Jesus, Mary and Joseph, this argument about the cycles is getting out of proportion. You are on the Internet discussing possible forgery of historical quotes on a forum for a free-for-all modification of a retail game. You are arguing about one of the most trivial aspects of the mod, one of the least concentrated areas, and you have made several threads about it in the recent time. I understand if you find certain aspects dubious, and I can understand it if you wish to discuss the topic, but this is just silly. You are, in laymen terms, wasting time discussing a bullshit thing. This modification is not about cramming in the most impressive quotes ever conceived by man. Understand that modifying the quotes is at the bottom of the bedrock that represents our priorities, and with the team moving over their efforts to the M2TW platform, these kind of threads are grating on our nerves, mildly speaking.

Why don't you guys move over and criticize my Middle Persian translations instead? I don't hold a degree in linguistics. I am pretty sure I have botched up the grammar considerably and in many places. With work in a Middle-Persian voice-mod, I am sure the problem gets even worse. It is even in late Sassanian rendition. C'mon, why don't you guys come over here with your planks, hammers and nails? This is important. This will bug the hell out of you if you play the Pahlava. You will see those errors constantly, on the campaign map, or even on the battlefield. Why don't you guys question the authenticity on that?

I'll tell you guys this much: When you are out to break new grounds in multimedia, with a set goal and with all the creativity in the world, you are bound to break a few things along the road. Our goal is clear, and it has been stated many times, but this mod is not about peer-reviewed history. We must allow some conjecture, we must allow ourselves many liberties, and in many times against our will and in most times imposed by us because of the game's basic structure. I use Middle Persian because for what it is worth, it changed very little between the Parthian rendition and the late Sassanian incarnation as written by Medieval Zoroastrian scribes; The bi-lingual inscription of Shâpûr I proves its similarity, and the Manichaean "Parthian" texts of Turfan gives all of it another weight.

It is a small sacrifice along the road of a huge improvement, very unorthodox, but a true pioneer's move in breaking new grounds. I do not speak the old Pârnî language. I do not know a terrible lot of Old Persian, and I am not a specialist in discovering the grammatical difference between Parthian Pahlavî and Sassanian Pahlavî (Even though they belong to slightly different branches). But I need a core, a bedrock until I can bring about the chisel and the sculptor's hammer.

So pay some respect and complain about things that matter. I am almost flabbergasted that no one has uttered anything about the Persian translations. Just recently we have a handful of threads about Celtic quotes. What kind of signals does that send to me? Could I just put any kind of garbage into the mod without people noticing? People don't question why there is an Achaemenid bodyguard cavalry with xyston in the game (As accurate as it can get, yet somewhat unorthodox due to how recent the idea of Achaemenid "proto-knight" is), or why there is for instance a completely inaccurate portrayal of a Hyrcanian hillman with a rope for a belt.

Or why there still are Pajama foot-archers wearing the tiara of the old Immortals' regiment. Or why the old Iranian archer-spearmen was once named "Arshtibara" as if they were royal spear-bearers. These were significant things! Partho-Hellenic infantry, and elephants... It's silly, "most" people think of Parthians as being strictly light horse and knight in its military structure.

This is silly. You are arguing about obscure cycles, when the efforts could be better concentrated on healthy observation of more important things.