05-11-2015, 02:42 AM
Hello.
I've researched a lot regarding the migrating tribes in the 5th century, specially the Alans. Read "A History of the Alans in the West", and though it's a good read, does numerous mentions on how they assimilated local culture and basically slowly let their traditions fade away because they were so welcome to foreigners.
My question is: regarding the Alans that stayed in Gaul as Rome's foederati (near Armorica and southwest/western modern France), how would one determine the "rate" of transition? Let's estimate pre-Chalóns and post-Chalóns, for instance.
Given there's numerous source materials on how the Sarmatians fought and their similar war strategies with the Huns, but more focused on heavy cavalry lancers. The dominating strategy of the time was already the mounted archery tactic. So how did they lose such an important cultural trait when it's clear that it was the most important and valuable thing they could offer as foederati? I know they were assignated as the main clashers against the Hunnic forces, and even were called as mounted troops, but this doesn't fit with the standard "culture loss due to the culture melting pot" theory.
If I see a source material of a 2nd century Sarmatian, would that fit a Taifal/Alanic horseman as well? Or would they have more "romanized" weapons and clothes/armor?
I've researched a lot regarding the migrating tribes in the 5th century, specially the Alans. Read "A History of the Alans in the West", and though it's a good read, does numerous mentions on how they assimilated local culture and basically slowly let their traditions fade away because they were so welcome to foreigners.
My question is: regarding the Alans that stayed in Gaul as Rome's foederati (near Armorica and southwest/western modern France), how would one determine the "rate" of transition? Let's estimate pre-Chalóns and post-Chalóns, for instance.
Given there's numerous source materials on how the Sarmatians fought and their similar war strategies with the Huns, but more focused on heavy cavalry lancers. The dominating strategy of the time was already the mounted archery tactic. So how did they lose such an important cultural trait when it's clear that it was the most important and valuable thing they could offer as foederati? I know they were assignated as the main clashers against the Hunnic forces, and even were called as mounted troops, but this doesn't fit with the standard "culture loss due to the culture melting pot" theory.
If I see a source material of a 2nd century Sarmatian, would that fit a Taifal/Alanic horseman as well? Or would they have more "romanized" weapons and clothes/armor?
Alan Beling
Creator of Rise of the Foederati
www.riseofthefoederati.com
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/fi...=907046271
Creator of Rise of the Foederati
www.riseofthefoederati.com
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/fi...=907046271
