Sub-Roman Britain (Cavalry etc)

[dashydog]

Morning Alanus,
Yes, this makes sense, as does your earlier comment about oven men and implied "no armoured horses" comment. There dont seem to have been any significant long bow men in this era, which isnt surprising and the various accounts I have of warfare in Armorica/Orleannais make little mention of archers save as mounted "Hungarian style" cavalry. Igitur:no need for horse armour. The kataphract idea seems to have been suspended and I can only guess that it was the friendly local Huns who saw to that in their time. I suppose our "Nouveaux Riches" equestrian classes/bullies would have massacred any pezzie found with a bow! In fact, the whole history of equestrian dominant societies is one where skilled infantry were disliked, unless hired in and deliberately avoided. Cant have the plebs having rights earned in battle, can we?
And, the Genoese crossbow men werent an item so early on.
That also fits in with a period that I always see as one where the Celto Roman iron trades collapsed and very different Saxon ones came in slowly to fill the gap.

[Alanus]

Back to Dashydog,

This more or less seems the case. The sub-roman "event" was carried on by a prestegious nobility, headed by "tyrants," aka tyranni. The weapons described above come from the Saint Cadoc Records. Along with the Liber Llandavensis, they constitute an historical addition to Gildas (and perhaps a few ancient, but corrupted, peoms might be added with due caution).

However, from art we find plenty of evidence for the bow. It wasn't the long-bow, but a composite bow of the Roman type. It shows up on villa mosaics and again in the illustration within the Virgilius MS (circa 600) in the Vatican. The bow's siyahs, the bone and wood extentions, have been found at Caerleon. They match, exactly, the siyahs now built into the Roman bows made by Csaba Grozer. (I have two of them) The recurve bow seems to have pervaded all of early Europe, even made by the Fenni and Sami (without the sinew part); but it disappeared by the medieval period when the long-bow (cheap and fast to make) superceeded it.

What we have, then, is a class of warrior and retinue which appears as a cross between Celtic and Roman-- and cavalry oriented.

[dashydog]

I agree. The degree of it all...the ratios of what to what, is something that needs clarification. In Armorica the cavalry classes were very powerful. The Romans "en landed" the Alans in a way specifically designed to ensure that they could concentrate on being cavaly and not having to farm themselves. The bloodlines of beef stock there seem to support that.I think it stayed that way for at least a couple of hundred years. The Franks and co subsumed the Alans but embraced the system.

England was quite different. By 450 we see the great Roman estates finally crumbling for all sorts of reasons and various Angle and Saxon groups moving in. LIke all Germanics, they are hanseband in their thinking and infantry minded. The horsey thing would have been to do with status and bosses being mobile. Who was that English lady general..Aethekfkad or whoever..who zoomed up and down England on c ampaign doing immense journeys? Its not until the 800 that we hear of various Alan horse mercenaries moving in "on loan" to Scottish and English princelings, before marrying the bosses daughter and taking over. I imagine the Sarmat crowd at Ribchester, if they did survive as a group, did a really good trade bashing people up for money, as the only real cavalry in the game.

We dont seem to see a real equestrian class moving into Blighty until William arrives with his Bretons. However, as intimated above, they were prowling around before.
It must have been damned hard to run a war in post Roman Britain. The archaeology shows a wholesale movement back to the old iron age hill forts 450 onwards. Roman trade has collapsed..in everything from pozzolana to iron and tin. Getting plate made for armour and helmets must have been hell on earth.

INcidently. Changing the subject. Have you ever come across lasoes being used in cavalry warfare of our period.? They wre in standard use in Eastern Euroope but hears nothign about it in the west

[Conal]

I agree. The degree of it all...the ratios of what to what, is something that needs clarification. In Armorica the cavalry classes were very powerful. The Romans "en landed" the Alans in a way specifically designed to ensure that they could concentrate on being cavaly and not having to farm themselves. The bloodlines of beef stock there seem to support that.I think it stayed that way for at least a couple of hundred years. The Franks and co subsumed the Alans but embraced the system.

Were the Alans actually "en landed" in Armorica or in neighnouring Orleans & Valencea so they were close at hand?

If they were not part or Armorician society and therefore not subsumed then the future references to Breton cavlary may have been with regard to a home grown type and not, what is often assumed, specifically a direct development of Alanic cavalry. I ask this as in AD448 the Armoricians are said to have revolted due to Alanic settlement. Is it clear that they were in revolt as the Alans had been put amongst them or that they were interfering from adjacent lands? Either way they were not being accepted so maybe they were not assimilated, maybe resitence wasn't futile????

I think quite a lot has been made of a few sentences in the Gallic chronicles, especially that for 452.

[dashydog]

Hello Conal. I am not sure. Never really thought about it, to be honest. I tend to use Bachrach as a source and can check back through that. The Alans were hated in areas of Armorica,,as per cutting out the tongues of the Alan wimmin. THats for sure. Give me a couple of days while I "dredge". Right now I would comment that the Alans seemed to have been very good at making good marriages and wedding the right sort of gentry! To my mind, this is where the spread comes from. Not nearly as dramatic as "mighty conquest"! AS people, they didnt seem to have the love of paperwork, title deeds,wills, infantry skills that the germanics types did. So, they werent that good at holding territory,..in all its many meanings..unless they married it.

[cagwinn]

Hello Conal. I am not sure. Never really thought about it, to be honest. I tend to use Bachrach as a source and can check back through that. The Alans were hated in areas of Armorica,,as per cutting out the tongues of the Alan wimmin.

I have found Bachrach to be very unreliable - I caution anyone using him to check (and then double check) his sources, because he often plays fast and loose with the facts.

The foundation legend about the cutting off the tongues of the native women of Armorica (the original text says nothing about them being Alans!! That is plain and simple modern revisionism, with no textual support) is derived from a Breton pun on the alternate name of the region, Letauia, which in Old Welsh and Breton could be parsed as Let-tau "half-silent", ie "mute" (of course, this is a folk etymology - the name is actually Gaulish and means "The Broad One", the name of an old Celtic earth goddess).

By the way, the tongue-cutting was allegedly done by Conan Meriadoc and his men in the 4th century - well before the Alans were settled in Armorica.

[dashydog]

I wouldnt want to comment publicly in a defamatory way but I take your point. His maps of settlement, though, i feel to be good. I have to admit to being suspicious of anyone with a mania for "feigned retreats". Instant turn off that, as is all mention "our Arfer" .

Since you are plainly an expert on The Gallic, what do you make of the word Ker???

[Robert Vermaat]

I have found Bachrach to be very unreliable - I caution anyone using him to check (and then double check) his sources, because he often plays fast and loose with the facts.

Chris, you are overreacting. I think your comment is a bit unfair towards Bachrach, who is a great scholar of the early Middle Ages. You should mention that Bachrach wrote this when the attitude towards primary sources was more 'loose' than it was after David Dumville et al turned the tide the other way.

Btw, I took your point on Vortimer on 'the other forum', and altered my page once more. I guess I relied far too much on secondary sources, which is a mistake for a historian. :oops:

[dashydog]

If they were not part or Armorician society and therefore not subsumed then the future references to Breton cavlary may have been with regard to a home grown type and not, what is often assumed, specifically a direct development of Alanic cavalry. I ask this as in AD448 the Armoricians are said to have revolted due to Alanic settlement. Is it clear that they were in revolt as the Alans had been put amongst them or that they were interfering from adjacent lands? Either way they were not being accepted so maybe they were not assimilated, maybe resitence wasn't futile???

Conal.
Bachrach is fairly copious on this. Far too much to retype for you. He is fairly clear about various Alan settlements to the West of the Orleannais but I dint find any official "settlements" in that. Some of them i have seen for myself when working there. Endorsement from the Emperor seems to have been implicit. Viz a viz Breton cavalry, Regino of Prum and Hermoldus point out their "foreign way" of fighting. This included refusal to dismount and fight on foot, "Hungarian styles of attack", armoured horse etc etc. Any one of these means Sarmatian or Alan. There were no other foreign cavalry to do it. Refusal to dismount and fight is 10000% Samratian attitude. So, to me, it means that the Breton Cavalry were foreigners, were Alan. And, they did seem to adapt and marry in quite well..once they stopped thieving and doing their cossack style protection rackets. Tumultuous times, methinks!

[cagwinn]

Since you are plainly an expert on The Gallic, what do you make of the word Ker???

In what context? If we are talking about Breton place names, Ker (cognate with Welsh Caer) means "castle, fortified town, city", It is ultimately derived from Latin castrum.

[dashydog]

Castrum, to me, in Latin useage, is a camp or garrison.

But your version of Ker might work. Its an old aristocratic family name in UK. It could have origins in Christianity..Ker= priest in Indo aryan and some Turkic dialects. Also has to do with word Black in slawic languages which, in old proto versions, can also use it as Priest. The black word is interesting because it crops up as in blacksmith and various other metalworking "magic" vocab.

I never did work it out. metallurgy, magic and religion wre often mixed, which complicates thing a bit.

[cagwinn]

I have found Bachrach to be very unreliable - I caution anyone using him to check (and then double check) his sources, because he often plays fast and loose with the facts.

Chris, you are overreacting. I think your comment is a bit unfair towards Bachrach, who is a great scholar of the early Middle Ages. You should mention that Bachrach wrote this when the attitude towards primary sources was more 'loose' than it was after David Dumville et al turned the tide the other way.

Btw, I took your point on Vortimer on 'the other forum', and altered my page once more. I guess I relied far too much on secondary sources, which is a mistake for a historian. :oops:

Well, I have by no means read the man's full body of work, but I have read History of the Alans in the West, as well as a few other articles of his on the Alans, and have not been especially impressed by his scholarship (Bachrach is the main source of a number of Malcor & Littleton's wilder claims about the Alans and Sarmatians, by the way). His attempts to find Alanic or Sarmatian settlements in every western European place name that even remotely resembles these two ethnic names is notably shoddy (he doesn't even consider, no less mention other etymological possibilities for the names). Some of his statements about the Bretons are true head scratchers.

I saw that you changed your article - I did notice spelling errors, though - you have Vo®toprix where you should have *Vo®teporix and Votiporix where you should have Voteporix (for this is how the name is spelled on the stone inscription).

[cagwinn]

Castrum, to me, in Latin useage, is a camp or garrison.

But your version of Ker might work. Its an old aristocratic family name in UK. It could have origins in Christianity..Ker= priest in Indo aryan and some Turkic dialects. Also has to do with word Black in slawic languages which, in old proto versions, can also use it as Priest. The black word is interesting because it crops up as in blacksmith and various other metalworking "magic" vocab.

I never did work it out. metallurgy, magic and religion wre often mixed, which complicates thing a bit.

Oh, the surname Ker®...my understanding is that it's either Gaelic, perhaps from Irish ciar "dark, brown", or Norse (Old Norse kjarr "marsh [dweller]").

[dashydog]

shoddy (he doesn't even consider, no less mention other etymological possibilities for the names). Some of his statements about the Bretons are true head scratchers.ell, I have by no means read the man's full body of work, but I have read History of the Alans in the West, as well as a few other articles of his on the Alans, and have not been especially impressed by his scholarship (Bachrach is the main source of a number of Malcor & Littleton's wilder claims about the Alans and Sarmatians, by the way). His attempts to find Alanic or Sarmatian settlements in every western European place name that even remotely resembles these two ethnic names is notably

Heh Heh..You ll never forgive him for that will you (Malcor etc)?? I do concur, I must say, on that matter. But, Bachrach was a great step forward on Alan history. I wish I were that good. Are you that good?? Its so easy to be dismissive of other's great labours. His work that ties into "things out East" is pretty good.

And, I l ltell you this. The "Alan name thing" has always bugged me but I have tried for years to find better explanations. I have found none. None at all. And in so many of these places, the Alans did settle and were recorded. I travelled for a long time in these regions on business and boy did I try hard to find alternatives. Its like the village Respenda. What else can it be but that??? I study Sarmatians etc and one name stem that also drives me bats and it is AS or Asp. As in Aspar, Asparuch. AS as a name stem crops up all through Alan, Sarmat and Bulgarian history. Yet, it means nothing in any of these languages. It did once, you can be sure. But we dont know it now.

[cagwinn]

shoddy (he doesn't even consider, no less mention other etymological possibilities for the names). Some of his statements about the Bretons are true head scratchers.ell, I have by no means read the man's full body of work, but I have read History of the Alans in the West, as well as a few other articles of his on the Alans, and have not been especially impressed by his scholarship (Bachrach is the main source of a number of Malcor & Littleton's wilder claims about the Alans and Sarmatians, by the way). His attempts to find Alanic or Sarmatian settlements in every western European place name that even remotely resembles these two ethnic names is notably

Heh Heh..You ll never forgive him for that will you (Malcor etc)?? I do concur, I must say, on that matter. But, Bachrach was a great step forward on Alan history. I wish I were that good. Are you that good?? Its so easy to be dismissive of other's great labours. His work that ties into "things out East" is pretty good.

And, I l ltell you this. The "Alan name thing" has always bugged me but I have tried for years to find better explanations. I have found none. None at all. And in so many of these places, the Alans did settle and were recorded. I travelled for a long time in these regions on business and boy did I try hard to find alternatives. Its like the village Respenda. What else can it be but that??? I study Sarmatians etc and one name stem that also drives me bats and it is AS or Asp. As in Aspar, Asparuch. AS as a name stem crops up all through Alan, Sarmat and Bulgarian history. Yet, it means nothing in any of these languages. It did once, you can be sure. But we dont know it now.

For me, a much more useful resource on Alanic history is Agusti Alemany's "Source on the Alans" (if any of you haven't seen it, you can read a fair amount of it on Google Books: http://books.google.com/books?id=8bZ4c5oZpNAC ). I prefer reading the primary sources, themselves, minus too much speculation (ala Bachrach).

As far as the Breton personal name Alan is concerned (and the English name Alan is likely derived from Breton), it most likely comes from a Common Celtic *elan- or *alan-, a name for a type of young animal (probably either a young deer or pony). Some European placenames containing the elements *asp-, *sarm- or *alan- may be derived from Alanic/Sarmatian names, but many can also be explained through other languages.