History background of Armenian units?

[paullus]

Not sure, as they long preceded my tenure and I've not worked on Armenia (ie, I'm not really the guy to answer this), but I've the impression they're meant to form a sort of parallel to Roman legionaries, showing a type of unit with simple shortswords derived from Hellenic and Persian equipment and combat traditions. I know you've done work in this area MP, so you may well know the frequency of sword finds in the Caucasus.

An additional note:
There will very likely be an additional and exciting thureos-equipped unit for late-game Hayasdan. MP, you can probably guess it, but I'd rather you didn't spoil the surprise.

[MeinPanzer]

Not sure, as they long preceded my tenure and I've not worked on Armenia (ie, I'm not really the guy to answer this), but I've the impression they're meant to form a sort of parallel to Roman legionaries, showing a type of unit with simple shortswords derived from Hellenic and Persian equipment and combat traditions. I know you've done work in this area MP, so you may well know the frequency of sword finds in the Caucasus.

Swords aren't all that unusual in finds in an around Georgia (for which we have fairly plentiful information, compared to the unfortunately sparse finds from Armenia), but they have a fairly peculiar chronological and geographical distribution. The akinakes is found down until around the early 4th c. BC all along the Caucasus mountains (owing to the steppe influence from the north). From the 4th-3rd c. BC, the only swords found are the usually larger "Sindo-Maeotian" style, which is very simple in shape (no guard, straight-edged blade, very simple pommel) and which is found only in the northwest (i.e. modern Abkhazia, in the richer coastal cities of Colchis). Very rich burials also include kopides, but these disappear by the beginning of the EB timeframe, while a later, 1st c. BC short sword found in the palace at Dedoplis Gora is of a vague form that I am unable to identify with any parallels.

The one thing that is desperately lacking form all Armenian and Caucasian units right now are axes. It's evident from finds throughout Colchis, Iberia, Albania, and Armenia that the panoply par excellence was spear or javelins and axe, most likely with a thureos. I think you would be well served to replace the Georgian Swordsmen unit with an axemen unit of some kind.

An additional note:
There will very likely be an additional and exciting thureos-equipped unit for late-game Hayasdan. MP, you can probably guess it, but I'd rather you didn't spoil the surprise.

I'm sure it will be a popular addition to the roster and should look great in EBII.

[Foot]

The reason the georgian unit had a sword was because of model sharing. Personally I would have preferred a longer sword and/or axe for both units, but I had only just joined when the armenian version was concepted. You can expect far more variety in EBII.

Foot

[Celtic_Punk]

that is why I am buying M2TW for the sole purpose of playing EBII :)

[Sarcasm]

There will very likely be an additional and exciting thureos-equipped unit for late-game Hayasdan. MP, you can probably guess it, but I'd rather you didn't spoil the surprise.

Dude, what? I don't know that one

[artavazd]

There was also the native influence from the Urartian kingdom of Armenia.


Helmet

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...menia_1254.jpg
[
B]Shield:[/B]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...dSarduri02.jpg

Armor:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...an_Armor_2.jpg


Quiver:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...erVertical.jpg

[MeinPanzer]

There was also the native influence from the Urartian kingdom of Armenia.


Helmet

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...menia_1254.jpg
[
B]Shield:[/B]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...dSarduri02.jpg

Armor:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...an_Armor_2.jpg


Quiver:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...erVertical.jpg

The Urartian kingdom predates the EB timeframe by well over three centuries, and so any equipment from that time period is irrelevant to reconstructions during the EB timeframe.

[Sarkiss]

The Urartian kingdom predates the EB timeframe by well over three centuries, and so any equipment from that time period is irrelevant to reconstructions during the EB timeframe.

it is, nevertheless, likely to influence later Armenians.
with arrival of new tribes circa VI BC Urartians did not just perish, but most, if not all, remained within their original inhabit and contributed over the centuries to fusion of new and old tradition into one.

according to Gabriel Soultanian's "The Pre-History of the Armenians" the Urartian enclave encircled on all sides by proto-Armenians had their language fading away in line with their identity.

the eclipse of Urartian language was the reason for Urartu, as a separate ethnic unit, to die a natural death; but even that death could not negate the legacy with which Urartu had endowed the hybrid nation of the Armenians, who are while physiognomically of Caucasian type, yet speak an Indo-European dialect.

[MeinPanzer]

it is, nevertheless, likely to influence later Armenians.
with arrival of new tribes circa VI BC Urartians did not just perish, but most, if not all, remained within their original inhabit and contributed over the centuries to fusion of new and old tradition into one.

according to Gabriel Soultanian's "The Pre-History of the Armenians" the Urartian enclave encircled on all sides by proto-Armenians had their language fading away in line with their identity.

Cultural heritage does not necessarily reflect military equipment. The equipment of the Caucasus and Armenia changed, like in most other areas of the old world, from the Urartian era to the EB timeframe quite drastically.

You are correct that the time period predates the EB timeframe by well over three centuries, but the traditions did continue. For example one of the most characteristic symbol of the Armenian military in the time frame of EB ( and even into the middle ages) would be the conical helmet. This type of helmet has been around since the time of the Urartu kingdom or even before. The other images of the scale armor, and the large round shield are also found in Armenia during EB's timeframe.

Could you provide some evidence for conical helmets and round shields of the Urartian type being used in Armenia during this time period?

Stating that Urartian military equipment can be used to recreate units from the EB timeframe is like stating that Archaic Greek equipment can be used to recreate Greek units. Later types may have derived from this, but they changed quite drastically.

The tradition of cavalry in Armenia, even though influenced by the Parthians in EB's timeframe, has an older tradition found in the kingdom of Urartu.

That may be, but that is no reason to use Urartian-era arms and armour as evidence for the EB timeframe.

[Foot]

Don't worry, that is certainly not where we will be drawing our evidence from. The Armenian Plateau had seen both the spread of Iranian and Hellenic culture since that time, so any influence from Urartu would need to be seen through those eyes. As it is I really don't see any place for Urartean artifacts in the conception of Caucasian units.

Foot

[artavazd]

The Urartian kingdom predates the EB timeframe by well over three centuries, and so any equipment from that time period is irrelevant to reconstructions during the EB timeframe.

You are correct that the time period predates the EB timeframe by well over three centuries, but the traditions did continue. For example one of the most characteristic symbol of the Armenian military in the time frame of EB ( and even into the middle ages) would be the conical helmet. This type of helmet has been around since the time of the Urartu kingdom or even before. The other images of the scale armor, and the large round shield are also found in Armenia during EB's timeframe. The tradition of cavalry in Armenia, even though influenced by the Parthians in EB's timeframe, has an older tradition found in the kingdom of Urartu.