05-27-2013, 08:53 PM
All evidence is pointing towards Arrian having considerable military experience, which does not necessarily imply marshaling field armies in large, important battles. I would add to Duncan's comment that being a Bithynian did not mean he was not Greek, for Bithynia had a substantial "ethnic" Greek population as did Cappadocia, Mysia, Paphlagonia and other provinces in Asia Minor, especially in the major towns, like Nicomedia.
I am not a military man but I have served my two years as an officer in the Greek army, in the engineer corpse. I also have done some years of horseback riding when I was younger, not many and unfortunately none in reenactment gear, but enough to be able to understand some of the basics of steering a horse, galloping on rough terrain, through narrow paths, jumping over hindrances, (almost) being thrown off by scared horses etc. I like to think I have no invested interests and as for cavalry fighting in the sources, there are many accounts of such (measuring in the hundreds), which may be used to form a picture. How many of them may be used to support your theory is a hard task you will have to embark on, if you haven't already.
I only have to say that you base too much on what you call "common sense". I will not engage in an argument about who has the most experience with anything, I however know that when you will present/publish your theory about how an early Republican army was arrayed you will be confronted with criticism and questions for which you will need references. Your understanding of the ancient cavalry battle is very different to mine and I would not like to think of myself as lacking common sense. I will not say that your hypotheses are false but I can again state with certainty that they do not comply with general understanding of cavalry battles as stands today or with the sources. I do not think that you disagree with that. So, if you are really personally convinced that you are right, if you really are so sure of your own interpretation of reality, then you need to find a way to support it other than stating the obviousness of your arguments. I ascertain you that they are not as obvious as you think. If you propose that this is how the sources should be interpreted you have to state the sources and your interpretation thereof. If you think that there are no sources to be trusted, for any reason, then you need contemporary support, some works of accepted scholars who will be of the same opinion. If you cannot find support in sources or in the works of other scholars, you will have a very hard time defending your work. Your attack plan of a turma is also something new. As I said, I will not debate "logic", if I do I will have to call you irrational and you me, so we will come to a dead end and probably raise the tones of our voices without any reason. But you need references. You need a Xenophon, a Polybius, an Arrian, one of the emperors, someone to at least hint at something like that. Have you read the Byzantine manuals? Do you think that any such action is described in any of them? I asked you again, you have to base your understanding on something. What is it? Is it your experience as a rider? Some ancient/modern writer? You do realize that what you are proposing is very different to customary understanding and you want to challenge it. That is all right, I have done so many times in the past myself as have many here and others not here. Believe me, I have an open mind, but I need to see better based arguments, even if these come from Napoleonic treatises.
I am not a military man but I have served my two years as an officer in the Greek army, in the engineer corpse. I also have done some years of horseback riding when I was younger, not many and unfortunately none in reenactment gear, but enough to be able to understand some of the basics of steering a horse, galloping on rough terrain, through narrow paths, jumping over hindrances, (almost) being thrown off by scared horses etc. I like to think I have no invested interests and as for cavalry fighting in the sources, there are many accounts of such (measuring in the hundreds), which may be used to form a picture. How many of them may be used to support your theory is a hard task you will have to embark on, if you haven't already.
I only have to say that you base too much on what you call "common sense". I will not engage in an argument about who has the most experience with anything, I however know that when you will present/publish your theory about how an early Republican army was arrayed you will be confronted with criticism and questions for which you will need references. Your understanding of the ancient cavalry battle is very different to mine and I would not like to think of myself as lacking common sense. I will not say that your hypotheses are false but I can again state with certainty that they do not comply with general understanding of cavalry battles as stands today or with the sources. I do not think that you disagree with that. So, if you are really personally convinced that you are right, if you really are so sure of your own interpretation of reality, then you need to find a way to support it other than stating the obviousness of your arguments. I ascertain you that they are not as obvious as you think. If you propose that this is how the sources should be interpreted you have to state the sources and your interpretation thereof. If you think that there are no sources to be trusted, for any reason, then you need contemporary support, some works of accepted scholars who will be of the same opinion. If you cannot find support in sources or in the works of other scholars, you will have a very hard time defending your work. Your attack plan of a turma is also something new. As I said, I will not debate "logic", if I do I will have to call you irrational and you me, so we will come to a dead end and probably raise the tones of our voices without any reason. But you need references. You need a Xenophon, a Polybius, an Arrian, one of the emperors, someone to at least hint at something like that. Have you read the Byzantine manuals? Do you think that any such action is described in any of them? I asked you again, you have to base your understanding on something. What is it? Is it your experience as a rider? Some ancient/modern writer? You do realize that what you are proposing is very different to customary understanding and you want to challenge it. That is all right, I have done so many times in the past myself as have many here and others not here. Believe me, I have an open mind, but I need to see better based arguments, even if these come from Napoleonic treatises.
