SoA Forums

A few years ago, I wrote two articles that were published in Slingshot. The first covered the Lamian War, and the second focused on Peithon's expedition to Bactria. Today, I've completed the third installment, which explores Kyrene and Egypt during the years 324–321 BCE. Unlike my previous work, this piece does not include any wargaming material; it is purely historical, with an analysis of the Kyrenean army.

Why might this interest you?
One key reason is my use of sources that are rarely referenced in English-language publications. For this article, I translated and drew heavily from several French and Italian works, such as Laronde and Lazzarini, making them the foundation for my examination of the Kyrenean army.

If you're curious, you can find the article here:

https://www.academia.edu/125990457/Floderus_Thibron_Ptolemaios_and_the_battle_for_Kyrene

Admittedly, I'm feeling a bit drained (and hang-over from last night's concert) from the writing process, so I asked ChatGPT to generate a summary. Here's the TL;DR version from our potential future robot overlords:

This paper explores the events in the southwestern corner of the Makedonian Empire, focusing on Libya and Egypt, following Alexander the Great's death.
Harpalos, a childhood friend of Alexander the Great, served as the treasurer of the Makedonian Empire. Unlike his warrior peers, Harpalos indulged in an extravagant lifestyle, lavishly spending on women and other luxuries. When Alexander departed for the East, Harpalos was entrusted with the treasury in Babylonia. His excessive spending did not go unnoticed, leading him to flee to Kilikia. He later moved to Athens with 5,000 talents of silver, 30 ships, and 6,000 mercenaries. Afterward he had to flee again, this time to Crete, where he was ultimately murdered by Thibron, the commander of his mercenaries.
Following Harpalos' death, Thibron was left with an army but no employer or funds. He allied with exiles from Kyrene and Barke, promising to help them reclaim power in their cities. However, Thibron harbored his own ambitions to conquer these wealthy regions and crown himself king. He recruited additional soldiers in Crete and set sail for North Africa.
Greek colonization of Libya commenced in the 7th century with the establishment of Kyrene. Subsequent cities such as Barke, Euesperides, and Teucheira were founded. Initially independent, these cities were incorporated into the Persian Empire by Kambyses II in 525 BCE. Kyrene later transitioned from a democracy to an oligarchy, expanding its influence over neighboring tribes and cities.
The Kyrenean army used three titles for their officers: Strategos (generals), Lochagos (file commanders), and Triakatiarchos (leaders of the Triakatioi). The army included various types of soldiers such as Tethrippos (chariots), Paraibatai (hoplites who rode chariots), Peltastoi (light infantry), Pezoi (infantry), Monippos (cavalry), and Akontistai (spear throwers). The exact roles of some units are unclear, but the army was relatively small, with around 100 chariots, 600 cavalry, and 1,000 infantry.
Thibron's invasion of Kyrene likely caught the city by surprise, but Kyrene responded swiftly. Following initial battles, Thibron captured Kyrene's port Apollonia and took hostages. He negotiated a peace treaty with Kyrene, which required a payment of 500 talents and half of their war chariots. However, Kyrene soon broke the treaty, leading to further conflicts. Thibron's fleet encountered difficulties, including ambushes and storms, but he managed to regroup in Euesperides.
After Alexander's death, Ptolemaios became the governor of Egypt. He secured control over Egypt's treasury and mercenaries and supported the exiled oligarchs from Kyrene. Ptolemaios sent an army led by Ophellas to assist them, which eventually led to Thibron's defeat.

If you read it and have any comments or corrections, please don't hesitate to let me know.

"There are 17 named Triakatiarchos file leaders,"
But earlier you suggest that:
"Lochagos were file commanders,"

Which is it? I think you mean both are file-commanders of different sorts, but this is not made entirely clear. Lochagos in any case would more likely be a company commander in classical hoplite armies - lochoi of 50 or 100 men in Xenophon's Anabasis, for instance, or larger in Xen's version of the Spartan army; it only seems to be with the Macedonians that lochos=file comes into use.

"the name of the unit, Triakatioi, suggests that the group consisted of around 300 men"
Are you sure? I'd have thought a connection with 30 more likely than 300 - triakonter, triakas "thirtieth day" in Hesiod, etc.

Hi, thank you!
Yes, you're correct—both are meant to be file commanders. I'll make that clearer.
The idea that Triakatioi is supposed to mean 300 isn't mine. I might have misunderstood what I read, but if I recall correctly, Lorande and at least one Italian article mention this idea.

Very interesting post. A future project I have planned is to is set up the battle of White Tunis a decade after this. Further West I know but Agathaocles sucks in the Kyrenians betraying their leader who by then is a chap called Ophellas. I did not know much about this part of the Greek world so this helps fill some background.

That episode is quite strange. Ophellas, the same figure mentioned at the end of this paper, was a seasoned veteran of numerous wars (including Alexander's campaign to India) and likely skilled in navigating political intrigues. Yet, despite his extensive experience, his campaign appears to have been poorly planned, and upon his eventual arrival, he was completely outmaneuvered by Agathocles.

The thorny question about the Kyrenean army, I suppose, is whether they used two types of wheeled vehicle with distinct tactical roles, or just one. Xenophon in the Kyropaedia lists them as one of the nations who skirmish with their chariots in the old Trojan manner. Aeneas the Tactician describes them using two- and four-horse wagons to transport hoplites.

QuoteThe method of managing a chariot employed of old at Troy and that in vogue among the Cyrenaeans even unto this day he abolished; for in previous times people in Media and in Syria and in Arabia, and all the people in Asia used the chariot just as the Cyrenaeans now do. But it seemed to him that inasmuch as the best men were mounted on the chariots, that part which might have been the chief strength of the army acted only the part of skirmishers and did not contribute anything of importance to the victory.

QuoteOf the people of Cyrene and Barca and certain other cities the story runs that they made their rescue expeditions over long wagon-roads in four- and in two horse vehicles (ἐπὶ συνωρίδων καὶ ζευγῶν - there's a thread in the forum somewhere where we discuss the usage of συνωρίς); and when they had reached the appointed place, and the vehicles had been arranged in order, the heavy-armed troops (οἱ ὁπλῖται, obviously) alighted, and, forming at once in ranks, attacked the enemy with unimpaired strength.

Is this two types of vehicle, or one?

Interesting read thank you, I was only having a 'discussion' about this the other day and how classing Ktrene Chariots as Kn's if pure wargaming fantasy.

Quote from: skb777 on December 03, 2024, 01:09:49 PMInteresting read thank you, I was only having a 'discussion' about this the other day and how classing Ktrene Chariots as Kn's if pure wargaming fantasy.

It seems North Africa held onto chariots a little longer than further east. At White Tunis the Carthaginians supposedly used 4 horse chariots that I assume would have looked much like those of Persia from earlier. How to use within the rules I want to use is a question to which, as yet, I have no answer. It does not seem that Agathocles made much use of any he may have had from the Cyrenians.

Quote from: Duncan Head on December 01, 2024, 08:54:58 PM"the name of the unit, Triakatioi, suggests that the group consisted of around 300 men"
Are you sure? I'd have thought a connection with 30 more likely than 300 - triakonter, triakas "thirtieth day" in Hesiod, etc.

Clement, in Quelques aspects de l'éducation cavalière (available to download as a PDF), states (in my translation):
"However, the Cyrenean ephebic system follows an older Dorian agogé (training system), retaining several legacies, particularly the name of the ephebes: the triakátioi, meaning 'the Three Hundred.'"
Cordiano, in Ginnasiarchia ed evergetismo a Cirene tra la fine dell'epoca tolemaica e l'età di Sinesio, supports the same view. I have not seen anyone question this interpretation.

Quote from: Duncan Head on December 01, 2024, 08:54:58 PMLochagos in any case would more likely be a company commander in classical hoplite armies - lochoi of 50 or 100 men in Xenophon's Anabasis, for instance, or larger in Xen's version of the Spartan army; it only seems to be with the Macedonians that lochos=file comes into use.

Yes, the concept of a lochos is far from straightforward. We find references ranging from Aelian's 8 men to Thucydides' 200. Xenophon also mentions 25 in one instance, doesn't he? Both Laronde (Cyrène et la Libye hellénistique) and Stucchi (Architettura cirenaica) base their estimates on 16 men, though without providing a strong justification. Their reasoning likely stems, at least in part, from the fact that 16 produces figures reminiscent of Ophellas' army in 308.

However, there's no real evidence to suggest that the number of chariots and cavalry in 340 should match those of Ophellas' army in 308. Another monument lists a priest, nine generals, five tethrippos lochagos, and 129 soldiers. While the monument is damaged—potentially missing additional names or titles—if the preserved portion is relatively intact, it points instead to 24 or 32 men per lochos rather than 16.

Additionally, the ratio of cavalry to infantry is worth examining. Currently, it stands at 41%, which feels a bit high. A city the size of Cyrene should have fielded between 5,000 and 10,000 soldiers. Some have suggested that Cyrene might have been larger than Athens, though I remain skeptical. Given Cyrene's reputation for its horses, it's reasonable to assume a relatively high proportion of cavalry, perhaps around 20%.

So why do I still use 16? I believe it's a better estimate than 24 or 32, as those figures are even harder to justify, at least in my opinion. But as much smarter people than me says: "We don't really know".

Quote from: skb777 on December 03, 2024, 01:09:49 PMInteresting read thank you, I was only having a 'discussion' about this the other day and how classing Ktrene Chariots as Kn's if pure wargaming fantasy.

This remark surprised me, as they're Cv in the DBMM army list (and were already in the 1993 DBM version), but I see they're Knights in the DBA version. The difference is apparently because DBA is more rigid about classing chariots by the number of horses, in turn because Phil felt that more appropriate for the simple set.

(The really weird thing is that Libyan chariots are explicitly excepted and classed as Cv despite having four horses - but this doesn't carry over to the Kyreneans despite these having adopted their vehicles from the Libyans!)

Of course, one might think that Cv too is too "heavy" a classification for troops that "acted only the part of skirmishers". Actually, this ties into an old of idea of mine that all DBX chariots should be lightened one class, so that those currently Cv (often described as "skirmishing chariots" or similar in lists) become LH and those currently classed as Kn become Cv. (Scythed chariots would remain as they are.)

Quote from: Duncan Head on December 03, 2024, 11:27:09 AMThe thorny question about the Kyrenean army, I suppose, is whether they used two types of wheeled vehicle with distinct tactical roles, or just one. Xenophon in the Kyropaedia lists them as one of the nations who skirmish with their chariots in the old Trojan manner. Aeneas the Tactician describes them using two- and four-horse wagons to transport hoplites.

QuoteThe method of managing a chariot employed of old at Troy and that in vogue among the Cyrenaeans even unto this day he abolished; for in previous times people in Media and in Syria and in Arabia, and all the people in Asia used the chariot just as the Cyrenaeans now do. But it seemed to him that inasmuch as the best men were mounted on the chariots, that part which might have been the chief strength of the army acted only the part of skirmishers and did not contribute anything of importance to the victory.

QuoteOf the people of Cyrene and Barca and certain other cities the story runs that they made their rescue expeditions over long wagon-roads in four- and in two horse vehicles (ἐπὶ συνωρίδων καὶ ζευγῶν - there's a thread in the forum somewhere where we discuss the usage of συνωρίς); and when they had reached the appointed place, and the vehicles had been arranged in order, the heavy-armed troops (οἱ ὁπλῖται, obviously) alighted, and, forming at once in ranks, attacked the enemy with unimpaired strength.

Is this two types of vehicle, or one?

I tried to look into this matter of chariots, whether they had one or two types. I also tried to figure out what the expression actually means, but it didn't make things clearer. So far, I've only found evidence for four-horse teams and cavalry, not two-horse teams. That said, two-horse teams might exist, but I doubt it.

Additionally, I'm not sure if drawing parallels with Homeric chariots is particularly fruitful. There are many years separating them, and I'm more inclined to believe that Cyrene's chariots were inspired by the Libyans and are therefore more closely related to those of the Carthaginians. Moreover, we shouldn't forget that it's the charioteer, not the warrior, who holds the more prestigious position. I don't think the most prestigious individuals were simply acting as taxi drivers—they would also want to prove their courage and strength.

Quote from: BjörnF on December 03, 2024, 05:19:20 PMClement, in Quelques aspects de l'éducation cavalière (available to download as a PDF), states (in my translation):
"However, the Cyrenean ephebic system follows an older Dorian agogé (training system), retaining several legacies, particularly the name of the ephebes: the triakátioi, meaning 'the Three Hundred.'"

OK - yes, I've found Clément, now, and also a couple of sources that specifically point out τριακάτιοι as a Doric dialect equivalent of τριακόσιοι, so I withdraw that point.

Quote from: Andreas Johansson on December 03, 2024, 05:56:50 PM

Quote from: skb777 on December 03, 2024, 01:09:49 PMInteresting read thank you, I was only having a 'discussion' about this the other day and how classing Ktrene Chariots as Kn's if pure wargaming fantasy.

This remark surprised me, as they're Cv in the DBMM army list (and were already in the 1993 DBM version), but I see they're Knights in the DBA version. The difference is apparently because DBA is more rigid about classing chariots by the number of horses, in turn because Phil felt that more appropriate for the simple set.

(The really weird thing is that Libyan chariots are explicitly excepted and classed as Cv despite having four horses - but this doesn't carry over to the Kyreneans despite these having adopted their vehicles from the Libyans!)

Of course, one might think that Cv too is too "heavy" a classification for troops that "acted only the part of skirmishers". Actually, this ties into an old of idea of mine that all DBX chariots should be lightened one class, so that those currently Cv (often described as "skirmishing chariots" or similar in lists) become LH and those currently classed as Kn become Cv. (Scythed chariots would remain as they are.)

Apologies I should have mentioned I was referring to DBA. It unfortunately makes this a very powerful opponent given that they can have 4 Kn's and poor old Alexander only get 1. How should they be used? We do have eyewitness accounts from Caesar - too much is probably made of their effectiveness in wargames as they were not much use other than ferrying HI about or as a shooting platform. Though Caesar does say in Book IV of his Gallic Wars that 'Celtic charioteers "combine the mobility of cavalry with the staying power of infantry.' A big horse charging you is quite an intimidating thing to face though no horse is going to charge into a solid wall of spears, but they are very good at chasing down disordered, fleeing or panicked troops - much like Cv. There was a reason they fell out of favour, most likely because they weren't a very good or certainly a waste of horse and resources.

I have now updated the paper by completely rewriting the chapter on the Kyrenean army. I have abandoned the idea of a lochos being composed of 16 men and instead propose unit sizes of 32, 48, or 56. :-)
https://www.academia.edu/125990457/Floderus_Thibron_Ptolemaios_and_the_battle_for_Kyrene

So, am I going to get to read this in Slingshot in future? Just asking!