ETRUSCANS?

[Pabzer262]

I think that was the general practise for a lot of the Macedonian armies, or at least having the unarmourd chaps at the back, or so the theroy goes.

I really like this list, seems a good balance. I especially like the Hv Cav as either Polybius or Livy mention that they were pretty good. In gact virgil mentions the heavy use of Cav in the Etrucan armies in the Aeneid.....I amdit written during the time of Augustus and set any years before our period, it may refelt a Roman opinion or attitude towards Etruscan armies.

I take it we can use this list for an early republican Roman army with a few tweaks? As far as I am aware the compostion of the early Roman armies were very similar due to thier Etruscan inheritance. I think the Polybian reform (from want of a better name) didn't occur until at least the capture of Veii and I think that it was a reponse to the Celtic sack of Rome. If I find any more information I shall post.

Wish opsrey would relese a Men at Arms on the Etrucans or at Ancient Italian armies!

Regards

Chris

[marioslaz]

I take it we can use this list for an early republican Roman army with a few tweaks? As far as I am aware the compostion of the early Roman armies were very similar due to thier Etruscan inheritance. I think the Polybian reform (from want of a better name) didn't occur until at least the capture of Veii and I think that it was a reponse to the Celtic sack of Rome. If I find any more information I shall post.

Polybian reform does not exist. Polybian is just an historian (from Roman point of view). I mean he didn't have an impact on Roman tactic and his name tied to Roman army because he described the Roman army tactic. The major reform of the republic period were Camillo's reform (but for many historians Camillo never existed) and Mario's reform. Polybian era is a further develop of Camillan age, while Mario's reform was by far much more radical.

You can use Etruscan army for an early Roman, indeed. You can use it also for Monarchy age.

[Pabzer262]

Good good I would like to make these armies up...they do look nice and there are a couple of compaines out there making nice figures for this period of histroy.

I don't generally like calling Republican armies of the punic wars Polybian for the reassons pointed out, but I'm used to it thanks to DBA!!! I've heard of Camillo thnakd to Livy. From other scraps of information that I recall the Triarii were still armoured in the hoplite fashion..anyone have any thoughts on that?

Chris

[rbodleyscott]

I really like this list, seems a good balance.

A word of caution. Peter's Etruscan list is not the "official" list. That will be published in "Lost Scrolls" early in 2010.

It is fairly similar, but there are differences which might affect basing.

The official list allows a choice of fielding the 1st class separately from the 2nd and 3rd classes or in mixed battle groups. Either way, they are all classified as Heavy Foot. There is no option to field the 2nd and 3rd classes as Medium Foot.
The 1st class (when deployed separately) are Armoured until the end of the list. Separately deployed 2nd and 3rd class are Protected. When in mixed BGs some can be graded as Armoured, the rest are Protected.

The list does have Devoted troops and Axemen but they share an overall maximum of 1 BG (4 bases total). The Axemen cannot be used after 405 BC. All the heavy foot are Undrilled prior to that date, following that date they get the choice of being Drilled or Undrilled.

There are only a maximum of 6 chariots and there are no Light Horse.

The Early Republican Roman list (prior to 340 BC) is similar (without chariots of course), but with worse cavalry and an option to grade the 1st class as Superior.

[marioslaz]

I don't generally like calling Republican armies of the punic wars Polybian for the reassons pointed out, but I'm used to it thanks to DBA!!!

I do it often too! Bloody DBx!
In Italy we say "Chi va con lo zoppo impara a zoppicare" (I found the corresponding phrase in English "He that dwells next door to a cripple will learn to halt")

[marioslaz]

From other scraps of information that I recall the Triarii were still armoured in the hoplite fashion..anyone have any thoughts on that?

Chris

Mario's reform equipped triarii as principes and hastati and brought their number to the same of principes and triarii. If I don't miss, he made this reform to build a new formation la "Coorte" (cohort I think in English) because Romani had a lot of trouble in Spanish where for many military roles a "legione" was too much and a maniple too few. Before Mario, Triarii were equipped like hoplites, but they had scutum instead of hoplon. Even armor was different, because Triarii wore a chainmail instead of breastplate in bronze (classical age) or in linen (hellenistic age) used by hoplites.

This is a little Off Topic in a thread about Etruscans. Anyway, I apologize not to be off topic, but because I reply with a great delay; at first glance I didn't realize the question.

[themightycid]

Livy is to say the least a biased source. To accept his claims the Etruscans were effete and cowardly and only a threat because of their huge numbers is risky. However it is likely that he will be a bit more accurate as to who Rome was fighting in a particular battle. I think we can accept some Gallic allies for the Etruscans. If we just assume everything in his work in fiction we are left with complete guesswork.