Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 189

Thread: [Suggestion] muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

  1. #161
    wudang_clown's Avatar Fire Is Inspirational
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    7,357

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Quote Originally Posted by Dago Red View Post
    Where did you get that from, steel in large quantities in antiquity? I don't think so. That would be revolution, it would literally turn history and archeology upside down. It was called the bronze age for a reason!
    Accidentally, I have exaggerated my statement. But it is known that steel was produced on Indian subcontinent already in 2nd/3rd century AD. Source (I couldn't find anything better now).

    By the way, Bronze Age isn't precise term, neither is Antiquity. You wouldn't say 2nd/3rd c. AD is Bronze Age, would you?

    Regarding "large scale of production", I was referring to medieval period. You can read about it in Similar like White and Black: a Comparison of Steel-making Crucibles from Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent:
    [...] the production of crucible steel [in Akhsiket in Central Asia] apparently covered the entire period from the 9th century to almost to the very end of the town's existence. The massive quantity of crusible remains and their very standardised cylindrical shape and size, of around of litre internal volume, attest to the industrial nature of the steel production at Akhsiket.
    This is one site only; there are few more described in the paper.

    Under the patronage of m_1512

  2. #162

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Iron and steel daggers and short swords have been found aged older than 2000BC but are very rare. As for mail hauberks being worn by Assyrians- I have alot of doubts. That Assyrians had some knowledge of iron definitely. That it was produced in enough quantity to armor many of their soldiers in mail is quite questionable. Scale iron which is laced unto leather is much lower weight, and required much less iron while offering defense stronger than bronze mail which has been found made as late as 5th century AD.

    Many older books even if 1970s are old used mail and scale interchangeably. Mild steel and iron are not that different either. For a better explanation of iron vs steel and the methods to smelt either here is a relatively concise article-

    http://mygeologypage.ucdavis.edu/cowen/~GEL115/115CH5.html

  3. #163
    Blatta Optima Maxima's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Free Democratic People's Republic of Latvia
    Posts
    10,738

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Quote Originally Posted by Harith View Post
    soo... can we all now agree that Muslims did use heavy armor from 400AD and onward?
    There were no Muslims in 400AD...

  4. #164
    Harith's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    On The Road
    Posts
    1,786

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Quote Originally Posted by Cocroach the great View Post
    There were no Muslims in 400AD...
    sorry I usually use Muslims to refer to Arabian Peninsula or the Middle East.

  5. #165
    Blatta Optima Maxima's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Free Democratic People's Republic of Latvia
    Posts
    10,738

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    How can one refer to the Sassanids and 3/4 of the ERE as Muslims...?


    Anyway, since the Parthians, Sassanids and Romans had cataphracts I'd say they did have heavy armor. That illustration looks like BS, though, since I don't remember any sources attributing bronze cuirasses to cataphracts.



    Final point, what makes Drago think someone used tin armor? Tin is more expensive than iron, and much less useful.
    Last edited by Blatta Optima Maxima; August 24, 2011 at 08:24 AM.

  6. #166
    Harith's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    On The Road
    Posts
    1,786

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Quote Originally Posted by Cocroach the great View Post
    How can one refer to the Sassanids and 3/4 of the ERE as Muslims...?


    Anyway, since the Parthians, Sassanids and Romans had cataphracts I'd say they did have heavy armor. That illustration looks like BS, though, since I don't remember any sources attributing bronze cuirasses to cataphracts.



    Final point, what makes Drago think someone used tin armor? Tin is more expensive than iron, and much less useful.
    just because they were ruled by Persians or Romans doesn't change the fact that they are Arabs. Now, majority of Arabs are Muslim, therefore I got used to using the term Muslim to refer to an Arab alright?

  7. #167
    Blatta Optima Maxima's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Free Democratic People's Republic of Latvia
    Posts
    10,738

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    You really honestly think Mesopotamia, Egypt, Syria and Levant was inhabited by Arabs before the Islamic conquests?

  8. #168
    Harith's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    On The Road
    Posts
    1,786

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Quote Originally Posted by Cocroach the great View Post
    You really honestly think Mesopotamia, Egypt, Syria and Levant was inhabited by Arabs before the Islamic conquests?
    do u honsetly think they were inhabited by Persians and Romans only and not Assyrian, Akkadian, Egyptian and Saracen?

  9. #169
    Blatta Optima Maxima's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Free Democratic People's Republic of Latvia
    Posts
    10,738

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Those lands were inhabited by Assyrians (Chaldeans?), Egyptians and Syrians respectively. None had anything to do with Arabs. apart from being Semitic.


    "Saracen" was a Latin word for any semitic desert peoples.

  10. #170
    Dago Red's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    "Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" ~John Adams
    Posts
    3,095

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Guys let's not stray too far into classical antiquity or the late Roman period. I will say though that the term Saracen was used by Romans to describe a desert people (distinct from Arabs). Later the Greeks broadened it and began using it to refer to all Arab people's to the east. Then in the Crusades, the term got its more modern connotation, broadened even more, which refers simply to any Muslim. It has somewhat derogatory connotations IMO and should probably be avoided. I move to have it stricken from BC all together, except for some colorful usage in descriptive text - certainly there should be no "Saracen swordsmen" unit (present as an AOR unit near Syria and in the Abbasid areas -- perhaps "Syrian swordsman" is better?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Cocroach the great View Post
    Final point, what makes Drago think someone used tin armor? Tin is more expensive than iron, and much less useful.
    You mean me? Lamellar was made out of many, many materials and most was not metal. Leather, horn, bone, textiles and varieties of metal were all used. Similarly, different kinds of scale armor (not too distant from lames in concept) were made of a wide variety of materials. Tin was used. At some point in this discussion I may have overstated it's use, but it was in fact used. Most lamellar was of course, hardened leather -- readily available to anyone. This thing about tin came up again, when this description of a kind of corslet was posted... since this thread is so long, here it is again:

    Quote Originally Posted by matmohair1 View Post
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



    I'll also add, that tin is not necessarily "less useful" than other materials. Certainly when you compare it to hardened leather -- which would have been the basic material, it is better. Moreover, tin does not oxidize in air as easy as other metals -- so it does not corrode as fast. Europeans sometimes used tin to coat the individual scales of their scale armor, so this corslet with tin plates above, and other armors made of/or incorporating tin in the Middle East are entirely rational.
    Last edited by Dago Red; August 24, 2011 at 04:07 PM.

  11. #171
    Harith's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    On The Road
    Posts
    1,786

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Quote Originally Posted by Cocroach the great View Post
    Those lands were inhabited by Assyrians (Chaldeans?)
    no.. Assyrians are the real and first people to inhabit Iraq in Nineveh which is one of the oldest city (if not the oldest) in the world. They have nothing to do with Hellenistic culture or the Greeks. They existed before the Hellenistic culture.

    Google for more information and please don't continue this pointless argument because I made a mistake and I apologize.

  12. #172
    Blatta Optima Maxima's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Free Democratic People's Republic of Latvia
    Posts
    10,738

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Dude, I know, I just forgot what their exact name was.

  13. #173
    Harith's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    On The Road
    Posts
    1,786

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Quote Originally Posted by Cocroach the great View Post
    Dude, I know, I just forgot what their exact name was.
    no problem

  14. #174

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    About the chain mail that Etruscans and the Japanese made earlier was too simple and lack any protection value in terms of Celtic/Gallic chain mail.

    I already visit the website but i can hardly see why these civilization need chain mail and i didn't see these culture need chain mail because Etruscans armed similar to Greeks while Japanese usually armed with lamellar armor. No evidence shows that they use it in large number and whats the purpose using these white elephants while bows and arrows could render chain mail useless.

  15. #175
    nnnm's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    UAE
    Posts
    1,236

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Guys this is not the topic of this thread.



  16. #176
    wudang_clown's Avatar Fire Is Inspirational
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    7,357

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Thread cleaned, some posts moved to a new thread.

    Under the patronage of m_1512

  17. #177

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    The chain mail was used in Assyrian Empire? Give me a break, actually no Assyrian use chain mail because there are no such technology to produce such armor. The armor was used by the Romans in Middle East and eventually the Sassaind Persians produce a different pattern of chain mail to arm cavalry and infantry in large quantity.

  18. #178
    Ghazi Warrior's Avatar Libertus
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Multan, Pakistan
    Posts
    80

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    i think heeehehe is concerned about historical flow of game. if muslim units become less armoured then they will not be able to go according to history, as the heavily armoured crusader armies will conquer areas which they never had even passed by in history.

    i also completely agree with dago red and appreciate his interest, approach and solid arguement. it was not proper for muslim factions to stick firmly to only skirmish battle tactics. and when heavily armoured crusaders came, then they haven't won battles depending only on shooting from range and avoiding meele. they certainly had good meele cavalery and infantery for competing crusader armies.
    as for seljuks of rum are concerned, their janissaries were famous for meele and their gunpowder mastery was known in world. their very main weapon heavy devastating cannons and hand gunners was an uncureable disease for byzentium. their very big factor of victory against byzentium was clear advantage in war technology.

    then why will they restrict themselves to avoid from heavy armour against heavily armoured knights and other units.
    janissaries of ottomans were a weapon against both mounted and unmounted armour of europe.

    according to my historical knowledge, byzantium did not has variety of troops compared to ottomans.

    as for as ayyubid are concerned, in saladin's era their big weapon was to cut the supplies of enemies and harrasing them by a lot of skirmishes and gurilla attacks. he was used to weaken the enemy by thousand cuts before final attack.

    while in bebris's time, late ayyubid era, his mounted mumluks were equaly armoured to frankish heavy knights and mongol heavy cavalery. thats why he clearly defeated combined armies of frankish crusaders and mongols. this shows that he was no way lacking in armour strength than crusader knights in later crusades.

    i think this will be much helpful for clarifying.

  19. #179

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    Quote Originally Posted by matmohair1 View Post
    yes. Armenia, Georgia and other eastern Christians did so, they also combined it with Roman & west European examples as well

    heavy armor was used by the Armenians since their wars with the Sassanian Persians
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    middle eastern Christians
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 




    Georgians
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Armenia during the crusades
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Muslim & Christian warriors of the 12th century
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    14th century Armenia & the Caucasus
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    the same changes were happening in north Africa
    -
    later Muslims in Spain combined western and eastern styles of armor and even invented new ones such as the manople gauntlet sword

    14th - 15th Andalusia
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



    From which book are this pics excactly?
    http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/6...ee4e41859a.jpg
    http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/5663/picture16m.png




  20. #180
    matmohair1's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Abu Dhabi - UAE
    Posts
    2,155

    Default Re: muslim weaponry and military structure in future BC versions

    this one is from a Russian encyclopedia & is illustrated by Dr M.Gorelik

    http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/6...ee4e41859a.jpg

    this is an illustration by Igor Dzis from a book about the Battle of Kulikovo

    http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/5663/picture16m.png


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •