OT-- Weapons of the Alans (Alani) people

Originally posted by Scythian


Well, the Alan's language would have been a little different from Old Persian, probably about the same difference as between Swedish and Norse? It's hard to say, since I am not a linguist.
There are, as far as I know, no known written records of the Alans, since they were apparently nonliterate. They had a strong oral tradition, like many of the Indo-Europeans, but had little use for writing.

Thanks, Scythian, for the info. Yes, I'm sure the Alans' dialect wasn't the same as Old Persian - but I just was curious if they were close; it sounds as if they were.

I also figured they were non-literate, and, like most (all?) Indo-Europeans, with a strong oral tradition. Sometimes that oral tradition is recorded though (one of the good things Christianity tended to bring with it was literacy, or at least literate monks who liked recording and preserving things -- Islam, though it may be strange to think it, actually did the same, to some extent -- lots of mediaeval Arab linguists & other scholars).

For something completely (or almost completely) non-related to kukris, but related to oral epics, you can now hear me reading Beowulf in Old English by clicking here ;)

cheers, B.
 
Ben,

I'm not sure if this reference will help you out or not. ... I found it on a site that was describing the history of Magyars (Hungarian Steppe tribe).

----
Then the Magyars, now alone, crossed the Urals westward to settle in the area of present-day Soviet Bashkiria, situated north of the Black Sea and the Caucasus. Remaining there for centuries, they became neighbors of various Ural-Altaic peoples such as the Huns, Turkic-Bulgars, Alans and Onogurs. Inevitably, these proto-Magyars adopted many of their neighbors' cultural traits and customs. Some ethnic mingling also occurred before the various Hungarian tribes, pressured by waves of migrating nomads, started their own migration westward toward the Carpathians.

-----

So the Alans were of a Ural-Altaic people according to this site. Does this give you a hint at what language they spoke?

This stuff is too fun!! I should have gone for a history major...

Alan
 
Originally posted by ACStudios
Ben,

I'm not sure if this reference will help you out or not. ... I found it on a site that was describing the history of Magyars (Hungarian Steppe tribe).

----
Then the Magyars, now alone, crossed the Urals westward to settle in the area of present-day Soviet Bashkiria, situated north of the Black Sea and the Caucasus. Remaining there for centuries, they became neighbors of various Ural-Altaic peoples such as the Huns, Turkic-Bulgars, Alans and Onogurs. Inevitably, these proto-Magyars adopted many of their neighbors' cultural traits and customs. Some ethnic mingling also occurred before the various Hungarian tribes, pressured by waves of migrating nomads, started their own migration westward toward the Carpathians.

-----

So the Alans were of a Ural-Altaic people according to this site. Does this give you a hint at what language they spoke?

This stuff is too fun!! I should have gone for a history major...

Alan

Hi Alan,

Yes, assuming that site is correct, they spoke a language somewhat like Hungarian or Turkish (which are not Indo-European languages). I don't know much about these group of languages. It's debated whether Uralic and Altaic actually form one family or not.

Prominent Uralic languages = Hungarian, Finnish & Saami [Lapland]
Prominent Altaic langs = Turkish and Mongolian.

Some researchers also think that Japanese and Korean are Altaic languages. So it's an odd family, Finland to Turkey to Mongolia, possibly to Japan.

cheers, B.
 
Ben,

Very interesting. The site I got the information from is: www.horsearchery.com

They have an extensive history section, which documents the exodus of the horse tribes across the Carpathian mountains and then each king for several centuries. I actually only got to King Bela IV, who was reigning during the Mongol invasion, but it goes on quite a ways after Bela.

Not to mention that they have some great bows on that site :D

Alan
 
I was referrred here from the sword forum.

I generally agree with what I have read here, but my specialty is Roman and Anglo-Saxon equippage, not Steppe Nomads. But I will note that the curved saber type weapon did not appear until much later,I think with the Mongols and the Ottoman Turks around the 12th -14th Centuries. Blades up until then were generally straight and either single or double edged.

I liked what the Slade's Anglo-Saxonia site had to say about Seaxes. They did come in many forms, sizes, and varieties, including the rounded form that we call the Frankish Seax. I was not so taken with what he showed as Anglo-Saxon helmets. Most of what he showed were Norse, the Eyeglass type or the earlier Vendel type, then the Norman nasal helm, which was a late arrival, 10th Century probably being the earliest. He then shows the Burg Castle Helm, which is a larte Anglo-Saxon type from around 800CE, but ignores the famous Sutton Hoo helm and the Benty Grange Helm, which are much earlier Anglo-Saxon types. The Sutton Hoo helm, from the ship burial of theat name, appears to be a modified Late Roman Ridge Helmet, withadded face mask and much elaboration, while the Benty Grange Helm is an iron framework into which it is thought that they put horn plates to make a form of a spangenhelm. It is topped with a gorgeously sculpted boar.

Enough, I have to run.
 
Originally posted by FullerH


I liked what the Slade's Anglo-Saxonia site had to say about Seaxes. They did come in many forms, sizes, and varieties, including the rounded form that we call the Frankish Seax. I was not so taken with what he showed as Anglo-Saxon helmets. Most of what he showed were Norse, the Eyeglass type or the earlier Vendel type, then the Norman nasal helm, which was a late arrival, 10th Century probably being the earliest. He then shows the Burg Castle Helm, which is a larte Anglo-Saxon type from around 800CE, but ignores the famous Sutton Hoo helm and the Benty Grange Helm, which are much earlier Anglo-Saxon types. The Sutton Hoo helm, from the ship burial of theat name, appears to be a modified Late Roman Ridge Helmet, withadded face mask and much elaboration, while the Benty Grange Helm is an iron framework into which it is thought that they put horn plates to make a form of a spangenhelm. It is topped with a gorgeously sculpted boar.

Hi Fuller -

Actually I can take neither the credit for the seax-info nor the blame for the helmet-info, those are just my 'direct links' to Regia.org (a re-enacted society) pages -- I don't have any Anglo-saxon weapon pages of my own up yet, just links to ones I've found.

I don't understand why they didn't show some of the other helmets myself, particularly the Sutton Hoo helmet - which is gorgeous, but if you scroll down a bit from the Weapons & Warfare (& other Saxon entertainment) Section on my page, there's actually a special Sutton Hoo section which does have photos of the Sutton Hoo helmet at least.

Slades Anglo-Saxonia

cheers, B.
 
Why hello Hugh!!!!
Welcome to the Cantina. Lots of good stuff here and you can even buy a khukuri if you would like.:)
Several even if you happen to get infected with HIKV. Don't say you weren't warned.;)
 
Originally posted by ACStudios

So the Alans were of a Ural-Altaic people according to this site. Does this give you a hint at what language they spoke?

This stuff is too fun!! I should have gone for a history major...

Alan

Well, from everything that I have read, the Alans were definitely Indo-European speakers, being one of the great tribes of the Sarmatians. Their language is noted by both all of the major authorities of the Greeks, Romans, and Sassanians as being "Scythic", or Indo-Persian.
But, that website is not necessarily wrong. The Alans, along with the other Sarmatians, were heavily assimilated in the first few centuries A.D. by other steppe tribes. Some joined with the Huns (Altaic-speakers) to raid the Romans and the Goths, while others joined with the Goths (Germanic-speakers) to fight the Huns and the Romans, while yet others were colonized in Rome to defend against the depredations of their fellow nomads!
Most of these groups were rather small when compared to agricultural states, and safety often lay in numbers. When the Mongols began their career of destruction, they absorbed both Turkic and Iranian speaking nomads in their hordes, and the historical evidence shows a similar pattern for the period of the Huns.
The period of the Great Migrations is endlessly fascinating to me, though I find the Iranians much more interesting than the Germans, for some reason.
 
Originally posted by Scythian


Well, from everything that I have read, the Alans were definitely Indo-European speakers, being one of the great tribes of the Sarmatians. Their language is noted by both all of the major authorities of the Greeks, Romans, and Sassanians as being "Scythic", or Indo-Persian.
But, that website is not necessarily wrong. The Alans, along with the other Sarmatians, were heavily assimilated in the first few centuries A.D. by other steppe tribes. Some joined with the Huns (Altaic-speakers) to raid the Romans and the Goths, while others joined with the Goths (Germanic-speakers) to fight the Huns and the Romans, while yet others were colonized in Rome to defend against the depredations of their fellow nomads!
Most of these groups were rather small when compared to agricultural states, and safety often lay in numbers. When the Mongols began their career of destruction, they absorbed both Turkic and Iranian speaking nomads in their hordes, and the historical evidence shows a similar pattern for the period of the Huns.
The period of the Great Migrations is endlessly fascinating to me, though I find the Iranians much more interesting than the Germans, for some reason.

Scythian - I did a bit of 'research' and you're exactly right. Found some more information on the Alans too, Alan ;).

from Late Sarmatian - the Alan or Shipovskaya cultures, 2nd - 4th century A.D.:
Late Sarmatian sites were first identified by P.D. Rau, who also associated the Late Sarmatian sites with the historical Alans. At the beginning of the 1st century A.D., the Alans had occupied lands in the northeast Azov Sea area, along the Don. Based on the archaeological material they were one of the Iranian-speaking nomadic tribes began to enter the Sarmatian area between the middle of the 1st and the 2nd century A.D. The written sources suggest that from the second half of the 1st to 4th century A.D. the Alans had supremacy over the tribal union and created a powerful confederation of tribes. They continued to rule in the North Black Sea steppes until they were invaded by the Huns in the late 4th century A.D. Most of the Alans were absorbed by the Huns while a small number of them fled to the North Caucasus or went west and reached the shores of Gilbraltar.

One of the most characteristic traits of the Late Sarmatian culture was the artificial deformation of skulls. This was probably accomplished by tying a soft cloth around the infant's head forcing an elongation of the cranium. This cultural trait was specific to the populations living east of the Don River and included the Southern Ural population. In contrast to the Middle Sarmatian culture, the predominant orientation of the deceased was to the north.

though not much is known about Scythian (the language I mean - not that I know much about Scythian either ;) ). Most people hold it to be an Indo-European tongue, and related to the Indo-Persian languges (Sanskrit, Old Persian, &c.), but I ran across at least one site which argues that it's a member of the Slavic family.

Supposedly the Sarmatians were a matriarchal culture:

The most fascinating feasture of Sarmatian culture is their women warriors. Herodotus reported that the Sarmatians were said to be the offsprings of Scythians who had mated with Amazons and that their female descendants "have continued from that day to the present to observe their ancient [Amazon] customs, frequently hunting on horseback with their husbands; in war taking the field; and wearing the very same dress as the men" Moreover, said Herodotus, "No girl shall wed till she has killed a man in battle."
Both Herodotus and Hippocrates accounts inform us the Sarmatians took interest in turning their women into strong-armed huntresses and fighters. Archaeological materials seem to confirm Sarmatian women's active role in military operation and social life. Burial of armed Sarmatian women comprise large percent of the military burial in the group occupy the central position and appear the be the richest.

I don't know if this quite qualifies them as 'matriarchal' though.

In any case, here are some Sarmartian/Alan sites I found:

Steppe People of Eurasia

Women Warriors of the Steppes

yet more women warriors

(I'm starting to get Zena images ;) )

Goths, Samartians & Huns

Art of the Samartians

cheers, B.
 
Beoram, you really should find a pic of a quality reproduction of the Benty Grange Helm to include, it is the oldest known Saxon piece and is a very striking work of art.
 
Ben/Scythian,

I spend all last night (until 9:30 this morning) reading about the Magyars. ... I got all the way through the Mongols invasion before falling asleep. Very interesting stuff I must say.

Tonight, it looks like I'll take a look at the Samaritans and the links that you provided Ben.

Thanks again, you guys are contributing a lot to my education! :)

Alan

The cool thing will be when I try to form a connection from my Cherokee and Celtic backgrounds, to the steppes people (I'm working on an SCA persona) sometime from 1300-1400 CE (those are the 12-13th centuries, right??? I ALWAYs get messed me up with the dates) I actually think I can pull it off easily enough! :D
 
Some of you may find this Osprey book interesting. Among other things, it includes some pics of Sarmatian heavy cavalry from various Roman relief carvings. The author, Simon MacDowall, also observes that the Sarmatians were likely the origin of the Late Roman cataphracti, while the Parthians/Sassanid Persians were the origins of the more heavily armored clibanarii. A clibanus was a Roman bread oven made of iron, if you think of a heavily armored soldier in the desert sun, you get the idea. The book is Late Roman Cavalryman 236-565 AD(Warrior Series, No. 15), by Simon MacDowall with Christa Hook as Illustrator. There is a wealth of detail in this book and in its companion, Late Roman Infantryman 236-565 AD(Warrior Series, No. 9), by Simon MacDowall with Gerry Embleton as Illustrator.

There is another book, Island of Ghosts, by Gillian Bradshaw, which is a novel of historical fiction. It is set during the principate of Marcus Aurelius, who had defeated the Sarmatians in a campaign of attrition similar to the Sioux War of 1876-1877. As part of the treaty, the Sarmatians sent a large number of their heavy cavalry to the Province of Britannia to serve away from the Danubian Border, where they had been such a menace. This is historical fact, the fictional part is what happens to them after they get to Britannia. The most interesting part of the book, however, is that Ms. Bradshaw has the Sarmatians using stirrups in the late 2nd Century CE, basing her position upon Sarmatian tomb discoveries in the Western Ukraine that have saddles with what can only be stirrups found near to them. Some of these tombs date from the 1st Century BCE. If true, this really upsets much of European military history, which places the appearance of the stirrup around the 7th Century CE. I should, however note, that Ewart Oakeshott, in his book, The Archaeology of Weapons: Arms and Armour from Prehistory to the Age of Chivalry, has the Goths using stirrups at Adrianople on 9 August 378, when they trounced the Eastern Roman Army and killed the Emperor of the Eastern Empire, Valens. So he has stirrups in use only some 200 years after the setting of Bradshaw's novel. Please understand, howewver, that neither of these have been accepted by anything like a majority of the historical commentators that I have read.
 
Originally posted by FullerH
Beoram, you really should find a pic of a quality reproduction of the Benty Grange Helm to include, it is the oldest known Saxon piece and is a very striking work of art.

Thanks Fuller. If I ever get round to putting up my own Saxon weapons pages I'll be sure to put it in. I might just put a pic of it on the main page for now (I do have the sutton hoo helm, you notice, [which is also my icon on this forum, with my eyes pasted in ;) ]).

cheers, B.
 
Originally posted by FullerH
The most interesting part of the book, however, is that Ms. Bradshaw has the Sarmatians using stirrups in the late 2nd Century CE, basing her position upon Sarmatian tomb discoveries in the Western Ukraine that have saddles with what can only be stirrups found near to them. Some of these tombs date from the 1st Century BCE. If true, this really upsets much of European military history, which places the appearance of the stirrup around the 7th Century CE. I should, however note, that Ewart Oakeshott, in his book, The Archaeology of Weapons: Arms and Armour from Prehistory to the Age of Chivalry, has the Goths using stirrups at Adrianople on 9 August 378, when they trounced the Eastern Roman Army and killed the Emperor of the Eastern Empire, Valens. So he has stirrups in use only some 200 years after the setting of Bradshaw's novel. Please understand, howewver, that neither of these have been accepted by anything like a majority of the historical commentators that I have read.

In "A History of the Alans in the West", Bernard Bachrach claims that large numbers of Alani settled in Brittany/Armorica in the 5th century AD, and that identifiable elements of Sarmatian culture were still present there in the High Middle Ages. Interestingly, the Alans were a major contingent of the Gothic force that hammered the Romans at Adrianople.
 
Stumbled across some references to the Alani in a book read on Beowulf. (The Geats of Beowulf by Jane Acomb Leake. Madison: Uni. of Wisconsin Press, 1967). The book is regarding the question 'Who are/were the Geats' (Beowulf is said to be a Geat; Hrothgar, who Grendel is persecuting, is a Dane). The two traditional claims have been the Geats are the Gautar, a Gothic tribe that lived in the south of Sweden; the other claim has been that the Geats are Jutes. Leake claims that the Geats are rather 'mythological', being based on a classical (Roman) name (Getae) for a particular Germanic tribe (which may or may not have ever existed) which was later 'misapplied' to various Germanic peoples and that the author(s) of Beowulf may have used it to bridge differences between the Saxons and the Danes by introducing a 'common ancestry' through the (mythical) Geats. I don't know if I believe this, but it's interesting.

In any case, here are the passages concerning the Alani/Alans:

Procopius likewise uses Getae and Gothi in a broad sense. He writes, 'There were many Gothic nations in earlier times, just as also at present, but the greatest and most important of all are the Goths, Vandals, Visigoths and Gepaedes. In ancient times, however, they were named Sauromatae and Melanchlaeni; and there were some too who called these nations Getic. All these, while they are distinguished from one another by their names, as has been said, do not differ in anything else at all,...and, as it seems to me, they all came originally from one tribe, and were distinguished later by the names of those who led each group'. Later he adds the non-Germanic Alans to the 'Gothic' nations.
(pg. 30)

[in Martianus Capella:] 'From this point the Scythian coast is crowded with a diversity of barbarians; for there are the Getae, the Dacians, the Sarmatians, the Amaxobii, the Trogodytae, the Alans, the Germans...'
(pg. 32)

[from Priscian's Periegesis:] 'To the north of it is barbarian country, and countless tribes are contained within this remote area, for which the entrances to desolate Maeotis provide a boundary. From this place come the savage Germans and warlike Sarmatians and the Getae and also the tribe of the Bastarnae and the multitudes of Dacians and the warlike hearts of the Alans and the Tauri, who hold the Dromon of brave Achilles, narrow and long near the entrance to Lake Maeotis...'
(pg. 33)

During the barbarian invaions, the Getae-Goths were designated as one of the savage tribes that Alexander [the Great-BMS] enclosed, and in the Jewish or Syrian version of Pseudo-Callisthenes referred to above, the list of people excluded is headed by 'Goth, Magoth' [in the Christian-Roman period, certain people decided that the name 'Goth' was related to the (evil) biblical people of Gog-Magog-BMS]:
'Thither accordingly Alexander before the mountains were closed drove two-and-twenty kings with their peoples and there at the extremities of the North he shut them in and the gates he called Caspian and the mountains Breasts. And the names of the nations were these: Goth, Magoth, Anougoi, Egeis, Exenach, Diphar, Photinaioi, Pharizaioi, Zarmantianoi, Chalonioi, Agrimardoi, Anouphgoi, Tharbaioi, Alanes, Phisolonikaioi, Saltarioi, and the rest. These were the peoples that were confined within the gates that king Alexander built to exclude them because of their uncleanness. For they ate things polluted and base, dogs, mice, serpents, the flesh of corpses, yea unborn embryos as well as their own dead. Such were all of them practices which king Alexander beheld, and since he feared that these nations might come forth upon the civilized world, he confined them' [from Asser's Life of Alfred]
(pg. 39)

[Aethicus Ister writes]: 'The same philosopher makes clear mention of all these things in his writings. Thus there are also the Vafri, the Frigontae, the Murini, the Alapes, the Turchi, the Alani, the Maeotae, the Chuni, the Frisii, the Dani, the Vinnosi, the Rifei, the Olches, whom the people in those regions call Orchi, tribes whose way of life is completely unclean and impure in the moral sense, living beyond every kingly government of the earth, without law, without God and religioius ceremonies. For the entire area is called Germany because the inhabitants have huge bodies, are quite numerous, are inured to the most savage customs, are even unconquerable, and bear the rigor of cold better than other nations. He says that there are a hundred cantons, ranging from habitable to uninhabitable, from the Rhine River to the Ocean, many islands, and the Maeotic marshes'
(pg.55-56)

[Adam of Bremen writes in his description of the Baltic]: 'In this sea there are also very many other islands, all infested by ferocious barbarians and for this reason avoided by navigators. Likewise, round about the shore of the Baltic Sea, it is said, live the Amazons in what is now called the land of women. Some declare that these women conceive by sipping water. Some, too, assert that they are made pregnant by the merchants who pass that way, or by the men whom they hold captive in their midst, or by various monsters, which are not rare there. And when these women come to give birth, if the offspring be of the male sex, they become Cynocephali; if of the feminine kind, they become most beautiful women. Living by themselves, the latter spurn consort with men and, if men do come near, even drive them manfully away. The Cynocephali are men who have their heads on their breasts. They are often seen in Russia as captives and they voice their words in barks. In that region, too, are those who are called Alani or Albani, in their language named Wizzi; very hard-hearted gluttons, born with gray hair. The writer Solinus mentions them. Dogs defend their country. Whenever the Alani have to fight, they draw up their dogs in battle line...[Concerning the Baltic Sea,] I am of the opinion that this body of water was perhaps called by the ancient Romans the Scythian or Maeotic swamp, or 'the wilds of the Getae', or the Scythian swamp, which Martian says was 'full of a multifarious diversity of barbarians'. There, he says, live the Getae, Dacians, Sarmatians, Alani, Neutri, Geloni, Anthropophagi, and Troglodytes. Because he deplored their delusions, our metropolitan appointed Björkö as a metropolis for those peoples. This city, situated in central Sweden, lies opposite Jumne, the city of the Slavs, and all the shorelines of that sea encircle it at equal distance...'
(pg. 76-77)


an interesting quote - the Alani were often confused with the Albani (Albanians??), Leake reports.


On the contemporary Ebstorf map, northern Europe is peopled by 'Alani Schite et Daci Anoxobii Trogodite Sarmathe'...
(pg. 90)


cheers, Ben.
 
:eek: :eek: :eek: Oh MY! I hadn't read that the Alani were people eaters! Yikes ....

I'm glad now that I've drifted into the Magyar history. I haven't found any references of nasty culinary habits. That whole region (Carpathian Basin and the Steppe region on the other side) has a very cool background. If you like to raid and pillage that is :D

Thanks for sharing Ben!

Alan
 
Back
Top