Historical Opponents?

(Still no broadband, so I'm posting this from a Wetherspoons pub while her indoors...er...the love of my life  is cooking Sunday dinner.)

Mar 24, 2017 8:42:58 GMT timurilank said:

I/32b Wu or Yueh Chinese Army (584 BC – 480 BC) add I/14d Chinese Border Tribes (2000 BC – 401 BC)
(Army I/14d lists I/32b as an enemy, but I/32b doesn’t mention I/14d)

Interesting.

I do not find I/32b on the list of enemies for I/14d, but do read I/13b.
I/32b are the Wu and Yueh states are located on the East China Sea and would have fought each other, their neighbouring states or the Vietnamese (I/49a).
Action:
See no need to add.

My mistake. I don't know where I got I/14d verses I/32b from. Too many wicked strength ciders perhaps.

And you're also right about the II/4b Yueh army being too far south to fight the I/14d Chinese Boarder Tribes.

(I've got several World History atlases at home...I just didn't think of looking at them.)

Is the following correct?

I/14d Chinese Border Tribes (2000 BC – 401 BC) change II/4a to II/4d Other Chinese Armies (480 BC – 356 BC)
I/14d Chinese Border Tribes (2000 BC – 401 BC) remove II/4e Other Chinese Armies (355 BC – 202 BC)

Here is the last of the Book 1 errors (page 5 has been updated: fanaticus.boards.net/thread/603/historical-opponents?page=5 )

Replace the I/52i Enemies with Italiot Enemies: I/36a, I/36d, I/52i, I/55a, I/55b, I/55c, I/57a and Italiot Allies: none.
Replace the I/52i Enemies with Siciliot Enemies: I/36c, I/52i, 61a and Siciliot Allies I/36c.
(This is similar to what we did with the II/81c British-Armoricans...split their enemies to make things clearer.
The same people, and the same army, but in different locations with different enemies.)

I/53 Saitic Egyptian Army (664 BC – 335 BC) add I/7d Early Libyan Army (475 BC – 70 AD)
I/7d Early Libyan Army (475 BC – 70 AD) add I/53 Saitic Egyptian Army (664 BC – 335 BC)
(Why would the Early Libyans, who are mutual enemies of the I/2 Early Egyptians, the I/22 New-Kingdom Egyptians, the I/46b Kushite Egyptians, the I/53 Saitic Egyptians up till 476 BC, and a bit later the II/20 Ptolemaic Egyptians, suddenly decide not to fight the I/53 Saitic Egyptians during the period of 475 – 335 BC?
Could it be that the Carthaginians had subdued ALL of the Libyan tribes between 475 – 202 BC?
Even the far eastern Libyan tribes such as the Garamantes that lived in towns and raided Egypt?
Possibly, but it looks like an omission error to me.)

I/55a Etruscan Army (650 BC – 600 BC) remove I/55d Latin Army (399 BC – 338 BC)
I/55d Latin Army (399 BC – 338 BC) remove I/55a Etruscan Army (650 BC – 600 BC)
(Although 1/55a and I/55d are listed as mutual enemies, the dates don’t match.)

I/55b Roman Army (650 BC – 578 BC) remove I/55d Latin Army (399 BC – 338 BC)
I/55d Latin Army (399 BC – 338 BC) remove I/55b Roman Army (650 BC – 578 BC)
(Although 1/55b and I/55d are listed as mutual enemies, the dates don’t match.)

I/55d Latin Army (399 BC – 338 BC) remove as Allies the I/52i Italiot or Siciliot Hoplite Army (668 BC – 449 BC)
(Army I/55d lists I/52i as allies, but the dates don’t match. They are listed as allies under the earlier I/55c army.)

I/56a Early Kyrenean Army (630 BC – 314 BC) add I/7d Early Libyan Army (475 BC – 70 AD)
I/7d Early Libyan Army (475 BC – 70 AD) add I/56a Early Kyrenean Army (630 BC – 314 BC)
(Again the I/7d Early Libyans have gone suspiciously quiet during the 475 – 314 BC period.
Looks like another omission error, similar to the I/7d verses I/53 noted above.
Especially suspicious as the I/56a Early Kyrenes can have I/7d Early Libyans as allies.)

I/56a Early Kyrenean Army (630 BC – 314 BC) remove II/12 Alexandrian Macedonian Army (359 BC – 319 BC)
II/12 Alexandrian Macedonian Army (359 BC – 319 BC) remove I/56a Early Kyrenean Army (630 BC – 314 BC)
(I can find no evidence of Alexander or his father Philip II intervening in Kyrene in this period, at least not militarily.
The first conflict with the Macedonians was in 322 BC when Kyrene was annexed by Ptolemy.)

I/56b Later Kyrenean Army (313 BC – 74 BC) remove as an Ally the I/7c Early Libyan Army (665 BC – 476 BC)
I/56b Later Kyrenean Army (313 BC – 74 BC) remove II/20d Ptolemaic Army (53 BC – 30 BC)
II/20d Ptolemaic Army (53 BC – 30 BC) remove I/56b Later Kyrenean Army (313 BC – 74 BC)
(The I/7d Early Libyans are still suspiciously quiet, and now the I/7c Libyans want to join in!
Anyway, none of the above dates match.)

I/57a Etruscan League (600 BC – 400 BC) remove as Allies the II/11 Gallic Army (400 BC – 50 BC)
(The Gauls had only just started to enter the Po Valley in 400 BC, so it’s too early for the Etruscans to have them as allies. But they are listed as allies in the later I/57b Etruscan League Army of 399 BC – 280 BC)

I/61b Early Carthaginian Army (340 BC – 275 BC) remove as Allies the II/40 Numidians (215 BC -24 AD)
(It is too early for Carthage to have the Numidians as allies, as the dates don’t match.
Note that the II/40 Numidians are already listed as allies for the later II/32b Carthaginians.)

I/63 Paionian Army (512 BC – 284 BC) change end date to – 274 BC?
(This is a tricky one...if army I/63 ends in 284 BC, then they can’t be the enemies or allies of the II/30a Galatians, as their start date is in 280 BC. DBMM says that the Paionian tribes included the Eastern Paionians, the Agrianians, and the Kingdom of Paionia until it was annexed by Lysimachos. Perhaps some of these tribes remained independent for a bit longer to allow them to become enemies and allies for the Galatians in 278 BC – 274 BC)

I/64b Kofun culture Japanese (275 AD – 407 AD) change II/77 to II/77a Shilla Korean Army (300 AD – 670 AD)
I/64c Kofun culture Japanese (408 AD – 500 AD) change II/77 to II/77a Shilla Korean Army (300 AD – 670 AD)
(Army II/77a lists I/64b and I/64c as enemies, but both of these just list the generic II/77 as an enemy.
They should be more specific and list II/77a, as II/77b has a much later date.)

I/64b Kofun culture Japanese (275 AD – 407 AD) add I/64b Kofun culture Japanese (275 AD – 407 AD)
(The DBA 3.0 army of I/64b doesn’t list itself as an internal enemy like the DBMM army list does, but I think it should.
The DBMM listing informs us that Chinese sources say over 100 Japanese states existed in the earlier Yayoi period, and that priestess-queen Himiko ruled some 20 of them in 248 AD from her palace in Yamatai. In the subsequent Kofun period there was a gradual consolidation of most of Japan under an Imperial dynasty based in the Yamato basin.
Note the words ‘gradual’ and ‘most’ of Japan.
The 27 years between Himiko’s death in 248 AD to the start of the Kofun period in 275 AD does not seem long enough to consolidate some 80 autonomous tribal uji clans, each with its own clan gods and domain...but the 160 years from 248 AD to 407 AD is certainly enough time to allow for the consolidation of most of Japan.)

                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------

Right then: every single army, sub-list and ally in Book 1 has been thoroughly cross-checked and scrutinized.

“This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end.
  But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”
                                   ---Winston Churchill

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:-

No action required, just some general information:
The tribes listed above actually border Roman territory as any good map tracing the Latin Wars would illustrate. Map (Wiki Common) upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/Latium_-5th_Century_map-en.svg/500px-Latium_-5th_Century_map-en.svg.png