"Attalid dynasty warriors as pike or hoplites?" Topic

Is any evidence for one over the other or does anyone have any opinions on the matter?

In DBA 3 they are rated as either AX or HD.

AX would be a looser formation group of hoplites with lighter equipment.

The HD (horde) option would be an undrilled citizen levy presumably still equipped in a basic hoplite manner.

In that DBA 3 list over half of the army is composed of skirmishing missile troops.

Haven't read enough about them to have any other insight.

Duncan Head's armies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars suggests that the militia were not relied upon for field battles. From him, the bulk of the forces were mercenaries and mostly lt troops. He suggests no phalanx; good cavalry, peltasts and other light troops, plus (at various times)Galatian mercenaries and Kappadokian allies. In 189BC, exSeleucid forces including elephants and military settlers (perhaps phalangites) were acquired.

I'd always pictured them as thueophoroi/thorakitai types; but that can't be the case in the earlier years, before the Gallic invasion. Interesting…

Thanks gavandjosh02. There was a good lecture on YouTube on the Successors i watched yesterday which mentioned the use of mercenaries. I did not presume that that meant being solely reliant on them though.

Given the immense wealth the city had though they certainly could have afforded to maintain mercenaries year round.

Thanks.

PS, one of the main reasons I was asking about this was I am researching for a good Successor battle that I could do a year+ long project of collecting the minis for both sides.

One of the Roman ones I looked at (Magnesia?) had a significant portion of its troops (8,000 out of 30,000) supplied by Pergamon. I guess that would be a butt-load of Greek mercenaries!

which youtube?

Sorry Lordghee:
youtu.be/iWqeUayY_tA