Historical Enemies Forum - Please read before posting

[lionheartrjc]

This section has been created for posts about the historical enemies of ancient armies to support the forthcoming MeG Historical Enemies list which will be posted on the MeG website shortly.

The lists may require two types of correction:
1. Where we have omitted a historical enemy of an army.  Please provide supporting evidence as to why you believe it is an omission.
2. Where we have included an army that was not a historical enemy of an army.  This is clearly more tricky to determine unless there is an obvious issue such as geographical inconsistency.

Many thanks.

Richard Jeffrey-Cook

[AntiokosIII]

Is the criterion 'did fight', or 'could have fought', or 'nearly fought but didn't have carfare to get to the battle' or what?

[lionheartrjc]

The criterion is that the two armies fought, not that they could have fought.  Where the sources are lacking, it is that on the balance of probabilities the armies fought.

Richard

[GDP]

I have been using the DBMM army list for historical enemies as each list includes there enemies, DBA also includes the same list of enemies.
Could be helpful?

[nikgaukroger]

They got used - although I found the DBMM ones to contain some hilarious errors.

[AntiokosIII]

The criterion is that the two armies fought, not that they could have fought.  Where the sources are lacking, it is that on the balance of probabilities the armies fought.

Richard

Thanks, Richard. Makes it simpler.

[mad lemmey]

Nik,
Share the errors! 

[nikgaukroger]

I think the Korean that had Bedouin enemy was my favourite.