On this general topic, listen to our interview with @BretDevereaux on Ancient Warfare podcast #150: http://thehistorynetwork.org/aw150-introducing-mail-armour-in-the-roman-army/ … (I forget if we went over this too, or I read it in his article)
-
-
Thanks, I shall have a listen
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
Livy reports this detail as well (Liv. 33.46.4) but Livy is almost certainly using Polybius as his source, so this doesn't provide independent confirmation.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä -
I’m just wondering if a Carthaginian soldier is potentially already familiar with a thureos is it such a big step to then use a Roman scutum?
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
It's a bigger shield, but I wonder what Polybius here means by 'in the Roman manner' (εἰς τὸν Ῥωμαϊκὸν τρόπον). One might parallel Plb. 30.25.3, the Seleucid military parade at Daphne.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @BretDevereaux, @wargamesodyssey ja
There, the parade is led by troops "Equipped in Roman style, armored in mail coats" which might suggest that Polybius has armor, as much as shields and weapons, in mind when he thinks about troops being (re)equipped in Roman style.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä -
Yes, that’s entirely possible. It’s a shame they’re not really mentioned again or else they’re standard troops reequipped with mail and that’s why they seem to disappear as we’re looking for Roman style tactics but it’s purely a change in body armour not function?
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
The extent and evidence for Roman-style 'military reform' in Hellenistic armies is an active area of debate. You want to read N. Sekunda, Hellenistic Infantry Reform in the 160's BC (2006), but also note C. Fischer-Bovet, Army and Society in Ptolemaic Egypt (2014) for a retort.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä -
Thank you. Is Sekunda’s book an updated version of the 2 separate volumes he wrote of the Seleukids and Ptolemies? I have his Seleukid work but never did get the Ptolemaic one. The other book is on my to read list along with another recently published work on the same army
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @wargamesodyssey, @BretDevereaux ja
This is the other Ptolemaic study I was reading till I got distracted by colonial Africahttps://www.amazon.co.uk/Army-Ptolemaic-Egypt-323-Institutional/dp/1473833833/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1NDT6H92NZUCO&dchild=1&keywords=ptolemaic+egypt&qid=1622152625&s=books&sprefix=Ptol%2Caps%2C176&sr=1-1 …
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 3 tykkäystä
Briefly reviewed on my blog! https://acoup.blog/2021/03/26/fireside-friday-march-26-2021-on-the-nature-of-ancient-evidence/ …
It's very good, though @ProfPaul_J 's dates means that he isn't as focused on the question of the Ptolemaic army of the 160s.
-
-
Vastauksena käyttäjille @BretDevereaux, @wargamesodyssey ja
I have plenty of opinions on the army of the 160’s but they’re not published... yet!
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @ProfPaul_J, @BretDevereaux ja
Look forward to reading them someday, I’ve certainly enjoyed reading what you’ve written so far
0 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Vastauksena käyttäjille @BretDevereaux, @Clogfather1975 ja
Thank you, I shall have a read
0 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäysKiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.