Our previous introduction to the Hellenistic Age began with two new TACTICA opponents, the Maceconian Successors and the Galatians. The latter first appeared on the Greek mainland and eventually migrated to the interior of Asia Minor. This second in a series of articles dealing with the Hellenistic period concentrates on two major contenders that occupied Asia Minor and territories stretching well into the eastern fringes of the known world. These contenders are the Seleucids (sometimes referred to as the "Syrian" Empire) and the Pergamenes. In many respects, the Seleucids constituted the principal military and political power of the day, built largely on the ruins of Alexander's original empire. This Hellenistic giant came the closest of any successor state to recreating that empire and with it, world dominance. At its height, the empire controlled territories stretching from the Mediterranean to the Indian border. At its worst, it was plagued by intervals of internal revolt and internecine family struggles that eventually left a hollow sheH of a once mighty empire, ripe for Roman plucking. For their part, the Pergamenes are an off-shoot of this vast empire, their formal independence tracable to the days of the Seleucid governor, Philetarious, who, given an eye for good business practices, "appropriated" the Seleucid treasury under his care and proceeded to establish himself and his nephew Eumenes as separate rulers in defiance of Seleucid authority. Busy as they were with other revolts at the time, the Seleucids were unable to initially oppose this singular piece of opportunism. The delay eventually provided their ex-subordinates enough time to establish themselves as the defacto rulers of the Asia Minor coast, proving once again the political adage that the provisional often becomes the permanent. Though Pergamene authority and, indeed, their right to exist, would be continually challenged by the Seleucids, the wealth of Pergamum based largely on sea-born trade - continued to flourish, allowing the purchase of the mercenaries needed for survival. [1] Pergamurn eventually gained its status as a "legitimate" kingdom in 237 B.C. when a descendant of the state's original founders defeated the Galatians (still very much alive in the Asia Minor interior) and established the "Attalid" dynasty as the "bulwark of Hellenism against the Barbarians". [2] This rationale - however effective it may have been from a propaganda standpoint - ignored the fact that, having once defeated them soundly in battle, the Attalids thereafter had few qualms about hiring these same Galatians as mercenaries in Pergamene pay against the Seleucids! In its final days Pergamum gained the singular distinction of claiming they had never been conquered by the Romans, as was the case with other, less fortunate successor states. Instead, Pergamum -- lock, stock, and people -- was "bequeathed" to the Roman Senate in what has to be one of the largest inheritance packages ever recorded in human history. [3] The Seleucids and Pergamenes presented prime examples of rival Greek cultural and military organizations. Their armies mirror their cultural and economic diversities. (it should be noted in passing that two additional Hellenistic states rooted in Asia Minor that were roughly co-existen twith these, the Pontics and Armenians, have previously been dealt with in Tactica Supplement 1.) Collectively, these four opponents serve not only to illustrate in detail the final years before Roman dominance, but act as reflections of the different cultural systems of the era. DESIGNING THE SELEUCID ARMY Unlike many of their opponents, the Seleucids and their military establishment reflect an almost embarrassing amount of riches. From Seleucia, their capital on the Euphrates, and Antioch, their capital in Syria, Seleucid rulers commanded a wide range of indigenous peoples and, by extension, a wide range of troop types. Grounded on a foundation of Greek military professionalism in the form of the heavy infantry phalanx, the Seleucids could easily complement their forces with additions drawn from the remnants of the Persian Empire: elephant tributes from India, camel levies from Arabia, and mercenaries from throughout the Mediterranean world. Complicating matters, however, is the fact that not every type of local contribution would necessarily be utilized in every army that took the field. Moreover, with each passing generation of Seleucid rule, the appearance and composition of the army as a whole could - and often did - change dramatically to reflect local shortages in manpower or the personal whims of the rulers themselves. An examination of Seleucid campaigns beginning with the third century B.C. fails to isolate any common army composition. In some instances, the armies fielded by the Seleucids appear to be phalanx- intensive, while at other times cavalry predominates, and in still others the elephant arm combined with chariot forces appears to be in the forefront. Add to this that over the course of time many units easily recognizable at one given period (such as the Argyspides) disappear completely by the next major battle with no explanation, and the troop type situation becomes confusing in the extreme. Attempts to design a "standardized" version of the Seleucid armyconsistent with over 300 years of history were eventually abandoned with much frustration. No matter what com bi nations of troop types/strengths might be represented by any such "generic" listing, any number of historical exceptions to the rule could easily be found. Moreover, no matter how strongly any such "typical" Seleucid force makeup could be defended by the designer, there was the likelihood that numerous would-be Seleucid players would be disappointed with the final generic listing, given that his/her favorite troop type was either missing or minimized. For these reasons, attempts to manufacture an "average" Seleucid army were abandoned in favor of finding one or more "common denominators" on the battlefield irrespective of time or place. From this was born the concept of the "Army Core", a selection of units that realistically represented with a high degree of probability troops in any Seleucid field force. Surrounding this nucleus are a variety of different troop types that represent local contingents, regional components or specialized "corps" which were often found accompanying the Seleucids in battle. Based on individual player preference, when added to the core army units already identified, these additions reflect an acceptable approximation of any one of a hundred different types of Seleucid field armies that saw actual combat in a variety of situations and geographical locations throughout the empire, over a period of several centuries. From scholarly sources and ancient accounts of actual battles, we can begin with an approximation of the Seleucid army. At its maximum potential under emergency conditions, the Seleucid empire is estimated as capable of raising the equivalent of roughly 47,000 infantry of all types and 8,000 to 8,500 cavalry. Under normal circumstances, the numbers would be considerably less. [4] An average figure used for purposes of game design standards is 30,000 infantry and some 5,000 to 6,000 cavalry, which seems to equate well with known figures for historical campaigns. [5] The Seleucid Core of 216 gaming figures represents 21,000 troops, with the possibility of different unit selections bringing this total up to about 30,000 with little difficulty. (Again these figures are utilized as guidelines - players seeking to reenact specific campaigns may alter them as they see fit. [6] Within the Seleucid Core are three Kataikoi phalanxes. These represent a combination of full-time professionals and reservists-turned-settlers. Initially, the majority of these units would have been made up of Alexander's veterans, their places in the ranks being taken later by mercenaries and other Greek colonists from both mainland Greece and Greek Asia Minor. Succeeding generations of Greeks from numerous Seleucid citycolonies within the empire no doubt provided additional contributions from traditional soldier families. Accounts of the period attest to the high degree of Greek professionalism already alluded to. For this reason, Seleucid phalanxes should retain standard depth bonuses but a gradual decline in capabilities over generations is reflected in the elimination of morale bonuses where these same phalanxes are concerned. The Bactrian phalanx listed in the army core represents its own "core" of Greek settlers and professional soldiers around which are added local levies from Eastern Asiatics drawn from Bactrian lands roughly corresponding to modern-day Afghanistan. Following the breakaway of the Bactrian territories from the rest of the empire in approximately 250 B.C., these troops would have been supplanted by other Indo-European types found in the empire's heartland, although the name "Bactrian", if not technically accurate, can be retained for historical simplicity. No Seleucid army was ever fielded without its fair share of mercenaries, not only in the phalanxes but in the form of light infantry and skirmisher troops as well. to this end, both peltast and skirmisher contingents are represented as core components to which can be added additional peltast units from among the optional troop types. Alexander's fine Companion cavalry quickly dispersed after his death in 323 B.C., scattered among the numerous rivals in the days of the initial Succession Wars. Those who remained beyond the rise of the Seleucid state took divergent evolutionary paths, some retaining the long xyston lance-like spear, others returning to the use of the traditional Greek cavalryman's weapon, the javelin. Over the course of time, Greek influences vied with Persian and Eastern - Oriental as deciding factors in the proper development of cavalry potential. As a result, many Seleucid rulers were well served by javelin-and-shield and javelin-sans-shield troopers, while others were equally favored by the utilization of heavily armed and armored cavalry in the form of the Seleucid cataphract. [7] In a similar manner, many Seleucid light cavalry contingents relied on traditional spears, while others employed the bow with equal conviction. Both variations are brought into the core army and additional troop selection lists. An inspection of the additional troops available to the Seleucid player reveals the inclusion of both chariot and elephant contingents. Regarding the former, the Seleucids were the only Hellenistic state to retain extensive use of chariot forces well into the 2nd Century B.C. While the numbers of these vehicles could often be considerable, many Seleucid armies ignored them completely. Much appears to have been at the whim of the current ruler. As such, they are listed as additional units which may be optionally selected. A stronger case can be made, however, for the inclusion of elephants. Throughout much of the period, large numbers of elephants were maintained in the satrapy of Seleucia at Apamea. [8] The original animals were obtained from India in exchange for the ceding of border provinces the Seleucids wisely decided they probably could not hold onto anyway. What developed over time was the creation of a full-fledged elephant Corps with attendant support troops, grooms and the like. There are abundant examples of the use of large numbers of elephants in battle. [9] While one can argue the relative worth of these beasts, the fact remains that the typical Seleucid commander was pleased to have them on hand. Despite this predisposition, however, the numbers of available beasts probably never exceeded 80 to 90. Their usefulness as breeding stock for future generations competed with their usefulness on the battlefield. This, combined with the gradually diminishing number of animals in the last century B.C., makes it reasonable to include this troop type as an additional, optional pair of units rather than as mandatory inclusions in every Seleucid army. (And from a purely practical standpoint, players especially those wishing to game in 25mm scale - may not have the money to support a mandatory provision. Making the use of elephants in a Seleucid force optional appears to be a more practical consideration.) One final note concerning troop availability deals with the inclusion of the Seleucid Agryaspides. These formed the equivalent of the Seleucid elite guard, many soldiers having been originally members of Alexander's Hypaspists, and others recognized as the best in their respective formations, combined to make an elite fighting force. Unfortunately, in the early days of the wars of the Alexandrian Successors, these same Agryaspides were found to be very politically unpredictable, oft times given to switching sides before, after - or during! - battle. Eventually they were posted to an obscure portion of the empire's interior and they were never heard from again. As such they represent a common occurrence in the early years of Seleucid rule, namely the disappearance of troops after a given point in time for no apparent reason, their disappearance leading to seeming inconsistencies in army organziation. [10] They are included here as a legitimate inclusion to many an early Seleucid campaign but should be utilized only sparingly. Their presence should be discounted in any campaign setting much beyond the year 300 B.C. SELEUCID OPPONENTS One of the nice things about playing the Seleucid is the availability of a host of opponents with which to game. Traditional enemies include the Macedonian Successor list already given last issue, and the Egyptian Ptolemaic listto follow in another installment. The previously introduced Galatians also served as a thorn in the Seleucid side for some time, as would eventually Republican Rome. In addition, given the capability of players to devise different army compositions from the list of additional troop types provided below, it is likewise possible to use this same Seleucid army list to promote and effectively game the various internal revolts and family disputes that were waged in the empire in the form of Seleucid versus Seleucid encounters! And then, lastly, there are the Pergamenes. The Pergamenes started off as independent rulers with a stolen war chest of some 9,000 talents of gold and silver. [11] By comparison, the average amount of monies needed to support Athenian campaigning annually during the Peloponnesian War is estimated at being 1,800 to 2,000 talents. [12] Armed with this surfeit of riches, the Pergamenes quickly established their hegemony over much of the Asia Minor coast in what became known, initially, as the Northern League. [13] Busy with their own problems both at home and in their eastern lands, the Seleucids were unable to initially respond to these developments. [14] However, nothing was forgotten. Beginning around 235 B.C., Antiochus, brother of Seleucus II, attempted to retake Pergamum. To this end, he made a fateful alliance with the with the Galatians which began several years of bitter fighting, battle after battle engaged "with deadly and unrelenting hatred". [15] Between 231 and 229 B.C., Attalus I of Pergamum defeated Antiochus and his allies in a series of running engagements, in the process enlarging his domains and expanding his control of more and more of the Asian Minor interior. Unable to make any headway with the Pergamene League, Antiochus eventually gave up the game and decided to try overthrowing his brother instead. The indirect result of the Pergamene's successful campaign against Seleucid arms was the abandonment of Seleucus II's own campaign against the encroaching Parthians in order to deal with the internal threatto his throne. This in turn would have far reaching implications, for, although Seleucus II would eventually win out over his traitorous brother (Anthiochus eventually escaping to Thrace only to be murdered by the local Galatians), never again would he or his successors be able to mount a successful campaign against the Parthians, who would eventually weaken the empire beyond the point of no return. The Parthians would control much of the Seleucid kingdom well into Roman times. PAINTING THE SELEUCID ARMY Much of what can be said concerning Macedonian and Macedonian Successor armies can be applied to the Seleucids in terms of uniform colors, etc. For the phalanxes, tunic colors traditionally remained the red of Alexander's troops, although there would be more room for local variation among these phalanxes than in their Macedonian counterparts. Helmet types likewise would include the standard "horned" Macedonian attire as well as more oval or Thracian designs. (if RAFM 25mm figures are available the combination of different heads will lead to welcome variations within individual phalanxes.) Where the Bactrians are concerned, however, Asian influences in the form of trousers of cotton or light linen are discernible. Peltast units can incorporate any number of color designs desirable for both shield and tunic variations, as mostof these figures will represent individual mercenary contingents. Where the elephant corps is being represented, however, care should be taken to acquire models that accurately reflect the largely predominant Indian elephant overthe smaller North African variety used by the Ptolemites. [16] Asian cavalry types can be painted like various Scythian and Eastern/Indian types available to the Persians or, with minor variations allowing for Greek influences in shield designs, Persian units can be adopted wholesale. Tactica Guide to the Hellenistic World Part Two: The Seleucids and the Pergamese Seleucid Design, Opponents, and Painting Seleucid Army Lists Pergamene Design, Opponents, and Painting Pergamene Army Lists Back to Table of Contents -- Courier #56 To Courier List of Issues To MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1991 by The Courier Publishing Company. This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com