Unit Browser for RTR: Imperium Surrectum

Short description

The retainers of Galatian nobles fight as heavily armoured swordsmen.

Description

Protected by iron helmets and metal chainmail as well as a reinforced thureos shield, these men can easily survive the first attack of the enemy’s skirmishers before charging onto his line and hacking their way through with their long swords that are made by the famed Celtic ironsmiths.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The term ambacti is first mentioned by Caesar in his ethnography of the Gauls: “And those of them most distinguished by birth and resources, have the greatest number of vassals and dependents (ambacti clientesque) about them” (Caes. Bell. Gall. VI, 15, 2). A similar phenomenon was already observed by Polybios a century earlier, who writes: “They treated comradeship as of the greatest importance, those among them being the most feared and most powerful who were thought to have the largest number of attendants and associates” (Polyb. II, 17, 12). Just like in Rome, each Celtic noble had his own band of retainers. While the common clients came from the poorer masses and would support their patron with physical labour and political support, the strongest and bravest of their followers were rewarded by being equipped with almost the same armour and weapons as their masters. This practice was quite different from the system used by e.g. the Romans, who equipped all soldiers in the same way (though one may speculate the origin of the Triarii lay in a similar system).

Some powerful Gallic princes such as Orgetorix the Helvetian or Dumnorix the Aeduan had hundreds, if not thousands of Ambacti at their disposal, though these would also have included the less well-armed poorer member of their retinue, who often fought as skirmishers. For those Celts who went on the long trek down into Greece and eventually across the Bosporos into Asia, the Ambacti’s ties of loyalty to their noble patron would have become even more important, as it was virtually the only way to keep such forces together. The nobles, however, had to make sure that they could feed and pay their retainers, and thus regularly accepted to fight for Greek or Anatolian communities or kingdoms. The victims of Galatian raids blatantly ignored the fact that their Hellenic or Asiatic cousins had hired them and simply depicted the Galatians as brutal monsters, who did not refrain from killing even women and children in their lust for blood. Pompeius Trogus summarises both views in the following assessment: “The nation of the Gauls, however, was at that time so prolific, that they filled all Asia as with one swarm. The kings of the east then carried on no wars without a mercenary army of Gauls; nor, if they were driven from their thrones, did they seek protection with any other people than the Gauls. Such indeed was the terror of the Gallic name, and the unvaried good fortune of their arms, that princes thought they could neither maintain their power in security, nor recover it if lost, without the assistance of Gallic valour” (Iust. XXV, 9, 2).