| aapch45 | 28 Feb 2016 9:10 a.m. PST |
Horses are expensive… really expensive.
From what I understand, the parthians had a regular army that was more or less funded by the state.
How then could they afford such a huge amount of horses? They were a stable empire, not nomads (as far as I know) so it's hard for me to wrap my head around how they funded this huge army.
If they were a nomadic peoples, most of the soldiers would be civilian with their own horses.. but this doesn't seem to be the case with the parthians.
Let me know, and please cite sources Thanks so much
Austin |
| Pictors Studio | 28 Feb 2016 9:22 a.m. PST |
The silk road passed through their territory and they could tax the merchants that went along it. |
| Rudysnelson | 28 Feb 2016 9:50 a.m. PST |
The Parthians operated under a feudal system with part of the taxes being paid in military service. |
| Toronto48 | 28 Feb 2016 10:36 a.m. PST |
As Rudy has indicated Parthia operated under a feudal like system and horse breeding were a passion for the nobility. If they were not fighting they were off hunting. Partia was also a large area with no roads so horses were also needed for transport |
| JasonAfrika | 28 Feb 2016 10:48 a.m. PST |
Horses are NOT expensive in horse cultures. You are confusing Western economics with Eastern Steppe peoples economics. Huns, Mongols, Alans, Parthians, Scythians, etc, etc. Horses/ponies are common and affordable. |
| Hafen von Schlockenberg | 28 Feb 2016 12:13 p.m. PST |
C'mon,all you pedants--we know you're gritting your teeth and growling "NUMBER!" |
| GarrisonMiniatures | 28 Feb 2016 12:45 p.m. PST |
Interesting one re Parthians is thought that they might have been uniformed to a degree based on which 'Lord' they served. |
| GurKhan | 28 Feb 2016 2:07 p.m. PST |
"The Parthian king, on the other hand, said that he would order his governors to collect troops — the customary practice whenever it was necessary to raise an army, as they have no standing army and do not hire mercenaries."
- Herodian III.1.2 |
| aapch45 | 28 Feb 2016 2:39 p.m. PST |
I must have misunderstood something along the way.
I always thought they maintained a standing army.
Thanks for all the info so far Keep it up Austin |
| Rich Bliss | 29 Feb 2016 7:54 a.m. PST |
Well, they probably got most of their troops from Old Glory. That would reduce the overall cost. |
| Dexter Ward | 29 Feb 2016 9:02 a.m. PST |
Like most feudal societies armies were raised by lords as needed – definitely no standing army (by contrast the Sassanids certainly did have a professional standing army). |
| vtsaogames | 29 Feb 2016 11:56 a.m. PST |
So, the right flank is my brother in law and all of his retainers. He claims to have 4,000. I'm not so sure. My left is my cousins and their retainers. Did they say about 2,500? And me in the center with my brothers and maybe 3,000 troops last time I counted… Wonder how many are still here today. |
| Dexter Ward | 29 Feb 2016 12:35 p.m. PST |
Carrhae wasn't fought by the main army, but by one of the nobles (the Surena) who had a relatively small army. It's a tribute both to his guile and the incompetence of Crassus that the Romans lost. |
| HarryHotspurEsq | 02 Mar 2016 8:51 a.m. PST |
Also, as I understand it, the Parthian elite maintained a 'mobile' life style with horses and horsemanship very much at its heart. The nobility and their army moved from place to place and seem to have set up camp capitals around whichever city the king was visiting. They were not sedentary in the sense of the Roman state. |
receives a gift from his wife…