"Alan!" Topic

Just thinking about an Alan force circa 350 – 450AD to fight for and against my Late Imperial Romans and various Germans. Was going to use some 28mm Victrix Scythians for the light cav but give some shields and spears. My question is around the Noble Cav. Ian Heath says mostly armoured horses where as Phil Barker says mostly unarmoured horses. Would the riders look more Sarmation or by this date more Roman/Goth? Kontos or shields and spears/swords?

Arrian called them Scythians in his "Order of battle against the Alans". He does say they have shock cavalry I think. but tells his front rank infantry to aim their pila/lancea at breast height for horses. If they were predominantly armoured, I dont think there would be an expectation that breast height would be vulnerable? So maybe a small amount of Sarmatian lookalikes, the rest no horse armour.
I remember reading somewhere they were blonde and clean shaven, Sarmatians were swarthy.
Or I could be completely wrong…

Many thanks Korsun0, thats really helpful.

Ammianus described the Alans as "nearly all tall, blond and handsome".

Now I always wonder just how blond people described in Classical sources as blond really were, given that modern Greeks and Italians have much more expansive definitions of "blond" than I do, but presumably they tended to have lighter hair colour than the Romans, even if not necessarily light enough that I'd call them blond.

I don't remember if he says anything about (other*) Sarmatians, but the Huns he describes as dark, short and inhumanly ugly.

* By some definitions, the Alans were a subgroup of the Sarmatians.

Thanks Last Conformist, just reading Ammianus at the moment. I read I think in one of the WRG books that the rest of the Sarmations where 'dark and sallow'

So maybe a small amount of Sarmatian lookalikes, the rest no horse armour

I would agree, except for the last sentence of Arrian's Order of battle against the Alans:

'The Scythians being lightly armed and having unprotected horses [text breaks off ]'

Many thanks Herkybird. That seals it, no horse armour.

I think you need to consider the last section of the _Ektaxis_ to get the context of the last sentence.

(31) So then, if they overcome one flank or the other, it is altogether necessary that the horses be brought against them on the unshielded flanks. Thereupon let the horsemen rush upon them, not still in a skirmishing fashion, but having been brought into contact with the enemy some with broadswords, some also with axes. The Scythians being unprotected and having horses which are unprotected….

So, my interpretation is that they are "unprotected" since they are being hit on the shieldless side (the word in Greek for men and horses is gymnoi, literally naked but in context defenseless or unprotected). As to horse armor, it might be that if they had horse armor it might be half armor and thus the horse was vulnerable when hit in the flank.

Interesting. not heard that quote before. Many thanks Custosarmorum.

Funny, I read the last paragraph (31) as sending your cavalry against the unshielded flank meaning the Alans used shields – (as shown on several models link ) – otherwise it makes the comment on unprotected horses moot. To me, suggesting frontal horse armour is a bit of a stretch.

I agree that the opening sentence clearly indicates that the Alani carried shields.

The interesting thing to me is the comment that the horses are unprotected when hit from the shieldless side -- Arrian in his Taktika that covers the hippika gymnasia (cavalry exercises, sections 33-44) implies that Roman cavalry covered themselves and their horses with their own shields on their left side and back but could not of course cover their right side which Arrian (e.g. Taktika 21.1) routinely refers to as the spear side (section 36, if I recall), and so on the unshielded side both horse and man are unprotected.

There is nothing in Arrian that explicitly mentions horse armor. That said, given the use of horse armor in southern Russia, Armenia, and Parthia, I don't think it can be ruled out (and half armor fits with the context of greater vulnerability on the shieldless side).

A final point to consider is that Arrian and Ammianus are separated by nearly 250 years, so just as the Roman army looked very different over that time span, the same is probably true of the Alani.

I agree completely!