Jhykronos
Auxiliaire
Inscrit le: 02 Aoû 2015 Messages: 95
|
Posté le: Ven Juin 18, 2021 7:04 am Sujet du message: Sassanids |
|
From 629 AD:
How many cataphracts can they get?
How many horse archers can they get?
Because the literal reading of the list says 2-8 and 4-24 respectively (same as the earliest period), but this obviously isn't the intention. _________________ - Let the Die be Cast |
|
ethan
Signifer
Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 347
|
Posté le: Ven Juin 18, 2021 12:53 pm Sujet du message: |
|
I don't know what the intention is...not an expert on Sassanids.
It looks to me like:
224-330AD
Asavaran with Lance
2-8
Asavaran with Bow
0
Horse Archers
4-24
330-488AD
Asavaran with Lance
2-8
Asavaran with Bow
4-8
Horse Archers
0-12
489-628AD
Asavaran with Lance
0-2
Asavaran with Bow
6-16
Horse Archers
0-6
From 629AD (nothing said about Lance guys so reverts back to original, nothing said about horse archers so same, clear direction on Bow guys)
Asavaran with Lance
2-8
Asavaran with Bow
6-12
Horse Archers
4-24 |
|
Mike Bennett
Centurion
Inscrit le: 11 Nov 2017 Messages: 489
Localisation: Carnforth, Lancashire, UK
|
Posté le: Ven Juin 18, 2021 1:46 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Cannot imagine that is the intention, but agree thems the words
I imagine that I am not alone in suspecting that the intention was to reduce the Asavaran with bow, but keep LH and cataphract the same as the immediately preceding years |
|
Jhykronos
Auxiliaire
Inscrit le: 02 Aoû 2015 Messages: 95
|
Posté le: Ven Juin 18, 2021 5:28 pm Sujet du message: |
|
It would be the first time I have seen anyone suggest that they reverted back to proto-Parthians just before being conquered by the Arabs. _________________ - Let the Die be Cast |
|
madaxeman
Magister Militum
Inscrit le: 01 Nov 2014 Messages: 1468
Localisation: Londres Centraal.
|
Posté le: Ven Juin 18, 2021 10:18 pm Sujet du message: |
|
So... are we guessing that the From 489-628AD heading should have said From 489-651AD? _________________ www.madaxeman.com |
|
Jhykronos
Auxiliaire
Inscrit le: 02 Aoû 2015 Messages: 95
|
Posté le: Dim Juin 20, 2021 2:27 am Sujet du message: |
|
madaxeman a écrit: | So... are we guessing that the From 489-628AD heading should have said From 489-651AD? |
Just "From 489" would probably work. Assuming they want that army to get other options like the Dailami. _________________ - Let the Die be Cast |
|
KevinD
Légat
Inscrit le: 23 Aoû 2021 Messages: 500
Localisation: Texas
|
Posté le: Jeu Sep 16, 2021 9:13 pm Sujet du message: |
|
Yeah, masses of Parthian style horse archers and cataphracts during the Arab Conquest seems pretty silly.
But what does “- Later period†mean in the line “From 489 to 628 AD - Later period†mean? Nowhere else in the list (or even any other list I can recall) uses this formulation. Is it supposed to be describing the period from 489-628 AD as the “Later period†or does it mean the following lines also apply to a “Later period†after 628 AD? This might make historical sense as it avoids the Parthian style horse archer mob and all those cataphracts fighting the Arab Conquest and also allows one to account for the issue that there were reputedly 4,000 Dailami who defected to the Arabs after the Persian defeat at al-Qadisiyyah in 636 AD. But if that’s the intent the wording to get there sure is convoluted. |
|
duck2744
Barbare
Inscrit le: 26 Sep 2017 Messages: 22
|
Posté le: Mer Mar 23, 2022 9:26 am Sujet du message: |
|
Hi guys
What is the conclusion of this thread? Should the sub list header read 'From 489 to 651 AD?
I am trying to put a list together for 630AD.
Thanks
Philip |
|