Parthian names

[Philippe]

The plain vanilla version of the RTW has a character named Phraotes. I'm no Iranian expert, but I think this should be Phraates. The RTW Parthian character list doesn't include Phraates.

In real life (tm) the Arsaces who founded the Parthians about twenty years after the game starts (and yes, I'm pretty sure he usually dies of old age long before that) had a brother named Tiridates. I may be looking at the wrong place, but the data file that I checked with Parthian names didn't include a Tiridates. (If EB has its own lists I'm probably looking in the wrong place).

On an unrelated note, Parthia starts out allied with Pontus. The result of that alliance would seem to be that it causes a break in the alliance with Seleucia when Seleucia eventually gets into trouble with Pontus. This causes Seleucia to attack Parthia many years before Parthia split off from the empire historically. I'm surprised that the Parthians even know where Pontus is at that date. Though I suppose people knew their geography a whole lot better in those days...

I'm still grappling with basic mechanics so there may be something I overlooked (as in one should never take RTW dates seriously anyway) but I wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to set the game up so that the Seleucids leave Parthia alone until after 250 B.C.?

I'll admit that I haven't looked at the ramifications if you're playing the Seleucids instead of the Parthians.

One mini-bug that I've noticed springs to mind -- when playing a tactical battle some of the Parthian archer units (who may actually be Daha -- I don't remember) when you give them an order to launch a missile attack the pointer shows up as a javelin rather than a bow. Is this intentional ? If you aren't familiar with what I'm refering to I can go start a few battles and try to reproduce it.

[Lucasiewicz]

In real life (tm) the Arsaces who founded the Parthians about twenty years after the game starts (and yes, I'm pretty sure he usually dies of old age long before that) had a brother named Tiridates. I may be looking at the wrong place, but the data file that I checked with Parthian names didn't include a Tiridates. (If EB has its own lists I'm probably looking in the wrong place).
I think he's born ingame around 330 BC and therefor mostly dies even a while before 250 BC. Even though there are mutliple sources and possibilities on the year of his death, there is some consensus nowadays that he would have ruled until 211 BC and not his brother Tiridates. So, even if this is not a certainty, he should be rather young at the start of the game. At least young enough to be able to sing it out until around 250-240 BC. And if EB accept that Arsaced ruled until 211 BC, he should even be in his 20'er years at the start of the game (not necessarily being the factions leader, because I have no idea who was it's leader in 272 BC).


One mini-bug that I've noticed springs to mind -- when playing a tactical battle some of the Parthian archer units (who may actually be Daha -- I don't remember) when you give them an order to launch a missile attack the pointer shows up as a javelin rather than a bow. Is this intentional ? If you aren't familiar with what I'm refering to I can go start a few battles and try to reproduce it.
This is intentional for some reason that I forget. It solves some sort of problem. My guess it's done so that they can keep firing while retreating. Might be wrong. The point is that's no bug, but intentional.

[Moros]

I believe it had a reason in a 7.2-7.4 (for rome 1.2) however it doesn't matter anymore in 8.0 (patch 1.5) and are just a slip trough. Probably is corrected in the next patch or the patch after that.

[The Persian Cataphract]

Hello Philippe,

"Phraortes" is in all actuality a name that has origins in the Median empire, as such a ruler did exist during Median times. This is, of course, the basis for the later "Phraates", which later became "Farhâd". This is an anachronism that CA not only pulled on certain characters with typically ancient Median names, but CA has also included ancient Assyrio-Babylonian names such as "Nidintu-Bel". We are however working with the names and as such, will have a basis in this chart that you can see right here:

http://www.cais-soas.com/articles/personal_names_articles.htm

Since the Parthians are one of the most poorly documented of nationalities, a certain degree of improvization will need to be applied. Aside from the Nisa ostraca some inspiration will be drawn from early Sassanids. Names such as "Vologases" seems to appear quite late in Sassanid regal genealogy as well.


In real life (tm) the Arsaces who founded the Parthians about twenty years after the game starts (and yes, I'm pretty sure he usually dies of old age long before that) had a brother named Tiridates. I may be looking at the wrong place, but the data file that I checked with Parthian names didn't include a Tiridates. (If EB has its own lists I'm probably looking in the wrong place).

While historical realism is a great priority, there is a slight issue with this. It appears that Arsaces, the founder of the Ashkanid dynasty had a father, also named "Arsaces", giving us a clear reminder of the controversy of the true founder of the Achaemenid Empire (Cyrus II The Great), and which monarch under the Medians who established the dynasty (Achaemenes). Prior to Cyrus II The Great, there was a Cambyses, and before him, a Cyrus I, but Cyrus II The Great also has a son, Cambyses II... You see, it's at first quite irritating, but it hints at that the system of naming is hereditary for the Iranian monarchs, rather hinting at that the name is treated as a title. Now of course, I don't know much about how RTW works, but two characters named "Arsaces" is going to cause problems. Of course, the roundabout is that the mod wishes to portray the Parthians as the "Pârnî", before they became the Parthians who ousted and in all practicality replaced the Seleucid empire.

With sincere regards,
~TPC~

[Lucasiewicz]

While historical realism is a great priority, there is a slight issue with this. It appears that Arsaces, the founder of the Ashkanid dynasty had a father, also named "Arsaces", giving us a clear reminder of the controversy of the true founder of the Achaemenid Empire (Cyrus II The Great), and which monarch under the Medians who established the dynasty (Achaemenes).
Interesting. I'm wondering where you got your information for this? Because I'm currently wanting to get deeper in to the Parthian history.


Now of course, I don't know much about how RTW works, but two characters named "Arsaces" is going to cause problems.
Well, if the Arsak/Arsaces who died at 211 BC. indeed was the second in line, are there any hints for his real name? Giving him his real name would then be an option (maybe EB allready did this, I remember being one son of the older Arsaces being Ardumanish, but I forgot the other two)? And one of the other children of the other Arsaces would have to be Tiridates, brother to the later Parthian king Arsaces, not? Or is that person only fiction? And can't there really not be two characters with the same name in RTW?

[The Persian Cataphract]

Here you go, friend:

http://www.parthia.com/arsaces1.htm

http://www.parthia.com/parthia_history.htm#Early


Well, if the Arsak/Arsaces who died at 211 BC. indeed was the second in line, are there any hints for his real name? Giving him his real name would then be an option

This is a problem. Parthia is a very poorly documented power, and we have few outlets on Parthian names, outside of the ostraca found in Nisa (Featuring roughly 200 names, however, luckily all Iranic). Arsaces is a little bit of a dilemma as it also is treated as an epithet. All legitimate early sovereigns of Parthia have "ARSAKOU", a Greek inscription. This is furthered by the fact that these kings consider themselves as descendants of Arsaces. The name of Arsaces the elder and Arsaces I could either be genuine, or they could be mere titles, but that is all we know, because later on "Arsaces" becomes a de facto title, an epithet. Again, this can be traced to Achaemenian times, and even Bessus the usurper of Bactria (Former satrap of Darius III Codomannus) assumed for himself a name, as if it was a title. So, if Arsaces, the person himself, was not genuinely named "Arsaces", we are in a hot spot, because we have no other name to refer him with, unfortunately. We are right now in the stage of either choosing the Hellenized or Iranic form of these names, so you have a point.


nd one of the other children of the other Arsaces would have to be Tiridates, brother to the later Parthian king Arsaces, not? Or is that person only fiction?

No, it's true. Tiridates (Tîrdâd) was co-regent of Arsaces I, though he is often dismissed in Parthian history due to insignificance. He is far more real than "Ardumanish" or "Bagabigna", in which the latter sounds like an infant's first attempt at uttering words :laugh4:


And can't there really not be two characters with the same name in RTW?

Well, I'm not qualified to speak on the technical issues, but considering that this would otherwise be something easily applied, I think there will be an issue if there are two characters named "Arsaces". This is a shame, because those two characters have identical names, while they can't be referred to with anything else. One could perhaps exploit the ambiguities of the names by naming the elder "Arshâk" and Arsaces I as "Ârashk"? It sounds a little like cheating :inquisitive:

[Philippe]

I've always wondered about the naming conventions in RTW. Are we absolutely sure that two different characters can't have the same name, especially if they have different fathers? There are an awful lot people named Seleucus, Antiochus, and Ptolemy, and you can only tell them apart by the extra names like Philadelphus and Soter.

[The Persian Cataphract]

When you put it in such terms, yes it is possible to have two Arsaces, with the titular suffix. Wouldn't otherwise identical names come in conflict with ancillaries and traits bound to each characters? Dunno, really... Haven't spent too much time analyzing how RTW works :oops:

[Moros]

2 of the same name in rtw= no good.

[Lucasiewicz]

We are right now in the stage of either choosing the Hellenized or Iranic form of these names, so you have a point.
This 'we', is that EB? I don't know whether you are helping the EB team or not TPC. But anyway, EB has always chosen to more faction-minded aproach, i.e. how the faction named buildings, units, etc. for themselves cfr. Kart-Hadasht or Pahla shivatir. Why wouldn't the characters be named Arsak, Tirdad, etc. ?


There are an awful lot people named Seleucus, Antiochus, and Ptolemy, and you can only tell them apart by the extra names like Philadelphus and Soter.
This could work, only if the Parthians gave themselves nicknames. But I understand from what TPC said earlier on, that there are no other names known for Arsaces I then this one. Are their other names known for the other and later Parthian kings? Did the Parthians give themselves nicknames?

[Philippe]

Could Arsaces I, Arsaces II, and Arsaces III be considered three separate names? Can I, II, and III be considered nicknames? Failing that how about "the First", "the Second", and "the Third" since that is what you say when reading these names out loud. Or that old standby "the Elder" and "the Younger" (e.g. Pliny).

But can the game program make names with Roman numeral nicknames appear in logical order? It would be kind of weird to have a Ptolemy VII appear as the grandfather of a Ptolemy II.

This is a really interesting question, because it creates the possibility of making the prosopography a lot more realistic. I really don't like the way the names work in RTW, especially for the Romans. Names simply didn't work the way the game presents them, and the name of an individual was highly predictable for males and females provided you knew birth order and/or the month of birth.

Women's names are especially irksome in RTW because in reality they were birth order names (Prima, Secunda, Tertia for First, Second, Third daughter) followed by the clan name of their family (Julia, Aemilia, Claudia, Poppaea). Roman women, unlike their Greek counterparts, had numbers for names.

[Lucasiewicz]

Could Arsaces I, Arsaces II, and Arsaces III be considered three separate names? Can I, II, and III be considered nicknames? Failing that how about "the First", "the Second", and "the Third" since that is what you say when reading these names out loud. Or that old standby "the Elder" and "the Younger" (e.g. Pliny).

But can the game program make names with Roman numeral nicknames appear in logical order? It would be kind of weird to have a Ptolemy VII appear as the grandfather of a Ptolemy II.
I think such is not possibly with RTW, because the game randomly choses the names from a list of possibilities. So, this can't be an option. But it might be an option for the starting characters. So we could have like Arsaces and Arsaces I maybe?

[Teleklos Archelaou]

See how we renamed the baktrian start kings - out of necessity from this problem. They are both Diodotos, but Theodotos means the same thing and since sometimes you'll find them referred to that way too, we got out of the problem by making one one and the other the other. Trust us, we've tried to do it otherwise, but having two people with the same name, or even the same name but then a second one stuck on it, in descr_strat.txt causes a problem.

[Philippe]

I suspected that was the case, but just wanted to be sure.

My Greek is a bit rusty, but Theodotos and Diodotos don't really mean exactly the same thing. Theos is usually a god, as in some god or other. Dios is the genetive of Zeus, though it can sometimes be taken in a monotheistic context. So the first name probably means something like "Given by [a] God", the second name is a bit more like "Given by Zeus". They both translate out to pretty much the same thing in English, but one of them is really more specific (and poytheistic) as to source. If you change the ending of each name to -doros (as in Diodorus Siculus or Justinian's wife Theodora) you get names that mean "Gift of ..." instead. Other examples of specific gods used in name compounds would be things like Apollodorus, Athenagoras, or Poseidonius.

Should be fine for game purposes.

I wonder what the equivalent names would be in an Iranian language?

[The Persian Cataphract]

This 'we', is that EB? I don't know whether you are helping the EB team or not TPC. But anyway, EB has always chosen to more faction-minded aproach, i.e. how the faction named buildings, units, etc. for themselves cfr. Kart-Hadasht or Pahla shivatir. Why wouldn't the characters be named Arsak, Tirdad, etc. ?

Well, not to be rude or anything but this is beginning to sound like "twenty questions" :2thumbsup:

This is mainly a linguistic problem. The Parthians were known for being very liberal with adopting whatever the culture they saw fit to improve society to the benefit of their interests. The Parthians may have spoken an Indo-Iranian language, the Parthian pahlavî, the predecessor of the Middle Persian proper, developed by the Sassanians, however this was certainly not lingua franca in the area, and it is firmly established that the Parthians spoke Greek in "administrative circumstances", while at the same time there was a decline of the Greek language, to the favour of the Aramaic by the 2nd-3rd century C.E. In our case, it gives us lingual flexibility, while at the same time, may cost us consistency. Unfortunately, Parthia is such a faction. While the lingo is practically the same as the Sassanian pahlavî (Considering that it was the basis for that language). Now among Iranians, Arsaces was known as "Ârashk", however the evidence we have of these regal names either come from the Nisa ostraca, or from Graeco-Roman sources, or from numismatics. The mints always had Greek inscriptions. So, true that EB has chosen a more faction'esque approach, but that does not necessarily conflict with historical fact.

The characters could easily be given Iranian names, but again, the numismatics is predominantly Greek, and when there are names like "Phriapatius" I'm at the loss of words as to what Iranian name possibly could correspond to the Hellenized form. Unfortunately, not all names are dead give-aways :no:


This could work, only if the Parthians gave themselves nicknames. But I understand from what TPC said earlier on, that there are no other names known for Arsaces I then this one. Are their other names known for the other and later Parthian kings? Did the Parthians give themselves nicknames?

Some did, but this may have been a later titular practice. It is known from coins of Mithradates II "The Great" was known as "Epiphanes" or "God manifest". In fact, this relates to his Iranian name to the highest degree as it is translated as "Mêhrdâd" or "Given by Mithrâ/Mêhr", deity of contracts. Having an Iranian name, and a Greek suffix would look silly, and having the Iranian name alone would make "divine manifest" redundant. It's a nice idea you brought up, but no... Not if it's going to be Iranian names. It's a shame, I kind of like how Mithradates Epiphanes rolls off the tongue :book:


Could Arsaces I, Arsaces II, and Arsaces III be considered three separate names? Can I, II, and III be considered nicknames? Failing that how about "the First", "the Second", and "the Third" since that is what you say when reading these names out loud. Or that old standby "the Elder" and "the Younger" (e.g. Pliny).

I oppose the usage of figures, because they do after all only appear in succession lists and in numismatics. However, I am keen on the usage of "The Elder", as a means to solve the problem between the two starting Arsaces/Ârashk. Though the title is to be purely informative as it was not common practice to make use of designations such as "the elder" among Iranians. In fact, in the case of the ancient Iranians, it has not been noticed in any indigenous sources.

Like Lucasiewicz said, I think this is possible for the starting characters only.


I wonder what the equivalent names would be in an Iranian language?

You mean for "God-given"? Today's modern equivalent is "Khudâdâd", though back then it would probably have been the "Meherdates" (Mithradates/Mithridates in Romano-Hellenized form) or as the modern incarnation, Mêhrdâd. Given by Mithrâ/Mêhr. Trying to apply Ahura Mazda/Ohr-muzd/Hôrmuzd, Zervân, Verethragnâ/Vahrâm or Ânâhitâ would seem awkward. Seeing how similar Theodotos/Diodotos actually is to Mêhrdâd is quite scary at times.

[Foot]

See how we renamed the baktrian start kings - out of necessity from this problem. They are both Diodotos, but Theodotos means the same thing and since sometimes you'll find them referred to that way too, we got out of the problem by making one one and the other the other. Trust us, we've tried to do it otherwise, but having two people with the same name, or even the same name but then a second one stuck on it, in descr_strat.txt causes a problem.

Isn't there a way round this by having the internal names different, but having the external names the same. eg. you could have arsaces and arsaces1 as the internal name, and then both arsaces and arsaces1 have the same external effect (as given in names.txt). I did try that once, but couldn't get it to work properly, but that may just be my ineptness, rather than a flaw with the idea

Foot