Research Q&A

[pedrov]

Anyone? Im doing final modifications to my mod/scenario and one of the modifications was the addition of the Sarmatian civilization. It can represent both sarmatian, schytian (spelling?), dacian or any neighbooring civ, i just need some city and leader names for it. Im going to use both Sarmatian Swordsman and Eastern Cataphract as unique units for them.

Please forgive if I add information for others looking for info. I apologize in advance for the rambling. There are some science and military leaders listed. No cities though, but check the Bosphoran Kingdom for names if the time period fits your needs... I don't know.

It's reasonable to include the Scythians, Sarmatians (or Sauromatae) and Parthians together, but not really their neighbors (though they were allied with the Geloni & Budini against Darius). Most other tribes were Turkic and spoke some variant of Altaic (as did the Mongols). But the Scythians & Sarmatians were Indo-Aryan and spoke languages more closely related to that of the Persians. Herodotus, in his histories, devotes a book to the Scythians and Thracians, but has nothing to say about cities or leaders... mostly stuff about drinking blood from the heads of their first vicitims in battle, and other such things that make them out to be very nasty people.

In general, the Greeks regarded the Scythians as drunks and they were portrayed in this fashion in a number of comedies, including one about a Scythian philosopher (read: Scientific Leader), Anacharsis.

The modern term, "parting shot," as in the final word of an argument, is derived from the Parthian shot (shooting back behind while retreating on a horse) and the greeks attributed this tactic, so effectively used by the Mongols, to the Scythians, and it is depicted in much of their art & pottery. In addition to the bow, they used a strange version of the battle axe called a "Sagaris" (its blade was at a right angle to the handle, like an ice-axe) and a short, curved sword called an "akinakes."

The Scythian king who fought against Darius was Idanthyrsus. Practicing a tactic of skirmish and retreat against the Persians, he summed up his strategy (and hence the lack of named cities) in a letter to Darius which stated, "If you want to know why I will not fight, I will tell you: in our country there are no towns and no cultivated land; fear of losing which, or seeing it ravaged, might indeed provoke us to hasty battle." Kind of sounds like Batu's threat to Hungary above.

When Darius had invaded Scythia, the Scythians were joined by the Sauromatae (or Sarmatians). They were more warlike than the Scythians and their women fought in the same manner as their men (many burials found with Sarmatian women in full armor and with weaponry). Herodotus thought they were descended from Amazons. Unlike the Scythians, who fought much like the Mongols with bow and short sword, the Sarmatians used a lance and broadsword from horseback and were fully armored. The tribes that particulalry showed this proto-knight tendency were the Roxolani, Alani, and Iazyges. These heavy horseman, as filtered through the persians, are the source of the latin cataphractus (or clibanarius). The romans took this tech and used it against the undisciplined foot soldiers of the Dacians. The Sarmatians, once more settled and integrated in the roman empire, became the Bosphoran Kingdom

At the time of the battle between the Persians and Scythians, the Parthians were already the subjects of Darius, they helped him fight and lose to Alexander. After the death of Alexander, the Parthians and their territory were allotted to Seleucus. They rebelled under the leadership of two brothers, Arsaces and Tiridates, sometime before 247 B.C. When the romans (under Crassus) fought, and were defeated by, the Parthians, the parthian general was Surena.

The Sarmatians fought on the side of the Dacian king, Decebalus against the emporer Trajan. Interestingly, the Sarmatians were pressed into service with the Roman army after Marcus Aurelius defeated them. Some served in northern england (the fort at Chesters) along hadrian's wall. The emporer Galerius (293-311) had a Sarmatian bodyguard.

Edit: Sources are "Warriors of the Steppes" by Erik Hildinger and "Chronicles of the Barbarians" edited by David Willis McCullough. The former is a military history of central asia from 500BC to 1700AD. The latter is a collection of first-hand accounts of encounters with barbarians (e.g., "The life of Timur" by Ahmed ibn' Arabshah).

 

[LouLong]

Thanks all, my leader list increased thanks to you guys !

 

[Mistfit]

ooh ooh a great site with maps and city names on the Scythians
http://www.silk-road.com/artl/scythian.shtml

 

[pedrov]

ooh ooh a great site with maps and city names on the Scythians
http://www.silk-road.com/artl/scythian.shtml

You are truly the googlemaster. I didn't take the time to read the whole thing, but are you sure the city names are of Scythian origin?

Edit: Excuse me, I should have said your are truly the Googlemathter.

 

[Mistfit]

You are truly the googlemaster.

Uber-Googler

I didn't take the time to read the whole thing, but are you sure the city names are of Scythian origin?

I am not 100% sure of that. But 3 of the names on the map I did see in other places listed as being Scythian. Olbia,Kul Oba, and Theodosia (Although this one is typically listed as a city the over took in the Bosphoran period.) So I presumed they were Scythian in orgin. I will look into that further. Good catch.

I found this in Civ Fanatics site (although it looks different from the one I use)
SCYTHIANS (Thamis & Kryten):
Kul-Oba
Sarmatia
Saka
Pazyryk
Massagetai
Rhoxolani
Siracae
Sindi
Tauri
Maiotia
Kimmeria
Getae
Iazygia
Alania
Tanais
Chersonesus
Tyras
Oblia
Theodosiopolis
Panticipaeum
Pityus
Dioscurias
Phasis
Tiflis
Asiopolis
Tabae
Paratae
Parnii
Maracandans
Margianes
Sarsae
Choresmii
Chertomlyk
Solocha
Litoj-Kurgan
Kelermes
Melitopol
Kamenskoe
Gorodishche
Solokha
Maikop
Ulski
Elizavetinskaya
Kostromskaya
Kerch
Tyras
Olbia
Tovsta
Seven Brothers
Tanais
Gaimonov
Melgunov
Here's the Link of the names listed most of them are on the map I provided.

 

[Mithadan]

So that's where this thread went! (Didn't notice its stickiness until now...)

Hm, I have a vague memory of reading here at cfc about the meaning of "Keshik", that that's an elite guard...

Indeed, the Keshik was the "Imperial Guard." Here are some other Mongol unit names in case they come in handy:

arban -- a troop of 10
bagatur -- the officer in charge of a troop of 10
jagun -- a squadron of 100
minghan -- a regiment of 1000
tumen -- a division of 10,000 (mongol armies typically consisted of two or three tumens)​

--from S. R. Turnbull, The Mongols (Oxford: Osprey, 1980), pp. 22-23.

 

[Ozymandias]

So that's where this thread went! (Didn't notice its stickiness until now...)Indeed, the Keshik was the "Imperial Guard." Here are some other Mongol unit names in case they come in handy:

arban -- a troop of 10
bagatur -- the officer in charge of a troop of 10
jagun -- a squadron of 100
minghan -- a regiment of 1000
tumen -- a division of 10,000 (mongol armies typically consisted of two or three tumens)​

--from S. R. Turnbull, The Mongols (Oxford: Osprey, 1980), pp. 22-23.

Huh. So my "recollection" of a horde being a body of troops equalling approximately a regiment is delusional ... I HATE when that happens ...

Many Thanks,

Oz

 

[Mistfit]

Googlemathter

I'm not sure I understand? Is that a compliment?

 

[pedrov]

I'm not sure I understand? Is that a compliment?

Sort of.

If Thimon Thez, then you're the Googlemathter! That is, unless Thimon Thez is not slurred Simon Sez, in which case, I make no sense!

Egat! I want to change my stupid title! I want it to be either:
"Ain't no stinkin' wheat muffin!"
or
"Gatherer of Loose Threads"

But no, I'm thechieftan!

Enough of my rambling this is supposed to be a Q&A post.

 

[Mithadan]

Huh. So my "recollection" of a horde being a body of troops equalling approximately a regiment is delusional ... I HATE when that happens ...

Well, who knows? Maybe "minghan" means "horde" in Mongolian? I for one have no idea how many soldiers one expects in a "regiment." I'm just quoting from the book-guy, maybe he's just making the troop-squadron-regiment comparisons up? Ach, big deal.

I'm not sure what to call my renamed Keshiks; I was thinking Jagun, but now I'm thinking Minghan. Currently my batch of Ansar Warriors (they need to get renamed too, I'd reckon) is about 15 units strong -- and I'm still holding my own. So say I've got the equivalent of a single Mongol army (even though it's not Mongolian, obviously), say three tumens. That's 30,000 soldiers divided by 15 units = 2,000 men per civ-unit. Thing is, jagun just sounds so much cooler...

 

[mrtn]

.... Thing is, jagun just sounds so much cooler...

The coolness-factor is important, listen to your heart!

 

[Mistfit]

Sort of.

If Thimon Thez, then you're the Googlemathter! That is, unless Thimon Thez is not slurred Simon Sez, in which case, I make no sense!

But no, I'm thechieftan!

Enough of my rambling this is supposed to be a Q&A post.

(lightbulb goes off in Mistfit's Head) - Ahh now I get it. I had forgot I even put that there. My boy told me that he played Simon Says at preschool the other day and I almost fell off the chair laughing because he has a hard time pronouncing his S's.

Be calm pedrov - the Avatar will come. You only have to wait until a week from Saturday, right?

I could start working on the Custom one any time now for you

Back on topic.
Did you see the city list I pulled off of the net? It corroborates the names on the map I pulled earlier. So I think that it would be safe to use them, Yes? Did you try the link? It Says CFC but it doesn't look like the CFC I know. Any guesses?

 

[pedrov]

Did you see the city list I pulled off of the net? It corroborates the names on the map I pulled earlier. So I think that it would be safe to use them, Yes? Did you try the link? It Says CFC but it doesn't look like the CFC I know. Any guesses?

It sort of looks like where CFC (by the way, why not CFF?) threads go to die:suicide:. I've come across that style often when searching on this site... archives?

My only confusion, and the reason why I asked, is the quote I gave earlier in this thread about them not having any cities (until the Bospheran Kingdom anyway). Perhaps I'm being stuborn, but I'm just curious if these are names that evolved after a later period of settlement. I don't have any other of Herodotus' books, and I only have some passages of his on the Scythians and Thracians, but he never mentions a place, but rather tribal regions (almost like saying Crazy Horse was killed in Lakota lands). We had similar issues with the mound builders... most of the names we know are the names given to them by later settlers (e.g., Poverty Point, Effigy Mounds, etc.).

Oh and if you're serious about helping with an avatar, let me know and I'll PM you. We'll spare the thread such dialogue.

 

[Mithadan]

The coolness-factor is important, listen to your heart!

Yes, you make a good point their, sir. I think what initially swayed me to the jagun side of things was a tactical diagram of how the mongols engaged an enemy force -- the units shown in the diagram corresponded to jaguns (divided into light cavalry and heavy cavalry types, no less), which sounded like it was the main working "unit" from their point of view. I didn't get much sense that a Mongol general would say "send a few arbans over there, and a minghan over here." Of course, they probably did say such things.

 

[Madeira]

Thanks Mistfit and pedrov, your help is greatly apreciated I now have enough to do the sarmatian/scythian civ

Btw, I also have the goths in my scenario, but had to randomly place some cities (except perhaps Gothiscandza), if you come across a goth map before they invaded the roman empire, i could change it to make it a bit more realistic

Thanks again!

 

[Mistfit]

Btw, I also have the goths in my scenario, but had to randomly place some cities (except perhaps Gothiscandza), if you come across a goth map before they invaded the roman empire, i could change it to make it a bit more realistic

If you have a list of city names that you are using I might be able to find their proper placement.

 

[Ozymandias]

Well, who knows? Maybe "minghan" means "horde" in Mongolian? I for one have no idea how many soldiers one expects in a "regiment." I'm just quoting from the book-guy, maybe he's just making the troop-squadron-regiment comparisons up? Ach, big deal.

I'm not sure what to call my renamed Keshiks; I was thinking Jagun, but now I'm thinking Minghan. Currently my batch of Ansar Warriors (they need to get renamed too, I'd reckon) is about 15 units strong -- and I'm still holding my own. So say I've got the equivalent of a single Mongol army (even though it's not Mongolian, obviously), say three tumens. That's 30,000 soldiers divided by 15 units = 2,000 men per civ-unit. Thing is, jagun just sounds so much cooler...

Mille grazie -- quasi-OT question: do we think that 2,000 men per Civ unit is about "right" for the ancient and/or medieval worlds?

-Oz

 

[pedrov]

Mille grazie -- quasi-OT question: do we think that 2,000 men per Civ unit is about "right" for the ancient and/or medieval worlds?

-Oz

As usual, I'm going to take a stab at this by flinging out a bunch of information. This is just a collection of unit/size information from "Brassey's Encyclopedia of Military History and Biography."

Classical Greece and Macedon:
-Hoplites were organized into companies of "100" and "battalions" of 500 to 1,000.
-In the early 4th century, BC, the spartans fielded an army of 6-7 "morai" of approx. 600 men each.
-Macedonian army organized in "taxeis" (regiments) of 1500 men each. The simple phalanx consisted of ~8,200 men. Alexander invaded Asia with 4 of these and left three in Macedonia. The macedonian cavalary was organized into groups of ~500. Aproximately 5,000 of the 35,000 men in Alexander's army as it crossed the Hellespont in 334 BC were cavalry.

Romans:
-Centuries of (can you believe it?) 100 men (though this was ideal in some cases and most(?) centuries did not contain 100 men).
-A legion of 3,500 men consisted of 10 "cohorts" (regiments), each containing one "maniple" (battalion) of each troop type (velites = light infantry, youngest soldiers; hastati, principes, and triarii = heaviest infantry, oldest).
-Each maniple contained 2 centuries of 60-80 men, except for the triarii, which contained only a single century.
-Each cohort also had a "turma" (troop) of 30 cavalry, though they fought separately from the cohort.

Romans (after the Marian reforms in 105 BC):
-division into four different troop types and the maniples were abolished.
-Legion contained 10 cohorts, each with six 80-man centuries. The centuries of the first cohort were doubled in size, so that a typical legion contained 5,280 men.
-Cavalry and Light infantry were provided by the Auxilia, organized in 500 and 1,000 man cohorts, and were assigned, as needed, to individual legions.
-This organization remained until the late roman empire, which differs primarily in terms of the perentage of barbarians in the army.

Around 1450 AD, an example of the French army, now professionalized (rather than made up of irregular bands of mercenaries), would consist of an army with varying numbers of companies. Each company contained between 30 and 100 "lances." Each lance contained a man-at-arms, his squire (who counted as a soldier), two mounted archers, and two pages (considered noncombatants). This type of army fought in the latter stages of the hundred years' war.

In modern times (e.g., US Army), the largest formation/unit that is not built around combined arms (e.g., linking artillery to armor to infantry, etc.) is the Battalion. It is a unit of 400 to 1,200 personnel.

In general, the most common unit size appears to be around 500 men. This would include the spartan "morai" (600), The roman "cohort" (480 men) after the Marian reforms, the french company (small = 120, large = 400), and the battalion (400 to 1,200 personnel... though some of these are certainly support staff of various sorts... the advent of motorized infantry in WWII dramatically changed the ratio of support personnel to combat personnel... In WW1, more than 80% of military personnel fought on the front lines, by WW2, the number was closer to 25%... i.e., I'm guessing that the actual number of combat forces in the modern battalion is actually closer to 400 than to 1,200).

 

[Ozymandias]

@Pedrov -- you're a machine Thanks much, I think this'll give a better "handle" on mod design.

Best,

Oz

 

[pedrov]

@Pedrov -- you're a machine Thanks much, I think this'll give a better "handle" on mod design.

Best,

Oz

It's more fun than writing mydissertation right now... so keep em comin' or I'll have to actually work!

Perhaps off topic for this forum, but I'd like some resources for requesting some units. I'm working on a mod with an Atlantean culture (of the advanced-technology variety) and I'd really like to add more units that fall into the sci-fi/anticipatory-victorian/jules verne/league of extraordinary gentlemen class of weapons and vehicles for the dark ages (psuedo-rennaissance) and industrial eras. I'll probably use some of the futuristic units available for the modern era and greek/egyptians units for ancient times.

I've got a few units already (e.g., nautilus, airship, steam tank, steam tiger, etc., and even the DaVinci Tank). Anybody have some thoughts on good resources where I can find images and descriptions to pass on to the unitmakers? Where's the uber-googler?