Not a balance question, but a historical one. Why did Macedon lose access to Xystophoroi starting 260 BC?
I've done some limited digging online but I haven't had any luck finding info about this. Did the Macedonians stop using lancers on purpose, and if so, why? Or did they become unable to recruit lancer cavalry? Any recommendations for further reading on the Macedonians around this time period?
Macedon 260-148 BC: Where did the lancers go?
-
Geffalrus
- Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
- Posts: 1205
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
- Location: Virginia, USA
Re: Macedon 260-148 BC: Where did the lancers go?
I've seen this discussed a couple times in various places. One of the most recent was - oddly enough - on the forum for the Rome 2 Total War mod, Divide et Impera. Here's the thread from their preview section where one of the developers talks about their interpretation of late Macedonian and Epirote cavalry: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?750602
Additionally, here's a nice page about the late Antigonid military that also discusses the topic: https://deadliestblogpage.wordpress.com ... ntigonids/
In summary, my understanding is that two things might have happened:
1) Cavalry shields were used more by Epirus and Macedon in the period after Pyrrhus's Italy Campaign - possibly - as a result of his experience with shield bearing Roman or Italian cavalry (Campanian probably). It's unclear whether this was to increase the defensive potential of the horsemen in melee, or as part of an intentional shift to skirmishing tactics similar to the increased popularity of Tarantine style cavalry in other armies. The fact that Light Spear cavalry in FOG2 BOTH evade and fight in melee is actually a nice compromise between the two.
2) The other possibility is that cavalry tactics changed because there were no longer enough Macedonian noble estate holders interested in aggressive shock cavalry tactics to form lancer units. To protect the dwindling numbers of noble horsemen, they shifted to less aggressive tactics than those used by Alexander or the Seleucids (who had more landed estates and/or subjects with the right cavalry traditions like the Medias). It should be noted that Alexander's use of lancer cavalry may well have been a relatively new development compared to earlier Macedonian kings, and thus a function of a specific policy rewarding nobles for bravery in such aggressive cavalry tactics. As such, lancer cavalry should not necessarily be thought of as the default Macedonian cavalry formation, but rather something that happens when the king takes measures to support it (leading by example, gifting estates to brave nobles, etc etc). That's my theory at least.
So it was most likely a combination of changing royal policy and logistical considerations that moved the Antigonid Kingdom away from the strong cavalry formations used by earlier kings (and the Seleucids). Cavalry are costly to field, after all, and definitely require a particular socio-economic base to support (the knightly feudal system, for example). It seems likely that the Late Antigonids no longer had that system. Instead, their armies used a much higher percentage of infantry than Alexander and the Seleucids, which we see in their army list containing the perhaps the largest total pike population, and definitely the largest Veteran pike contingent. This also replicates how they relied on infantry for battlefield success at Selasia, and battlefield defeat at Cynoscephalae and Pydna.
Additionally, here's a nice page about the late Antigonid military that also discusses the topic: https://deadliestblogpage.wordpress.com ... ntigonids/
In summary, my understanding is that two things might have happened:
1) Cavalry shields were used more by Epirus and Macedon in the period after Pyrrhus's Italy Campaign - possibly - as a result of his experience with shield bearing Roman or Italian cavalry (Campanian probably). It's unclear whether this was to increase the defensive potential of the horsemen in melee, or as part of an intentional shift to skirmishing tactics similar to the increased popularity of Tarantine style cavalry in other armies. The fact that Light Spear cavalry in FOG2 BOTH evade and fight in melee is actually a nice compromise between the two.
2) The other possibility is that cavalry tactics changed because there were no longer enough Macedonian noble estate holders interested in aggressive shock cavalry tactics to form lancer units. To protect the dwindling numbers of noble horsemen, they shifted to less aggressive tactics than those used by Alexander or the Seleucids (who had more landed estates and/or subjects with the right cavalry traditions like the Medias). It should be noted that Alexander's use of lancer cavalry may well have been a relatively new development compared to earlier Macedonian kings, and thus a function of a specific policy rewarding nobles for bravery in such aggressive cavalry tactics. As such, lancer cavalry should not necessarily be thought of as the default Macedonian cavalry formation, but rather something that happens when the king takes measures to support it (leading by example, gifting estates to brave nobles, etc etc). That's my theory at least.
So it was most likely a combination of changing royal policy and logistical considerations that moved the Antigonid Kingdom away from the strong cavalry formations used by earlier kings (and the Seleucids). Cavalry are costly to field, after all, and definitely require a particular socio-economic base to support (the knightly feudal system, for example). It seems likely that the Late Antigonids no longer had that system. Instead, their armies used a much higher percentage of infantry than Alexander and the Seleucids, which we see in their army list containing the perhaps the largest total pike population, and definitely the largest Veteran pike contingent. This also replicates how they relied on infantry for battlefield success at Selasia, and battlefield defeat at Cynoscephalae and Pydna.
We should all Stand With Ukraine. 
