Pontic Imitation Legionaries

[AlanYork]

As Mithridates' army was described as being luxuriously equipped with lots of gold and silver, shining armour, silk etc how is it that in the FoG lists he couldn't afford to kit out his imitation legionaries with enough armour for them to count as "armoured"? Seems a little odd as they are, after all, by definition trying to imitate the Romans and there's no shortsge of money or equipment.

I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just wondering what the thinking was behind the current classification as it means that real Romans destroy the Pontics in the melee phase with little difficulty. The Romans certainly won most of the battles but was it with such ease? I have read about the Romans losing the battle of Ennium where the imitation legionaries seemed to have performed fine so is it possible they have been a little harshly treated in the lists? Classifying the Pontics as "Armoured Swordsmen" would seem fairer, giving the Romans a deserved advantage in the melee phase but probably better reflecting the imitation legionaries equipment and not making them quite such a pushover.

[stecal]

It seems to be a general penatly for any imitation legionary troop types - they are never allowed to be better than protected. I would think any nation that wanted to copy the legionary would start with the armor & equipment, where they fail is the Roman training and discpline. Armored, poor impact foot would be an interesting option (maybe not even swordsmen).

There was a recent discussion about armored Successor Pike that are not allowed to be armored, only protected, since it makes them too powerful.

[Blathergut]

Not that I know RBS thinking or such, but it seems some things in FoG are designed for effect rather than historical precision as you mention. This may be an example of that.

[Three]

It seems to be a general penatly for any imitation legionary troop types - they are never allowed to be better than protected. I would think any nation that wanted to copy the legionary would start with the armor & equipment, where they fail is the Roman training and discpline. Armored, poor impact foot would be an interesting option (maybe not even swordsmen).

There was a recent discussion about armored Successor Pike that are not allowed to be armored, only protected, since it makes them too powerful.

Thing is though, there seems to be less stricture applied to the armies in Lost Scrolls, tons of armoured impact foot/swordsman there.

[batesmotel]

Not that I know RBS thinking or such, but it seems some things in FoG are designed for effect rather than historical precision as you mention. This may be an example of that.

Both the Seleucids (Roman Argyraspides) and the Bosporans (city militia) get armoured, impact foot which are essentially imitation legionaries, so not all the imitations are only protected. I don't know why some lists are restricted to protected ones, especially the Pontic.

Chris

[Blathergut]

Maybe overall effect? Reflecting how some did historically as opposed to others?

[ShrubMiK]

Did the Pontics still have such an excess of dosh after they had been defeated a few times? The imitation legionaries came along later in the lifetime of the list, after all.

[Scrumpy]

JD & RBS were jealous of Mithradites wealth... Easy answer if not historically accurate

[nikgaukroger]

As Mithridates' army was described as being luxuriously equipped with lots of gold and silver, shining armour, silk etc how is it that in the FoG lists he couldn't afford to kit out his imitation legionaries with enough armour for them to count as "armoured"? Seems a little odd as they are, after all, by definition trying to imitate the Romans and there's no shortsge of money or equipment.

So why are you not asking why all the troops in the army are not classified as Armoured - why just the imitations?

[AlanYork]

As Mithridates' army was described as being luxuriously equipped with lots of gold and silver, shining armour, silk etc how is it that in the FoG lists he couldn't afford to kit out his imitation legionaries with enough armour for them to count as "armoured"? Seems a little odd as they are, after all, by definition trying to imitate the Romans and there's no shortsge of money or equipment.

So why are you not asking why all the troops in the army are not classified as Armoured - why just the imitations?

Because giving heavy armour to skirmishers would seem a little silly and as I said the imitation legionaries are, by definition, trying to imitate the Romans, who are armoured.

[eldiablito]

This is strange to me... One of the abilities of the Romans (at least in FoG) is to be skilled swordsmen. So, another way to represent the inferior abilities of imitation legions is to make them swordsmen instead. The Romans will be Superior (and Elite) skilled swordsmen compared to imitation's Average swordsmen. That is still a PoA and better re-rolls. As stated earlier, if I was trying to imitate a particular enemy, I would first try to get the same equipment; so both types of legions would be Armoured.

Well, this is just from an outsider's perspective and I certainly do not have any historical evidence to support this "common sense" response.

[mbsparta]

I always look at imitation legionaries as imitating the fight style of the legions rather than a look-a-like contest. And if you want to be a real legionary, be a Roman!

Mike B

[rbodleyscott]

As Mithridates' army was described as being luxuriously equipped with lots of gold and silver, shining armour, silk etc how is it that in the FoG lists he couldn't afford to kit out his imitation legionaries with enough armour for them to count as "armoured"? Seems a little odd as they are, after all, by definition trying to imitate the Romans and there's no shortsge of money or equipment.

Approaching 40 years ago, when I was a callow youth, I wrote an item in Slingshot arguing that my Pontic pikes should be armoured because of the quote above (from Appian, I think).

I was told not to be silly, and not to believe every bit of propaganda in an ancient source. The statement was supposed to indicate how luxurious and effete the Pontics were, not how well-equipped.

This notwithstanding, the overall effect is what we hope to achieve and the present classifications get the effect we are aiming at. Much as I am a fan of Mithridates, the truth is that the Pontics only won battles against badly led "Roman" armies, some of which did not contain many actual Romans.

Legionary armour (chainmail at the time) is not that easy to conjure out of thin air in large quantities, without the necessary expertise and fabricae. It might conceivably have been done, but we think it unlikely. So, much as Mithridates might have liked to equip his imitation legionaries with armour, we think it fairly unlikely that he did so to any significant extent.

We could certainly be wrong, but have no plans to change the army list accordingly.

You can, of course, classify them any way you like (with your opponent's agreement) in non-tournament games.

[AlanYork]

As Mithridates' army was described as being luxuriously equipped with lots of gold and silver, shining armour, silk etc how is it that in the FoG lists he couldn't afford to kit out his imitation legionaries with enough armour for them to count as "armoured"? Seems a little odd as they are, after all, by definition trying to imitate the Romans and there's no shortsge of money or equipment.

Approaching 40 years ago, when I was a callow youth, I wrote an item in Slingshot arguing that my Pontic pikes should be armoured because of the quote above (from Appian, I think).

I was told not to be silly, and not to believe every bit of propaganda in an ancient source. The statement was supposed to indicate how luxurious and effete the Pontics were, not how well-equipped.

This notwithstanding, the overall effect is what we hope to achieve and the present classifications get the effect we are aiming at. Much as I am a fan of Mithridates, the truth is that the Pontics only won battles against badly led "Roman" armies, some of which did not contain many actual Romans.

Legionary armour (chainmail at the time) is not that easy to conjure out of thin air in large quantities, without the necessary expertise and fabricae. It might conceivably have been done, but we think it unlikely. So, much as Mithridates might have liked to equip his imitation legionaries with armour, we think it fairly unlikely that he did so to any significant extent.

We could certainly be wrong, but have no plans to change the army list accordingly.

You can, of course, classify them any way you like (with your opponent's agreement) in non-tournament games.

Thanks for the explanation Richard, I can't say that I agree with it (didn't 6,000 Populares legionary exiles transfer their allegiance and presumably their equipment to Mithridates when Sulla and the Optimates seized power in Rome?) but it was good of you to take the time to answer.

[mbsparta]

You need to be careful how you look at the army list. Do you wan to build a Pontic army? Then if so, have at it; the list is very interesting and diverse. If you want to build a LRR army with cool Mithridatic stuff in it, then you just can't.

Mike B

[AlanYork]

You need to be careful how you look at the army list. Do you wan to build a Pontic army? Then if so, have at it; the list is very interesting and diverse. If you want to build a LRR army with cool Mithridatic stuff in it, then you just can't.

Mike B

Nope don't want to build a Pontic army Mike, don't have to, I already have one.

I feel that a classification that would better suit what the available sources tell us is Armoured, Poor, Impact foot, swordsmen.

To say that the statement about how well equipped the Pontic troops were indicates how luxurious and effete they were, not how well-equipped seems to me to be merely a supposition, a perfectly valid and reasonable one, but a supposition and an interpretation nevertheless. The fact remains that the Roman sources tell us the Pontics were well equipped, to dismiss it as propaganda and then classify them as merely "protected" seems a very odd decision and to be making an assumption for which there is little or no proof. Why not just assume the writer (I think Richard is correct, Appian) merely told the truth without reading into it what a list writer may want to see?

That's my view anyway, I could be wrong, I make no claim to being any more an expert than any of you guys, it just seems logical to me.

Regards
Alan

[ShrubMiK]

Of course, as you yourself recognise, your preferred interpretation is supposition as well.

If you want to take the sources really literally, you would have to consider that the gold, silver, and silk you make such mention of would not deflect many weapons If they were relatively heavily armoured would you not expect the sources, if being totally honest and objective, specifically to say so?

And an abundance of fancy kit might be assumed prove a lot of disposable wealth - but maybe all the dosh was spent on frippery and none was left over for boring real armour.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you per se, just playing Devil's advocate...I haven't read enough on the subject to have a firm opinion myself. I just have the general feeling that Mitthradates was rich, could afford to assemble a large well-equipped army and have realistic dreams of becoming a superpower, but after some initial successes his ambitions were cut down to size and at exactly the point where initiation legionaries come into play he is slightly reduced to desperation and probably doesn't have the resources he could once call upon.

[AlanYork]

Of course, as you yourself recognise, your preferred interpretation is supposition as well.

If you want to take the sources really literally, you would have to consider that the gold, silver, and silk you make such mention of would not deflect many weapons If they were relatively heavily armoured would you not expect the sources, if being totally honest and objective, specifically to say so?

And an abundance of fancy kit might be assumed prove a lot of disposable wealth - but maybe all the dosh was spent on frippery and none was left over for boring real armour.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you per se, just playing Devil's advocate...I haven't read enough on the subject to have a firm opinion myself. I just have the general feeling that Mitthradates was rich, could afford to assemble a large well-equipped army and have realistic dreams of becoming a superpower, but after some initial successes his ambitions were cut down to size and at exactly the point where initiation legionaries come into play he is slightly reduced to desperation and probably doesn't have the resources he could once call upon.

I can't disagree with anything you say though I still struggle to believe that Mithridates could not afford armour for his main line infantry. For the assorted rabble maybe not, but these guys would surely have been a priority.

My prefered interpretation has at least got the advantage of being a literal one, it has something tangible behind it, whereas the alternative could just be taken as a personal view of what the author really meant. That, of course, does not make me right.

It all comes down to interpretation as you correctly say so perhaps it would have been better to give a choice of Protected, Average Imitation Legionaries or Armoured, Poor. I certainly feel there is enough justification for the latter option rather than choosing one interpretation of the sources as definitively correct and the other as being out and out wrong.

Ah, the joys of ancients eh!!!!

Regards
Alan

[Eques]

I don't believe the imitation legionaries ever really came up against Roman ones. Pontus moved to "ILs" post Sulla and that particular army was wiped out by sieges, disease, starvation and boating disasters rather than pitched battles (unless they featured in the Battle of Tigranocerta).

With regard to the OP's mention of the Battle of Ennium I too came across that on the internet but think it is just someone fantasising or describing one of his FoG battles. Never heard of it anywhere else.

According to that recent Mithridates biography the IL army was a lot less poncy than the pike based one and more focused on the fighting and killing.