Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Tim Grimmett]

All--

I got a chance to get a sneak preview of Craig's army. The figures and paint
job are superb.

It will really knock your socks off.

If there is any justice he and the Greek will face off in the theme with two
armies that everyone should stop by and admire.

T



craigshar2 <craigshar@...> wrote:
The Greek Polis was controlled by the Artaxerxes II at this time.

Their were more Persian subjects of "Greek heritage" than of "Persian
heritage" in the Achaemenid empire. Do we say the Japanese; Nisei
battalions of WWII are Japanese or are they Americans of Japanese
decent? The Persians were great horsemen of the Iranian plateau and
took advantage astonishingly, immediately of the seafaring peoples of
the eastern Mediterranean and Indian Ocean.

Please think not as a late 19th or early 20th British historian,
Charles Omstead started breaking that mold about 75 years ago. This
Persia empire is cosmopolitan, not through Helophile lens. Thank you.

Craig
--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "tabletop06897" <lowclan@m...>
wrote:
> At the risk of all those on the Group not interested in the subject
> zoning out altogether, here are a few thoughts on the recent posts
> on Iphicratean Hoplites and Takabara in the Later Achaemenid List.
>
> 1. In general, we answer "why" questions to explain our
> reasoning, not to get into arguments. This is because an advocate
> can always find something to say in pushing an agenda, and it all
> gets a little pointless after a while.
>
> 2. The one thing that really catches our collective eye on list
> matters is citation to a good original source or a persuasive
modern
> argument. So far, we don't think we have seen either on this
> subject.
>
> 3. Sorting through the recent posts, it seems to us that there
> are really only two arguments being made about the Later Achaemenid
> Persian list: first, there are too few Greek mercenary
Iphricratean
> Hoplites, and second, non-Greek native Takabara should get the
> benefit of Greek Infantry Hoplite Rule #1. Success on either point
> would give the proponents more list-rule-advantaged LMI LTS, Sh,
> which appears to be the objective. To date, no persuasive
authority
> has been cited for either proposition.
>
> 4. The first argument was addressed by my last post, which
> still stands. In so far as the specifics of the reply to that post
> are concerned, (a) the number of Iphicratean Hoplites is greater in
> the Saitic Egyptian list b/c we think that they were relatively
more
> important in an Egyptian army of that period than in a Later
> Achaemenid army, (b) there is no indication that Sekunda is relying
> on anything other than Diodorus (and not some undisclosed Persian
> source), and (c) while the Persians did react to Greek military
> developments, there is no consensus that Persians imitating Greek
> troop types performed as well. Aside from these specifics, we
> disagree strongly with the idea that it is all a matter
> of "opinion," as if all opinions were entitled to the same weight.
> They are not. It is a matter of authority and persuasive argument,
> not personal preference or desire. (And no, there is no "conflict"
> between points 8/9 and 6/7.)
>
> 5. A further indication of the speculative and personal
> character of Sekunda's reconstruction of events … if one were
> needed, given his explicit statement on this account … is to be
seen
> in the final remark in the Osprey passage, on p. 27, asserting:
"…
> Philip of Macedon used the concept to reform the Macedonian army in
> 359 BC. The Macedonian word used for the 12-foot `Iphicratean'
pike
> was sarissa." Whoa. Now there's a controversial remark, presented
> flatly (at this point) as historical fact. It isn't. I am not
> aware of any ancient author who makes this claim, and in particular
> (while there is disagreement on the specifics) the early Macedonian
> sarissa is thought to have been longer than 12 feet. While the
> theory is intriguing and even inherently likely, to some extent, it
> is not "historical fact." (The idea is not new, and has been
> broached before in wargaming circles, but that doesn't make it
> correct. For a fuller discussion of the subject, see the article
by
> Richard Nelson in Slingshot, 49/30-33.)
>
> 6. The second argument is an alternate route to get to the same
> place. In order to justify a list rule advantage for non-Greek
> Takabara, the proponent seems to be suggesting that they were
> similar if not the same as Iphicratean Hoplites, arguing that (a)
> Iphicrates was instructed by Persian officers in instituting the
> reforms, (b) Iphicrates himself was as much Persian as Greek, and
> (c) Iphicrates was a close personal friend of Pharnabazos,
> concluding that since Iphicrates was training Greek mercs in the
new
> techniques while in Persian service, and since Persians
subsequently
> show up with similar armament, it follows that Iphicrates trained
> them as well as the Greeks and therefore they should have the same
> capability. This is a novel and imaginative theory, but it has
> virtually no foundation in the historical record and is inherently
> rather unlikely.
>
> 7. In the first place, our sources such as they are attribute
> the reforms to Iphicrates, personally, as evidence of his personal
> creativity and contributions. Nothing suggests that he acted at
> Persian prompting. (And of course parallel developments on the
> Greek mainland noted previously make it even less likely.)
>
> 8. Secondly, there is no reason to think that Iphicrates was
> unusually subject to Persian influence. He may have served at
> Cnidos, but then perhaps half the fleet was Greek and so this was
> nothing unusual. By the time he was twenty, he was leading
peltasts
> for Athens in the Corinthian War. He worked for a few years toward
> the end of his career as a condottiere for Persia. But the
> overwhelming majority of Iphicrates' active military career was in
> Athenian service or on his own hook in the Thrace-ward regions.
> Again, if he had a foreign connection, it was with Thrace, as
> attested by the anecdote attributed to his son by a Thracian
> princess, Menestheus, who claimed that his father tried to make him
> as Thracian as he could.
>
> 9. By contrast, it would be highly unusual for a high-born
> Persian grandee like Pharnabazos (who was a descendent of Otanes,
> one of the seven nobles who assisted Darius in the murder of the
> pseudo-Smerdis, and thus of the very highest tier of the Persian
> nobility) to take any notice of the 18-year old son of an Athenian
> cobbler, esp. since Conon, the Athenian commander of the fleet, is
> said by Cornelius Nepos to have previously acquired a high degree
of
> personal influence over Pharnabazos.
>
> 10. The relationship of the Greek condottiere to the Persian
> Empire is perhaps best illustrated by the example of the Athenian
> Chabrias. When Pharnabazos wished to remove him from the command
of
> the Egyptian fleet, he did not simply order him to resign, which he
> presumably could have done if he were a Persian officer or subject;
> rather, he threatened the Athenians with the Great King's
> displeasure, and Athens then recalled him. The condottiere
remained
> first and foremost a citizen of a Greek polis, and whatever loyalty
> he felt toward a barbarian employer would have been very much a
> secondary consideration.
>
> 11. More perhaps to the point, I am not aware of any authority
> who claims that Iphicrates trained non-Greek Takabara. It is not
> enough to say that he was in the same place at the same time, and
> therefore that he "must" have trained them. Such an unusual event
> would require more than mere supposition.
>
> 12. One could note in passing, with respect to the lesser points
> in the recent posts, that while the Persians occupied parts of
> Thrace for a time, the last garrison had been driven out of those
> regions over 100 years before the period under discussion, and it
is
> in any case doubtful whether they had any material impact while
they
> were there. Moreover, there is a significant difference between
> instances in which a Babylonian or a member of any of the other
> subject peoples of the Persian Empire might have risen to high
> command, and paid professional service by a free man of a free
> republic. In any case, it will have been exceedingly rare for a
non-
> Persian (or perhaps a Mede) ever to have had command over a
> significant body of Persian national troops, with the exception of
> naval commands in which the Persians seem to have recognized their
> limitations. (Off hand I can think of only one exception, Datames,
> who is said to have been of Carian descent.)
>
> 13. We are not shy about making a list change where we think the
> evidence warrants it. Check out the existing volume of errata.
> However, we are reluctant to make changes based on what seems to be
> result-oriented inferential reasoning that requires an overbroad
> leap of faith. Such appears to us to be the case here.




---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


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



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Bill Chriss]

> All--
>
> I got a chance to get a sneak preview of Craig's army. The figures and
> paint job are superb.
>
> It will really knock your socks off.
>
> If there is any justice he and the Greek will face off in the theme with
> two armies that everyone should stop by and admire.
>
> T
>


Now that would indeed be a scream!!! However, given the theme armies
available, I could not play later hoplites but will be bringing my
Hellenistic Greeks. STill, that should be fun enough!!


Greek

[Bill Chriss]

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Tim Grimmett <grimmetttim@y...>
wrote:
> All--
>
> I got a chance to get a sneak preview of Craig's army. The
figures and paint job are superb.
>
> It will really knock your socks off.
>
> If there is any justice he and the Greek will face off in the
theme with two armies that everyone should stop by and admire.
>
> T


I heartily concur. I would love to face a Persian army. I only
regret that I cannot play Greek hoplite lists in the theme and hence
will do the next best thing and play my magnificent Hellenistic
Greeks, led by Philopoemen. I just finished refurbishinig them and
painting more new units. I figure there will be more than enough
ALexanders to go around (and besides, he was a Macedonian, which is
still a Hellene, but from a different part of Greece than me).


-Greek

[Craig Scott]

Tim, very kind of you my friend (o: I hope to fight only Hellenistic
armies for the theme...

Craig
--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Tim Grimmett <grimmetttim@y...>
wrote:
> All--
>
> I got a chance to get a sneak preview of Craig's army. The figures
and paint job are superb.
>
> It will really knock your socks off.
>
> If there is any justice he and the Greek will face off in the theme
with two armies that everyone should stop by and admire.
>
> T
>
>
>
> craigshar2 <craigshar@c...> wrote:
> The Greek Polis was controlled by the Artaxerxes II at this time.
>
> Their were more Persian subjects of "Greek heritage" than
of "Persian
> heritage" in the Achaemenid empire. Do we say the Japanese; Nisei
> battalions of WWII are Japanese or are they Americans of Japanese
> decent? The Persians were great horsemen of the Iranian plateau and
> took advantage astonishingly, immediately of the seafaring peoples
of
> the eastern Mediterranean and Indian Ocean.
>
> Please think not as a late 19th or early 20th British historian,
> Charles Omstead started breaking that mold about 75 years ago. This
> Persia empire is cosmopolitan, not through Helophile lens. Thank
you.
>
> Craig
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "tabletop06897" <lowclan@m...>
> wrote:
> > At the risk of all those on the Group not interested in the
subject
> > zoning out altogether, here are a few thoughts on the recent
posts
> > on Iphicratean Hoplites and Takabara in the Later Achaemenid List.
> >
> > 1. In general, we answer "why" questions to explain our
> > reasoning, not to get into arguments. This is because an
advocate
> > can always find something to say in pushing an agenda, and it all
> > gets a little pointless after a while.
> >
> > 2. The one thing that really catches our collective eye on
list
> > matters is citation to a good original source or a persuasive
> modern
> > argument. So far, we don't think we have seen either on this
> > subject.
> >
> > 3. Sorting through the recent posts, it seems to us that
there
> > are really only two arguments being made about the Later
Achaemenid
> > Persian list: first, there are too few Greek mercenary
> Iphricratean
> > Hoplites, and second, non-Greek native Takabara should get the
> > benefit of Greek Infantry Hoplite Rule #1. Success on either
point
> > would give the proponents more list-rule-advantaged LMI LTS, Sh,
> > which appears to be the objective. To date, no persuasive
> authority
> > has been cited for either proposition.
> >
> > 4. The first argument was addressed by my last post, which
> > still stands. In so far as the specifics of the reply to that
post
> > are concerned, (a) the number of Iphicratean Hoplites is greater
in
> > the Saitic Egyptian list b/c we think that they were relatively
> more
> > important in an Egyptian army of that period than in a Later
> > Achaemenid army, (b) there is no indication that Sekunda is
relying
> > on anything other than Diodorus (and not some undisclosed Persian
> > source), and (c) while the Persians did react to Greek military
> > developments, there is no consensus that Persians imitating Greek
> > troop types performed as well. Aside from these specifics, we
> > disagree strongly with the idea that it is all a matter
> > of "opinion," as if all opinions were entitled to the same
weight.
> > They are not. It is a matter of authority and persuasive
argument,
> > not personal preference or desire. (And no, there is
no "conflict"
> > between points 8/9 and 6/7.)
> >
> > 5. A further indication of the speculative and personal
> > character of Sekunda's reconstruction of events … if one were
> > needed, given his explicit statement on this account … is to
be
> seen
> > in the final remark in the Osprey passage, on p. 27, asserting:
> "…
> > Philip of Macedon used the concept to reform the Macedonian army
in
> > 359 BC. The Macedonian word used for the 12-foot `Iphicratean'
> pike
> > was sarissa." Whoa. Now there's a controversial remark,
presented
> > flatly (at this point) as historical fact. It isn't. I am not
> > aware of any ancient author who makes this claim, and in
particular
> > (while there is disagreement on the specifics) the early
Macedonian
> > sarissa is thought to have been longer than 12 feet. While the
> > theory is intriguing and even inherently likely, to some extent,
it
> > is not "historical fact." (The idea is not new, and has been
> > broached before in wargaming circles, but that doesn't make it
> > correct. For a fuller discussion of the subject, see the article
> by
> > Richard Nelson in Slingshot, 49/30-33.)
> >
> > 6. The second argument is an alternate route to get to the
same
> > place. In order to justify a list rule advantage for non-Greek
> > Takabara, the proponent seems to be suggesting that they were
> > similar if not the same as Iphicratean Hoplites, arguing that (a)
> > Iphicrates was instructed by Persian officers in instituting the
> > reforms, (b) Iphicrates himself was as much Persian as Greek, and
> > (c) Iphicrates was a close personal friend of Pharnabazos,
> > concluding that since Iphicrates was training Greek mercs in the
> new
> > techniques while in Persian service, and since Persians
> subsequently
> > show up with similar armament, it follows that Iphicrates trained
> > them as well as the Greeks and therefore they should have the
same
> > capability. This is a novel and imaginative theory, but it has
> > virtually no foundation in the historical record and is
inherently
> > rather unlikely.
> >
> > 7. In the first place, our sources such as they are
attribute
> > the reforms to Iphicrates, personally, as evidence of his
personal
> > creativity and contributions. Nothing suggests that he acted at
> > Persian prompting. (And of course parallel developments on the
> > Greek mainland noted previously make it even less likely.)
> >
> > 8. Secondly, there is no reason to think that Iphicrates was
> > unusually subject to Persian influence. He may have served at
> > Cnidos, but then perhaps half the fleet was Greek and so this was
> > nothing unusual. By the time he was twenty, he was leading
> peltasts
> > for Athens in the Corinthian War. He worked for a few years
toward
> > the end of his career as a condottiere for Persia. But the
> > overwhelming majority of Iphicrates' active military career was
in
> > Athenian service or on his own hook in the Thrace-ward regions.
> > Again, if he had a foreign connection, it was with Thrace, as
> > attested by the anecdote attributed to his son by a Thracian
> > princess, Menestheus, who claimed that his father tried to make
him
> > as Thracian as he could.
> >
> > 9. By contrast, it would be highly unusual for a high-born
> > Persian grandee like Pharnabazos (who was a descendent of Otanes,
> > one of the seven nobles who assisted Darius in the murder of the
> > pseudo-Smerdis, and thus of the very highest tier of the Persian
> > nobility) to take any notice of the 18-year old son of an
Athenian
> > cobbler, esp. since Conon, the Athenian commander of the fleet,
is
> > said by Cornelius Nepos to have previously acquired a high degree
> of
> > personal influence over Pharnabazos.
> >
> > 10. The relationship of the Greek condottiere to the Persian
> > Empire is perhaps best illustrated by the example of the Athenian
> > Chabrias. When Pharnabazos wished to remove him from the command
> of
> > the Egyptian fleet, he did not simply order him to resign, which
he
> > presumably could have done if he were a Persian officer or
subject;
> > rather, he threatened the Athenians with the Great King's
> > displeasure, and Athens then recalled him. The condottiere
> remained
> > first and foremost a citizen of a Greek polis, and whatever
loyalty
> > he felt toward a barbarian employer would have been very much a
> > secondary consideration.
> >
> > 11. More perhaps to the point, I am not aware of any
authority
> > who claims that Iphicrates trained non-Greek Takabara. It is not
> > enough to say that he was in the same place at the same time, and
> > therefore that he "must" have trained them. Such an unusual
event
> > would require more than mere supposition.
> >
> > 12. One could note in passing, with respect to the lesser
points
> > in the recent posts, that while the Persians occupied parts of
> > Thrace for a time, the last garrison had been driven out of those
> > regions over 100 years before the period under discussion, and it
> is
> > in any case doubtful whether they had any material impact while
> they
> > were there. Moreover, there is a significant difference between
> > instances in which a Babylonian or a member of any of the other
> > subject peoples of the Persian Empire might have risen to high
> > command, and paid professional service by a free man of a free
> > republic. In any case, it will have been exceedingly rare for a
> non-
> > Persian (or perhaps a Mede) ever to have had command over a
> > significant body of Persian national troops, with the exception
of
> > naval commands in which the Persians seem to have recognized
their
> > limitations. (Off hand I can think of only one exception,
Datames,
> > who is said to have been of Carian descent.)
> >
> > 13. We are not shy about making a list change where we think
the
> > evidence warrants it. Check out the existing volume of errata.
> > However, we are reluctant to make changes based on what seems to
be
> > result-oriented inferential reasoning that requires an overbroad
> > leap of faith. Such appears to us to be the case here.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Craig Scott]

Greek,

Consider a few Darics and work for me, enjoy (o: See you folks
tomorrow. Be well.

Craig

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, hrisikos@D... wrote:
> > All--
> >
> > I got a chance to get a sneak preview of Craig's army. The
figures and
> > paint job are superb.
> >
> > It will really knock your socks off.
> >
> > If there is any justice he and the Greek will face off in the
theme with
> > two armies that everyone should stop by and admire.
> >
> > T
> >
>
>
> Now that would indeed be a scream!!! However, given the theme armies
> available, I could not play later hoplites but will be bringing my
> Hellenistic Greeks. STill, that should be fun enough!!
>
>
> Greek

[Bill Chriss]

> Greek,
>
> Consider a few Darics and work for me, enjoy (o: See you folks
> tomorrow. Be well.
>
> Craig
>


Touche', old boy, but I play Epaminondas (or Philopoemen as the
Hellenistics), not Memnon!!


-Greek