior would mount the chariot before battle with an ample supply of javelins. Once on the field the warrior would throw his javelins while the horses ran at high speed, an impressive feat of the kind the Celts were famous for. After the supply of javelins ran out the driver would bring the chariot to a stop and let the warrior dismount, allowing him to fight on foot. The chariot then left the field and returned after either the battle was over or the warrior was in trouble, in which case the chariot acted as a quick means to get away.

The Hellenes

When it came to chariots the Hellenes had a fine martial tradition. The Mycenaeans, their Bronze Age ancestors, had been among the greatest chariot users of the era if not the best in the Aegean area. So it is quite a surprise the Hellenes did not use the chariot as a weapon of war until after Alexander’s conquests when the Hellenistic Successor kingdoms used them to a limited extent. In general while the Hellenes did not use the chariot in war the vehicle was still held in high regard because of the memories of the Mycenaean era preserved by Homeros or Homer and others. Because of this the chariot assumed great religious and ceremonial importance, as well as for entertainment. Called afyia in Koine Greek the Hellenic chariot was usually drawn by two horses but more could be hitched by use of a bar called a trace that could be added to the front of the chariot. Because of the wide range of styles there are no measurements for a typical Hellenic chariot, however in general the Hellenic chariot was smaller then the Celtic model, itself already small by chariot standards. Building materials consisted primarily of wood, wicker, and precious materials like bronze. Unlike the Celtic chariot the Hellenic model had no suspension system, making all rides unpleasant. Mountings or ornamentation could be quite extravagant depending on the wealth of the person for whom the chariot was meant. A marking feature of Hellenic chariots was the limited control the driver had over his horses, which made turning a hazardous venture.

The chariots used in the racing competitions were more specialized. Chariot racing in Hellas first became a serious sport in 680 BC when they were introduced into the Olympic Games. Racing chariots had to be custom built for that purpose, as the regular chariot would not last long on the track. To this purpose the racing chariot was fortified with the addition of a curved body or basket what was attached to the platform. This basket was made from hardwood and generally was 3 feet high and covered the chariot from the front, along the sides, almost to the back which was left open for ease of mounting and dismounting. After contact with the Celts the Hellenic racing chariot was reinforced with iron rims on the wheels and later iron reinforcement was also added to the basket.

After Alexander the Great the war chariots appeared in small numbers. As documented by both Hellenic and Roman sources the Successor Kingdoms used a number of war chariots in their armies. These chariots appeared to have been of the scythed variety, which will be explained below. The primary users of these chariots were the Seleukids and the Mithridatic dynasty of Pontos.

The Persians

The Persians established the first world superpower by defeating the Middle East’s premier chariot powers: Media, Lydia, Babylon, and Egypt. According to Xenophon, Cyrus the Great was dismissive of chariots, viewing them as a waste of perfectly good horses, materials, and men. Nevertheless the Persians did in fact have use for chariots and the Achaemenid army had at least two chariot using contingents. The primary use of the chariot by the Persians was that of command post and status symbol. It was not uncommon for a Persian general to conduct the business of battle from his chariot, and orders could be carried to the front lines by swift horsemen or other chariots belonging to his staff. As a status symbol the chariot was the centerpiece of military parades. Evidence also exists that chariots were used extensively in hunting, especially lion hunting. Chariots were used for religious purposes also. Called ratha in Old Persian the Persian chariot was drawn by four horses and larger then the Celtic model. The size of the chariots could vary between contingents of the Achaemenid army, although the Libyan chariot was the same size of the Persian model, and the Indian was larger. They were generally built out of wood and wicker, possibly of other materials as well but these are unknown. A distinctive feature of the Persian chariot was its wheels. Most chariots used wheels that had four spokes on it, whereas the Persian model had six. This was because of the great size of the Persian chariot, and it needed strengthened wheels to accommodate the heavier frame. Another distinguishing feature of Persian chariots was the inclusion of a seat for the driver.

The scythed chariot was a brilliant military innovation. Modern scholars however still debate who invented the scythed chariot and when. The two most likely candidates are Cyrus the Great and Ajatashatru, the King of Magadha. In the earlier case Cyrus invented the scythed chariot in the 540s for use against Kroisos (Croesus) of Lydia. In the later case Ajatashatru invented the scythed chariot as a ‘wonder weapon’ to turn the tide in his war with the Licchavi Republic in 475. The scythed chariot was essentially an overhauled regular chariot. The wheels and axle were replaced with a reinforced wheel (nine spokes instead of six) and elongated axle. The basket was overhauled with the seat being replaced with a wooden turret reaching up to the elbows. Of course the most noticeable change was the iconic scythes themselves, fixed onto the axles and made from iron.

In battle the Persian chariot had many uses. Except in the case of the scythed chariot the Persian chariot was used primarily as a mobile command post during battle as mentioned above. The scythed chariots were meant solely for battle, but were seldom used as cavalry was the preferred strike arm of Achaemenid armies. When used in battle the scythed chariot was employed as a scare weapon and to break up large infantry formations with their scythes in support of cavalry. Contrary to popular belief the scythed chariot was an effective weapon, and even defeated Hellenic hoplitai on occasion.

The Romans

The Romans were first exposed to chariots in the early years of the Republic while fighting the Etruscans and the Celts who had settled in Italy, who had brought chariots with them from Gaul. From the Etruscans the Romans also learned of chariot racing, which the Etruscans had borrowed from their Hellenic trading partners. Much like the Hellenes the Romans would never use the chariot for warfare. Instead they used the chariot for religious, entertainment, and triumphal purposes. Called the currus in Latin, the Roman chariot was identical with the Hellenic model, only made much more splendid in construction. The best example of this was the quadrigae, the triumphal chariot used in the Triumph of a general and later the emperors. The quadrigae were so highly decorated with gold, ivory, and sculpt work that the baskets are still prized as works of art in museums.

Still some words must be said about chariot racing in Rome. While racing was already a sport under the Hellenes, it was the Romans who made the sport into an institution of the state. The racing chariots were divided into four factions: the Reds, the Blues, the Greens, and the Whites. While at first these factions were little more then just a necessary organizational structure, they soon became the object of intense devotion and rivalry in the fans and later the focus of political and religious disputes. In fact by the time that 0 AD ends the remaining teams, the Blues and the Greens, had taken on the characteristics of political parties. Ultimately racing was put to an end by the Roman Emperor Justinian in the aftermath of the Nika Riots in 532.

Interestingly there is evidence of Roman experimentation in the 4th century with the idea of a ‘cataphract chariot’. According to the ‘de Rebus Bellicis’ the Roman military was considering the use of a chariot like contraption that would be pulled by a cataphract. This device had scythes mounted on it which were lowered into a deadly position by the rider at the last moment prior to contact. But nothing about this is known for sure, or that this contraption saw battlefield use.

In conclusion the twilight era of the chariot was one of interest and excitement. Maintaining its usefulness well into the next era.

[Romans: Ancient Britain from Magnus Maximus to the Jute Rebellion]

In this article we will give an overview of the events that occurred in Ancient Britain from the time of the Roman usurper Magnus Maximus to the revolt of the Germanic foederati retained by Vortigern.

Britain had become a dangerous venture to the Romans. By the late 4th Century AD the island of Britannia had become a problem for the Roman Empire. An isolated outpost on the edge of the known world, Britannia often had to be heavily garrisoned, and these garrisons equally often became the basis for several revolts by successive governors and vicarii. Hard fighting was not new to the diocese, both to internal and external threats. The Picts, who had displaced the Caledonians after the latter was wiped out by Septimius Severus, the Gaels, and the Germanic tribes, all formed the greatest threats from without, the diocese’s own administration the greatest threat from within. These problems reached their fever pitch in 367, the year of the so-called ‘Great Conspiracy’. This event was a year long war in which the Picts, Gaels, and the Germanic peoples all launched a coordinated assault on Britannia with the cooperation of the disgruntled Roman garrison manning Hadrian’s Wall. The war was eventually won by Rome through the skilled leadership and timely reforms of Comes Flavius Theodosius, the father the future Emperor Theodosius the Great. This saved Britannia, but the diocese’s troubles did not end. In 380 a Hispanic former staff officer under Comes Theodosius named Magnus Maximus returned to Britannia to assume the post of Comes Britanniarum. He quickly gained the trust and love of both his troops and the population of the diocese through his willingness to cooperate with non-Romans and his leadership against a mass invasion by the Picts and their Gaelic allies in 381. Just two years later Magnus Maximus was acclaimed Emperor by the army, a position his contemporaries note he did not want, but still lusted after. The would-be Emperor left Britannia before the year was out and took most the garrison with him.

At first Magnus Maximus achieved startling success, slaying the rightful Emperor Gratianus and seizing control of the entire Western Empire save Italia itself. In 384 the Eastern Emperor, Theodosius the Great, arranged for a tripartite division of power with Magnus Maximus recognized as a colleague, so long as he recognized Gratianus’ half brother Valentinian II as an colleague as well. This power arrangement didn’t last the year, and Magnus Maximus set up his son Flavius Victor as his successor despite the agreement. Britannia prospered under Maximus, despite the fact he did not govern from there as the vicarial administration hoped, and the diocese became his greatest stronghold. For his part the usurper did reward the Romano-British for their loyalty, and many of the most important power players in Post-Roman Britain got their start under Magnus Maximus. In 387 Maximus overstepped his bounds and invaded Italia, driving out Valentinian. Theodosius made war on the usurper and defeated him at Aquileia in 388. Flavius Victor was executed soon after, reuniting the empire for a while. This proved to have ill effects for Britannia, which once again fell into disuse.

With the fall of Magnus Maximus the final Roman pull-out was not far away. Even though the usurper was defeated his government and official appointments remained intact. The Roman military returned, but much reduced in scale then before. The experience gained in the revolt of Maximus had caused the Romans to not invest Britannia with as large a garrison as previously. Hadrian’s Wall and the Saxon Shore forts were effectively abandoned, and the barbarian raids intensified. By 396 Germanic naval raids had reached such a point the true power of the Western Roman Empire, the magister militum Stilicho, was forced to lead a naval expedition against them. The situation in the Western Roman Empire, in the meanwhile, had severely worsened. Valentinian II had been assassinated in 393, the pagan rhetorician Eugenius set up to succeed him, Eugenius was himself ousted and executed, and Theodosius the Great set up as the last ruler of the entire Roman Empire.

Upon his death the empire was split again between his sons, Honorius in the west, Arcadius in the east. But Honorius was but a child, so Stilicho held real power, but his power was not firm. The Germanic situation in Britannia only compounded his problems. The magister militum was forced to stay in Britannia for only a year before problems elsewhere called his attention. Nevertheless Stilicho’s naval expedition brought results and the raids slacked off by 399, although the Gaelic naval raids continued unabashed. Ultimately the rising threat of the Visigothic king Alaric and Roman internal problems saw the beginning of what was to become the Roman withdrawal from the British Isles in 402. The diocese fell into chaos as the raiders returned, the military began to mutiny, and the civilian populace rose in revolt. In 406 the mutineers elevated one of their commanders to the purple as the Emperor Marcus, only to tear him down when he proved inept. His successor, Gratianus, was honored as Gratianus II, only to be torn down as well for incompetence. In his place the soldiers elevated another officer, named Constantine, to the purple in 407. Honored as Constantine III, he proved to be what the soldiers were looking for. Fashioning himself the new Magnus Maximus, Constantine left Britannia quickly taking the garrison with him, and they would not return. Like his predecessor, Constantine at first enjoyed rapid success. Stilicho was all but overthrown by this point, and while his lieutenant was able to hold off Constantine’s advance for a while the rebel forces soon broke through. By 408 Constantine III had control over all of Gaul, and the threat he posed to Honorius was real. Through his personal leadership and that of his lieutenants Constantine emerged victorious over all difficulties, defeating an attempted pincer attack by Stilicho and even annexing Hispania, the family stronghold of the Theodosian dynasty.

Following the death of Stilicho and continued problems with Alaric, Honorius agreed to recognize Constantine III as legitimate, and the usurper reached the height of his power. Constantine had already forgotten his roots, and this would come back to haunt him. In 409 the diocese of Britannia rose in revolt against their own Emperor, even ejecting what remained of his government. New appointments were made by Honorius to replace those put in place by Constantine. As for the would-be Emperor the loss of Britannia was the beginning of his troubles. His magister militum, Gerontius, rose in revolt, taking Hispania with him. By the following year it was all over, as Constantine had gambled on the new conspiracy of Honorius’ magister equitum Allobich and lost when the latter was executed. Gerontius was defeated by the rising star of Honorius’ new magister militum, Constantius, who then went on to defeat Constantine III himself. With the defeat of the usurper, and of his nascent colleagues in Hispania (Maximus) and Germania (Jovinus) the provincial government of Britannia had expected the full return of Roman authority. But surprisingly Honorius decided to give the Romano-British exactly what they, from his perspective, had been agitating for. He abandoned the diocese, ordering the last military and civilian personnel that would still listen to his orders to evacuate. As one last act Honorius penned the famous letter to the Romano-British in which he told them to fend for themselves. The Roman period of British history was over.

With the abandonment of the island the British Dark Age had begun. By the end of 410 AD it had become abundantly clear the Romans had no intention of returning, and while some Roman officials had opted to stay behind they were now on their own. Outside forces soon began to attack the newly independent land, with the Gaels switching from their normal raids to outright colonization in what is now northern Wales and the Germanic raiders beginning to land in force. Only in the north, against the Picts, was the line held. In this case the defense was led by one Caelius Votepacus, the Dux Britanniarum, the highest ranking military position under the Romans. Votepacus had been in Britannia for so long he was called by his soldiers and commoners alike Coel Hen or Old King Cole of nursery rhyme fame. Not much is known about Caelius Votepacus and given his age and military expertise it had been recently suggested that Votepacus could have been in place as Dux Britanniarum as early as Magnus Maximus’ day. From his home base at Caer Ebruac (which the Romans called Eboracum), the military capital of Britannia, Coel Hen held near total control of the northern half of the country. The situation in the central and southern areas was by contrast far from settled. Before long however two men rose up as the most powerful rulers of the region. One of these was a native Romano-Briton who had achieved high rank under successive vicarial administrations starting with Magnus Maximus whose name was Vitalinus but whom we know by his later title of Vortigern. Vitalinus was also seemingly a major landowner, with his territories stretching to encompass what is now the Midlands, south, and central Wales. His talent had earned him the notice of the Emperor Theodosius who arranged for the marriage of Vitalinus to Sevira, a daughter of Magnus Maximus. However the emperor died before he could oversee the marriage, and as a result it was delayed a number of years, occurring under the patronage of Honorius and Arcadius instead. This made Vitalinus a man of great importance in Post-Roman Britannia, for not only was he a major landowner but he had marital ties to the popular Magnus Maximus. The other figure was a trueborn Roman of the senatorial class, a client of the great Bishop Ambrose of Mediolanium (modern Milan) who we only know as Ambrosius the Elder. While he is best known today as the father of Ambrosius Aurelianus, Ambrosius the Elder appears to have been a figure of some importance. It appears from what little evidence we have available that Ambrosius the Elder was the last appointed governor of the province of Maxima Casaeriensis. Because the monk Gildas tells us that Ambrosius wore the purple it appears that he was no regular governor, but a consularis. Such a governor had to be of the senatorial class and already hold great prestige. This and the name of the man himself have led historians to conclude that Ambrosius the Elder was probably a member of the Circle of Ambrose, a close company of family and associates attached to Ambrose of Mediolanium. From an outside view point it appeared that a showdown between Vitalinus and Ambrosius the Elder was certain, but remarkably they decided to share power. Vitalinus probably realized he needed the legitimacy that a high ranking Roman could provide, and Ambrosius probably realized that he needed the military might that Vitalinus could provide.

Together the two men unified the southern and central provinces of Britannia by 420 at the latest. With this out of the way Vitalinus turned his attention north to fight Coel Hen for the north. But the old general was a talented commander and he effectively kept Vitalinus out of his lands, while at the same time fighting the Picts and Gaels along his northern border. It was on this duty that Caelius Votepacus was slain, leading a military raid on the Pictish frontier in 425. Vitalinus, who had already begun to bring in and settle a number of Roman and Romano-Gallic soldiers from Armorica (Brittany) as foederati, took advantage of this to launch an invasion of the north. The heirs of Coel Hen fought for two years before finally submitting to Vitalinus, although their submission was one in which they dictated the terms. Happy enough Vitalinus called for the gathering of all the petty-kings and important officials in the diocese of Britannia to meet him in assembly. This assembly became the Romano-British version of the Roman senate, and was called the Council of Princes. Vitalinus proclaimed himself the leader of a unified Britannia, but was not happy to take any existing title. Instead he invented a new one just for him, Wortigernos or Vortigern which means ‘Highest King among Kings’. The Council accepted the grandiose title but with the understanding that Vortigern’s power was not absolute, and that they ruled with him jointly. If Vortigern resented this we do not know, because the power arrangement was solidified and came into effect without problems.

With Vortigern’s uneasy reunification of Britannia it appeared peace was returning, but it was not to last. Even though Vortigern was now recognized as a high king he was not entirely happy yet with his authority. The main reason was the political alliance that had been arranged between himself and Ambrosius the Elder had broken down. This resulted in a division within the Council of Princes into roughly two parties: a provincial one backing Vortigern and a Roman one backing Ambrosius. This political conflict however soon took on a more religious nature. Vortigern, and by extension those who backed him, were not mainstream Christians but Pelagians. Pelagianism was in short a radical theology that denied the concept of original sin, and hence the saving grace of Christ. This sect was popular in the hinterlands of the Roman Empire, far and away from the hierarchy of the Roman Church. Pelagianism was also much more accommodating to native religions, which made it popular in the environment of Post-Roman Britain where the old Celtic religion was still powerful. By contrast Ambrosius the Elder was a staunch mainstream Christian, as were those who backed him. The ties that such men would still have with the Roman Church would have made them particular targets for the provincials, as they sought to cut all connections to Rome. Their tolerance of the old Celtic religion would have been low, and it was not uncommon for Roman clergy to go about chopping down Celtic groves or alternatively using those sites as Christian holy places. But by 429 other problems would force Vortigern’s attention. The Picts had come down in force by boat into modern Wales at the bequest of the Gaelic colonies and client states there. Along the way the Picts picked up a substantial number of Germanic mercenaries who latched on to them in hopes of raiding the countryside. This was a major offensive, and it is against this background that the Bishop Germanus of Auxerre landed. Germanus had been sent by the Church in Gaul, whom were concerned by the spread of Pelagianism, and wanted to see what Germanus could do. Unsurprisingly Vortigern was upset, he did not want to see the return of any Roman authority to what he viewed as his land. As it was the bishop worked quickly, humiliating the Pelagian clergy in public debate at Augusta and from there working his way to the shrine of Alban at Verulamium, the first Christian martyr in Britannia. However on arrival Germanus learned of the military threat and changed tact. He met with Vortigern and offered to lead an army into Gaelic territory to meet the invaders before they could cause much harm, since he was a solider earlier in life and understood military strategy. Vortigern allowed him to do so, not realizing that Germanus had ulterior motives. He not only intended to win a military victory, but also a religious one. As it was Germanus led his army into northern Wales and found the raiders. He lured them into a valley where he had stationed his army and at a prearranged signal they shouted out ‘Alleluia!’ several times over. The shout, amplified by the valley walls, broke the Picts and their Germanic allies, sending them back to the sea. Germanus had won his victory and left the island, but not before Vortigern convinced the bishop to bless his eldest son Theodosius and take his youngest, Britu, to raise as a foster son. Germanus left soon afterwards, content he had accomplished his mission.

With the immediate threat taken care of, the larger problem of what to do with the Gaelic colonies presented itself. If there was one thing that Vortigern came away with from recent events it was that he needed to bolster his military might. Armorica would probably not give him the troops he needed so Vortigern turned to the Germanic raiders that so plagued Britannia. Taking on one’s former enemies to serve you as foederati was a time-honored Roman practice, especially when those same former enemies could protect you from even more hostile enemies. It was under these circumstances that Vortigern would meet the man who would eventually spell his end. This man was none other then the Jutish atheling (prince or warlord) Hengest. This man, and his twin brother Horsa, had become something akin to outlaws in the Germanic world. Although by their very names and the circumstances of their birth Hengest and Horsa were intended to do great things the utter destruction they wreaked on the Frisians, including the massacre of the entire royal clan, led to their exile. Hengest recognized the opportunity to regain his honor in Britannia. So along with Horsa and three boat loads of warriors personally loyal to him, 200 in all, Hengest landed in southeastern Britannia (what is now the Isle of Thanet) at Vortigern’s request. After confirming the agreement by which Hengest and his warriors would serve as foederati they immediately got to work. The success that Hengest achieved against his own people was startling, and before long he was a virtual legend. Taking advantage of this Hengest probed the environment back home and found it favorable. He brought in additional warriors to serve him. Soon the initial landing zone was no longer satisfactory to Hengest’s needs and he demanded more. Vortigern, who appreciated the much-needed stability this brought him allowed it, granting Hengest the use of a natural harbor known today as Hengistbury Head. But the first signs of strain began to appear when Hengest brought in his cousins Ochtha and Ebissa, bringing with them an additional 18 boat loads, 12,000 warriors in all. He masked this under a request to Vortigern to be allowed to extend operations northward against the Picts. Vortigern, who had his own political purposes, had no qualms with this.

For many years the north of Britannia was dominated by the heirs of Coel Hen, men who supported Ambrosius the Elder in Council and made themselves a powerful nuisance to Vortigern. The two most powerful of these heirs was Cunedda and Cerneu. Cunedda was the son-in-law of Coel Hen, having married his daughter Gwawl. Cunedda himself also had important bloodlines. His grandfather was a Roman general named Paternus, who commanded the Votadini contingent along Hadrian’s Wall under the command of Comes Theodosius following the ‘Great Conspiracy’. The Votadini for their part were Brythonic Celts, but years in Roman service had changed their culture and language. Under Cunedda the Votadini had formed their own kingdom, Gododdin. Cerneu was the eldest son of Coel Hen and inherited the key parts of his realm, including Caer Ebruac. Not to mention the elite core of his father's army. Vortigern attempted to break their power by forcing Cunedda and the greater part of his people to leave their lands and move to northern Wales to expel the Gaelic presence there. Cunedda’s new kingdom would later become Gwynedd, the most powerful of the Welsh states. As for Cerneu, Vortigern forced him to take command of the new foederati under Ochtha and Ebissa. This he did, however reluctantly, leasing the land of Deywr as a base of operations. Deywr became the basis for the later Germanic kingdom of Deira.

The anger of the Council had been aroused. Vortigern’s actions in his dealings with Hengest had been done with out the approval of the Council of Princes, and now that he had upset the northern balance of power they had enough. Ambrosius the Elder, as always, was the leader of the opposition to Vortigern. But his leadership now was not simply against a good leader who made the occasional wrong decision but against a military tyrant in the worst Roman mold. It was in this climate of political uncertainly that Hengest played his greatest card yet. He invited Vortigern to his headquarters on Thanet to renegotiate the terms of service in 436. Once he arrived Hengest introduced the high king to his young daughter, Roawen, during a feast. Sevira was already dead by this point and from all accounts Roawen was a beautiful young woman. It wasn’t difficult to trick Vortigern into a marriage with her. Hengest wanted a sizable gift of land in exchange for his daughter. In truth Hengest already controlled the area, but he needed to legitimize his ownership. Vortigern agreed to sign over the territory, which became the first Germanic kingdom in Britannia, Cantware or Kent. The reaction of the Council of Princes and the Church bordered on volcanic. The Council was enraged that Vortigern would just sign over land that didn’t belong to him. The Church was angered that Vortigern would marry a pagan and not even attempt to convert her, or even let missionaries meet with Roawen. No man in Britannia was more angry then Ambrosius the Elder. Cantware comprised a large chunk of old Maxima Casaeriensis, land that Ambrosius still considered rightfully his by Imperial decree. The following year Vortigern called the Council of Princes into order for the purpose of setting aside additional provisions for the Germanic foederati, whose numbers had been recently bolstered by the arrival of a substantial new contingent. This was in fact not simply more family members and their bands coming to support Hengest but was the arrival of a new Germanic body. This was the Angles under their own atheling, Eomer. Back in Scandinavia the two men apparently knew each other, and it appears from the records that Eomer served under Hengest as a vassal. The Council outright refused, and when Vortigern attempted to go over their heads Ambrosius the Elder and his supporters walked out and raised their own armies, igniting a civil war. The conflict lasted only a few months and by 438 it was over with the decisive defeat of Ambrosius at modern Wallop, Hampshire. Vortigern had won the war, but his government had ceased to exist. The Council of Princes had dissolved itself and fighting between the petty kingdoms broke out.

In 441 Hengest, who had manipulated events from behind the scenes, raised the standard of revolt in Cantware alongside Horsa and Eomer. Bursting out from the confinements of their settlements the Germanic warriors swept out like a massive tidal wave on the unprepared and bickering Romano-British. Whole regions were wiped clean of inhabitants as the Germanic front swept forward. In the confusion Vortigern was overthrown and captured by Jutish warriors, probably with Roawen’s aid. Theodosius, who was talented, dynamic, and a mainstream Christian, was set up to succeed him alongside his brother Catigern. The new high king took the title Vortimerix, an old Gallic title meaning ‘Highest King’. We know him as Vortimer. Under Vortimer the Romano-British reformed and held the line against the Jutes and Angles long enough to organize a counterattack by the early 450s.

In conclusion this period of British history is one of great interest and foreshadowing of the events to come. While ultimately not much is known for sure about this era, causing most of this article to be based on informed conjuncture, the essential facts remain the same. This period was one of beginning and ending as it both spelled the end of Roman domination in Britain and the beginning of England as we know it.

[Joshua's 21st Birthday!]

Thanks Erik,

You're probably right about where this should go. But I have always put my B-day announcement on this board, don't know why. Just the way I am I suppose.

[Joshua's 21st Birthday!]

YAY!!!!

Well today is a big day for me, THE DAY I TURN 21!!!

Yes I am now 21 years old, and looking back on the past year I see that God has really blessed me. I have had a good year for my writing, and I feel that I have grown in my skills as a writer. I also know that God continues to bless me by allowing me to remain here at Wildfire Games, working on 0 AD. I hope that there is many more blessings in store, I just need to pray for them!

I also know He blesses me with my wonderful family, and by allowing to go on a birthday extravaganza and getting a load of cool books. I got a fifth one today from my Mom and Dad: The Wars Against Napoleon Good reading!

So let the party commence!

Hahahaha!!!

[Battles: The Battle of Badon Hill]

The battle of Badon Hill or alternatively the Siege of Mynydd Badon was fought in the general area of central to southern England between the Romano-British (Romanized Brythonic Celts) and the recently arrived Saxons and their allies. Fought sometime between 491 and 516, this battle has been described as epoch-making for it halted the Germanic advance for over half a century.

Unfortunately much about this battle is shrouded in mystery. Due to a sheer lack of information, unreliability of much of the sources, and the growth of legend, much of the details that surround this great battle have been lost to the ravages of time and is unlikely to ever be resolved. Perhaps the greatest dispute is the identity of the Romano-British commander. According to St. Gildas, whose writing was close to the latest estimated date of the battle, the commander was at least partly Roman and of noble birth (possibly of senatorial rank) named Ambrosius Aurelianus. Other, although much later sources, record that the commander was Arthur, whose mere mention continues to cause strife among historians. Concerns over how old Aurelianus would have been at Badon Hill if he had Roman parents, or even Roman grandparents, which when combined with the Arthur identity controversy (including a theory that Aurelianus was Arthur), have left this debate far from settled. For the purposes of this article we shall assume, as a recent theory goes that Aurelianus was already dead by the time of the battle and that Arthur (whoever he was), serving under him first as a cavalry officer and then steadily gaining rank, and was his successor. A smaller debate has also risen up over the identity of the Saxon commander. But this a far more settled question and the consensus is that the Saxon leader was none other then Aella, a Saxon nobleman who followed the lead of the great Hengest to Britain (though unlike his Englisc counterpart Eomer, the first leader of the Angles, he did not serve Hengest). Following the death of Hengest his position, that of Bretonwalda, Lord of Britain, passed to Aella by right of arms.

Another debate is over the location of the battle. Like with the debate over the commanders there is also a debate over the exact location of the battle. Until recently the location could range as far north as the Scottish border, but recent research and archeology has kept the possible candidates in the general area of central to southern England, with the possibility of ranging out as far as Wales. The two most likely and well considered places for the battle to have taken place is Solsbury Hill, near modern Bath, and Buxton, in Derbyshire. The main arguments here for either are of a primarily linguistic nature, centering on the word ‘bath’ and its varied translations, with added religious arguments on the part of Buxton (the area was a spot of religious importance both to the Druids and to Christians). Again for simplicity’s sake we shall assume that Solsbury Hill was the spot of the battle, since the theory we have mentioned above postulates that Arthur was form and operated primarily in and around Dfyneint or Dumnonia, which corresponds roughly to modern Cornwall, and Bath would have rested on the Dumnonian frontier.

Now we can attempt to put together a reasonable timeline of events leading up to the battle. In 410 AD the Western Roman Emperor Honorius pulled the last vestiges of the Roman military from Britain and told them to fend for themselves, thus marking the end of Roman Britain and the beginning of the great British Dark Age. Initially leaderless and lost Britain descended into anarchy. Eventually the land was united by a former Roman magistrate named Vitalinus, who to celebrate his unification created the title Wortigernos (Highest King among Kings).

We know this man today as Vortigern. As with most Dark Age figures we know very little for sure about Vortigern, but he is chiefly remembered for inviting the Germanic Eotenas or Jutes into Britain. The invitation probably occurred in the early 430s and the twin brothers Hengest and Horsa took control. After Hengest used his young daughter Roawen to force Vortigern into giving him control of Cantware (modern Kent) a faction of dissatisfied Romano-British nobles, led by the father of Ambrosius Aurelianus (named tentatively by modern historians as Ambrosius the Elder), rose in revolt. While this revolt was crushed Hengest and Horsa saw their chance and also rose in revolt in 441. The Eotenas Rebellion caught the Romano-British off-guard and many were killed.

By 455 the sons of Vortigern, led by his eldest son Theodosius (better known as Vortimer), had managed to contain the flood of Germanic warriors, the Eotenas having by now been joined by a substantial number of Englisc (Angles) led by Eomer, and old ally of Hengest. A peace conference is called at Stonehenge by the Romano-British, but turns into a blood-bath when Hengest broke the truce and slew all 300 princes in an attempt to render the Romano-British leaderless. Vortigern, who had been held captive by Hengest, was released after this incident, but died a wretched death shortly thereafter, Vortimer having been killed not long before the Stonehenge Conference, and himself the most hated man in Britain. Without the leadership of Vortigern or his sons the Romano-British nearly collapsed.

In 460 leadership was brought to Britain by Ambrosius Aurelianus, who used the fame of his father’s name to jump-start what was to become a brilliant military career. Aurelianus created a strategy in which the Romano-British constructed a series of defensive strong points along the borderline between them and the invaders. But these strong points were not the main focus of his strategy. Instead Aurelianus used these points as advance warning system and as a diversion. The main focus was on the cavalry. Ambrosius Aurelianus’ greatest legacy was the creation of a dedicated force of highly mobile and heavily armed and armored cavalry inspired by Rome. What these cavalry were like is unknown, as too little information exists, aside from being mobile and heavy. But in all likelihood these men were cataphractii, the heavy horsemen of the Roman Empire inspired by the Sarmatians. In any case Aurelianus’ system worked, and worked well. The Eotenas and allies had never encountered cavalry quite like Aurelianus’ forces before and it wasn’t long before the Germanic lines began to fall back.

With this much needed breathing room Aurelianus allowed for the Romano-British to recover and prosper. In recognition for his deeds Aurelianus was proclaimed in the Roman fashion Amherawddyr, which was the Brythonic pronunciation of the title Imperator. To the Romano-British the title Amherawddyr took on grand connotations, becoming a title meaning High King of Britain and Supreme Commander. While his authority was not universal, Ambrosius Aurelianus held sway over many of the Romano-British kingdoms and became a great terror to the Eotenas and their allies.

In 477 the Germanic cause received new blood with the unexpected arrival of the Seaxnas, better known as the Saxons. The Seaxnas and their leader, a young nobleman named Aella, were not welcomed initially. Up to this point Hengest controlled all Germanic forces in Britain, even as the Englisc followed their own leaders. Aella was a wild-card whose arrival mirrored his own too closely for comfort. Ultimately Hengest decided to use Aella as a border warden on the western frontier. It is about this same time that many speculate the rise of Arthur to prominence. Following this line of thought Ambrosius Aurelianus would have needed someone to fulfill for him the responsibilities of a Comes Britanniarum. Under the Romans the Comes Britanniarum was one of the three military commands in Britain, equal to the Comes Litoris Saxonici, and subordinate to the Dux Britanniarum. The Comes formally held command of Britain’s Comitatensis, or mobile field army. Under the defense system created by Aurelianus such a post would be of vital importance, as the mobile field army was the crux of his strategy. As Aurelianus aged he would need someone to take actual field command for him, while he was still Amherawddyr. Arthur described as ‘warlike’ and ‘terrible’, fits the bill. As we had speculated above he would have been already serving on the Amherawddyr’s staff as a cavalry officer, so the promotion to effective command of the field army is not too big a leap to make.

Continuing on our course Ambrosius Aurelianus would have most probably died somewhere around 480, which when we consider his birth to have been around 433, gives him a long full life and plenty of time for a military career like his. But the question of his succession threw the Romano-British into chaos again. None of the princes on the so-called Princely Council wanted to lead and Aurelianus’ own children, whom Gildas called much inferior to their father, were among them. Arthur then stood to be his successor, but did not apparently for a number of years. The reason lies most probably in the earliest ecclesiastical accounts, which describe Arthur as a uncultured martial brute, meaning he must have done something to anger the church, but what they don’t go into. Regardless the Council had no qualms in letting him keep his position, as Arthur would have continued to have fought the invaders regardless of the political situation. This probably led to his eventual proclamation as Amherawddyr by the army. A civil war would have erupted following this as Arthur’s ascension would not have been clean or smooth, but in any case bigger problems would draw the new Supreme Commander’s attention. In 488 Hengest, the great enemy of the Romano-British, died from old age. His death caused a splintering in the Germanic command structure, and their actions lost their former cohesion. The Englisc, in conjunction with the Picts with whom they had allied, began a new advance in the north. Arthur, now the Amherawddyr, was drawn north to fight against them, and this probably marked the beginning of the traditional 12 Battles of ‘King’ Arthur.

Now we move towards the great battle itself. For the purposes of simplicity we shall assume that the Battle of Badon Hill took place in 497. By this time Arthur, while still not on good terms with the high nobility and the church, had become a greatly popular leader. Most of Britain heeded his command, even though this control was unsteady. For the most part it is reasonable to believe that Arthur would not have made great modifications to his predecessor’s system, although it appears that Arthur did use his infantry, especially Gaelic mercenaries, more then Aurelianus did, but the focus remained on the cavalry, which the primarily infantry armies of his enemies had little success against. However the Germanic cause suddenly began to surge again when Aella, the young upstart, suddenly emerged as the new Bretonwalda, intending to take Hengest’s place as Lord of Britain. In 491 Aella and his youngest son Cyssa, partly in revenge for the deaths of his older children in a raid, launched a massive attack on Rhegin, a small Romano-British kingdom on the borders with the Seaxnas. The city-fort of Anderida fell quickly and the entire population was put to the sword. This event traditionally marks the foundation of Sussex. From his new base Aella presided over a mass offensive in the south, Rhegin was wiped off the map by Cyssa, and Seaxnas ranged so far out that they could reach the ruins of Augusta, modern London. Capitalizing on his so far amazing success Aella was able to re-unify the Germanic forces in Britain, and with the formal submission of Hengest’s heir and the new king of Cantware, Oisc, his power was solidified. With this newfound unity Aella and Oisc together began a steady forward advance. By 496 the Seaxnas had reached the borders of the great Kingdom of Dfyneint, overrunning the defenses in place within the Coed Andred (a land of forest, farms, and rock that stretched from modern Pevensey Castle to the far border of Dorset). By now the Germanic resurgence had forced Arthur’s re-call to the south, most likely at the personal request of King Gereint, a possible blood relative to Arthur. Gereint was an avid proponent of naval warfare and under his rule Dfyneint, alongside Dyfed (a nominally client kingdom of the Gaels), and Llydaw (a predecessor of what was to become Brittany with close ties to the Romano-British) in Gaul formed a naval triumvirate that could challenge Germanic naval superiority on equal footing. This in combination with Dfyneint’s importance as a trade hub made the kingdom a tempting target for Aella and Oisc.

Arthur was probably quick to realize that Aella had to be stopped before he entered Dfyneint, or else the whole south would collapse. But he also would realize that he could not fight Aella on open ground, when he fought it had to be on ground of his own choosing, were he could use his cavalry to full effect. The place chosen was a fortified hill fort near the Roman resort town of Aquae Sulis, a region called Baddan by the Romano-British. In the theory in which we have been thus far following in this article it is postulated that Arthur would have attempted to formulate a strategy were he could ambush the numerically superior Germanic forces with his cavalry within a relatively small space, maximizing the amount of havoc he could wreak upon them, while at the same time luring them into overconfidence. Baddan would have been good for this, as the terrain would be excellent for Arthur’s hypothetical plan. In any case in 497 Aella resumed his advance westwards into Dfyneint itself and made towards Aquae Sulis, intending to level the nearby hill fort to allow him to advance further into Dumnonia unhindered, and also to eliminate any early warning to the Romano-British. When Aella, having probably encountered light resistance, found the fort already manned he adapted to the situation and decided to lay siege, confident that the garrison could not hold out for long. Arthur, laying wait in the nearby woods, would have realized the time was right and ordered the advance.

The Battle of Badon Hill had begun. Unfortunately there does not appear to be any solid evidence on what happened during the battle itself, so we shall have to guess most of the details. The sudden appearance of the cream of the Romano-British military bursting out of the woods likely at a fast pace would have been a great shock to the Seaxnas and Eotenas laying siege to Badon Hill. This would have forced them to break siege and turn around to face the on-coming horsemen, placing their hope that the terrain would break the charge. Arthur is described as bearing the cross during the Badon Campaign, which probably means he could have been leading the charge at the battle wearing a shield with a cross blazoned upon it. Alternatively Arthur could have been using a literal cross as his battle standard here, emphasizing his role as a leader of Christians. In any case the Romano-British cataphractii would have collided head on with the Germans on the slope. It is possible that at this point the garrison of the fort would have attempted to sally forth and hit the Seaxnas and Eotenas from behind. Caught in a vice between the Romano-British cavalry and infantry the battle turned into a slaughter. Nennius reports that Arthur slew 960 men personally. While this is the stuff of super-hero legend the number is still significant. 960 would roughly correspond to 8 Germanic ‘long hundreds’ of 120 men each, a much debated unit of organization noted first by Tacticus, and even used into the days of the Vikings by the Norse. What this probably means is that the Romano-British killed more than the equivalent of 8 ‘long hundreds’ of their enemy. As one last speculation, given the aftermath of the battle, it is likely that Aella was slain at Badon. With the death of their Bretonwalda the Germanic forces would not have had the will to continue and would have fled the field. Arthur had won his great, mysterious, victory.

In the aftermath of the battle much happened. With the great victory of Badon Hill Arthur had saved Dfyneint and thrown back the Seaxnas and Eotenas to their former borders before the offensive began. But Arthur’s victory had wider repercussions. With Aella dead the Germanic forces had no stable leadership and the title of Bretonwalda was lost to lapse in use. Without any stable leadership the Germanic advance was halted and they fought amongst themselves, but rarely against the Romano-British, for over half a century or about 70 years. Some even left Britain to return to The Continent, to seek their fortune in Gaul with their cousins the Franks, who had begun to convert to Christianity. As for the Romano-British Arthur had become a hero larger then life, and his legend would soon obscure his actual life. As for what Arthur did after Badon that is unknown as is the circumstances of his death. But the battle remains significant regardless, and is the last major battle fought within the timeframe of 0 AD.

[Other: The Thracian Peltast]

One of the most famous light infantry in history was the peltast, which started as a javelin man and changed into a variety of different roles, native to the land of Thrace. From the moment the Thracians first came into armed contact with their southern neighbors, the Hellenes, they changed the face of warfare, and continued to do so well into the Roman era. In this article we will give an overview on the Thracian peltast.

Thrace and Hellas had a long history of contact. One of the most interesting aspects of this contact was the Thracians would pick up and adopt for their own bits and pieces of what the Hellenes discarded in their advancement as a people. The most famous of these adoptions was the use by the Thracians of Mycenaean practices and war tactics, which when combined with their unique culture created a dangerous synthesis. The peltast was the most famous product of this synthesis. The Hellenes first met the Thracians in the 7th and 6th Centuries as colonies were settled all along the famous Thracian Shore on the Aegean and Black Seas. The newly established Makedonian kingdom added to the pressure. But fighting did not break out, for even though the Thracians were famous for their love of war and fighting, they realized that trade with the southerners was far more profitable. Even as those same southerners slowly pushed them out of their own lands. When the Achaemenid Persians met the Thracians first in Bithynia in Asia Minor, then again in Thrace itself they immediately recognized the uses of such naturally excellent warriors. But they also found the Thracians to be uncontrollably rowdy. By the 5th Century this became their defining reputation. They initially fought for the Achaemenids in the Persian Wars, only to decide to turn against them and destroy whole divisions of the Achaemenid forces (not to mention wound the commander, Mardonius) during the evacuation from Hellas. Influence from both Persia and Hellas resulted in the creation of the first real Thracian kingdom, that of the Odrysai. It was this Odrysian kingdom that was on the receiving end of the Athenian colonization expeditions into the Strymon Valley. This was the first time the Hellenes would come into large-scale armed contact with the Thracians, and the culture shock would be enormous. The Thracian peltast, dressed in colorful heavy clothing, wearing no armor at all, carrying a small shield, and using only a short spear or some javelins, inflicted painful humiliating defeat on not 1, but 9, Athenian expeditions. It was an unprecedented defeat, one that all Hellenes found smarting. When the Thracians followed up on their victories by raiding the colonies along the Thracian Shore and extracting tribute they realized it wasn’t a freak accident of chance. This in turn sparked one of the greatest fashion and military crazes of the ancient period, as everyone in the Hellenic world, and even beyond, sought to copy the Thracians. Even right down to the clothing they wore, as Hellenic peltasts were known to have worn Thracian costume. This resulted in a light infantry revolution and from this point forwards the peltast, and his heavier derivatives centuries later, would become an indispensable part of warfare. But the original Thracian peltast, the progenitor of the craze, would always remain the best. Whether as political allies, as was common during the later phase of the Odrysian kingdom and its successor states, or as mercenaries (as was common for Thracians), they remained preeminent. The Makedonians under Philippos II and Alexander the Great realized this and Alexander retained a sizable number of peltasts during his Persian Conquest. The Thracian peltast would even trouble Rome, and it was only in 46 AD that Thrace itself was finally subjugated. But the peltast alongside the equally famous Thracian cavalry would continue to serve in Rome’s armies. The Dacians, the descendants of the Thracian Getai, would also trouble Rome in later years, and required a momentous effort to finally conquer.

The clothing of the Thracian peltast was varied and interesting. The national costume of Thrace, as far as we know, changed little from the 7th to the 4th Century BC. All Thracians wore these clothing, but the peltast made it famous. The typical outfit consisted of a long tunic, zeira (cloak), alopekis (cap), and embades (boots). All of these articles were made from hemp, flax, wool, and fur. Leather or textiles were used in the making of belts, which were often adorned with wolf motifs. Important elements in the making of the distinctive character of Thracian dress were the heavy use of artificial or natural dyes and woven decoration or embroidery, sometimes both. The Thracian alopekis or cap often came in three forms. The basic design was made from dyed fox skin, with cloth sewn onto the sides and back to form neck and ear flaps, which were much needed in the winter. The Thracian tunic, as mentioned above, was long, reaching down over the knees, and heavy. The tunic was typically sleeveless. In contrast in the rest of Thracian clothing the tunic was not heavy decorated nor brightly colored except at the hemline. The zeira, or cloak, is the most famous piece of Thracian clothing. They were square and long, even longer then the tunic, extending down to the feet. The zeira was also wide, and could be drawn around the whole body. The material used in the making of the zeira is unknown, but most certainly must have been thick, because of the Thracian cold. The most notable feature was the heavy decoration of the zeira, which was brightly colored and bore geometric shapes. A modern theory suggests the geometric shapes served as a tribal and regional identifier, but this so far unproven. The last piece of the ‘kit’ was the embades, or boot. In contrast to the Hellenes or Romans the Thracians used large boots that covered not only the entire foot, but the lower leg as well. Regional variations in the manner of dress did exist. For example the northern tribes were known to have worn narrow pants, a short shirt or long sleeved shirt, pointed shoes, and jackets which were decorated along the edges.

In the 4th Century a dramatic change took place among the Thracians. Experiences in fighting during the Peloponnesian War, and then in various conflicts in the early years of the new century had a profound effect on the Thracians. Under the leadership of the Odrysian king Kotys I the Thracian peltast under went a radical change. The regular dress was discarded in favor of a mixture of Hellenic and Celtic styles. Not even the signature zeira survived the transformation. The new tunics were much shorter then the older, and lightweight. These new tunics came either short sleeved or no sleeves. There was no decoration, and the tunics were solidly one color, usually black, white, and red-brown. Evidence exists for a variation that was long sleeved and striped. There is also evidence of the adoption of the exomis by some tribes. The wearing of bronze or gold torcs, a Celtic neck ring, was taken up during this time, in groups of three. Hellenic style scandals and Scythian shoes also became popular. The wearing of armor, however, was the most significant change. Before this point only Thracian cavalry was allowed to wear armor, but since the reform this right was granted to the rest of the Thracian army, including peltasts. Thracian armor was usually borrowed from Hellas or the Scythians, and was generally of the older variety. Since they were light infantry the peltasts only wore two kinds of armor, a helmet and greaves. The most common helmet type was the so-called Thracian helmet and the Chalcidian, with the older Corinthian and newer Attic also being used, but in smaller numbers. The leg greaves were of the shorter, but more heavily decorated variety. Interestingly the northern tribes reacted a different way. In contrast to the southern Thracians, the northerners made their peltasts heavier, leaning on a shock role. The northern peltasts kept the old long tunic and zeira, over a long sleeved shirt and narrow pants. Over the tunic the northern peltast would have worn a linen or scale corselet, depending on that particular tribe’s connection with the Scythians and Sarmatians. Like the southern peltasts, their northern cousins also wore greaves. The use of pteryges was widespread among the northern tribes, and their peltasts were no different. The helmet of choice was the so-called Scythian helmet alongside the Thracian model. After the Romans defeated Makedon and made Thrace a client kingdom the peltast adopted Roman armor, wearing the lorica hamata (a mail shirt) and using the Montefortino and Thracian helmets. It is unknown if the Romanized peltasts retained any Thracian dress, although it appears that an amalgam of northern and southern styles was kept (like southern tunic/northern pants).

The weaponry of the peltast was what made him what he was. The Thracian peltast gained his name from the small shield he carried, called a pelte by the Hellenes. The pelte was a simple shield, being made from wood or a wicker frame over which goatskin or sheepskin could be stretched. There are examples from southern Thrace of wooden pelte over which has been applied a layer of bronze, like the Hellenes did with their famous aspis. But such examples are rare, and probably not the norm. However bronze rivets have been discovered on many pelte, which may have been used to keep the animal skin in place, or as decoration. The shield was rimless, and had a slight convex. The pelte came in two shapes primarily, a crescent shape and a round shape. The Hellenes left plenty of artwork of the Thracian peltast, and most of these depictions show the crescent shield, which means the crescent pelte may have been the most popular type. To be carried the pelte came with a simple single handgrip in the center of the shield and a leather strap to allow the peltast to sling the pelte on to his back when he needed to. Like their clothing the pelte was also highly decorated, ranging from a simple face to complex geometric designs and animal figures that even outdid the Hellenes in sheer variety and depth. As for the weapons carried by a peltast these could surprisingly vary widely. The javelin was the primary weapon of the peltast. But the Thracian javelin was unique. It was similar to a hoplitai doru, being made from ash wood and topped with a leaf shaped iron head. But the Thracian javelin head was small, not large like the doru. In length the Thracian javelin was 6 foot, making it extremely long for a throwing weapon. There is evidence to suggest the peltast would have carried some shorter, narrower, javelins with him in addition to the 6-footers. The exact number of javelins, of both kinds, that was carried by the peltast in the field is unknown. The Hellenes depicted them always carrying two, but their own written sources of battles with the Thracians show that more must have been carried. Occasionally the 6 foot javelin was used like a spear, and it was not uncommon for Thracian peltasts to form themselves into groups, some acting like spearmen the others like javelin men. These combined groups were very effective in battle, as the spearmen engaged in hand-to-hand while the javelin men fired away from behind. For a close quarters weapon this differed based on personal preference and tribal ties. For instance peltasts from the northern Triballoi and Getai used the akinakes, a Scythian straight dagger, which was also adopted by the Persians. Southern peltasts were more likely to use the sica. The sica was a small forward curving knife, and the ancestor of the famous (or rather infamous) Dacian falx. Like its derivative the sica was a kin to the scythe, and just as wicked in battle. Despite the small size of the weapon, the Hellenes gained a healthy respect for the sica, since it could puncture and rend shields and armor with ease.

From the 4th Century on all of this changed. With the reforms of the Odrysian king Kotys I the shield and weaponry of the peltast changed with his armor and helmets. The shield at first remained unchanged, and was even adopted by the Makedonians under the reforms of Philippos II for his revolutionary phalangitai. Alexander the Great also made use of the pelte, and distributed it to all of his light infantry, even the Agrianikoi assault troops. However in the 3rd Century the massive Celtic migration into Thrace and Makedon nearly drove the Thracians out. They eventually counterattacked and drove the Celts out, but the experience left a great impression on the peltast. They adopted the primary shield of the invaders, which the Hellenes called the thureos. The thureos, in contrast to the pelte, was a large shield, almost the size of a man. The Thracians downsized it to a much more manageable size, though it was still large and heavy. The thureos was built from wood, with an iron spine and boss added during construction. The shield was then covered by a layer of leather which was riveted on. The thureos, like the pelte, was rimless and had a convex. The convex in a thureos was caused by the presence of wooden ribs on the inside of the shield, which were supported by the iron spine. The Thracians used a long oval or egg-shaped thureos mostly, with evidence suggesting that may have also used the Galatian rectangular style as well. The shield was carried by use of a single central handgrip, and could not be carried on the back of the peltast. Decoration on a thureos is a largely unknown subject, even in the case of its native users, the Celts. However the evidence does suggest the Thracian thureos was highly decorated, not to the extent the old pelte was, but much more colorful then a Hellenic example. Most decoration took the form of geometric patterns, or more natural shapes. In weaponry the 4th Century onwards bore not so much as a major change in weapons as much as in how they were used. The changing times meant the purpose and role of the peltast also had to change. In the Makedonian army for example the Thracian peltasts acted as the flank guards for the pezhetairoi chiliostyes, as well as a mobile advance guard and active link with the cavalry. Some specially armed peltasts were even used as assault infantry. In battle peltasts would organize themselves into squads according to their weapons, giving the peltast amazing tactical flexibility, which resulted in 4 squad types. The first two was spear and javelin; the 4th Century saw the addition of two more: the rhomphaia and the sarissa. The rhomphaia was the pinnacle of the sica family of scythe-swords. Unlike the sica, which was a small knife, the rhomphaia was an enormous two-handed weapon. It was often compared to the falx, to which it was related and near in size, but there was differences. The rhomphaia was longer, did not curve as deeply, and was made entirely from iron, even the hilt. The rhomphaia was one of the most feared swords in the ancient world, and for good reason: one swing at a mounted opponent could kill the horse and chop off one of the rider’s limbs. No one knows exactly when the Thracians picked up the sarissa. What we do know is that it probably was early in the 4th Century, especially if the theory that Iphikrates’ experiments were inspired by the Thracians is correct. The most famous use of the sarissa by the Thracian peltast was by the Triballoi peltasts against Philippos II of Makedon in 339. The exact length of the Thracian sarissa is unknown, although estimates have placed it anywhere from 14-16 feet. In the cases of both weapons the thureos could not be used as a shield, so what these squads of peltasts used as a shield is unknown. The old pelte is the most likely choice, since its size would accommodate both the weight of a rhomphaia or the length of the sarissa. The arrival of Rome, as far as we know, did not effect the peltasts in terms of weaponry, although by that time they had abandoned the sarissa as a weapon.

In conclusion the Thracian peltast is one of the most important light infantry in history. From his beginnings as a simple hunter or peasant fighting to defend his land, to the dedicated multipurpose soldier, the Thracian peltast made a deep mark on history.

[Hellenes: Typical campaign and tactics of the Hellenic Phalanx]

The tactics and campaign procedure of the Hellenic phalanx, like the formation itself, under went many changes. Unfortunately not much about either of these is actually known. For that purpose in this article we will examine two examples of phalanx tactics and campaign procedure: The Spartans of Xenophon’s day and the classical system of Alexander the Great.

We shall start with the Spartans. Xenophon stands out today as being our best source on all things military in the Hellenic poleis, Sparta in particular. He records the Spartan system in great detail, leaving us the most intact record of any Hellenic military. In the 4th Century when the typical Spartan army would prepare to move out to battle a cavalry mora would sent out ahead, alongside a force of sciritae. The sciritae were hardy mountain folk native to Lakedaimon, living on the northern edges. Lightly armed and carrying no armor the sciritae performed an important duty as the scouts of any Spartan army during wartime. The cavalry performed duty as waypoint men primarily, ranging ahead of the main body. When the path was clear the baggage train would move up, followed by the first mora and after it a smaller baggage train, followed by another mora, which created an alternating pattern on down to the end of the army. Sometimes this was unnecessarily long, so the army would fall into a marching order where each mora, down to the individual lochoi would divide into halves. In this formation the baggage was placed into the center with the two halves of hoplitai on either side. When advancing into hostile territory the army would fall into a different formation, like a hollow box. In this formation the morae would form up into column along the ‘sides’ while at the ‘front’ and ‘back’ of the box they would have already locked the aspis and raised the doru for battle. It is interesting to mention at this point that all orders on campaign were conveyed by musical cues, via both horn and trumpet, voice being used only when necessary. In addition the hollow square formation was not unique to Sparta, as the Athenians used it during the Syrakusai campaign, but they could perform the movements needed to fall into it much more effectively. When the outriders or sciritae spotted the enemy the army halted and pitched camp. Camp shape would often change to fit the terrain, and could range to any geometrical shape. The cavalry would then be sent out to construct outposts along the perimeter, and these outposts would then be manned by the sciritae after nightfall. The Hellenes preferred to engage in battle usually the day after sighting the enemy, which is why it is not considered odd that the Spartans would pitch camp rather then engage on sight. Pre-battle preparations the following morning could differ in their extent depending on both how many morae are involved and whether or not one of the kings was present. If a king was present then his personal space within the camp would have been substantial, large enough to fit not only himself and his picked hippeis (300 elite bodyguards) but also the individual polemarchoi (plural of polemarch, the commander of a mora), diviners, doctors, personal servants, and oracles (sometimes these oracles would be sent to Delphi to consult the Pythia if the battle was large enough). Command meetings between the king and his staff were typically a flurry of activity, especially with the running of heralds. A herald had a variety of uses on campaign, but they were typically used to pass out orders down the line and to parley with the enemy. In this function the heralds were inviolate, as long as they held a staff of Hermes, the Hellenic deity of speed and messages, they could not be harmed. Once planning was over all command officers, down to the lochagoi, were called to the king’s tent. When they assembled he offered sacrifices, performed prayers, and finalized his orders. The commanders were then dismissed, having been told to tell their men to polish their shields, sharpen their weapons, and comb their hair (a peculiar Spartan practice that they did whenever their lives were in danger).

After the last preparations were made the Spartans would break camp and march onto the field, shedding their red cloaks as they did so. All Spartiates (true-blood Spartan citizens) that had taken part in the Olympic Games were expected to mount their garlands on their helmets, letting their enemy know just who they faced. The king, or if he was not present the ranking polemarch, would then sacrifice a goat in sight of the enemy while the flute-players struck up war music. Diviners would read the goat’s entrails, if they read favorably then the Spartiates were allowed to break ranks and eat breakfast, in armor, then return to their formations and lock shields. The ranking officer then gathered his subordinates and gave out the orders for the day one last time. This would be passed down the line all the way down to the individual hoplitai. With this the officers would take their positions at the right most file. The watchword, that is a simple phrase that be called out to identify one’s own side in battle was passed down the line and back all the way to the commanding officer. He then began to sing the paean, the hymn of war. The paean was a universal song that all Hellenes knew, but it could vary on dialect. This could cause confusion on the field between allies. One such instance occurred during the Syrakusai campaign, when the Athenians struck up the paean in Ionian, and their allies sung in Dorian. The Athenians were thrown into confusion due to the discordant singing. The Spartans had their own distinct form of the paean. In any case with the beginning of the song the trumpets began to play, accompanied by the flutes. This was the signal to level the doru to battle and advance. The step and pace of the phalanx was kept by the flutes and the paean, as each man attempted to move his feet to the sound of the music and tempo of the song. This could be very difficult, as even the smallest rock on the field could cause one man to lose pace and disrupt the entire phalanx. It was considered rare for a formation to keep cohesion the entire march. Only the Spartans could actually pull it off, due to their discipline. In any case once the distance between lines, regards of shape or cohesion of the formation had closed to 600 feet the singing (by now the entire army was singing) and music would cease. The officers would then bark out exhortations to their soldiers, calling on them to perform brave deeds in battle and follow them. The ouragoi, or rear-rankers, would then join in the exhortations. At this point it was all too common for the encounter to end. Many hoplitai armies often just disintegrated rather then actually close for battle, especially against the Spartans. If the enemy stayed then the trumpets sounded once more, the signal to the hoplitai to raise their doru overhead in attack posture. The officers then yelled out again, increasing their pace, asking who will be the first to kill his foe. Both lines had picked up to a run by now, and collided head on into each other. The clash of aspis upon aspis created such a loud racket that it could be heard across the entire battlefield. The timing of the charge, called the epidrome, had to be perfect. Too early and the formation would be exhausted, too soon and the army would not have enough momentum.

The actual fighting phase of a hoplitai battle, regardless of whether you were Spartan or some other Hellene, was always a messy and brutal affair. Among the Spartans the heaviest fighting fell on the first 3 ranks. This was because the doru of the first rank usually broke once the battle was joined. As a result the men would often ‘open’ their ranks wide enough to allow the rank behind them to get into the melee with their doru while the first rank pulled out their xiphos and ducked in. The Spartan xiphos was a particularly effective weapon, being shorter then normal, giving the Spartan hoplitai a wide range of options on how to attack. Oft forgotten at this point was the role of the rear ranks of the phalanx. These men were important because while the first ranks fought they pushed forward against the backs of their fellows, sometimes shouting encouragements. This pushing would provide momentum against the phalanx opposite, driving their phalanx steadily forward. This is why the phalanx became progressively deeper throughout history, the more men in the formation pushing forward the greater the momentum. But it also had the unintended side effect of making the phalanx unwieldy. One of the most important aspects of the melee phase was that the phalanx kept cohesion. The battle was always a swirling mess but as long as at least the rear ranks kept in line then the phalanx was still, ‘in formation’. The ultimate goal of phalanx battle was to drive the other phalanx to break. This is where the Spartans excelled; it took an entirely new approach to finally break the cohesion of the Spartan phalanx. According to Xenophon the Spartans of his day, usually with good reason, expected their enemy to break quickly. For this reason once the opposite formation broke the Spartan phalanx would draw back into close order and wheel to the left, striking the remaining enemy in his side, causing a chain rout as an attack on the sides was never expected. They adopted this tactic once alliance warfare, were a Spartan army was joined by allies on the field, became a reality in the late 5th Century. Once the opposing army was broke completely the Spartans would disengage, as they preferred not to chase in pursuit. Other poleis did organize pursuit chases. Such an action was always bloody, as in order to flee a hoplitai had to throw off his shield. Contrary to popular belief this wasn’t just an offense among the Spartans, but to the other poleis as well. The Athenians charged a 500 drachma penalty for example. Once the pursuit was over the so called ‘Truce of the Hellenes’ came into effect. Under this truce both sides returned to the field, unmolested, to strip the dead of valuables, pool the booty together, and most importantly to bury the dead or carry them off the field to be buried. The victors were allowed to take some of the armor and weapons of the enemy dead before their own could bury them for the purpose of erecting a tropaion, from which comes the English word trophy ,a word which has roots in the older trophe, which means ‘turn around’. It was usually erected on the spot where the losing phalanx broke, if possible. A more common occurrence saw the tropaion nailed onto a nearby tree, with the best piece of armor being inscribed with the date, name of the losing polis, and the name of winning polis. The rest of what was collected off the enemy was sent to either Olympia or Delphi as an offering of thanksgiving.

Now we move on to the classical army of Megas Alexandros. When Philippos II took control of Makedon and reformed his army he created one of the finest military machines the world has ever seen. Surprisingly only very little as actually survived on the technicalities of what made the Makedonian military as good as it was. Nevertheless evidence of the standard procedures during the Diadochi era does give us quite a bit to go on, enough for an accurate re-construction. The use of reconnaissance and of long range scouting was known to the Hellenes, but they were never particularly good at it. Some of the largest hoplitai battles could have been avoided by good intelligence. Alexander, and by extension his father, realized this and created a crack scout force, the prodromoi. Often paired with light infantry or with detachments of heavier cavalry, usually the Thracian regulars or Hellenic mercenaries, they ranged out ahead and provided Alexander with key intelligence during his campaigns. When the rest of the army was ready move up the scouts would return to escort the pioneer battalions as they cleared the path. The pezhetairoi chiliostyes followed them up the path organized into columns with ample space between for the baggage train of each individual dekas. The entire marching formation was guarded on its sides by an assorted force of Thracian peltasts and possibly the Agrianikoi, the elite Illyrian assault infantry. The Kretikoi, or Cretan archers, whom Polybios calls the most effective skirmishers in the Makedonian military, formed the rear guard on the march. This formation allowed for the Makedonians to be able to adapt to any situation that may occur on the march, as the light infantry would warn and delay the enemy long enough for the pezhetairoi to realign to face them, as well as to give the cavalry enough time to arrive. All orders and commands on the march were still relayed by horns and trumpets. When the enemy was spotted the scouts were again sent out to find a reasonable spot in which to pitch their tents. Unlike the Hellenes the Makedonians seemed to have understood the importance of fortifying their camp. While still not as good as the Romans, a typical camp in Alexander’s day was protected by a ditch and rampart, with a wooden palisade beaten onto the top. The Makedonians also had a picket system in place along all approaches to the camp site. The following morning the king and his generals would meet in impromptu planning sessions with him in the center of camp. Like in the Spartan camp the Makedonians gave the Royal tent and its surroundings ample space. Towards the end of his life Alexander’s personal enclosure housed not only himself and his staff but also an entire chiliostys, that of the basilikoi hypaspistai, the mysterious elite infantry division. Nothing specific is known about what else would have occurred the next morning, except that the army would have been expected to have left camp at a quick pace, leaving their personal packs behind.

The pre-battle phase had begun. It is interesting to note that the Makedonian phalanx always marched in column, only shifting into battle formation when contact was eminent. This would mean that on the day of battle the pezhetairoi chiliostyes would march onto the field arrayed in marching order. When the enemy lines became visible the order was passed down from the king to the chiliarchs to begin bathos, or deep order. This order was passed down to the dekas level. When bathos was ordered it meant that the phalanx, while still marching, was to draw itself from column order into an open square 32 yards by 32 yards. This was an incredible feat, and must have taken an extraordinary amount of discipline and skill to execute, especially while the entire army was still moving. At this point anything could happen. If the enemy was charging then the king would pass down the order for synaspismos, or locked shields. This order could contract the size of the unit to 8 yard by 8 yards, which was naturally quite uncomfortable and so was little used. If the enemy stayed put then the trumpets would play and the chiliarchs would begin to sing the paean. Philippos II had seen the uses of singing while a hostage of Thebes, and adopted it in his army for the exact reason the Spartans did, it kept the pace of the advance. It also frightened the opposing line. The Makedonian paean was unique from that of the Hellenic poleis, and supposedly rather simple. When the distance from the enemy was closed the singing would stop and the king would pass a new order down, pynosis, or close order. When pynosis was passed down then the pezhetairoi chiliostyes would deepen and contract, taking a new size of 16 yards by 16 yards. Still marching the officers would yell out to their men to increase their pace. Once the phalanx had built up enough speed the trumpets would sound again and the order would be passed down to lower the sarissai. Now at a running pace the entire chiliostys would emit a long yell, a last minute prayer to Enyalios (Ares, the deity of war, as the Makedonians knew him), before hitting into the enemy head on.

Makedonian battles were of a much larger and generally complex scale then a hoplitai battle. Unlike in the armies of Hellas the Makedonian phalanx was not the most important piece of the army, in fact in the army of Philippos and Alexander there was no one piece more important then any other. In what has been called the classical formation the 6 pezhetairoi chiliostyes were the center, and depended on the rest of the army for support. Once the battle was joined the phalanx’s job was to hold the enemy in place. By themselves they were not battle winners, but in conjunction with the cavalry they could become so. Because of the length of the sarissa the weight of fighting fell primarily upon not the first 3 ranks, but the first 5. Unlike the Hellenic doru, the Makedonian sarissa hardly broke in battle. Nevertheless all pezhetairoi did carry the kopis as their sidearm. Like the Spartan xiphos, the kopis was a very effective close-quarters weapon. The other ranks, as in the traditional phalanx, had the important job of pushing forward and shouting encouragements. They also had the additional job of using their sarissai as a makeshift shield against arrow fire. Like in the regular phalanx keeping cohesion was the most important job of every man in line. The resolve and strength of the pezhetairoi to keep their formation together was challenged many times in Alexander’s career, most famously at the Hydaspes River, were it was tested by Indian war elephants, an animal the Makedonians had never seen before. Unfortunately, as the diadochi so painfully learned, the Makedonian phalanx could not keep cohesion when hit on the sides of the formation, and was unable to wheel to face the new threat if already engaged. The length of the infantry melee in any Makedonian battle was generally not predictable, since it depended on how long it took the enemy to break. The pezhetairoi in general did not take part in pursuits, leaving that to the lighter elements. However the phalanx is recorded as taking part in pursuit on some occasions. Alexander was known to some times have had men strip off their armor for a quick chase. The practice of erecting a tropaion on the battlefield was adopted by the Makedonians, and Alexander was known to have sent the captured shields of the Persians as dedication offerings to Olympia.

In conclusion the campaigns and tactics of both phalanxes, that of Sparta and that of Makedon showcase how much had changed in phalanx warfare over a relatively short period of time.

[Hellenes: The History and Evolution of the Hellenic Phalanx]

This altogether is the basis for the syntagma of Philippos II. According to period sources the original syntagma of Philippos and Alexander was organized thus: The basic building block of the Makedonian phalanx was called the dekas, plural dekades. A dekas consisted of 16 men arranged in a straight file. The commanding officer of a file was called the dekadarch and served at the front of the line. Eight men followed the dekadarch up the line and at halfway was another officer, the dimoirites. The dimoirites served to divide the dekas into two manageable halves, with the dimoirites commanding the rear-half file. At the end of each half-file was another officer, the dekastateroi. Their job was the same of the ouragoi on the traditional phalanx, to keep order and make sure everyone did their jobs. Officers at this level were chosen from the most senior soldiers in the unit. 16 dekades comprised the syntagma. To this day it continues to amaze historians how the syntagma was such an organized and symmetrical unit. It was 16 files of 16 men, 256 in all, drawn into a square that measured to 16 yards by 16 yards when drawn together for battle, with a size twice that on maneuver. The syntagma was the lowest level administrative and tactical unit in the classical Makedonian army, with a professional officer staff. The commanding officer was the syntagmatarch who took position within the unit, though his exact position is unknown, though it would have been were he could control half of the unit. His second-in-command was the tagamatarch, who helped him to lead the unit by controlling the other half. A third officer was the hyperetes, the chief administrative officer of the unit who took care of odds and ends and the setting of camp and general administrative duties. Another unique feature of the syntagma was the ability of the unit to keep cohesion and effectiveness even when separated from the rest of the formation. Two syntagma comprised a pentekosiarchy, plural pentekosiarchia, of 512 men in 32 files. Like the syntagma the pentekosiarchy was another basic level tactical unit and in some sources the syntagma is skipped over in favor of the pentekosiarchy. This is unit is also known as the Makedonian lochos as it was originally named after the hoplitai lochos and gained the present name during the latter part of the reign of Alexander. The commanding officer of the unit was the pentekosiarch or earlier the lochagos. The syntagmatarch of each respective unit functioned as second-in-command to the pentekosiarch. A hyperetes was also attached to the command. A new addition at this level was that of the trumpeter, as musical cues were important in the Makedonian army. Three pentekosiarchia comprised a chiliostys, plural chiliostyes, of 1,536 men in 96 files. Also called a taxis, the chiliostys was the division level formation of the Macedonian phalanx. Often referred to in English as a battalion, the chiliostyes formed the backbone of Makedonian army. The commanding officer was called the chiliarch with the respective pentekosiarchia commanders as his seconds-in-command and all the intending staff. In the Persian Conquest Alexander took with him 6 chiliostyes of pezhetairoi, the honored veterans of Philippos II, with an additional chiliostys added later. In the case of the pezhetairoi we know the chiliostyes was recruited and formed by district. Special precedence was given to the chiliostyes recruited from the Makedonian highlands, which were designated asthetairoi.

Famous phalanx battles of this period are too numerous to mention. But to name two from before and after the Makedonian hegemony: The Battle of Leuktra where the power of Sparta was broken, and the Battle of Second Mantinea, the largest hoplitai battle in history. From after, the Battle of the Granicus River, which began the Conquest of Persia, and the Battle of Gaugamela, Alexander’s greatest victory.

In conclusion the evolution of the phalanx is a matter of continued interest. Ranging from the murky beginnings of the hoplitai at Argos in the 7th Century to the final triumph of the classic phalangitai at the Hydaspes River in India the phalanx is one of the most long-lived formations in history. While eventually eclipsed by Rome’s legionaries the hoplitai and the phalangitai and the formations in which they fought will continue to interest historians for ages to come.