|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 21, 2017 14:57:28 GMT
I/6c Early Aramean (2000 BC – 1101 BC) remove II/12 Alexander (359 BC – 319 BC)
Problem related to the previous post.
Action:
Remove II/12 Alexander (359 BC – 319 BC) from I/6c Early Aramean (2000 BC – 1101 BC).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 21, 2017 14:58:30 GMT
II/12 Alexander (359 BC – 319 BC) change I/6c to I/6b Early Arabs (1000 BC – 312 BC)
(As mentioned, army I/6c had already evolved into I/31ab in 1100 BC, and even these were extinguished by 710 BC.
Army I/6b Early Arabs should be the correct mutual enemy of II/12 Alexander.
Alexander’s siege of Gaza in 332 BC and his death in 323 BC is too early for armies II/22 or II/23, which both start in 312 BC.)
Agree.
Action:
Change I/6c to I/6b Early Arabs (1000 BC – 312 BC) on list of enemies for II/12 Alexander (359 BC – 319 BC).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 21, 2017 15:00:41 GMT
I/6c Early Aramean (2000 BC – 1101 BC) remove II/16a Antigonos (320 BC – 301 BC)
(As above, army I/6c was long gone by 320 BC, and II/16a doesn’t mention them.
The II/22f Any Arabo-Aramean Before 126 BC are already mutual enemies of II/16a Antigonos.)
The older version listed I/6c (Early Bedouin) and II/16a Antigonos as mutual enemies. Renaming I/6c as Early Aramean did leave II/16a remaining on the list, clearly an error. However, as the ‘Early Arabs’ are no longer listed against Antigonos’ list of enemies is this an omission?
Action:
Anyone have information about Arab cessation of conflict with Antigonos from 320 BC to 312 BC?
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 21, 2017 15:02:02 GMT
I/6c Early Aramean (2000 BC – 1101 BC) remove II/19a Seleucid (320 BC – 280 BC)
Correct as these were formerly the Early Bedouin of version 2.2 and are now I/6b in 3.0
Action:
Remove II/19a Seleucid (320 BC – 280 BC) from I/6c Early Aramean (2000 BC – 1101 BC).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 21, 2017 15:03:21 GMT
II/19a Seleucid (320 BC – 280 BC) remove I/6c Early Aramaeans (2000 BC – 1101 BC)
(Again, army I/6c was long gone by 320 BC, and II/19a Seleucid already has plenty of Arabs to fight with II/22f Any Arabo-Aramean and II/23a Nomadic Arabs.)
Actually, this should be changed to I/6b Early Arabs (1000 BC – 312 BC) as the older version Early Bedouin were listed as I/6c.
Action:
Change I/6c to I/6b on the enemies list of II/19a Seleucid (320 BC – 280 BC).
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Mar 21, 2017 17:48:09 GMT
The I/36 Italian Hill Tribes problem
This, like the 1/6 Early Bedouins and the I/14 Early Northern Barbarians, is another rag-bag collection of different peoples, with lots of date and historical opponent errors.
This one is a bit of a monster I’m afraid….
I/36a title: change to “Samnites (before 355 BC), Umbrians (before 650 BC), (delete Hernici) Ligurians (until 124 BC)
The Ligurians can only be allies and enemies of the Etruscans, the Gauls, and the Romans.”
(Lumping all these together with no dates is very confusing, and leads to date overlaps with other later listings.
For example, the Samnites starting in 355 BC have their own list in II/13, the Umbrians starting in 650 BC their own list in I/55e, and the Ligurians were not fully subdued till 124 BC.
The Hernici would be better placed in I/36d as they were often allies of the later II/13 Samnites.)
I/36d Other Hill Tribes: add “near Latium such as the Sabines, Aequi, Hernici , Volsci, Aurunci, Sidicini (until 290 BC)”
(The generic title of “Other Italian Hill Tribes” is misleading and led a friend of mine into thinking that it meant the entire length of the Apennine mountain chain of Italy...including the southern Alps!
All the peoples mentioned above were assimilated into the Roman Republic either before or by 290 BC.)
Now that we know who and when we are talking about, we can check for the correct mutual enemies and dates:-
I/36a Samnites, Umbrians, Hernici, Ligurians (1000 BC -124 BC) remove II/13 Samnite Army (355 BC – 272 BC)
II/13 Samnite Army (355 BC – 272 BC) remove I/36a Samnites, Umbrians, Hernici, Ligurians (1000 BC – 124 BC)
(The Samnites of I/36a evolved into II/13 when they formed the Samnite League in 355 BC, the Umbrians of I/36a have their own list starting in 650 BC, and the Ligurians of I/36a are too far north on the other side of Etruria, Latium, and Cisalpine Gaul. The Hernici were often allies of the Samnites during this period, as were the Volsci, and this is why the Hernici would be better placed in I/36d as the II/13 Samnites already have I/36d listed as allies.)
I/36b Sardinian Army (700 BC – 124 BC) add I/36b Sardinian Army (700 BC – 124 BC)
(Sardinia was inhabited by several independent tribes...and who were these tribes fighting before the Phoenicians, Carthaginians and Romans turned up? Why, it was with each other of course.
Indeed, as a sign of their warlike nature DBMM says that the Sherden Sea Peoples probably came from Sardinia.)
I/36b Sardinian Army (700 BC – 124 BC) remove I/35a Phoenician Army (1000 BC – 901 BC)
I/35a Phoenician Army (1000 BC – 901 BC) remove I/36b Sardinian Army (700 BC – 124 BC)
(Although I/35a and I/36b are listed as mutual enemies, the dates don’t match.
The many ancient remains of Phoenician settlement around Nora in Sardinia date from the 7th century BC)
I/36c Sicel Army (480 BC – 380 BC) remove I/61b Early Carthaginian Army (340 BC – 275 BC)
I/36c Sicel Army (480 BC – 380 BC) change Allies from I/61b to I/61a Early Carthaginian Army (550 BC – 341 BC)
I/61b Early Carthaginian Army (340 BC – 275 BC) remove I/36c Sicel Army (480 BC – 380 BC)
I/61b Early Carthaginian Army (340 BC – 275 BC) remove as Allies the I/36c Sicel Army (480 BC – 380 BC)
(Although I/36c and I/61b are listed as mutual enemies and allies, the dates don’t match.
And as the I/61a Carthaginians can have I/36c Sicels as allies, I assume that the reverse is also true.
After all, they were listed as mutual allies in the wrong dated I/61b period.)
I/57a Etruscan League Army (600 BC – 400 BC) change Ally I/36 to I/36d Other Italian Hill Tribes (1000 BC – 290 BC)
I/57b Etruscan League Army (399 BC – 280 BC) change Ally I/36 to I/36a Samnites/Umbrians, etc (1000 BC – 356 BC)
I/57b Etruscan League Army (399 BC – 280 BC) add Ally I/36d Other Italian Hill Tribes (1000 BC – 290 BC)
I/57b Etruscan League Army (399 BC – 280 BC) change Ally I/55c to I/55d Latin Army (399 BC – 338 BC)
(In the first case I/36 is too vague, and at this early period it should be the allies closest to Rome.
In the second and third cases I/36 is also too vague, and it should be allies that took part in the Samnite Wars.
In the forth case, the dates don’t match.)
I/36a Samnites, Umbrians, Hernici, Ligurians (1000 BC -124 BC) remove I/55b Roman Army (650 BC – 578 BC)
I/36a Samnites, Umbrians, Hernici, Ligurians (1000 BC -124 BC) remove I/55c Latin Army (650 BC – 400 BC)
I/36a Samnites, Umbrians, Hernici, Ligurians (1000 BC -124 BC) change Ally I/55c to I/55d Latin Army (399 BC – 338 BC)
I/55b Roman Army (650 BC – 578 BC) remove I/36a Samnites, Umbrians, Hernici, Ligurians (1000 BC -124 BC)
I/55c Latin Army (650 BC – 400 BC) remove I/36a Samnites, Umbrians, Hernici, Ligurians (1000 BC -124 BC)
I/55c Latin Army (650 BC – 400 BC) change Ally I/36a to I/36d Other Italian Hill Tribes (1000 BC -290 BC)
(Although all these armies are mutual enemies, and the dates are compatible, having the very early Romans and Latins fighting the Samnites before the 1st Samnite War in 343 BC is obviously wrong. Also, the Umbrians and Ligurians are too far away in this period to be enemies or allies of either Rome or the Latins.)
I/36a Samnites, Umbrians, Hernici, Ligurians (1000 BC -124 BC) remove I/59 Tullian Romans (578 BC – 400 BC)
I/59 Tullian Romans (578 BC – 400 BC) remove I/36a Samnites, Umbrians, Hernici, Ligurians (1000 BC -124 BC)
I/59 Tullian Romans (578 BC – 400 BC) change Ally I/36 to I/36d Other Italian Hill Tribes (1000 BC -290 BC)
(The I/36a Samnites/Umbrians/Ligurians are still too far away and not yet neighbours of Rome in this period.
And the Romans shouldn’t have I/36b Sardinians or Sicilian I/36c Sicels as allies at this early date...or at any date.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the above is EVERY SINGLE ONE of the I/36 Italian Hill Tribes errors. There are, thankfully, no more to come.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Mar 23, 2017 15:11:08 GMT
(Still no broadband. BT say it will be restored on the 30th of March! So posting from work.)
More Book I errors, and page 5 has been updated:-
I/13a Hsia and Shang Chinese (2000 BC – 1300 BC) change Ally from I/14a to I/14d Chinese Border Tribes
(Oops! I missed this one when I went through the I/14 Early Northern Barbarians before.)
I/8c Dilmum, Saba, Ma’in, or Qataban (1300 BC – 312 BC) change Ally from I/8a to I/8c Dilumun, etc (1300 BC – 312 BC)
(Army I/8c lists I/8a as an ally, but I/8a no longer exists as it had already evolved into I/8c by 1300 BC.
The DBMM list informs us that Akkadian texts say large armies were coalitions of dozens of small kingdoms.
Army I/8b is called ‘Makkan’, which is not a kingdom or tribe but merely the ancient name for the Arabian Peninsula.
As I/8a and I/8c armies are very similar, keeping I/8a as an ally or swapping to I/8c means little change to fighting style.)
I/19 Mitanni Army (1595 BC – 1274 BC) leave Ally as I/6a Early Bedouin Army (3000 BC – 1001 BC)
(This is an odd one...I/19 has I/6b as an enemy but I/6a as an ally. Maybe the ally should be I/6b as well, or should the list of enemies also include I/6a? Or perhaps it’s just better to leave it as it is.
Note that army I/20b Other Canaanites, of the same region and time period, have both I/6a and I/6b as enemies.
I thought I’d bring it to people’s attention in case anyone has more information.)
I/21b Later Babylonian Army (889 BC – 747 BC) change I/6c to I/31b Later Aramaean Army (900 BC – 710 BC)
I/21b Later Babylonian Army (889 BC – 747 BC) change Ally I/6c to I/31b Later Aramaean Army (900 BC – 710 BC)
I/31b Later Aramaean Army (900 BC – 710 BC) add I/21b Later Babylonian Army (889 BC – 747 BC)
(Army I/6c had already evolved into I/31b by 900 BC, therefore I/21b and I/31b should be mutual enemies instead.)
I/34c Later Hebrew Army (799 BC – 586 BC) remove Ally I/46a Early Kushite Army (745 BC – 728 BC)
(Army I/34c lists I/46a as an ally, and the dates do match, but how on earth did the Early Kushites of Nubia march all the way across Egypt to appear on the same battlefield alongside Hebrews? Later yes, when the Kushites had already taken over Egypt...but that army of I/46b is already listed as an ally of I/34c.
I think the I/34c Hebrews having the I/46a Early Kushites as allies is an error when they already have I/46b as an ally.)
I/34c Later Hebrew Army (799 BC – 586 BC) change Ally I/35 to I/35b Cypriot/Phoenician Army (900 BC – 666 BC)
(Army I/34c lists army I/35 as an ally...but which I/35 army? I/35a and I/35d we can discount as being the wrong dates.
That leaves either I/35b or I/35c, or maybe both of them. I think it would have been I/35b, but I’m not 100% sure.)
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 24, 2017 8:33:14 GMT
'The I/14 Early Northern Barbarian Problem
You’ll be please to note that the European Bronze Age armies of I/14a, I/14b, and I/14c are all ok.
However, the Chao, Ch’in, Ch’iang and other Chinese armies of I/14d and II/4 are in a bit of a mess.'
I/13b Shang Chinese (1299 BC – 1017 BC) change Ally from I/14a to I/14d Chinese Border Tribes
Agree, first the dates do not correspond and secondly the enemy should originate from a correct geographical location.
Action:
Change Ally I/14a European Bronze Age to I/14d Chinese Border Tribes for I/13b Shang Chinese (1299 BC – 1017 BC).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 24, 2017 8:33:55 GMT
I/32a Western Chou (1100 BC – 701 BC) change Ally from I/14a to I/14d Chinese Border Tribes
Agree, first the dates do not correspond and secondly the enemy should originate from a correct geographical location.
Action:
Change Ally I/14a European Bronze Age to I/14d Chinese Border Tribes for I/32a Western Chou (1100 BC – 701 BC).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 24, 2017 8:35:03 GMT
I/32c Other Chinese (700 BC – 480 BC) change Ally from I/14a to I/14d Chinese Border Tribes
(Army I/14a is the early European Bronze Age... last time I checked they were at the other end of the continent!)
Agree, same issue as previous post.
Action:
Change Ally I/14a European Bronze Age to I/14d Chinese Border Tribes for I/32c Other Chinese (700 BC – 480 BC).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 24, 2017 8:36:42 GMT
I/14d Chinese Border Tribes (2000 BC – 401 BC) change II/4a to II/4b Yueh Chinese Army (480 BC – 333 BC)
See link:
Public Domain, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=353842
Chinese Border Tribes are located in North China and Yueh province is in the south. I/14d is already an enemy of II/4d Other Chinese Armies 480 BC – 356 BC.
Action:
This may be a case of removing both II/4a and II/4e (non-corresponding dates) and replace with II/4d.
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 24, 2017 8:37:31 GMT
II/4b Yueh Chinese Army (480 BC – 333 BC) add I/14d Chinese Border Tribes (2000 BC – 401 BC)
(Armies I/14d and II/4a are listed as mutual enemies, even though the dates are wrong.
I think that I/14d and II/4b should be mutual enemies instead, as their dates do match.
See below for the II/4a Ch’in, who should be the mutual enemies of the I/14e Jung.)
Action:
Would not add I/14d for the same reason as previous post.
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 24, 2017 8:38:18 GMT
I/14d Chinese Border Tribes (2000 BC – 401 BC) change II/4e to II/4d Other Chinese Armies (480 BC – 356 BC)
(Army I/14d lists II/4e as an enemy, but II/4e doesn’t mention I/14d, and the dates don’t match.
However, army II/4d does list I/14d as an enemy, and the dates do match, but I/14d doesn’t mention II/4d)
Agree
Action:
Change II/4e to II/4d Other Chinese Armies (480 BC – 356 BC) for I/14d Chinese Border Tribes (2000 BC – 401 BC).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 24, 2017 8:39:55 GMT
I/14e Jung or Ch’iang Army (400 BC – 315 BC) change II/4c to II/4a Ch’in Chinese Army (355 BC -221 BC)
This would make better sense as the dates would correspond and they both also share the Kimmerian or Scythian Army as mutual enemies.
Action:
Change II4c to II/4a for I/14e Jung or Ch’iang Army (400 BC – 315 BC).
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Mar 24, 2017 8:40:48 GMT
II/4a Ch’in Chinese Army (355 BC – 221 BC) change I/14d to I/14e Jung or Ch’iang Army (400 BC – 315 BC)
Agree.
Action:
Change I/14d to I/14e Jung or Ch’iang Army (400 BC – 315 BC) for II/4a Ch’in Chinese Army (355 BC – 221 BC).
|
|
