An excellent UNESCO document on pre-Islamic Central Asia

[Chelchal]

It's a survey of of the cultures of the Silk Road (including the Sassanids, Guptas, and Kidarites) from the period 250AD-750AD. Since it's a UN document collated by international scholars, it's quite free of nationalist axe grinding as well. I call it a document but it's really a book over 500 pages in length. There is a great deal of information that would be potentially useful for future versions of this game or other IB based mods.

History of Civilizations of Central Asia

Pertinent information on the Sassanids:

In the 350's, when Shapur I was fighting the Chionitae, he used the region of Abarshahr (Nishapur) as his military headquarters against then. The regional governor was called the Karanang (in Greek, Charananges)

Certain Sassanid cities had special status as Royal Cities, under the administration of a Shahrab. They tended to be fortified military centers. These cities included:

Ardashir-Khvarreh (modern Firuzabad)
Gundeshapur
Feroz-Shapur (which surrended to Julian in 363. Ammianus noted its impressive fortifications and "great store of arms and provisions.")
Shad Shapur (Qazvin)
Ubulla (Southern Iraq)
Shapur Khvast (Khurramabad)
Vuzurg Shapur (Ukbara, just north of Baghdad)
Darabgird (Darab)
Gur (Fars Province)
Bishapur (which was built by Roman POWs)

Economic Life

Although, the Sassanids benefited from being middle men of the Silk Road, their economy was overwhelmingly agrarian. They adopted the Silver drachma of the Attic weight. The royal mints were located in Hormizd Ardashir (Ahvaz), Abarshahr, Ardashir-Khvarreh, Hamadan, Susa, and Bishapur.

I'll try to summarize the information on the Guptas and Kidarites as well.

[Joar]

Very interesting! Thanks for sharing.

[First Citizen Gallienus]

This is some great stuff. More rep for you.

[SeniorBatavianHorse]

Yes, a wonderful find. Thanks!

[Diocle]

Very interesting, thanks Chelcal!! +rep!

[Chelchal]

Thanks folks. This is where being an indefatigable googler gets you.

Well I can't rest on my laurels now. Here's a summary on the Kidarites and Hephthalites.

Kidarites were "Huns" of a sort, being called Chionitae (Xyon) and Priscus calls them the Kidarite Huns. "Hun" is simply a very old Altaic word meaning "person" which is the meaning it has in Mongolian today. For our purposes, "Hun" is simply a prestigious title for an equestrian, often nomadic confederation. It's actually analogous to how a "Roman" in the later empire had less to do with the actual city or even Italy or more to do with a prestigious universalizing order. So after his crushing victory over the Franks at Volturnus in 554AD, Narses told his soldiers it was their birthright as Romans to triumph eternally over the barbarians; he meant it, never mind that he was an Armenian commanding Germanic peoples, Slavs, and Huns on behalf of an Illyrian emperor.

But back to the Kidarites/Chionitae. In the context of SAI they were a very new polity, probably not established before the reign of Shapur II. Kidara was the successor to Grumbates around 360AD; he may have even been his son, although the relationship is unclear. The uneasy alliance between the Sassanids and Chionitae collapsed at this time. According to the ancient Chinese chronicler Li Yen nien in his work, the Pei-shih, that Kidara's army crossed the Hindu Kush and extended his reign as far as Peshawar, seizing territory from the Sassanids, or more likely their vassals, the Kushanshahs, in the region.

This Kidarite invasion was seriously destructive. They apparent overran the heavily fortified town of Shahr-i-Nau (near Dushanbe) while the Buddhist center at Termez was destroyed in the fighting between the Sassanids and Kidarites circa the 360s/370s AD. Generally speaking, urban centers and oases on the right bank of the Amu Darya were wiped out. This is consistent with the idea of an aggressive, expansionist, nomadic group.

Economy

The Kidarites imitated Sassanid, Indian, and Kushan coinage. They attempted no systemic reform or innovation and economic life in their territories was a patchwork of various conditions that the Kidarites made little attempt to unify or rationalize. Beyond issuing coinage in Kidara's name, they made little attempt to exploit the political significance of coinage.

The Pei-shih states that the Kidarites were nomads with large herds and compared them to the Hsiung-nu. They quickly established a stratified society over those they had conquered in Transoxiana and the territories around the Hindu Kush.

It is almost impossible to tell what kind of language they spoke.

Hephthalites

The Hephthalites appear after the time of SAI and their relationship to the Kidarites are anything but clear. The Indians lumped then together with the Kidarites as Hunas, which reflects the continuation of "Hun" as a prestigious title. Procopius calls them Huns as well, although different than all others. It is significant that he says they practiced inhumation while Ammianus describes Grumbates' son as being cremated.

Again, their language is guesswork, but it was likely either Turkic or Iranian. Of use to us is the military title Asparobido, a title of clearly Iranian origin (compare to the magister militum and Alan Aspar, or the Bulgarian leader Asparukh) referring to a general of the cavalry. Possibly, the Chionitae/Kidarites had a similar title as equestrian nomads themselves.

[Diocle]

Thanks for these informations! My knowledge of the Central Asia history in this age, using an euphemism, is not complete! ....really your work is precious!!! Thanks!!.....+rep

[Chelchal]

Just as an interesting tidbit, here is a coin of Constantius II...found in the oasis town of Kagharlik, located on the southern rim of the Tarim basin in what is now Xinjiang in western China.

Perhaps it was traded, perhaps it was brought back as loot by a Chionitae tribesman who participated in the sack of Amida.

[SeniorBatavianHorse]

Very nice! Thanks.

[Constantius]

Nice summary, speculating on how the coin came to be so far from Roman territory, I think is what makes studying archaeology fun

[Chelchal]

What's also interesting is how the Romans and Chinese, the two great imperial powers on either end of the Eurasian landmass, dimly viewed one another. In 97 AD, the Han ambassador Gan Ying, ventured as far west as Mesopotamia, but was either convinced or coerced to go no further than the Parthians, who for political and economic reasons, did not want the Romans and Chinese to make direct contact. He did send a report on the Roman lands, the Weilue (Peoples of the West) preserved in the official history of the Han dynasty, the Hou Hanshu. Here are some excerpts:

The country (that you reach) is west of the sea (haixi), which is why it is called Haixi (literally: ‘West of the Sea’ = Egypt). There is a river (the Nile) flowing out of the west of this country, and then there is another great sea (the Mediterranean). The city of (Wu) Chisan (Alexandria) is in Haixi (Egypt).

Now, if you leave the city of Angu (Gerrha) by the overland route, you go north to Haibei (‘North of the Sea’ – the lands between Babylonia and Jordan), then west to Haixi (Egypt), then turn south to go through the city of Wuchisan (Alexandria). After crossing a river, which takes a day by boat, you circle around the coast (to the region of Apollonia, the port of Cyrene). (From there, i.e. the region of Apollonia) six days is generally enough to cross the (second) great sea (the Mediterranean) to reach that country (Da Qin = Rome).

This country (the Roman Empire) has more than four hundred smaller cities and towns. It extends several thousand li* in all directions. The king has his capital (that is, the city of Rome) close to the mouth of a river (the Tiber). The outer walls of the city are made of stone.

* a Chinese li was about half a kilometer

This country (the Roman Empire) has more than four hundred smaller cities and towns. It extends several thousand li in all directions. The king has his capital (Rome) close to the mouth of a river (the Tiber). The outer walls of the city are made of stone

The ruler of this country is not permanent. When disasters result from unusual phenomena, they unceremoniously replace him, installing a virtuous man as king, and release the old king, who does not dare show resentment.

This is obviously a rather garbled statement. It must be a reference to Nerva being chosen on account of his qualities, although Domitian was of course assassinated before this took place. By "unusual phenomena", Gan Ying is referring to the Chinese idea of the Mandate of Heaven and how the emperor was replaced if he lost the Divine Mandate.

They have always wanted to communicate with China but, Anxi (Parthia), jealous of their profits, would not allow them to pass (through to China).

The common people can write in hu (‘Western’) script. They have multi-storeyed public buildings and private; (they fly) flags, beat drums, (and travel in) small carriages with white roofs, and have a postal service with relay sheds and postal stations, like in the Middle Kingdom (China).

The people (of these countries) are connected to each other. Every 10 li (4.2 km) there is a ting (relay shed or changing place), and every 30 li (12.5 km) there is a zhi (postal station). There are no bandits or thieves, but there are fierce tigers and lions that kill those travelling on the route. If you are not in a group, you cannot get through.

Chinese roads were actually even wider and more extensive than the Romans' were, but were not paved and merely used gravel.

This country (Rome) has installed dozens of minor kings. The king’s administrative capital (Rome) is more than 100 li (42 km) around. There is an official Department of Archives.

The king has five palaces at 10 li (4.2 km) intervals. He goes out at daybreak to one of the palaces and deals with matters until sunset and then spends the night there. The next day he goes to another palace and, in five days makes a complete tour. They have appointed thirty-six leaders who discuss events frequently. If one leader does not show up, there is no discussion. When the king goes out for a walk, he always orders a man to follow him holding a leather bag. Anyone who has something to say throws his or her petition into the bag. When he returns to the palace, he examines them and determines which are reasonable

.

The Romans of course had numerous client rulers under their tutelage. Gan Ying is probably including the suburbs when he accounts for Rome's size (keep in mind he did not even cross into Roman territory, let alone visit Rome in person.) The leaders Gan Ying refers to must be the members of the Consilium Principis.

They use glass to make the pillars and table utensils in the palaces. They manufacture bows and arrows.

The Chinese were deeply impressed by Roman glassware. The compound bow as a weapon was used by the Romans in the East, and the Han ambassador was probably made aware of this.

They divide the various branch principalities of their territory into small countries such as that of the king of Zesan (Azania?), the king of Lüfen (Leucos Limen), the king of Qielan (Wadi Sirhan), the king of Xiandu (Leukê Komê), the king of Sifu (Petra), (and that of) the king of Yuluo (Karak). There are so many other small kingdoms it is impossible to give details on each one.

Gan Ying is referring to Eastern lands under varying degrees of Roman control or influence. He seems to have had little idea of the empire beyond Libya or Italy.

This country produces fine linen. They make gold and silver coins. One gold coin is equal to ten silver coins.

They have fine brocaded cloth that is said to be made from the down of ‘water-sheep’. It is called Haixi (‘Egyptian’) cloth. This country produces the six domestic animals, which are all said to come from the water.

Since Roman currency was widely circulated beyond its frontiers, Gan Ying is probably making an accurate first hand observation. 20 years earlier, Pliny had said the exchange was 1: 11, but Vespasian had also debased the denarius, reducing the silver purity from 93% to 90%. By the time of Gan Ying's writing, Nerva had melted down many of Domitian's gold and silver statues to make currency, so the denarius had probably recovered.

By "water sheep", Gan Ying means the famous "Sea silk", the very fine and rare fabric made from shell fish harvested in the Eastern Mediterranean.

[First Citizen Gallienus]

Here's an interesting one:
http://www.neatorama.com/2010/02/04/...-roman-empire/

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

It's a survey of of the cultures of the Silk Road (including the Sassanids, Guptas, and Kidarites) from the period 250AD-750AD. Since it's a UN document collated by international scholars, it's quite free of nationalist axe grinding as well. I call it a document but it's really a book over 500 pages in length. There is a great deal of information that would be potentially useful for future versions of this game or other IB based mods.

History of Civilizations of Central Asia

Pertinent information on the Sassanids:

In the 350's, when Shapur I was fighting the Chionitae, he used the region of Abarshahr (Nishapur) as his military headquarters against then. The regional governor was called the Karanang (in Greek, Charananges)

Certain Sassanid cities had special status as Royal Cities, under the administration of a Shahrab. They tended to be fortified military centers. These cities included:

Ardashir-Khvarreh (modern Firuzabad)
Gundeshapur
Feroz-Shapur (which surrended to Julian in 363. Ammianus noted its impressive fortifications and "great store of arms and provisions.")
Shad Shapur (Qazvin)
Ubulla (Southern Iraq)
Shapur Khvast (Khurramabad)
Vuzurg Shapur (Ukbara, just north of Baghdad)
Darabgird (Darab)
Gur (Fars Province)
Bishapur (which was built by Roman POWs)

Economic Life

Although, the Sassanids benefited from being middle men of the Silk Road, their economy was overwhelmingly agrarian. They adopted the Silver drachma of the Attic weight. The royal mints were located in Hormizd Ardashir (Ahvaz), Abarshahr, Ardashir-Khvarreh, Hamadan, Susa, and Bishapur.

I'll try to summarize the information on the Guptas and Kidarites as well.

Note how all the Royal holdings are concentrated in one general area. Still going to argue against the feudal system?

[Chelchal]

If by one general area you mean several hundreds miles from each other? How is Iraq anywhere near Fars province? And Abarshahr, the imperial military HQ under Shapur II, is not far from what is now Turkmenistan. And how do they presuppose a system a feudal obligations between lords and vassals?

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

If by one general area you mean several hundreds miles from each other? How is Iraq anywhere near Fars province? And Abarshahr, the imperial military HQ under Shapur II, is not far from what is now Turkmenistan. And how do they presuppose a system a feudal obligations between lords and vassals?

It kinda is, when you look at the Sassanid empire. The royal holdings are all massed in the southern-southwestern portion. But the Sassanids lacked an obligation system indeed, which means the nobility could do whatever the they wanted with the poor peasants. But the political situation in the empire was quite similar to medieval Europe, where kings had to rely a lot on their peers, and were thus very limited in their power.

[Chelchal]

A lot of the talk of Iran as having a feudal past stems from Iranian historians discussing their country's past through a Marxist framework, since it was popular to do so alongside an anti-imperialist, nationalist agenda. Necessarily, this meant pigeonholing "feudalism" in somewhere in accordance with a dialectal materialist view of history. This doesn't just apply to Iran as well; the Soviets did indefatigable archaeological work in Central Asia and the Communist states of Europe. Unfortunately, when analyzing the data, their works assumed heavy ideological overtones.

The Irish professor E.A Thompson, from the University of Nottingham, examined the later Roman period through a Marxist lens as well. He did valuable work, such as studying the rural insurgency in the West, the Bagaudae, but his analysis sours when he literally attacked Roman elites as "class enemies."

But back to Sassanid Iran: was it a feudalistic state? Richard Frye, a professor of Iranian studies remarked at a Princeton University symposium:

"Feudalism is a method of government, not an economic or system. (I cannot entirely agree with this - Chelchal) If one is speaking of political systems, then one of the striking features of Western European feudalism was the mutual obligation between the lord and his serfs, a personal relationship to be sure, but institutionalized with a beneficium, the right to collect taxes or the produce, and a homagium or the obligation to perform certain duties to the lord above one. This system did not exist in ancient Iran or indeed at anytime in that land's history, for such contractual obligations going both ways, as far as we know, were unknown."

Manors, where peasant labor was organized for specific agricultural tasks, did not exist in ancient Iran. The peasants were left to their own devices and the landowners or authorities simply collected taxes. The Great King might force the peasants into corvee labor or into the militia, but this was the arbitrary result of his status as supreme ruler. The land itself was not the major issue in Mesopotamia or Transoxania or the lands between them; what was really crucial was the matter of water rights and their distribution. The Great King's servants might be rewarded with the command of an army or a governorship or the right to divert certain rivers; ownership of land was nothing remarkable, especially if the lord could not control how it was irrigated.

[SeniorBatavianHorse]

A lot of the talk of Iran as having a feudal past stems from Iranian historians discussing their country's past through a Marxist framework, since it was popular to do so alongside an anti-imperialist, nationalist agenda. Necessarily, this meant pigeonholing "feudalism" in somewhere in accordance with a dialectal materialist view of history. This doesn't just apply to Iran as well; the Soviets did indefatigable archaeological work in Central Asia and the Communist states of Europe. Unfortunately, when analyzing the data, their works assumed heavy ideological overtones.

The Irish professor E.A Thompson, from the University of Nottingham, examined the later Roman period through a Marxist lens as well. He did valuable work, such as studying the rural insurgency in the West, the Bagaudae, but his analysis sours when he literally attacked Roman elites as "class enemies."

But back to Sassanid Iran: was it a feudalistic state? Richard Frye, a professor of Iranian studies remarked at a Princeton University symposium:



Manors, where peasant labor was organized for specific agricultural tasks, did not exist in ancient Iran. The peasants were left to their own devices and the landowners or authorities simply collected taxes. The Great King might force the peasants into corvee labor or into the militia, but this was the arbitrary result of his status as supreme ruler. The land itself was not the major issue in Mesopotamia or Transoxania or the lands between them; what was really crucial was the matter of water rights and their distribution. The Great King's servants might be rewarded with the command of an army or a governorship or the right to divert certain rivers; ownership of land was nothing remarkable, especially if the lord could not control how it was irrigated.

Well put + rep!

[Chelchal]

The Royal cities are clustered in modern day Fars province (1), modern day Iraq (2), with Abarshahr in the Northeast. For a point of reference, central Fars and Central Iraq are about 580 miles distant...not what I'd call close! Fars was where the Sassanid royal house originated. It's not surprising that it would have special status.

Rome enjoyed special meat and grain provisions which by the standards of the time were exorbitant. Even as Attila's Huns were invading Italy, Aetius had to provide a meat ration for the city, quite apart from feeding his own troops. Diocletian favored his native region of Split; Julian had a special affection for Nicomedia and rebuilt it when he came to power. So the concentration of Royal Cities in Fars is merely a sign of regional favoritism, not feudalism.

As for the imperial residence at Abarshahr, or the Royal Cities in Iraq, that's hardly surprising, since they were militarized frontier zones. Naturally they would be specially fortified and provisioned and governed by trusted subordinates. If the Sassanid King had to rely on his peers, this was nothing remarkable, since only the Chinese had an imperial bureaucracy comparable to the Romans. The Gupta kings had to rely on guild leaders and village chieftains. And since the Romans governed such a huge area, praetorian prefects and the like held a great deal of power; if the emperor was deemed inadequate, a party seeking to depose him might center around a senator or a general.

At any rate, the power of the Sassanid King seems quite absolute. They made little pretense of trials and tribunals in the manner of the Roman emperors. A subordinate who displeased the great King might be imprisoned, or executed in some ghastly way, like being flayed alive. The Kings of medieval France or England, or the Hohenstaufens of the HRE hardly had this kind of arbitrary power.

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

It's all in the southern-southwestern end of the empire. So it is one part of the empire.

[Chelchal]

Absurd. That's like saying Thrace and the Lebanon were the same part of the Roman empire, since they are a similar distance apart as Mesopotamia and Fars.

Since mere distances do not convince you, let us look at terrain and culture. Fars is seamed with rugged mountains and valleys, the traditional highlands of Persian culture. As a fairly large region, the climate tends to moderate summers and winters in the north and hotter summers and colder winters in the south. As a traditional Persian heartland, it had been populated by Persian and Old Persian speakers for thousands of years. While there were cities such as Susa, it was not extensively urbanized in Sassanid times.

The Sassanid frontier zone in Mesopotamia was (and still is) arid desert country dominated by the Euphrates and Tigris rivers; thanks to the rivers, there are extremely fertile alluvial plains. While the northern regions were quite mountainous, the heavily populated zone between the two rivers is quite flat. Between the trading nexus of the Gulf and the grain surplus accumulated from the plains and the need to control irrigation, urbanization occurred earlier here than anywhere else in the world. As a opposed to the people of Fars, the people of Mesopotamia in Sassanid times spoke Semitic languages; Assyrians and Chaldeans of the cities who spoke Aramaic, and the tribal Arabic nomads of the countryside. Farmers were of both Aramaic and settled Arab backgrounds.

So, we have factually established that these are two distinct regions, hundreds of miles from each other, with very different terrain, climate, culture, and populations. Let's not forget that slow communications made the world march larger then than what it is today.

In the summer of 378, Emperor Gratian advanced from Lake Constance to Moesia to assist his uncle against the Goths. As the crow flies, it was a distance of over 700 miles. Marching at break neck speed, using the excellent roads and the Danube river, he left at the beginning of June and halted in Moesia in mid July. He was forced to stop to rest his exhausted vanguard and had to fight off swarms of Sarmatians and Alans once he stopped.

So, had very high speed, an army could travel the nearly 600 miles between Fars and Mesopotamia in five weeks assuming they could push aside all over road traffic and commandeer supplies. A conventional travel would probably take much longer, at least twice as long. And of course, the Zagros mountains are much higher and more rugged than those of Thrace and Illyria. And Gratian had the advantage of a major river running along a West-Axis; nothing comparable exists between Fars and Mesopotamia, so even an army force marching would probably take more like two months to cross from Fars into Mesopotamia. So communications were not easy even in normal circumstances for merchant caravans and the like.

So sorry Blatta, but 2+2 does not, in fact, equal 5 just because you wish it so.