Warlord/Immortal Hoplites

This box set is an interesting one because it was originally produced by Immortal Miniatures which, sadly, went under and sold the molds for all of its range to Warlord Games. This is why they are often referred to as the "Warlord/Immortal" hoplites. I picked up the Spartan Hoplites set for use as Allied/League Hoplites in an Alexandrian army, and mercenaries in other armies.

However, I did not fully understand the way in which the Immortal Hoplites sets are laid out, and I've seen a lot of confusion online about this. The situation isn't helped by the fact that the Warlord Games website did not have very good pictures of the sprues in the Immortal Hoplites sets at the time that I purchased them, though they have better ones now.

The confusion arises from the fact that Immortal Miniatures designed one main sprue containing helmets and crests suitable for their "Ancient" set, intended to depict hoplites of the pre-Peloponnesian War eras (Perhaps "Archaic" would be more accurate than "Ancient"?). The heads provided here are Illyrian and Corinthian helmets, and both the typical horsehair crest and the "tall" crest. However, although the store page states that the set can depict hoplites into the early 4th century BC, strictly speaking the Illyrian helmet was mostly obsolete outside of Illyria by the early 5th century, and the tall crest also went out of style by at least the 4th century if not earlier (certainly I have seen no evidence that it was worn in the time of Alexander).

So, in the Ancient set is provided the base sprue (with "Ancient" helmets) and a command sprue, with more Ancient-style crests and conversion pieces, as well as a commander and flutist. The Spartan set has the same base sprue with the addition of a Spartan "upgrade" sprue, containing two hoplite bodies and nine heads wearing pilos helmets and with the characteristic Spartan beards-sans-mustache. The Classical set, however, contains an upgrade sprue with helmets much more suitable to the mid-to-late 4th century (pilos, Phrygian, and some more interesting and exotic types) and, possibly, even the early-to-mid 3rd century BC. This was the kit that I ought to have bought for my purposes, but live and learn!

Four of these come in the box, along with four command sprues

So, to review the Spartan set I'll start with the base sprue. It has eight figures, of which two are wearing bronze "muscle" cuirass, two unarmoured, and the rest in linothorax, which is an excellent proportion for representing a unit, for the most part (it should be noted that one of the bronze cuirasses is of a decidedly Archaic type). One might quibble that most hoplites are thought to have eschewed all armour after a certain point (around the time of Iphikrates, if I recall correctly), but this is an acceptable compromise.

Sheathed swords are either xiphos or kopis/makhaira, judging by their shape, the aspis shields are quite large (some have suggested too large, though I like their excessive size, personally) and fully detailed on the inside with antilabe (the rope handle around the rim) and porpax (the leather or bronze strap in the center) both depicted in excellent detail. The left arm being molded attached to the shield is a downside for kitbashing, however, as it makes shield swaps essentially impossible unless a new left arm of the same scale can be found.

The doru spear is depicted well, at an appropriate length and in both over-arm and under-arm grips, to suit individual preference. Shield aprons and some kind of extra abdominal armour provide even more bits to play with.

My picture of the upgrade sprue didn't come out well, so I'm using the one from the Warlord Games Store

The upgrade sprue includes an unarmoured body wearing exomis and another sporting a "bell" cuirass (like the "muscle" but more flared around the belly to enable freedom of movement), in addition to eight heads in pilos helmet (Spartan standard-issue beginning toward the end of the Peloponnesian War, and continuing throughout the Hellenistic era) and one in what appears to be the soft felt pilos cap (a nice touch), as well as eight scabbarded xiphos swords of the extra-short Spartan variety (again a nice touch of historicity).

I was initially puzzled by the three headless helmets and petasos hat, thinking perhaps they were meant for the helmet-less bearded head on the main sprue, but it turns out they are a holdover from the Classical kit, which includes several "bald" heads to which this headgear may be affixed. It seems that the Spartan "upgrade" sprue is actually identical to the Classical upgrade sprue, above the section with the row of heads. For whatever reason, Warlord do not have a picture of the Classical Phalanx upgrade sprue at their website.

A final note, the Spartan set includes 40 metal aspis shields of uniform size, to represent accurately the fact that Spartan shields were mass-manufactured and issued by the state, and notoriously constructed to a standard size. The plastic shields on the main sprue are varying sizes, so again this is a nice touch of historical accuracy. The hoplite sets all come with sheets of decals, thus the shields (metal or plastic) are smooth, allowing hand-painting of designs if desired.

Test Figure I painted up

So, concluding remarks: these Immortal hoplites sets are just shy of excellence. The detail is mostly fantastic, especially the musculature on the exomis-clad body, the detail of the linothorakes and cuirasses, folds of the cloth tunics, and interiors of the aspis shields.

One of the weak points of sculpting are the faces, which are quite hit or miss, in part due to the fact that these miniatures are on the small and slender end of the sculpting scale, making it difficult to depict much face detail. Another is wrists, which tend to blend seamlessly into the backs of hands, creating a blocky impression, and greaves tend to be a little too chunky as well—perhaps both design choices were made for structural integrity, as they might be prone to snapping if realistically slender.

Overall, the details paint up well (see test figure) but due to their fineness can be obscured very easily by a botched priming or paint that is not thinned properly.

The historical authenticity is a huge plus, perhaps the first and foremost reason to buy this set, but it is undermined by the somewhat sloppy lay-out of the sprues and box-sets as a whole. One has to do a significant bit of groundwork to puzzle out which kit to buy and which components to use in order to actually take advantage of the historicity.

The size of the figures can be a downside or an upside, as they rank up well with some ranges (Relic Miniatures in particular, from what I've seen online) but not well with taller ranges (such as Victrix). I will do a scale comparison of all the figures I have so far at a later date, but for now suffice it to say that Immortal heads can be swapped with the Warlord Phalangites and vice versa. I wouldn't mix them in the same unit, but in their own units they look fine in the same army on the tabletop.

Victrix's competing set is one of their oldest kits, and it shows; they have advanced greatly since this release

In closing, for $32 USD (£20) for 40 miniatures, the Immortal range of hoplites are a fantastic value for money, in my opinion they look far, far more aesthetically pleasing than Victrix's Spartan Hoplites (indeed, their whole early Hoplite range leaves a lot to be desired), and I'm not aware of any other options in plastic for 28mm Spartans. They are also quite easy to find discounted online for 20% off or more, which makes them one of the cheapest plastic infantry sets in the entire world of 28mm Ancients miniatures. 

In the next few posts, I will be demonstrating what these kits can do as I construct and paint them. 

Warlord Games Phalangites Review

 First off, the standard Macedonian Phalangites.

Warlord Games "Macedonian Phalangites"

For $35 USD (£22) you get 40 multipart plastic figures which is a very affordable pricing standard. These seem to be intended to build up large blocks of rank-and-file infantry quickly and affordably, which is quite useful to a wargamer looking to start or expand a Macedonian army.

The box contains ten identical sprues, each consisting of four Phalangites. No command sprue is included, but it is possible to rectify this without making further purchases as I will demonstrate in a later post. It does not include bases either, but does include 40 black Macedonian star transfers for the shields.

Warlord Phalangites Sprue: Front

There are four bodies, six heads, six arms holding Sarisas, and four Pelte shields on each sprue. Each of the bodies is posed to fit into a specific place in a 3- or 4-rank formation, but there is some flexibility here. Two of the bodies are designed to hold their Sarisas at an angle in an advancing pose, two are intended to hold them straight up in a marching pose.

The flexibility comes in here, because you can swap the arms for the 1st and 2nd rank figures, introducing some variety in panoply in the different ranks, and the two rear-rankers could reasonably be expected to reside in the same rank (this makes a three-rank Phalanx for something like WAB a little easier to form up, while still leaving a four-rank Hail Caesar Phalanx amply supplied).

There is no option for a pikes-lowered pose, which is a disappointment to me personally because that is my favorite pose for Phalangites, but a great many wargamers tend to disagree with me and prefer static poses that are easy to rank up and move around the battlefield.

It is also perfectly reasonable to, say, buy one pack of metal Phalangites from a manufacturer like Wargames Foundry in any desired pose, and use them to form a "fancier" front rank alongside the Warlord Phalangites, or to mix them into the formation for increased variety. This is also likely how I will solve the lack of unarmoured and/or hat-wearing rear-rank Phalangites.

Warlord Phalangites Sprue: Rear

As far as historical detail goes, the sculptor made some interesting choices. The bog-standard (but historically dubious) selection of the massive, leaf-shaped spear head and the flanged, mace-like buttspike (both copied verbatim from the Vergina Tomb finds) are at once a strength and a weakness, a strength because visually these details make the sarisai infinitely more interesting than the old-school brass rod, but a weakness because of the aforementioned historical dubiousness.

Although very little is certain in Hellenistic history, I personally found Sekunda's arguments in Macedonian Armies After Alexander pretty compelling, at least as far as ruling out the massive spearhead, buttspike, and bronze connector as in any way related to sarisai. Artistic depictions suggest a narrow buttspike with a plate-like catch near the top, to enable its being stuck in the ground for camp storage. Literary references also refer to small, projectile-like heads for the sarisai, allowing more penetrative capability (and also making it less likely to get stuck in a shield or corpse after thrusting). Presumably most wargamers will not be bothered by this, but it does annoy me slightly. Although I am not a complete purist (with the source material being so spotty, this would be impossible anyway) I do like to make my historical figures as authentic as I can.

A final complaint about the sarissai is that they are quite on the short side, relative to the figure probably about 12' in length (as opposed to 15'-18' in Alexander's day, and 20'-22' feet in the era of the later Successors). Doubtless this decision was made for convenience, as a properly scaled plastic sarisa would be extremely vulnerable to bending or snapping

Helmet styles seem to have been chosen as a temporal compromise, to allow the customer to depict Hellenistic phalangites from as many periods within the era as can reasonably be expected. The Chalcidian and two Phrygian helmets were most popular in the early Hellenistic era and the time of Alexander (and even his father), while the Thracian, Attic/Pseudo-Phrygian, and cheekguarded Pilos are typical of the Diadochi wars to early Successor era. All of these types were probably used to a greater or lesser extent throughout at least the first 150 years of the Hellenistic era (through to the first conflicts with Rome), however, so the selection is very versatile. It would be nice to see some of the more exotic helmet styles from the period represented, but again this is very much a rank-and-file box, and for the price it's hard to complain.

The Transfer Sheet included in the box

Also included are 40 shield-decals depicting a simple black Macedonian star on transparent background. A nice (optional) touch, these can be used as is or replaced with higher-quality decals or even hand-painted designs.

Overall, I am quite happy with this set as a means to quickly and cheaply fill out massive phalanxes, to which additional, more expensive figures might be added later on, as front-rankers or elite units or whatever.

Warlord Games' "Macedonian Royal Guard"

The Macedonian Royal Guard box set contains the exact same sprues as the Macedonian Phalangites set (6 instead of 10, for a total of 24 figures) but with the addition of metal heads and shields that are used to distinguish them from "standard" phalangites.

Front and Rear view of the shield sprues, and selection of extra heads

There are 24 embossed shields in three different designs, half with Macedonian stars, and two of the crescent/half-circle style patterns which are quite common in artwork and coinage, these examples very likely taken directly from Head's "Armies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars". The four unique head sculpts consist of two Phyrgian, one Attic/Pseudo-Phrygian, and one Thracian, all with horsetail crests on the sides (the primary different between these and the standard plastic heads).

Macedonian Shield-Designs re: Head's AMPW

The sculpting quality and detail of the shields is excellent, but the heads leave a bit to be desired, particularly the faces which tend toward the "frog-mouthed" style seen in many metal figures. The lack of feathered plumage is particularly disappointing, as these were likely just as popular as "horsetails" to denote rank and unit, if not more so.

And since the set is based on the same plastic figures as the standard box, there is no variation in body-armour which might indicate better-equipped, more prestigious troops (such as solid metal muscle cuirasses, for example).

At $32 (£20) for the box, you pay a significantly higher price for these metal components: $1.33 (83p) per figure, versus $0.88 (55p) per figure in the standard box set. Are these components worth the extra $10.80? Not really. If money is no issue and you really like working with the Warlord plastic figures, then this set is a nice variation on the rank and file one, but for that price the flaws of sculpting can't really be overlooked. The embossed shields are quite good, and I would happily equip the standard phalangites with them as well (painted bronze rather than silver) if it werent for the fact that Warlord does not sell these shields separately. 

My recommendation is to buy Victrix's Macedonian Phalangites for your Argyraspid/Agema/Hypaspist Phalangites, since they are cheaper and better sculpted than Warlord's Guard Phalangite set. But, the standard Macedonian box is cheaper than Victrix, and therefore perfectly commendable as an affordable, competently-sculpted and laid-out kit for building huge armies on a budget. Scale is not a concern as long as they aren't mixed in the same units, but I will be covering this in a later post.

 
One final thought: Warlord's Successor Starter Army is a great way to get as many rank and file phalangites as you are likely to need outside of a BigRedBat-style convention event, to which may be added Victrix or metal manufacturer's figures for variety and specialized units such as royal guard or native levy phalangites, with the added bonus of eight companion cavalry and an armoured elephant. Unfortunately, as far as I can tell the latter is really only suitable for a Seleucid army, and then only in the "High" Hellenistic era — mid-3rd to mid-2nd c. BC in the most generous historical interpretation; the company's marketing of the set as suitable for Pyrrhic armies is totally inaccurate, as the elephants of Pyrrhos' army would have been towered Indians but unarmoured. Likewise, Ptolemaic elephants were not Indian, and whether or how they were armoured is up for debate. 

All that said, it's still a cool model to have. I will probably find myself picking this set up eventually because I'm building two Hellenistic armies, especially since this "army-in-a-box" can be found discounted at many online distributors, in some cases to the point where the cavalry and elephant are essentially free add-ons. 

Next, a review of the Warlord/Immortal Hoplites, and then thoughts on construction and customization.

First Purchase Block

After a long hiatus — progress! I've continued to work on this project throughout the past year and a half but only now had enough completed to feel comfortable returning to posting. As such, we'll begin by catching up with my progress so far.

Sample Contents from all three boxes

My first bloc (received for Christmas) consists of a box each of Warlord Games Phalangites, Macedonian Royal Guard (Silver Shields) and Warlord/Immortal Spartan Hoplites. The last was not strictly needed but picked up on a whim, and because I wanted to see if components were compatible between the sets. 

Closer View of the Sprues

I'll be doing some more in-depth reviews on these three sets in the coming days, but a few quick thoughts: these boxes are all terrific value for money, and the sculpting ranges from adequate to excellent (particularly considering that the sets are all on the older side). The extra metal heads from the Royal Guard kit leave a bit to be desired, but they are thoroughly usable out of the box.

In closing, this block netted me 64 Phalangites and 40 hoplites, a substantial body of infantry and, once completed, a major step towards getting my Hellenistic armies up and running.

The Plan: Part IV

Implementation

(See Part I of this series here)

With such a large and ambitious project, I needed very careful planning and clear goals in order to ensure that it was implemented. Again I was inspired by Olicanalad, who planned out his Punic Wars project by buying a big "pile of lead," and then painting small chunks or lots of his "lead-pile" within a set period of time, in order to complete the project within two years.

With a plastic-focused project like mine, it takes a bit more time to complete a group of miniatures due to the increased construction time. With metal figures, most of the time the only construction required is some cleaning of flash and basing. With plastics, heads, weapons, arms, shields, all have to be attached to the central body (some manufacturers even produce separate torsos and legs as well). This generally means much more detail and customizeability, but the trade-off is much more scraping and filing of mold-lines and attaching of very small components. 

Turning this...

In addition, I intended from the start to paint to a "showcase" standard, rather than a "battlefield" standard, despite the fact that I intend to use the collection for wargaming, because I enjoy painting and improving my skills by challenging myself with the ambitiousness of my painting. So I knew that getting about 1,000 figures, mostly plastic, built, painted, and based, would take a good deal of time. 

...Into this takes time (both pics courtesy of Victrix Ltd.)

Since budget is also a concern, rather than buying the entire heap of figures in one go and completing them over time, as Olicanalad did (for the most part), I decided I would purchase the armies in blocs defined by price (rather than number of figures). My initial target was to purchase $100-$150 blocs of figures, then construct, paint, and base the whole lot in a three-month period, and then buy the next bloc.

In this way I can space out my spending and gradually build up the armies over time. I can also buy one or two units for two or more of the armies in one bloc, allowing me to maintain project-motivation by giving me more variety of figures to work with (painting 240 Phalangites in a row being far more demoralizing than, say, 12 Companion cavalry, 40 Phalangites, and 40 Iberians, for instance). This will also allow me to complete small armies that can fight battles for skirmish games or smaller-battle systems (like Warhammer Ancient Battles) while working towards playing the big, cinematic battles, like Cannae or Raphia, that are the final goal of the project.

Warlord Games' as-yet unreleased Armoured Indian elephant

This gradual purchase and completion schedule will also allow me to work while I wait for some items that I require but are as yet unreleased (such as Victrix's plastic Macedonian cavalry, African elephants, and conversion sprues, Warlord Games' Indian elephants, etc.), and, of course, to cross my fingers and hope that currency exchange rates become more favorable.

The Plan: Part III

The Carthaginians and Republican Rome were arch-nemeses, doomed by geographic proximity to war constantly until one destroyed the other and achieved domination of the Western Mediterranean, and this they did over the course of the 3rd-2nd centuries BC. The situation in the east was similar...

The Mediterranean ca. 218 BC, courtesy of Wikimedia

The Seleucid and Ptolemaic Empires also warred ceaselessly over the Eastern Mediterranean coasts (the borders of each empire constantly shifted across modern Syria, Lebanon, Israel, and Turkey), in an ultimately futile attempt to rebuild Alexander's great empire. As with the Punic Wars, which I feel are to an extent best exemplified by Cannae, Raphia was the battle which most resonated with me (also one of the most well-documented battles) amongst the many Syrian Wars between these two Kingdoms, so this was the battle I initially decided to build my armies around.

However, the OOB for Raphia is massive — this was truly a clash of titans — and I quickly realized that it was probably an even less practical starting point than Cannae had been. So I decided instead to start out with a more limited goal: a basic plan for a generic "Alexandrian" Macedonian army which could be expanded until (with the addition of mercenaries and native levies) it could be split into two armies, Ptolemaic and Seleucid. With that task completed, I could gradually build up "faction-specific" units (such as the Arab levies whom Antiochos III used in several battles, or the Ptolemaic Machimoi Phalangites raised by Ptolemaios IV) after the core of the armies was in place.

Raphia

Alexander's expeditionary army consisted of a tightly-organized combined-arms force, each branch of which could be argued to be the best in the world in its field. The core was the Hammer (his Hetairoi, or Companion Cavalry) and the Anvil (the Macedonian Phalangites or Pezhetairoi, foot-companions).

These two core elements required several smaller support-units. The Hypaspistai ("shield-bearers", elite infantry unit) provided a "hinge" between the cavalry "hammer" and Phalanx "anvil". Without going too deeply into the topic, I fall into the camp which considers the Hypaspistai to have been equipped as Hoplites, for a variety of reasons, but capable of being equipped with javelins and lighter equipment for "spec ops" missions (I will post a more in-depth discussion of Hypaspistai at a later date).

In addition, Alexander had a veteran mercenary strike-force (at least at Gaugamela) as a "right flank guard" detachment consisting of Peltophoroi, Agrianian javelinmen, "Macedonian" Archers (likely non-Cretan mercenaries equipped as Cretan archers), Achaean "Peltasts", "Greek" cavalry, and Prodromoi lancers (probably Thracian by ethnicity). This was the force that pinned Darius' left-wing cavalry horde, allowing Alexander to swing back in to the center with 2,000 Companion cavalry at Gaugamela.

Gaugamela

 On the left, another flank-guard detachment consisting of Thracian Peltasts and light cavalry, Cretan Archers, Agrianian skirmishers, and Thessalian cavalry (equal in number to the Companions), was fine-tuned to refuse the flank effectively. The Thessalian cavalry's diamond-formation (Rhombos) was defensive in nature, because it allowed the cavalry to quickly react by turning in place, forming into a wedge at any of the four points, thus quickly reforming to counter-charge in any direction.

The Companions, being intended for offense, simply formed wedges. The Thessalians may have used javelins in the time of Alexander (which would perhaps have been more effective for a defensive battlefield role than long spears), but by the time of the Diadochoi wars, had been converted over to Xystophoroi (Xyston-Bearers), with the role of ranged and light cavalry being filled by mercenaries and native levies. Hippeis Thessalikoi would have been difficult to distinguish from the Companions by appearance (both during and after Alexander's reign), perhaps wearing less impressive cloaks and armour.

Thracian, Illyrian, Agrianian, Cretan, and Greek mercenary light troops (javelinmen, peltasts, slingers, and archers) were interspersed in small "penny-packets" throughout the army for different support-roles.

Peltasts, by Johnny Shumate

 The final element was a reserve of reluctant "allied" Greek League Hoplites, equipped with the traditional panoply of Hoplon, Linothorax, long Dory spear, greaves, and helmets.
So this is my list to recreate an Alexandrian Macedonian army:

Alexandrian Macedonian Army
1x24 Agema Phalangites
3x24 Pezhetairoi Phalangites
1x18 Hypaspistai ("light"-armed)
1x18 Peltophoroi
1x18 Mercenary Hoplites
1x16 Thracian Peltasts
1x16 Illyrian Peltasts
1x10 Agrianian Javelinmen (there were probably about 1,000 of these at Gaugamela, in two units of 500)
1x8 Cretan Archers (representing both the Cretan and "Macedonian" archers)
1x8 Slingers (Thracian, Agrianian, Rhodian, represented by one larger unit)
1x12 Companion Cavalry
1x12 Thessalian Cavalry

This is a balanced force which both represents the elements of Alexander's army fairly well, and should also prove effective in most rulesets. It also, I think, captures the look and feel of Alexander's army without requiring 500+ figures. Most importantly, it can be put together as a standalone, self-contained force in its own right, and also provides a core force which can be split to create the backbone of two Hellenistic Successor armies: the Seleucid and the Ptolemaic.

Here are the expanded lists for these two armies:

Seleucid
1x24 Argyraspidai
2x24 Katoikoi Phalangites (Colonists)
1x24 Pantodapoi Phalangites (Native Levies)*
1x18 Early Thorakitai (Light Hypaspists)
1x18 Thorakitai Proper (mail shirts)*
1x18 Thureophoroi (Thracians/Illyrians)
1x24 Uazali (Cilician/Carian/Psidian/other Anatolian light infantry)*
2x12 Arab Levy Infantry (Skirmishers)*
1x12 Cretan Archers (*)
1x8 Agema Hetairoi (Companion Cavalry)
1x8 Hippeis Thessalikoi (Thessalian Colonist Cavalry)
1x8 Galatian Cavalry+
1x6 Arachosian Cavalry (Javelins)*
1x6 Dahae Horse-Archers*
2x Indian Elephants*

Ptolemaic
1x24 Basilikon Agema (Royal Guards infantry; "Heavy" Hypaspists)*
1x24 Klerouchoi Phalangites (Colonists)
1x24 Mercenary Phalangites*
1x24 Machimoi Phalangites (Native Levies)*
1x24 Galatian Infantry+
2x18 Thureophoroi*
1x12 Thracian Peltasts
1x10 Agrianian Peltasts
1x8 Rhodian Slingers
1x8 Basilike Ile (Companion Cavalry)
1x12 Galatian Cavalry+
1x8 Tarantine Cavalry*
2x African Elephants*

Units marked with an (*) would need to be bought to add to the core Alexandrian army; those marked with a (+) need to be bought for the Carthaginians, and therefore do not represent any additional expense; units not marked are appropriated directly from the Alexandrian list.

These choices for expansion are a compromise between re-using all the units in the Alexandrian list, and also bringing the two armies closer to the OOB at Raphia (without having 500 figures per side).

But this is not the beginning and end of options for expansion. For example, once these two lists are completed (bought, constructed, painted), it would be simple to create a Pyrrhic army by the addition of some Tarantine Phalangites, Tarantine Hoplites, and the Ptolemaic army's Tarantine cavalry. To this could be added Samnite infantry from the Carthaginian/Roman armies.

Tarantine cavalry, artist unknown

An Antigonid force could be created by increasing the ratio of Phalangites and removing the eastern levies; if some Greek skirmish cavalry (Hippakontistai) are bought, and hoplite units are gradually built up (Tarantines, a couple of Allied Greek League hoplites for the Alexandrian army), combined with some javelinmen, then you have an early Greek force, such as that at Chaeronea; add the Thureophoroi, and you have a later Greek League army for the Social Wars. And many of the units for these armies could be used in early Diadochoi battles as well (Paraitacene, Gabiene, Ipsus, etc.)

Thus the principle of versatility provides a wide range of opportunities for expansion of these Hellenistic armies.

To come back to these lists, the new units are representative of later Hellenistic warfare. The Thureophoroi (thureos-bearers) are a new infantry type which developed over the course of the 3rd century BC, as a result of the Galatian invasion of the 270s. Here is a good explanation of the equipment and battlefield roles of the three main types of thureos infantry (Euzonoi, Thureophoroi, Thorakitai).

Kit-bashed Thureophoros made of Victrix components

Conveniently, it is fairly well-established that Illyrian skirmishers had adopted the thureos by the time of Alexander, and it is highly like that the Thracians had as well (this is probably due to their contact with eastern Celts several decades before the Galatian migrations which introduced the thureos to Greece, Macedon, and Anatolia, from whence it spread throughout the Hellenistic world), so I can comfortably equip my Alexandrian "Peltasts" (Illyrians and Thracians) with thureos shields, and then use them as Thureophoroi in Seleucid and Ptolemaic armies.

"Silver-Shields" or guard Phalangites can be used as Alexander's Argyraspids, can represent the Agema Pezhetairoi (the guard regiments before they were outfitted with silver shields), and can also be used as Seleucid Argyraspidai easily enough. One box of Warlord's Royal Guard Phalangites provides 24.

Warlord's Macedonian Royal Guard

Two boxes of Warlord's Phalangites provides 80 figures (a very economical way to build a big phalanx fast), which can be divided into the three units of 24 with eight extras. And Victrix miniatures' Peltasts and Unarmoured Hoplites sets will take care of the Agrianians, the peltasts, the Peltophoroi, the mercenary hoplites, the Cretan archers, and the Rhodian slingers.

And, finally, Victrix' (as yet unreleased) Greek and Macedonian cavalry sets will take care of the Companion and Thessalian cavalry (12 to a box), for a total of 24 heavy cavalry who can be split into three units of 8 for the Successor armies.

Victrix Miniatures "Macedonian Cavalry" renders

The rest of the later units are (currently) more difficult to find a plastic alternative for (except the additional Phalanxes, which I intend to procure from Victrix, for variety; they also have an option for Eastern Phalangites wearing pants in their Successor kit), but I will focus on getting the Alexandrian Macedonian army up and running, and then see about Victrix' conversion sprues that were mentioned on their facebook page, which may make units such as light Hypaspists and Thureophoroi much easier to implement in plastic. I am also holding out hopes that Victrix will eventually release an unarmoured Greek/Macedonian cavalry set, which could be used as Prodromoi and Tarantine cavalry.

With a starting point fixed for each of the four armies, I next need to sketch out a plan for purchasing, building, and painting the figures, which will be the subject of my next post. 

The Plan: Part II

This installment in my series on mapping out my four-army Macedonian and Punic Wars project will focus on the Punic Wars contingent — Hannibal's Carthaginian army, and a Republican Roman force to oppose him.

With an ambitious scheme forming, I went back to my initial Cannae project. These two armies (Hannibal's Carthaginians and Republican Romans) would constitute half of my four-army project, and half of the factions in my planned campaign.

Map of Cannae, courtesy of livius.org

Order of Battle

First I determined an OOB for Cannae by choosing reasonable troop-estimates from the (often self-contradicting) Wikipedia article (because yes, I am that lazy), and boiling those down to numbers which I felt would work equally well in Hail Caesar, Warhammer Ancient Battles, or any other ruleset suitable to large numbers of 28mm figures, which gave me:

Hannibal

Heavy Infantry — 8,000 Libyans; 8,000 Iberians; 16,000 Gauls (half left out of action as camp-guards); 5,500 Gaetulians

Light Infantry/Skirmishers: 8,000 (Including Balearic Slingers and "mixed nationality spearmen")

Cavalry — 4,000 Numidian; 2,000 Iberian; 4,000 Gallic; 450 Liby-Phoenician

Varro

4-8 Roman Legions with accompanying Latin Auxilliary Alae

1 Legion: 1,200 Velites/Leves, 1,200 Hastati, 1,200 Principes, 600 Triarii, 300 Equites [1];
Total: 4,200 infantry, 300 cavalry

1 Latin Ala: Identical, but with 900 cavalry rather than 300.

(Polybios [2] asserts that the legions were raised at "emergency strength" of 5,000 infantry and 300 cavalry; Alae at 5,000 foot and 900 horse).

The Roman figures are difficult to pin down for two reasons: firstly, the practice of using "emergency-strength" legions, with more men than the standard, and the fact that losing 90,000 men in a single battle stretches the boundaries of plausibility. That said, every source agrees that Hannibal was heavily outnumbered, so I essentially decided to just fudge the specific numbers and make sure the ratios were correct-ish.

As for Carthage, the precise ratios (1:1:1:1 Libyan/Iberian/Gallic/Skirmishers) makes coming up with a representative army-plan simpler, but there are still a few sticking-points. For instance, the Gaetulians. I had a devil of a time figuring out who precisely they were — a North-African Berber tribe, probably not too-dissimilar from the Numidians, except even less civilized, and notorious for wearing animal skins and living off milk and raw meat. Most representations of them seem to depict them as fast-moving, unarmoured warriors, practicing a skirmish-centric combat style (again, much like the Numidians). Why then are they listed under heavy infantry?

As best I can tell, this is a fairly accurate depiction of Gaetulian Infantry. From the Ancient Empires mod for Total War: Attila

Since there are no options for Gaetulian figures of which I am aware, I decided to simply erase them from my army-plan for the moment, and drop the extra 5,500 men into my Light Infantry total.

Which brings us to the next sticking point, Light Infantry being described as "mixed nationality spearmen". I presume this is due to the difficulty of Polybios referring to Javelinmen as ""Peltasts" or "Peltophoroi" and "Peltophoroi" being confused with pelta-bearing Phalangitai. This has led to many translations of Polybios referring to "Light infantry and pikemen" being sent on missions that should be given to skirmishers, such as occupying hills in front of the main body of troops. Luke Ueda-Sarson wrote an excellent, convincing, and exhaustive pair of articles on this subject.

Suffice it to say, I feel comfortable counting these as light infantry and skirmishers, and slotting in the Caetrati here so I can have more Iberians since they are my favorite component of Carthaginian armies. Alongside the Caetrati and Balearic Slingers (of whom 8 is probably far too high a number, since most armies had fewer than 1,000 slingers, but any fewer than 8 figures wouldn't feel or look right on the table, so I'm comfortable fudging this) a contingent of Libyan Javelinmen is included as well (wouldn't be "mixed nationality" if they were all Iberian!).

Victrix Unarmoured Iberians equipped as Caetrati; Photo from the Victrix Store-Page

After playing around with the numbers a good deal, I arrived at the following figures:

Carthaginian

Heavy Infantry: 48 Liby-Phoenician Spearmen, 48 Gauls, 48 Iberian Scutari
Skirmishers: 16 Libyan Javelinmen, 8 Balearic Slingers, 16 Iberian Caetrati, 16 Gallic Javelinmen
Cavalry: 24 Gallic Cavalry, 24 Numidian Cavalry, 12 Iberian Cavalry (the 450 Punic cavalry would be represented by Hannibal and his standard-bearer)
Total: 260 miniatures (200 Infantry, 60 Cavalry)

Republican Roman

Infantry: 2 Roman Manipular Legions and 2 Latin Alae Socii each consisting of roughly 12 Velites, 24 Hastati, 24 Pincipes and 12 Triarii per legion/Ala for a total of 48 Velites, 96 Hastati, 96 Principes, and 48 Triarii
Cavalry: 6 Roman Equites and 18 Allied Equites (deployed as 2x12 Equites
Total: 312 miniatures (288 Infantry, 24 Cavalry)

Getting the Armies on the Table

The feasibility of such a vast undertaking, as I mentioned previously, hinged on the large (and increasing) variety of plastic kits available. For the Punic Wars half of my project, I decided I would rely primarily on Victrix miniatures, supplemented with Warlord Games and the beautiful Agema Miniatures legionaries and Velites boxed-sets.

Agema Miniatures' Princeps, Hastatus, and Triarius

In particular, Victrix's releases of Iberian infantry and cavalry, and Numidian cavalry would be essential, as would their current Carthaginian and Roman sets. Since I find the Agema legionaries far more aesthetically pleasing than the Victrix, I decided that I would use three boxes of Agema legionaries (each provides 16 Hastati, 16 Principes, and 8 Triarii) for the two Roman Legions, and Victrix's Pectoral and Allied Auxiliary sets, each providing 60 figures including Leader/Standard/Musician commands, of which all can be constructed as Hastati/Principes, up to 18 as Velites, and 18 long spears for Triarii/Extraordinarii, for the Allied Legions (Alae Socii).

Victrix Italian Allies, from the Victrix store-page

The trick to the Victrix Roman sets is their versatility. Each sprue comes with six armoured bodies (chainmail, pectoral, or a mix for the Allied box) and two unarmoured, 2 bucklers and 8 scutum shields. So the unarmoured bodies can be given javelins, bucklers, and skirmisher heads to operate as Velites, or scutae, pilae, and legionary heads, to operate as unarmoured Hastati (the different units of the legion being most easily differentiated by including a mix of unarmoured and pectoral for Hastati, pectoral/chainmail for Principes, and chainmail/musculata cuirass for Triarii). This means you can build up to 18 Velites, or use all the unarmoured bodies as legionaries, and so on.

In order to get 48 Hastati, 48 Principes and 24 Triarii out of two Victrix Roman sets, the latter is the route I would have to go, and as such this necessitates the additional purchase of 3 boxes of Agema Velites (48 total, 12 per legion/ala).

Victrix has a running army deal called the "Victrix/Aventine Roman Infantry and Cavalry Deal" which includes any two Roman legionary boxes plus 12 (excellent-looking) Aventine Miniatures Equites for about $100 (dependent on the fluctuating USD/GBP exchange-rate). This is perfect for the project, as it provides almost half the Romans I need for a very affordable price.

Victrix/Aventine Deal

Victrix's newly-announced Greek/Macedonian Cavalry set will provide figures wearing bronze musculata cuirasses and Boeotian helmets, with options for spined cavalry shields and javelins/shorter spears (shorter, that is, than the Companions' Xyston) which could easily be made serviceable as Republican Roman Equites. The Republican cavalry are thought to have switched from bronze cuirass to chainmail sometime around the end of the 2nd Punic War, but it is very likely that both would have appeared side-by-side during the 50-year or so transition period, particularly since pre-Marian Roman soldiers purchased their own equipment. Depending on how Victrix's plastics scale up with Aventine's metals, it may even be possible to put a mix of figures in my two units of Equites. Warlord has also just released a Caesarian/Late Republican Equites set, which is another option for the second half of my needed Roman cavalry (though Warlord only provides 10 figures per box).

 For Hannibal's army, the Victrix Carthaginian box contains 48 Liby-Phoenician heavy spearmen (24 "Veterans" in Roman equipment, and 24 "regulars" in Hoplite panoply) along with 14 Libyan Skirmishers, which nearly covers the African infantry contingent.

"Hannibal's Veterans" by Victrix Ltd.

Two boxes of Victrix Iberians (one armoured, one unarmoured) would provide enough for 2x24 Scutarii and 2x16 Caetrati (slightly more than I need, but I really like Iberians so I'm not complaining), with one-quarter (8) of the Caetrati wearing armour, and one third (16) of the Scutarii unarmoured (by combining the two boxes) for a more realistic and aesthetically pleasing variety within the units.

Two boxes of Warlord Games Celts would give me 80 Gauls, more than enough for the 48 Warband and 16 Skirmishers I would need; the excess can be built with a higher proportion of shirtless torsos and painted with blue pants and white/blue shields and provide a Galatian contingent (though Victrix has let slip on their Facebook page that they will probably be releasing their own Gallic Celt sets, probably including cavalry, so I may bide my time and see what they look like before choosing between the two manufacturers).

For the Balearic slingers (of whom I want more than were probably present at the battle because they're cool) I had a couple of options, but will most likely use the slingers which come with the Victrix Peltast set (which I need to buy for my Successors armies anyway); alternatively, Victrix makes their own Balearic Slingers, but these don't look that different from the Greek slingers, and 12 of the Balearics come to a set, which is more than the 8 I need. I may eventually buy proper Balearic Slingers anyway, but the goal is to get these armies up and running ASAP, so in the meantime, Greeks will suffice.

Victrix Iberian Cavalry, courtesy of Victrix Facebook page

For the cavalry, Warlord Gauls (10 per box) and Victrix's Iberians and Numidians are the only options in plastic, and both companies' offerings look great. At roughly $24 USD (£19.95) for 12 cavalry from Victrix, their pricing blows metal competitors out of the water (Warlord's are a bit pricier and are plastic/metal hybrids, but still more affordable than the metal options I've been seeing).

572 miniatures, and that would only be two of the four total armies! Obviously, this would have to be more of a long-term goal, in the immediate term, simply getting armies that were large enough to use would have to suffice.

With these plans laid out for my Western factions, I will next turn to the Eastern Mediterranean...

DISCLAIMER: I am not a paid spokesman for any of the miniatures manufacturers whom I have linked in this post; I am linking to anything I refer to that I think someone might want to easily learn more about, because this series of intro-posts is intended to be a useful source of information, particularly for people who are new to historical wargaming and interested in getting started in this era.

Sources:
[1] Nic Fields: Roman Republican Legionary. Osprey (21-22)
[2] Polybius: Histories. 3.107.

The Plan: Part I

[Read my Project Intro post first]

Initially, I intended to attempt a recreation of the Battle of Cannae, because it is one of the most impressive (and mercifully well-documented) heroic victories in military history. This would mean collecting both a Carthaginian army and a Republican Roman army of relatively large sizes—at least 1-200 figures per side.

But, the more I thought about it (and the more I read about the Diadochoi) the more it appealed to me to aim at a four-player campaign (i.e. moving armies around a map and playing tabletop miniatures games to resolve battles when opposing forces meet) featuring Rome, Carthage, and eternal arch-enemies the Seleucid Empire and Ptolemaic Egypt (it helps that my core gaming group consists of three other players!).

Courtesy of Wikipedia

These four armies/empires have the benefit of 1) creating two sets of "historically-appropriate" opponents, 2) if not sharing borders, at least occupying the four quadrants of the Mediterranean (so allowing "What-if" battles naturally to occur as a result of territorial expansion), and 3) all operating in the same historical period (the 4th-2nd centuries BC).

It also occurred to me that this ambitious goal might be in reach, budgetarily speaking, due to the fact that there is a wide (and ever-widening) range of plastics covering this era, and because the multi-national nature of all four factions' armies meant there would be significant overlap in the forces I would need to build.

For instance, Hannibal's 2nd Punic War Carthaginian army relied heavily on Gaulish allies (and the Carthaginians made extensive use of mercenary Gauls in the 1st and 3rd Punic wars beside), so a good number of Gaulish infantry and cavalry would be obligatory; however, the Romans also fought alongside the Gauls on several occasions — including against Hannibal. So any Gaulish units which I purchased for the Carthaginians could also be used as allies for the Romans, if needed.

In addition, after the Eastern Celt rampage through Greece and Macedon, finally ending in a mass-migration to central Anatolia in the 270s BC, "Galatian" mercenaries became extremely popular throughout the armies of the entire eastern Mediterranean world, fighting for Antigonid Macedon, the Epirotes, the Seleucids, the Pontics and Pergamon, and even the Ptolemies, who encouraged thousands of Galatian Celts to settle in military colonies throughout Ptolemaic Egypt.

Galatians floating down the Nile — by Angus McBride (I think)

So, every unit of Gauls which I assemble has the potential to fit into any of these four target armies (and, potentially, future armies from the same era should I ever expand the project). Further, these elements of allied Gaulish forces would form a core which could be expanded into a standalone Gaulish army later on.

The same principle would apply to Iberian, Samnite, Greek, Anatolian, Thracian, and Persian contingents of these four armies, in that each category can be used in at least two armies.

Versatility is, therefore, one of the key advantages of the era and armies that I have chosen, and I decided to design these armies with versatility in mind, particularly because, if I was clever enough about it, I would eventually be able to construct additional armies primarily or entirely out of components procured for the Big Four—for example, Phalangites, Indian Elephants, and Companion Cavalry from the Seleucid army might be combined with Tarantine Cavalry, Samnite Infantry, and Gaulish mercenaries from the Carthaginian army to create an Epirote army.

To an extent, minor aesthetic/tactical changes throughout the 3rd century BC (which is spottily-documented anyway) could be fudged to create armies in nearby eras. If my Seleucid and Ptolemaic Phalanxes are not too explicitly Hellenistic in design, they could be used in an Alexandrian Macedonian army, or an early Successors/Diadochoi-era army, and the eastern auxiliaries of the Seleucids could be combined with (mercenary) Hoplites and used as the nucleus of a Late Achaemenid army to oppose Alexander (or used to beef up Diadochoi armies).

Are these Alexandrian Macedonian Phalangites or Later Successor Phalangites? You don't ask, and Warlord Games won't tell

This planning principle will be kept in mind throughout the project as I build a collection from the ground up, and I have covered it in such detail because I think it is a very useful principle to contemplate for other gamers that may be entering or considering the Historical Wargaming hobby as an alternative to fantasy and scifi wargaming, because it helps make collecting multiple armies more affordable and less time-consuming, and a versatile collection will allow its owner to more easily recreate the big, cinematic battles that got every history-buff hooked in the first place. 

So, with my era selected, and the armies I wish to collect chosen, I now needed more specifics for my plan, as far as which units to compose each army from.

To be continued...