01-07-2003, 09:37 AM
By R. Brzezinski & M. Mielczarek<br>
<br>
The Sarmatians were one of Rome’s most implacable foes, the first recorded conflict occurring in 16 BC, and hostilities never really let up until the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. Considering the important role the Sarmatians played in the military history of the Roman Empire, it’s surprising how few works about them are available in English. This book does a very good job as a basic introduction (technically I suppose this should fall into the Enemies of Rome series, but I guess Osprey discontinued it). The book covers the history of the Sarmatian people, and each of the important Sarmatian tribes, like the Roxolani and the Iazyges, as well as the Alans (even though the Alans are generally considered to have been a people separate from, though very similar to the Sarmatians). It also examines Sarmatian costume, armor, and weapons, including the Sarmatian bow, the ring pommel sword, and the fabled contus Sarmaticus long lance. Brzezinski makes good use of surviving evidence, including written sources, archeological finds, and artistic representations, the most important being Sarmatian, Bosporan and Roman. There are also very interesting discussions about the Sarmatian horse, the draco standard, as well as the basic appearance of the Sarmatians themselves (cranial deformation and tattooing were both practiced at different times by various tribes).<br>
<br>
The book was co-authored by Richard Brzezinski and Mariusz Mielczarek, though reading it I got the distinct impression that the book itself was written by Brzezinski alone. I know Mielczarek doesn’t speak English, and the feeling I got was that Brzezinski wrote the book based primarily on Mielzarek’s research (though Brzezinski is apparently a historian who specializes in Eastern Europe).<br>
<br>
Brzezinski dispels the long-held myth that the Sarmatians conquered their Scythian cousins by developing a kind of heavily armored cavalry, armed with long lances. In fact, none of the written accounts of the Sarmatians indicate that the armored horseman wielding a long lance was developed until the first century AD, long after the Sarmatians had supplanted the Scythians (the Sarmatians seem to have been materially much poorer than their Scythian cousins, so differences in military equipment and tactics may have had little to do with it). Brzezinski also notes that while there is much evidence for the existence of the armored Sarmatian horseman, there is very little for the existence of armored Sarmatian horses. In fact, there are only two existing representations of Sarmatians riding armored horses, and neither is actually Sarmatian (one is Bosporan and the other Roman - Trajan’s Column). However, there are many representations of armored Sarmatian riders on horses without armor. Also, the Sarmatian horse does not seem to have been particularly large, probably no bigger than the Roman pony, and was probably roughly the same breed as the typical steppe pony. I should also note (though the author doesn’t) that none of the ancient sources refer to Sarmatian cavalry as “cataphracts,â€ÂÂ
<br>
The Sarmatians were one of Rome’s most implacable foes, the first recorded conflict occurring in 16 BC, and hostilities never really let up until the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. Considering the important role the Sarmatians played in the military history of the Roman Empire, it’s surprising how few works about them are available in English. This book does a very good job as a basic introduction (technically I suppose this should fall into the Enemies of Rome series, but I guess Osprey discontinued it). The book covers the history of the Sarmatian people, and each of the important Sarmatian tribes, like the Roxolani and the Iazyges, as well as the Alans (even though the Alans are generally considered to have been a people separate from, though very similar to the Sarmatians). It also examines Sarmatian costume, armor, and weapons, including the Sarmatian bow, the ring pommel sword, and the fabled contus Sarmaticus long lance. Brzezinski makes good use of surviving evidence, including written sources, archeological finds, and artistic representations, the most important being Sarmatian, Bosporan and Roman. There are also very interesting discussions about the Sarmatian horse, the draco standard, as well as the basic appearance of the Sarmatians themselves (cranial deformation and tattooing were both practiced at different times by various tribes).<br>
<br>
The book was co-authored by Richard Brzezinski and Mariusz Mielczarek, though reading it I got the distinct impression that the book itself was written by Brzezinski alone. I know Mielczarek doesn’t speak English, and the feeling I got was that Brzezinski wrote the book based primarily on Mielzarek’s research (though Brzezinski is apparently a historian who specializes in Eastern Europe).<br>
<br>
Brzezinski dispels the long-held myth that the Sarmatians conquered their Scythian cousins by developing a kind of heavily armored cavalry, armed with long lances. In fact, none of the written accounts of the Sarmatians indicate that the armored horseman wielding a long lance was developed until the first century AD, long after the Sarmatians had supplanted the Scythians (the Sarmatians seem to have been materially much poorer than their Scythian cousins, so differences in military equipment and tactics may have had little to do with it). Brzezinski also notes that while there is much evidence for the existence of the armored Sarmatian horseman, there is very little for the existence of armored Sarmatian horses. In fact, there are only two existing representations of Sarmatians riding armored horses, and neither is actually Sarmatian (one is Bosporan and the other Roman - Trajan’s Column). However, there are many representations of armored Sarmatian riders on horses without armor. Also, the Sarmatian horse does not seem to have been particularly large, probably no bigger than the Roman pony, and was probably roughly the same breed as the typical steppe pony. I should also note (though the author doesn’t) that none of the ancient sources refer to Sarmatian cavalry as “cataphracts,â€ÂÂ
