"Pokrovka" is surely not Scythian city name

I don't think "scythian" is a Scythian word. I think it's a Greek exonym.

The word is of Eastern Iranian origin. It's thought that it might mean "archer." It comes from the same Indo-European root as the same word for the English "shoot." Someone joked that Scythian Saka Archer means "archer archer archer." Not totally true, but you get the idea.

I had to look this one up, because I agree with you, but didn't have the details.
The Greeks used two words, 'Skoloti' and 'Skuthai', the Persians called them 'Saka' or 'Sakae'

The Greek word is a borrowed word, not an exonym.

Speaking of Persians, both Roman and Indian sources say the Parthians were a Scythian tribe.
 
Where does that idea come from? It seems rather dubious, given that evidence of horse archery stretch across the entire Scytho-Sarmatian range, millenia before the advent of the Cimmerians in historical reference; most probably from before the Cimmerians headed west. AFAIK, archaeological finds have also so far pointed to a trend for the western Scytho-Sarmatians to use a higher proportion of self bows, relative to their eastern counterparts, possibly because of a lower abundance of wildlife with enormous horns, such as the argali.

First, evidence of Chariot Mounted Archery stretches back to at least 1700 BCE in Shang China and 2100 BCE in the area now known as Kazakhstan, but the archeological findings of 'bit wear' in horses mouths in the Botai culture in the Kazakhstan area dating from 3500 BCE are not necessarily consistent with riding rather than driving - especially since the Botai excavations have shown no skeletal evidence of horse domestication but a lot of evidence of horses as hunters' prey. The first unambiguous evidence of Horse Riders rather than Horse Drivers comes from Assyrian depictions of mounted archers and findings of saddles in graves in southern Siberia, and both of those date from the 9th and 8th centuries BCE.

BUT I'm probably being conservative: every new archeological dig seems to push dates back, and the next publication may show findings of evidence like saddles or riding bridles dating back another century or more: all of 'what we know' is subject to change...

Likewise, a primitive Composite Bow - or at least the materials of horn and bone for one, have been found in Sintashta culture graves dating to about 2100 BCE, and the 1700 BCE Shang chariot archers were using composite bows and composite bows were found in Tut's tomb (1324 BCE) BUT the earliest recurved composite bows with stiffened ends for increased power and recovery by the bow so far have been found in Scythian graves and no earlier (again, so far - everything is subject to new archeological discoveries) than the 4th century BCE. IF the Scythians in the west were using Self Bows it went un-noticed by any of their Greek or Persian enemies and neighbors, who all speak of the 'Scythian Bow' as the recurved composite type.

The problem, as I mentioned, is that Every Culture or Group on the Steppes from Mongolia to Rumania adopted a virtually identical horse-riding, mounted archery life and combat style and maintained it virtually without interruption from At Least 7 - 800 BCE to 1500 CE, and the differences among them were, frankly, minor compared to their similarities.

Speaking of Persians, both Roman and Indian sources say the Parthians were a Scythian tribe.

Case in Point for Similarities: people living the 'Scythian Lifestyle' who wandered into Non-Steppe areas with dramatic results include the Parthians, Seljuk and Ottoman Turks, Xiong-Nu, Huns, Jurchens, Mongolians, etc., etc.
 
Speaking of Persians, both Roman and Indian sources say the Parthians were a Scythian tribe.
IMO we should have had the Parthians in the first place.
 
Case in Point for Similarities: people living the 'Scythian Lifestyle' who wandered into Non-Steppe areas with dramatic results include the Parthians, Seljuk and Ottoman Turks, Xiong-Nu, Huns, Jurchens, Mongolians, etc., etc.

Except the Parthians were an Eastern Iranian tribe who may have initially worn pointy hats. Though I guess I should say more specifically about the Indians that they used the word for Parthian and Scythian more or less interchangeably--probably similar to how many west Asian and European peoples referred to the Persians and Medes interchangeably.
 
IMO we should have had the Parthians in the first place.

_Except that the Parthians, rightly or wrongly, are too often identified as 'late model Persians'. If we needed another Nomad Cavalry Civilization, there are a number that have a more distinct identity: the Xiong-Nu who bedeviled China, the Alans who may have introduced the metal stirrup to Europe, or, in the Now For Something Really Different category, the Commanches done right - light cavalry lancers who can Disappear (like Privateers or highly-promoted Scouts)!

Except the Parthians were an Eastern Iranian tribe who may have initially worn pointy hats. Though I guess I should say more specifically about the Indians that they used the word for Parthian and Scythian more or less interchangeably--probably similar to how many west Asian and European peoples referred to the Persians and Medes interchangeably.

"Pointed Hat Sakae" was the term used for the Parthians, and, to the non-Nomad, one fast-moving bunch of mounted archers looks pretty much like all the others when you're facing the pointy ends of the arrows...
 
_Except that the Parthians, rightly or wrongly, are too often identified as 'late model Persians'.
That's kind of my point. Aside from starting out as famous horse nomads (Parthian shot, anyone?), they did eventually settle down and become a settled civilization (as did most horse raiders eventually), giving us historically attested leaders, a language for them to speak, and city names. Plus they're not based on a very dubious story from Herodotus that casts Cyrus the Great as a mustachio-twirling villain...

Xiong-Nu who bedeviled China
So much of what we know about the Xiongnu is speculative, though. They don't seem a very viable civ choice to me.

the Alans who may have introduced the metal stirrup to Europe
Being Medieval, though, they don't really fill the same niche as the Scythians.

or, in the Now For Something Really Different category, the Commanches done right - light cavalry lancers who can Disappear (like Privateers or highly-promoted Scouts)!
The Comanche would have been somewhat interesting (though at the same time somewhat disappointing, given that Civ5's "Shoshone" was really a hybrid Shoshone/Comanche civ). Personally though, horse raider civs don't do anything for me (to date, the Civ franchise lacks the mechanics to portray them properly), and I'd prefer other Native American civs to a horse raider civ like the Comanche, Sioux, Nez Perce, etc.
 
"Pointed Hat Sakae" was the term used for the Parthians, and, to the non-Nomad, one fast-moving bunch of mounted archers looks pretty much like all the others when you're facing the pointy ends of the arrows...

Indian sources also refer to the pointy hats for the Shaka. Plus, they're on reliefs and I believe Scythian coins.
 
I just keep saying Prokhorovka just because of the tank battle during the Kursk Offensive. I can’t not see it
 
Being Medieval, though, they don't really fill the same niche as the Scythians.

The Alans persisted under that name into the medieval period, but they're first attested as "Alans" in the first century AD. Roman authors considered them to be synonymous with the earlier Massagetae (of whom Tomyris was once queen). They were the longest lasting autonomous and identifiable Scytho-Sarmatian tribe and while no longer a world power, they're still identifiable as the Ossetians. They probably would make a bit more sense as a civ than the "Scythians", who were not remotely united, at least in the historical period.
 
Top Bottom