Talk:Sacred Band of Carthage

message: I corrected the article. I don't want to start an editing war, but the previous material mostly read like something taken out of Rome: Total War. Sources are referneced in the article for the information given. 
The Sacred Band may have worn white - but if so, many other Carthaginian mercenaries probably did so as well (the Greeks, seeing a mixed phalanx of Carthaginians and Libyans at the Battle of the Krimisus was unable to distinguish between them). There is nothing particularly special about it. The "white", as it is, may be due to the use of linen armor.
There is no evidence to suggest that the Sacred Band existed in any shape, type or form after 310 BC. There is no evidence that I know off, beyond the name, that suggests the Sacred Band had any religious significance or dedication to any pantheon. Finally, the only reason to consider them elite seems to be that they were the only citizen infantry able to fight as a phalanx (as noted by Duncan Head, other Carthaginian citizen troops seem to fought lightly armed). Their actual battle performance was fairly poor, and they are generally referenced at being present in battles where they are wiped out.
Michael A. (talk) 11:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changed article 

message: did the band wear white because they were considered "already dead"? isn't that kinda like the japanese samurai then?
Or the Japanese samurai are kinda like them, course Carthage is some 2000 years older than samurai... Highlandlord 07:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  why white? 

message: Can Carthago really be called a republic? I thought it was ruled by aristocratic families? 89.204.152.14 11:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Republic? 

message: We need more sources and more historical input like where they were based were they fought the dates and locations of certain battles 65.5.157.195 22:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical Input

message: It says they were defeated in the Second Punic War but right underneath it, it says they disappeared during the First Punic War.
: This was a bad edit by me: I didn´t correct the former version. At the time of the Second Punic War there have been no Sacred Band anymore. Mausch 23:34, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The expression "were disappeared" sounds rather sinister. Unless they were murdered by mafiosi, it should change to something like "were disbanded" or even plain "disappeared". Orcoteuthis 13:47, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The "were" just was a relict from a bad abbreviation of the text. Grammar error. It´s already corrected Mausch 07:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What is this supposed to mean? How did they "disappear during the war"? Were they disbanded or what? Why? And what are the ancient sources for all this anyway? BTW, I just read Polybius' entire description of the First Punic War, and I don't recall a single mention of these bands, let alone their "disappearance".--91.148.159.4 17:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it´s just a bad translation from German. I intended to say what you described here: They simply have not been mentioned in any text any more and their last account has referred to a time during or after the First Punic War. I myself also have not read any direct account of the Sacred Band in and after the First Punic War, but have repeatedly heared by sources who should know, that there are textes which mention the Band during that time. I will ask these people for details. Meanwhile, I suggest to keep the information like that. How and why they disappeared, we probably never will know. I think the most important point is that they used to be an elite unit in the early times, but did not exist during Hannibal´s famous war. Mausch 07:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  disappearance of the sacred band 

message: Just wanna mention that I too think they wore white (color of death) because they wanted to represent death itself. But how can they be (i quote) "operating as heavy infantry", but still (i quote again) "rely heavily on mobility and maneuverability"?.
Heavy infantry simply does not rely heavily on mobility and maneuverability. Black Serpent.
: I agree with that and had the same thought when I first read these lines. From all sources I have outside from Wikipedia, the Sacred Band is referred to as a heavy, hoplite-style unit, so I delete the "mobility" part now. Actually, maybe this was intermixed with later Carthaginian citizen units, which fought in both styles, as hoplites as well as in looser formation. Mausch 07:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Heavy but Mobile?

message: 'Trained from an early age to be tough phalanx spearmen, these men were from wealthy Carthaginian families, and as such had extremely good equipment. They were trained from birth to be great warriors and they were able to afford high quality armor and weapons.'  Does anyone else think that these two sentences mean the same thing?125.237.102.165 (talk) 13:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: redundancy?