Сарматские всадники Северного Причерноморья
302
The second characteristic of a cataphrac-
tarii is described as an arming of a very long
spear (lance) as the principal weapon. It was
already explained above that we do not have
any grounds on which to consider that the
Sarmatians used the spears over 3 m long.
The so-called «Sarmatian seat» is associated
with the long spears (Блаватский, 1949,
p. 96–100; Хазанов, 1971, p. 49; Перевалов,
1999, p. 68–73), the unreality of which was
analyzed in Chapter 2.
Finally, the third discussed characteristics
of cataphractarii are specifics of their tactic
and military strategy. Concerning the latter,
a distinction such as the full gallop during the
attack is not convincing. V. D. Blavatsky saw
this dissimilarity in the depictions of the Scyth-
ian and Sarmatian horsemen. Here again, the
reason for the mistake lies in the source used:
differences in the depiction of the Scythian
and Sarmatian horsemen do not reflect the
different gaits but came as the result of differ-
ent artistic styles.
Scholars see the tactical uniqueness of the
Sarmatian catafractarii that, instead of the
Scythian «concentrated force» (Десятчиков,
1968, p. 46) they acted in single units formed
in wedge-shaped lines (Arrian., Тact., 16, 6).
It has to be noted that the lines of any spear-
armed cavalry attacked separately and at a sig-
nificant distance, in order to avoid the acci-
dental injuries of the front line of horsemen.
This make all our theorizations on the differ-
ences between the «wedge-shaped forma-
tion», «concentrated force», or any other un-
known-to-us formation used by the ancient
horsemen are, to put it mildly, unproduc-
tive.
The Sarmatian armoured cavalry consist-
ed out of noble and well-to-do nomads: prac-
tically all of the harnesses were found in the
rich tombs (a fact that the majority of these
tombs were robbed provides additional sup-
port for this assumption). But did the armored
horsemen form separate units? How was it
done in practice and who was in charge of
their command? Up to Genghis Khan, the
nomadic military forces were organized on
the grounds of the clan/tribe principle, and
the military units were formed from relatives
with their chiefs as commanders.
The Sarmatians, with their level of social
development, should not have had a different
structure, and for this reason the distinctive
characteristics of cataphractarii as separate
units with specific aims, tactics, central com-
manding, and other attributes of the army’s
structure is unlikely to have been realized in
the nomadic military forces. If Roman and
Iranian cataphractarii, as a type of a military
unit, had some needed distinctive character-
istics, it is not worth it to look for them in the
same degree among the Sarmatians.
Ammianus Marcellius, Heliodorus, Stra-
bo, Plutarches, and others described not Sar-
matian but Parthian, Iranian, and Armenian
cataphractii.
Indeed, this type of cavalry could appear
only in armies of developed states, with cen-
tralized power and other social controls avail-
able to provide forming, supplying, training,
and employing such specific military units.
Not going into details (they go beyond this
work), I suggest that cataphractarii initially
originated in Kang-hu and Parthia.
Meanwhile, despite the lengthy discus-
sions of the details, in general it is true that
cataphractarii appeared as an innovation in
ancient warfare. This innovation, however,
did not constitute the armoured cavalry (it ex-
isted before them), the pace of the attack, or
type of line formation (it is unlikely that we
will ever know it) but in the way of conduct-
ing the charge, namely, the assaulting spear
thrust on the galloping horse. Out of the three
mentioned characteristics of cataphractarii,
only this one actually differentiated them from
the earlier armoured horsemen. It is suggest-
ed that this assault became possible only after
a nomadic invention of the saddle with high
arches (see Chapter 5).
The new saddle significantly increased
the solidity and comfort of the horseman’s
seat. A spear attack from the galloping horse,
that during Scythian times was an advantage
of solely the athletes, became available and
an effective battle technique for whole ele-
ments. The Sarmatian tactic of the spear at-
tack is obliged its integration to this, one of
the paramount, inventions of the nomadic
culture.
Sarmatian «Amazons». Female participa-
tion in the military actions was, as believed
by many, an important part of Sarmatian war-
fare (Хазанов, 1971, p. 67). This believe is
based on written sources (Ps. Hip., De aero,
24; Mela, Нor. I, 114) and finds of weapons
in the female graves.
Sarmatian female graves with weapons
are not numerous. For the Sauromatian pe-
riod the female graves with weapon make up
8,3%; for the Early Sarmatian period their
number is decreased to 2,4%, and for the Mid-
dle Sarmatian period there are none. In the
North Pontic region, we do not know of any
female grave with weapons.
It should be noted that the female graves
with weapons are not uncommon for the
Scythians. According to E. P. Buniatian, they
make up about 29% of the common Scythian
female graves dated to the 4
th
century BC
(Бунятян, 1985, p. 70) that is more than the
Sauromatian ones of the same time (Смирнов,
1964, p. 201). S. A. Pletneva provides infor-
mation about such graves in the cemeteries
of the medieval nomads (Плетнева, 1983,
p. 14–19).
Thus, the female graves with weapons are
not exclusively a Sarmatian phenomenon.
The nomadic life, when men very often
wandered with herds, took part in raids and
wars, and perished in battles, women of the
nomadic society were forced into wielding
weapons to be able to defend themselves and
their family (Бунятян, 1985, p. 71). The par
-
ticipation of nomadic women in the military
actions, most likely, was limited to rare situ-
ations, during the counter-attack of the out-
numbered enemy or when men were absent
from the camp. Judging on a description by
Pomponius Mela and archaeological records,
the Sarmatian warrioresses were armed with
the bows, javelins, or lasso.
Types of the military actions. The tactics
and strategies of the Sarmatians’ warfare were
determined by the composition of their forc-
es where, similarly to other nomads, the light
cavalry dominated. The raids of different du-
rations and distances are examples of the main
types of military operations. As a rule, the goal
of the raids was not the physical annihilation
of an enemy but more about the trophies and
demonstration of military might, in order
to establish tribute and other types of exo-
exploitation (Першиц, 1975, p. 290).
The raids differed by the forces’ numbers.
They could have been small groups of vol-
unteers invited by one person, warriors of
one tribe, or joint forces of several tribes.
Ammianus Marcellinus stressed the role of
raids as a warfare strategy being typical for
the Sarmatians. «These tribes (Sarmatians
and Quadae — auth.) are more skillful for
the brigandage then for the overt war» (Amm.
Marc., XVII, 12, 2). Going on a raid, the
Sarmatians, similar to the later nomads, took
the spare horses with them. The legend about
Amaga says that the queen gave to each war-
rior three horses for the raid to Chersonesos
(Polyаen, VIII, 56). Her horsemen rode 1200
stadia, e.g. approximately 190 km. The num-
ber given for this distance conjures no doubts,
since Sivash steppes, from where Amaga
went into the raid are located within 1200
stadia from Chersonesos (Смирнов, 1984,
p. 71).
There is not much historical evidence
about the tactics of the Sarmatians in an open
field. According to Tacitus, while on a horse,
they preferred the slash to the use of bows:
«…man encouraged man not to permit a bat
-
tle of archers; better to anticipate matters
by a charge and a hand-to-hand struggle!»
(Tac., Аnn. VI, 35). Perhaps, the first assault
was made by the armoured cavalry, breaking
the enemy’s front lines with spears, and af-
ter that it joining the hand-to-hand charge:
based on the archaeological materials,
Summary