Seleucid persian cavalry question

[summsi]

when using victrix persian cavalry for eastern seleucid cavalry, should I use shields or not?

If yes, what kind of shields?

thanks in advance

[Panzer21]

It depends......

You have not really specified "when" for an empire that lasted from about 301 BC to 64 BC and underwent many changes....

The use of shields by Hellenistic cavalry has a long debate in the pages of Slingshot; even Alexander's Companions have references to shields, but it is generally accepted they were not used with the Xyston (lance).
One theory is that shields were adapted after contact with the West where they were used.

Tarrantine cavalry appear in the Diadochi wars, though whether they were Italians or carried shields is unconfirmed.

Pictorial sources show cavalry with shield late in the Hellenistic period, although even then unshielded lancers appear.

Seleucus inherited the former Persian / Eastern empire, so would have access to Iranian cavalry. Darius had tried to get the Persian cavalry to adopt the lance; how widespread is uncertain. Normally shown with javelins and no shield.

Late in the Seleucid era, small terracota statues have been found showing unarmoured trousered cavalry with a soft cap, javelin and round shield. They have been christened "Civic Militia cavalry" and reconstructions exist on which figures are based. The cap differs from the Persian " tiara" as shown in the Alexander mosaic.

HTH,

Neil

[Easy E]

I would look at it from a gaming perspective since History is a huge ?.  We really do not know and probably never will.  Besides, each trooper kind of did what they wanted so some might have shields, others might not, and others might have tried to bring the kitchen sink.  Standardization was not as widespread as we would like to think!   

From a gamist perspective Heavy cavalry should have shields, while other forms of cavalry should not.  The shields make it obvious for you and your opponent that these guys are the Heavies.  Make sense? 

[Panzer21]

I would look at it from a gaming perspective since History is a huge ?.  We really do not know and probably never will.  Besides, each trooper kind of did what they wanted so some might have shields, others might not, and others might have tried to bring the kitchen sink.  Standardization was not as widespread as we would like to think!   

From a gamist perspective Heavy cavalry should have shields, while other forms of cavalry should not.  The shields make it obvious for you and your opponent that these guys are the Heavies.  Make sense?

Unless your rules give an advantage of shields over unshielded........

The problem with saying "nobody know - do what you like!" means some people will say " OK I'll give them horse armour" or machineguns....
If you and your opponent agree, anything goes; as it's a game you can do as you wish and where's the harm?

I thought the question was really about what evidence exists in the scanty historical sources......
Neil

[summsi]

it is true that I wanted to know what the historical sources say.

As the time frame should be between 300 and 250 bc, I think that I will leave the shields away.

I am using the armoured persian cavalry, so it is clear that they are heavy cavalry. (If armour alone makes them to heavy cavalry)

Thanks to your replies

[Easy E]

I wasn't saying you were wrong in your interpretation of the materials and sources Neil.  I apologize if that was implied.   

Just trying to give a different perspective on the question.
       

[Panzer21]

I wasn't saying you were wrong in your interpretation of the materials and sources Neil.  I apologize if that was implied.   

Just trying to give a different perspective on the question.
     

No need to apologise.
The problem is, as you implied, the sources are somewhat sketchy.
All that can be done is to take what little their is and make "best guesses"!
Neil

[Panzer21]

it is true that I wanted to know what the historical sources say.

As the time frame should be between 300 and 250 bc, I think that I will leave the shields away.

I am using the armoured persian cavalry, so it is clear that they are heavy cavalry. (If armour alone makes them to heavy cavalry)

Thanks to your replies

For that time frame, I think you are better leaving the shields off.

There is some evidence that the Seleucid guard cavalry comprised Greek / Macedonian ethnic Companions and Iranian Agema, the latter may have used horse armour.
Neil

[FierceKitty]

Unless your rules give an advantage of shields over unshielded........

The problem with saying "nobody know - do what you like!" means some people will say " OK I'll give them horse armour" or machineguns....
If you and your opponent agree, anything goes; as it's a game you can do as you wish and where's the harm?

I thought the question was really about what evidence exists in the scanty historical sources......
Neil

Careful - you're in danger of talking sense here!

[Panzer21]

Careful - you're in danger of talking sense here!
[/quote

That would be a first then! 
Neil]