where are the camels?

[MeinPanzer]

There's never been a mention of camels used as warmounts in historical sources until the Arab conquest in the 7th century.

This is wrong. Livy explicitly mentions Nabataean archers riding dromedary camels in the battle of Magnesia in 190 BC.

Of pre islamic southern arabian culture very little is known, at all, due to lack of sources. Same goes for the bedouins. The fact that we do not know any sources that say anything about this, is not very relevant here, since there is so much more we do not know about the saba culture, than that we do know of it. There is for example, little to nothing known about wars whithin southern arabia.

What we know about southern Arabia is what cultures that surrounding them. And unfortunately neither the Greeks nor, preceding them the persians had much interest in internal arabian squables.

This is a bizarre statement to make, considering that we actually have a sizeable corpus of information from pre-Islamic southern Arabia, including accounts of warfare. We may have extremely limited historiographical sources related to pre-Islamic southern Arabia, but the epigraphical and lyric sources we have are quite extensive. To say that there is "little to nothing known about wars within southern Arabia," let alone "what we know about southern Arabia is what cultures surrounded them" is ridiculous.

IMO it would not be ahistorical at all to admit camels in certain regions. It would be speculation, yes, but it would be very plausible IMO that nomadic tribes, who were later reknown for the very fact that they rode camels, would ride camels to war in these times. Especially since the bedouins left next to no evidence of the fact that they were even there. Their history was oral, and them being nomad meant they would not have left very many significant traces from an archeological point of view.

We in fact know quite a bit about pre-Islamic Arabian warfare due to epigraphy relating to war and a rich lyric tradition which often celebrated the heroic achievements of warriors. We know from late pre-Islamic poetry that the camel was only used in warfare in tandem with cavalrymen, and it is no surprise therefore that we find a depiction of a cavalryman with an unarmed camelrider fighting with an infantryman with a shield on a 3rd or 2nd C. BC bowl from Mleiha. Taken directly from D.T. Potts' article "Some issues in the study of the pre-Islamic weaponry of southeastern Arabia:"

As Rehatsek
noted over a century ago, 'warriors were
so careful to fight with horses unexhausted
by fatigue that each man rode on a
camel ... and led the horse which he was to
ride in the battle, without any load by his
side ... whilst even the saddle was placed on
the camels, so that the horse should arrive
quite unfatigued on the battlefield' (Rehatsek, Notes on some old arms: 229. Cf. Macdonald
MCA. Was the Nabataean Kingdom a
“Bedouin State”? ZDPV 107 1991: 103.).
In South Arabia 'rkbt/'frs'm "persons
mounted on horses"' (Beeston AFL. Warfare in ancient South Arabia.
London: Qahtan: Studies in old South Arabian
Epigraphy, 3: 1976: 11.), were distinguished
from "s'd/rkb "mounted warriors",
who are clearly. .. different from cavalry,
[and] we must infer that they were
mounted on camels' (Beeston, Warfare: 12.). These, however,
were mounted infantry who simply rode to
battle on camelback, dismounting before
they engaged in combat.

Perhaps instead of shooting me down, you could wonder, would not camels give the saba more character, versatility. And since we no so little of the saba to begin with it might even be perfectly accurate as well. Of course there are next to no mentions of camels in battle. Historically the saba never ruled territory directly threathening the main powers of the period. Historically they were confined to southern Arabia and ethiopia.

Simply put, your impression of ancient Arabia and its archaeology is inaccurate. The EB Sabaeans have drawn from a lot of direct archaeological evidence which is not at all insignificant in relating to this culture in the last centuries BC.

[Reality=Chaos]

This is wrong. Livy explicitly mentions Nabataean archers riding dromedary camels in the battle of Magnesia in 190 BC.



This is a bizarre statement to make, considering that we actually have a sizeable corpus of information from pre-Islamic southern Arabia, including accounts of warfare. We may have extremely limited historiographical sources related to pre-Islamic southern Arabia, but the epigraphical and lyric sources we have are quite extensive. To say that there is "little to nothing known about wars within southern Arabia," let alone "what we know about southern Arabia is what cultures surrounded them" is ridiculous.



We in fact know quite a bit about pre-Islamic Arabian warfare due to epigraphy relating to war and a rich lyric tradition which often celebrated the heroic achievements of warriors. We know from late pre-Islamic poetry that the camel was only used in warfare in tandem with cavalrymen, and it is no surprise therefore that we find a depiction of a cavalryman with an unarmed camelrider fighting with an infantryman with a shield on a 3rd or 2nd C. BC bowl from Mleiha. Taken directly from D.T. Potts' article "Some issues in the study of the pre-Islamic weaponry of southeastern Arabia:"





Simply put, your impression of ancient Arabia and its archaeology is inaccurate. The EB Sabaeans have drawn from a lot of direct archaeological evidence which is not at all insignificant in relating to this culture in the last centuries BC.

Thanks for correcting me. I was maybe a bit stuck on the historiographical side of the sources. As for the archeological discoveies. Point me in the right direction please. The arabian peninsula has always been a fascination of mine. My knowledge of islamic arabia is however far more extensive. I read quite a lot of literature about this area, but even the more recent historical authors, seem to think that there is very little known about the place. This could of course be one of those things, where historians and archeologists don't work well together (as strangely often seems to be the case) I'm all for learning more about it. So do please tell. As for the camels. They were obviously used (according to your sources, which I assume to be correct), although not for charging into an enemy as such. this might be a bit dificult to put into game terms. The mounted archers sound more promising.

[MeinPanzer]

Thanks for correcting me. I was maybe a bit stuck on the historiographical side of the sources. As for the archeological discoveies. Point me in the right direction please. The arabian peninsula has always been a fascination of mine. My knowledge of islamic arabia is however far more extensive. I read quite a lot of literature about this area, but even the more recent historical authors, seem to think that there is very little known about the place.

What are you looking for? Information on warfare, lyric poetry, epigraphy, or just plain archaeology?

This could of course be one of those things, where historians and archeologists don't work well together (as strangely often seems to be the case) I'm all for learning more about it. So do please tell.

The lack of general information is probably due to the fact that the study of pre-Islamic Arabia, its culture, and its languages is, and has been for more than a century now, contained within a small and insular group of academic researchers. Non-academic texts are often hard to find, and even the academic texts are usually harder to track down than those of other areas of study.

As for the camels. They were obviously used (according to your sources, which I assume to be correct), although not for charging into an enemy as such. this might be a bit dificult to put into game terms. The mounted archers sound more promising.

Mounted archers were employed by northwestern Arabs, like the Nabataeans, but they were far removed from the southern Arabians. I agree that a Nabataean camel archer unit is justified in the EB timeframe, but any sort of Sabaean unit is not.

[Reality=Chaos]

What are you looking for? Information on warfare, lyric poetry, epigraphy, or just plain archaeology?





The lack of general information is probably due to the fact that the study of pre-Islamic Arabia, its culture, and its languages is, and has been for more than a century now, contained within a small and insular group of academic researchers. Non-academic texts are often hard to find, and even the academic texts are usually harder to track down than those of other areas of study.



Mounted archers were employed by northwestern Arabs, like the Nabataeans, but they were far removed from the southern Arabians. I agree that a Nabataean camel archer unit is justified in the EB timeframe, but any sort of Sabaean unit is not.

Well I'd like information on all of the mentioned bits really.

I do have access to academic works (I have just finished my Bachelor in history, with a minor about Islamic culture, and I'm going to do a master on Islam in the modern world) but most of these are bout the islamic period. Those reverences to pre-islamic culture are sadly short. I've always been very interested in pre- islamic culture though (I tend to get fascinated by those obscure parts of history that are still mostly blank)

[MeinPanzer]

Well I'd like information on all of the mentioned bits really.

I do have access to academic works (I have just finished my Bachelor in history, with a minor about Islamic culture, and I'm going to do a master on Islam in the modern world) but most of these are bout the islamic period. Those reverences to pre-islamic culture are sadly short. I've always been very interested in pre- islamic culture though (I tend to get fascinated by those obscure parts of history that are still mostly blank)

To begin with, the Journal of Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy has lots of scattered but up-to-date information on epigraphy and archaeology, including a few articles specifically related to warfare (most notably that one by D.T. Potts I quoted further up), and it is available online through Blackwell Synergy, which is available through many university databases. If you're looking for epigraphical information, the Corpus des Inscriptions et Antiquités Sud-Arabes is the most comprehensive work I have been able to find. I've only been through a few volumes thoroughly, but I have been able to find a few very interesting inscriptions relating to royal hunts and commemorating successful campaigns in warfare which date to the first few centuries AD.

A few notable publications on warfare:

Lichtenstadter I. Women in the Aiyam al-‘Arab: A study of female life during wafare in preislamic Arabia. London: Royal Asiatic Society Prize Publication Fund, 14: 1935.

Beeston AFL. Warfare in ancient South Arabia. London: Qahtan: Studies in old South Arabian Epigraphy, 3: 1976.

Macdonald MCA. Was the Nabataean Kingdom a “Bedouin State”? ZDPV 107 1991.

[Reality=Chaos]

Thanks a lot mate Now I can get down to the uni library and see if they have some for me.

[Barry Soteiro]

wouldn't the parthians or saka have camels drummers ?

[Ludens]

Could we please stop ridiculing the OP? He's asking a valid question. If you haven't got anything to add to the discussion, then don't add it.

As for the original question, the fact that we don't know much about Arabia in this time isn't a license to speculate. Whenever camels do appear in warfare, they seem to have been mostly used as transport rather than battle mount. You can off course add such a unit on the basis that it is physically possible, but so, then why were camels used so little? The probable answer is that, for one reason or another, they don't make very good battle mounts. It would also require several models to create such a unit (as the camel needs a model as well), and there is very little model space left in EB. Does that answer your question?

[Urnamma]

Thank you, MeinPanzer. You said most of what I wanted to say.

Also, in the threads I've read on the public forum, I've seen a lot of (well-intentioned I'm sure) fans virulently attack people asking these questions. There's no reason to do this, as he had a legitimate question, albeit an oft-repeated one. A proper response might have been to link him to old threads, not to attack him.

--

Reality=Chaos:

For the most part, even during the conquest period in the 7th century A.D., Camels were not used as battle mounts. Even at Magnesia, I would contend they were used as archery platforms rather than a true force of traditional mounted archers. Most of the episodes in Arabian history where 'camel soldiers' are depicted (including a very beautiful Assyrian relief), they are generally being ambushed.

The practical reason the camel is not used as a mount of war proper is that it really only has two speeds: a lumbering walk, and a breakneck run. Keeping a few camels around to frighten horses was a common practice, but actually mounting soldiers on them to fight is usually a no-go. Most arabs would ride their camels to battle, then dismount and get on their horses for the actual fight. This way, their prized war horses were not weighted down with baggage or in any way overly stressed and tired before a battle. Many other cultures did the same thing with mules, or rotated out horses, etc.

If you want more specifics, please let me know. I'm sorry you were attacked when you came here, and hope you attribute this to overzealous fans.

[Reality=Chaos]

Thank you, MeinPanzer. You said most of what I wanted to say.

Also, in the threads I've read on the public forum, I've seen a lot of (well-intentioned I'm sure) fans virulently attack people asking these questions. There's no reason to do this, as he had a legitimate question, albeit an oft-repeated one. A proper response might have been to link him to old threads, not to attack him.

--

Reality=Chaos:

For the most part, even during the conquest period in the 7th century A.D., Camels were not used as battle mounts. Even at Magnesia, I would contend they were used as archery platforms rather than a true force of traditional mounted archers. Most of the episodes in Arabian history where 'camel soldiers' are depicted (including a very beautiful Assyrian relief), they are generally being ambushed.

The practical reason the camel is not used as a mount of war proper is that it really only has two speeds: a lumbering walk, and a breakneck run. Keeping a few camels around to frighten horses was a common practice, but actually mounting soldiers on them to fight is usually a no-go. Most arabs would ride their camels to battle, then dismount and get on their horses for the actual fight. This way, their prized war horses were not weighted down with baggage or in any way overly stressed and tired before a battle. Many other cultures did the same thing with mules, or rotated out horses, etc.

If you want more specifics, please let me know. I'm sorry you were attacked when you came here, and hope you attribute this to overzealous fans.

No that's OK, there's always some people that go a bit too far. I can take some stick Thanks for the info. I know about camels. I actually saw one run in Morrocco, damn they are fast. The only thing that bothers me a bit, is that the arabians should have some benefit from having the beaties around during war. Incorporating a dismounting unit in the game would be utterly impossible, or if not, waaay to complicated for a single unit. Perhaps the movement of the armies on the campaign map could be influenced? I'd like specifics. As I said earlier I'm really intereted in the subject. Perhaps you could PM me some stuff?