+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Allies & Enemies of Rome (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Sub-Roman Britain (Cavalry etc) (/showthread.php?tid=6780)
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 08-29-2009
Welcome to the forum.
shock: The Equites Taifali, who were probably Sarmatian and not Germanic, were recorded as being stationed in northern Gaul and Britain; and their horses are mentioned in early Breton records. It would not be outrageous to believe that a sub-Roman British cavalry included this type of medium-sized, tough-boned, and hardy mount. (Maybe it lives as the Welsh Cob. :roll: )
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - bachmat66 - 08-29-2009
Salvete Dashydog,
the North Caucasus archaeological site Klin-Yar info can be gotten here - http://www.rdg.ac.uk/archaeology/resear ... n-Yar.aspx - but this site is very old and includes both Koban (Russian:????????? ????????) culture - eg horse tack from 8th c BC http://www.arcaucasica.ru/_images/gold_ ... 47_48f.jpg and late antiquity/early medieval Alanic strata.
Actually horses would be of various sizes and bone structure - eg Pazyrk kurgan finds with horses from 130 to over 150cm at withers, from steppe coarse type to Akhal-teke type - Pontic-Caspian steppes had plenty of horseflesh since the 4rd millenium BC, eg Anthony in Wheel, Horse and Language underlines the size of ancient steppe horses that Soviet archaeologist found in the Western Asian steppes, over 15 hands at withers was not infrequent.
The Caucasus region has had some of the finest horse breeds in the world - in the north it is especially the Kabardian, a medium size mountain horse of some very ancient pedigree eg http://kabardians.com/
Smaller horses are all about the economy, hardiness, endurance and agility -
Polish armies ventured into the Russian winters many times, returning with their horses et al, especially during the 16-17th centuries. Our sources write plenty about eating twigs, tree branches and actual tree leaves when no grass, hay nor other fodder was available - several times during prolonged sieges they actually fed horses a mixture of chopped raw meat with straw and a bit of gunpowder, supposedly horses became very fiery ( siege of Zbaraz 1648 AD) . Americas' native horsemen, of the llanos and prairies, never fed their horses other food but what was available near their camp during the winter months, since they wintered in the river valleys then they fed their horses smaller tree branches and twigs, eg cotton tree branches being very popular amongst the Upper Missouri tribes. Horses can dig the dried grass from under the snow 50cm deep, while sheep and cows die of hunger unable to paw the snow to grass and herbs underneath.
Having said that I do not think Polish armies, mostly made of cavalry, preferred to fight in the winter, it was the condition of the war theater - bogs, swamps, wetlands, numerous rivers, streams, and lakes - of the Western Russian Plain that forced winter campaigning. There were no roads, highways, while forts, cities and strongholds were built near or on the lakes, riverbanks, etc, thus easier to attack in the winter... but the suffering for the horses and men must have been terrible and I dare to say beyond our understanding...
I would also venture to say that Western Sarmatian tribes or confederacies (3rd century BC to 3rd c. AD) had a bit different horse than later Hunnic -Xioung-nu's long, angular horse. Usually it is thought that they came to the Pontic steppe during 4th century BC. I think they had plenty of time to breed horses for various uses, from food to warfare and parade, espcailly since they brought fine and reguilar horses from Central Asia, and had at their disposal (through trade, gifts and raiding) many ancient Armenian, Thracian, Scythian, Persian etc bloodlines. Again comparison can be made, perhaps very far fetched, with the America's native horsemen. Around 1810-20s these American warriors - Cheyenne, Crow, Comanche, Nez Perce, Cayuse etc - achieved possession of horse herds comparable with the nomadic Sarmatians and then they selected, trained, and used their horses based on their war, racing and hunting needs and their mounts' predisposition for such various needs. A wealthy warrior had several horses dedicated only for war and hunting, while the rest of his herds were sort of 'split' between being part of his social status and his family economic needs. Sarmatian warrior must have had many types of horses to select from...
sorry for this longish entry
ps
...intersting article about the crucible steel sword blades from Alani strata of Klin Yar http://home.att.net/~moltenmuse/examination.htm
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - dashydog - 08-29-2009
Dariusz, Alanus..This is Rodi..aka Dashydog. Greetings and thanks for good informative reply .
I could write hundreds of questions and comments so wil ltry not to "gabble".
Taefali. Interested in them,. Mysterious. What type of cav were they? Husaria/Lancers Sarmat? Skirmishers? Dragoon type? Archers? I do know that they were a large element in Carolingian armies with various Alanic and Wend groups. Alanus..It is very interesting if you research "Podolian Steppe Grey Cattle" which still exist and which Sarmaty left in parts of Italy and Croacja. These were their "Moving Empire". I did a lot fof work some years back that eventuated with findings that the Alans in Armorica exported these cattle to the Channel islands when they were still linked to mainand...and hence the Jersey cow of today..and others. Cattle genetics seem to be far far more advanced that human ones!!! There is money involved!" Looking at the spread of these cattle, horses must have been similar..as per your welsh cob!!
http://www.fellpony.f9.co.uk/fells/rom_ ... iesian.htm
This web site tackles the matter viz Fell Ponies in Cumbria. The lady is quite an expert.
Going back to maintaining Cav groups in Post Roman britain to maintain control i believe this would have been easy. I already said why I thought it affordable. The practicality was no different. The problem was no different to the polish one 1400 to 1939. IE:Vast borders and territories and a real need for fast movers who could rush to trouble spots. But, i dont think there was any anti Saxon unity amongst the Brits.None at all! Just a nasty shambles.
Dariusz, I worked in terrible cold myself and it is amazing how well one copes if one "knows"..and what happens if one doesnt. Zamoyski's acount of the Moscow trip illustrate it well. Steppe horses evolved to live with it and I too have read many accounts of Husaria horses digging in the snow to find food. But, the advantages of fighting in winter are great. You get things like: No dust. No noise. Frozen lakes and rivers for easy crossing. Super visibility at night, snow storms excepted. Sarmatian history is full of winter attacks on the Romans. If you dont have pontoniers and sappers, you need ice, I guess.
Ref Molten Muse. She did some good work years back on mini portable furnaces for smelting and i was hoping to prove that sarmat blascksmiths could do this, et temps of 1400 plus and do high carbon weapons grade steels. I wil lcheck back on that..
Cheers Rodi
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - recondicom - 09-13-2009
http://www.euskonews.com/0067zbk/gaia6705es.html
I know the word for stirrup is estribo. I recall seem other sources but I could not find them without a little work.
Vale.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 09-19-2009
Salve, Rodi
I'm pressed for time, will make this short and then come back later. Yes, I have studied the Sarmats/Alani and their relationship to the Goths, to later Taifali influences in Armorica and Britain. I believe that Herwig Wolfram expressed it best, that the Taifali were Sarmatian/Alanic. My own theory is that after the Roxolani advanced beyond Moldova, the next group-- the Taifali-- were impinged between the Tyrfingi Goths and Greutungi Goths. The Taifali appear to have created a foedus with the Tyrfingi that lasted for eight (8) generations. When Fritigern's Tyrfingi were allowed into Roman Moesia, the Taifali were not. They moved upriver and joined a band of Greutungi led by Farnobius. In an unfortunate battle in Illyricum, these Greutungi and Taifali were defeated by General Frigeridus, himself a Goth.
You know the rest of the tale-- the defeated Taifali and Goths were relocated onto the best pasture-land of the Po Valley and formed into the Equites Taifali. They were then sent to Gaul, just below the Loire. And they were later split into two alae, the Seniores (the bears) and the Iuniores (with the dragon and pearl). These two symbols are almost exclusively "Arthurian," and I believe they were sent across the Channel as commanded by the last Count of Britain.
hock: To me, the Taifali horses and the gray cattle were of great importance, especially in cavalry service and the construction of compound bows. I have a 45-pound asymetrical built from gray cattle horn by Czaba Grozer. The bow is awesome! It reaches 49 pounds with a 30 inch draw and really punches an arrow. The asymetrical is oft described as 'Hunnish," but we now know that the Alans and many other Sarmatians also used them. I would like to know more about their horses, since the breed had great historical significance within the late Roman cavalry.
ps: You studies and insights are very helpful. Post more! :wink:
Best regards,
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - marka - 09-23-2009
Quote:I'm very sure of the the fact that Gildas Is Arthur, but working under a pseudonym.
interesting thought.he seems to have a very personal grudge against magoclune (magoclunus)
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Ron Andrea - 09-23-2009
How can you tell? Glidas seemed to have a grudge against everybody. :lol:
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Medicus matt - 09-23-2009
Quote:Vortigern Studies:2xjgzi18 Wrote:I'm very sure of the the fact that Gildas Is Arthur, but working under a pseudonym.
interesting thought...
AND Vortigern AND Riothamus AND Ambrosius.
Recent evidence points towards him actually being the only native male left in Britain at the end of the 5th century, tasked with turning out the lights before he left. Hence the term 'Dark Ages' for the period that followed.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 09-23-2009
Quote:How can you tell? Glidas seemed to have a grudge against everybody. :lol:
Not really. It appears that Gilas held Agricola (Aircol Longhand) in high regard, calling him a "good king."
hock: As for "Arthur," I believe that he was an amalgum of the deeds of several men, and not mentioned by Gildas because the legend had yet to be completely codified.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Ron Andrea - 09-23-2009
Quote: Not really. It appears that Gilas held Agricola (Aircol Longhand) in high regard, calling him a "good king."
As for "Arthur," I believe that he was an amalgum of the deeds of several men, and not mentioned by Gildas because the legend had yet to be completely codified.
He seemed pretty positive about Ambrosius Aurelianus, too, but I was trying to be funny. :oops:
I totally agree about "Arthur." 8)
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - marka - 09-23-2009
Quote:How can you tell? Glidas seemed to have a grudge against everybody. :lol:
laughs....not quite.he talked about several kings and nobles but the passage against magoclunus sounds personal.
'arthur'was probably a title in any case or he lived to be a very very old man
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 09-25-2009
I don't believe "Arthur" was a title. It was most likely a signum, an epithet:
artus/artos (Britonic/Gallic) = bear
ur/uer (Britonic/Gallic)= superlative
But I certainly doubt it was Littleton and Malcor's antiquus "Artorius," a name that was passed down from father to son for 300 years (if you can actually believe that premise in the movie). :roll:
I mean what happens when you have three generations still alive?
"Hey Artorius, pass the bread."
"Here you go, Artorius."
"Thanks, Artorius."
"Hey! Wait a minute! What about ME? I'm an Artorius!" :lol:
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - marka - 09-25-2009
Quote:I don't believe "Arthur" was a title. It was most likely a signum, an epithet:
artus/artos (Britonic/Gallic) = bear
ur/uer (Britonic/Gallic)= superlative
yes i meant nickname really.
however looking at the timeline he was probably a few different people,some of the sources imply he was pagan or at least not a 'mainstream' christian.
the movie..well.... saxons (led by cerdic) attacking hadrians wall .....say no more.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Ron Andrea - 09-25-2009
Quote:I don't believe "Arthur" was a title. It was most likely a signum, an epithet:
artus/artos (Britonic/Gallic) = bear
ur/uer (Britonic/Gallic)= superlative
But I certainly doubt it was Littleton and Malcor's antiquus "Artorius," a name that was passed down from father to son for 300 years (if you can actually believe that premise in the movie). :roll:
I mean what happens when you have three generations still alive?
"Hey Artorius, pass the bread."
"Here you go, Artorius."
"Thanks, Artorius."
"Hey! Wait a minute! What about ME? I'm an Artorius!" :lol:
That's true (and cute), but records reflect many names being recycled in families.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 09-26-2009
That's true. But the movie claims the same name was transmitted generation to generation, ad infinitum, until we get to little Artorius who is being coached by Pelagius.
hock: Usually, when the ancestoral nomen is transmitted it goes from grandfather to grandson. However, "Artorius" does not mean "Arthur" or the original "Artur," at least by linguistics. It's probably a point that will be wrangled forever. :lol: