Steppe Nomadic Warfare (Military History)

Introduction

This bibliography addresses the sources by which the reader may learn about nomadic steppe-style warfare. For the purposes of this bibliography, such warfare is considered to be not only that practiced by true steppe nomads such as Scythians, Huns, Magyars, and Mongols, but also that practiced by settled (or semisettled) peoples who adopted or retained the nomadic approach to warfare, for example, Parthians, Turks, Mamluks, Crimean Tatars, and Russians. The subject of nomadic steppe-style warfare presents two problems for the researcher. First, steppe warriors have been almost universally illiterate, and, even where they developed a rudimentary bureaucracy to supervise subject peoples, as happened with the Mongols, they did not as a general practice write their history. This means that, for the most part, their history has been written by their enemies. Second, because most steppe warriors lived or emerged from the center of the Eurasian landmass to prey on settled peoples or upon other steppe warriors who had established themselves over settled societies at various points along the perimeter, the various accounts of their activities are written in too many disparate languages for a single researcher to master. Primary accounts of them are thus found in classical Greek, Latin, Armenian, Russian, Polish, Hungarian, Chinese, Persian, and Arabic—to mention only the greatest number. This bibliography of necessity concentrates on Western sources and translated Middle Eastern and Eastern sources. In recompense, however, the difficulty of life on the steppes of Asia molded the tribes from which the steppe warriors sprang into peoples with very similar societies, customs, and military practices. These similarities extend not only across geography, but across time. Thus the accounts of the military activities of Scythians, Huns, Mongols, and Crimean Tatars are remarkably uniform, although their activities extended over a period of more than two thousand years and stretched from central Gaul into western China. A good understanding of the strategy, tactics, and equipment of the Mongols, for instance, has general application to most steppe warriors: at most, details of their equipment differ, though not the equipment itself. Settled peoples had a clear bias when reporting on steppe tribes, who were seen, for the most part, as mere predators with few redeeming qualities apart from their occasional value as allied soldiers. This evident bias should put the reader of primary sources on guard; however, such bias does not come into play in any significant way when ancient writers describe the organization, tactics, and equipment of these warriors, apart from exaggerating the size of nomadic armies. A reading of different authors from different times and places on important points always shows close agreement about weapons, tactics, and strategy. Furthermore, a number of settled peoples adopted military equipment and tactics from the steppe where it was useful to them, and so it is very clear that their accounts of these things are accurate.

General Overviews

The subject of nomadic steppe warfare is narrow enough that no general work of any depth seems to have been written exclusively on this topic apart from Hildinger 1997. However, there are useful chapters or passages on the campaigns and tactics of various nomadic warrior societies in other general works on the history of warfare, notably Keegan 1994, Jones 1987, and Lot 1946. Grousset 1970, monumental and easily available, although primarily a general political history, touches on the details of steppe-style warfare in its first chapter. Although these last four works do not treat nomadic steppe-style warfare in exhaustive detail, they are informative as to its general characteristics and, by contrasting it with the more familiar aspects of warfare as practiced by sedentary peoples, they are helpful.

Grousset, René. The Empire of the Steppes: A History of Central Asia. Translated by Naomi Walford. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers, 1970.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Treats briefly the essential military characteristics of the steppe warrior, though with some exaggeration about the practical range of the composite bow. Though dated, the book is still useful and was long a standard text on the history of the many steppe tribes of central Asia. Now superseded by Sinor 1990 (cited under Modern Works Treating Specific Peoples).
Find this resource:
Hildinger, Erik. Warriors of the Steppe: A Military History of Central Asia, 500 B.C. to 1700 A.D. New York: Sarpedon, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Apparently the only general history of nomadic steppe-style warfare. It contains chapters dealing with nomadism, the essential combination of horse and bow, strategy and tactics, and the activities of the most significant of the nomadic warrior societies, or those settled societies that retained or adopted their military techniques.
Find this resource:
Jones, Archer. The Art of War in the Western World. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1987.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Chapter 2, “The Diversity of the Medieval Ways of War,” treats briefly, but perceptively, the Mongol approach to war from a primarily strategic and logistical viewpoint.
Find this resource:
Keegan, John. A History of Warfare. New York: Vintage, 1994.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Chapter 3, “Flesh,” discusses in some detail the various aspects of nomadic life that work to mold nomads into successful warriors.
Find this resource:
Lot, Ferdinand. L‘art militaire et les armées au Moyen Âge. Paris: Payot, 1946.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Several chapters treat the more significant nomadic warrior societies with whom the West had contact. The work is long (two volumes) and detailed. There is unfortunately no English translation.
Find this resource:
Significant Primary Sources

The significant primary sources that deal broadly with steppe-style warfare available to Western researchers are listed in this section, and they cover a period of more than two thousand years, from the 5th century BCE to the 17th century CE. Most of them deal with the subject briefly. Original texts dealing specifically with archery or horsemanship, the two hallmarks of nomadic steppe-style warfare, are treated elsewhere or are listed in the sections dealing with specific campaigns and battles. Of those that are useful to the military research, some, such as the Herodotus narrative about the Scythians, are the product of report (in Herodotus 2003). Others are the product of personal observation: Ammianus Marcellinus (Ammianus Marcellinus 1986), generally considered the last historian of the classical period, was a 4th-century CE Roman military officer; Priscus of Panium was a 5th-century CE envoy of the Eastern Roman Emperor to Attila; Procopius of Caesarea (see Procopius of Caesarea 1914–1940), the personal secretary of the 6th-century CE Byzantine general Belisarius, accompanied his master on campaign; and Maurice (see Maurice 1984) was a 6th-century CE Byzantine emperor to whom a military manual is attributed. Giovanni da Pian del Carpine (see Giovanni da Pian del Carpine 1996) was a papal envoy to the Mongol Khan in 1247. Marco Polo’s account (Polo 2008) describes his years spent in Mongol-ruled China shortly thereafter. Timur (see Timur 1972) was a powerful late-14th- and early-15th-century Turco-Mongol emir who dictated his military regulations, and Gonzalez de Clavijo (see Gonzalez de Clavijo 1928) was a Spanish envoy to Timur’s court who recorded his observations. The personal knowledge of the informant is made clear in the case of each work listed in this section.

Ammianus Marcellinus. The Later Roman Empire, A.D. (354–378). Translated by Walter Hamilton. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin, 1986.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Book 21 discusses the Huns in vivid detail, commenting on their equipment, tactics, and appearance. The author’s description is interesting not only for its detail, but because he was a retired Roman army officer and veteran of many campaigns (though not against the Huns, who were not yet preying directly upon the empire).
Find this resource:
Beauplan, Guy Le Vasseur de. La déscription d’Ukrainie. Ottawa, Canada: Les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa, 1990.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Account by a French traveler of his experiences in Ukraine in the 1630s, including attacks upon him by Crimean Tatars. Contains detailed descriptions of Tatar military practices and tactics as well as valuable contemporary illustrations, including a visual plan of their method to confuse and evade pursuit. There is no English translation.
Find this resource:
Dawson, Christopher, ed. The Mongol Mission: Narratives and Letters of the Franciscan Missionaries in Mongolia and China in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries. New York: Sheed and Ward, 1955.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This valuable collection of the writings of missionaries in medieval Asia includes William of Rubruck’s account of his mission to the court of the Mongol Khan in 1254.
Find this resource:
Giovanni da Pian del Carpine (Giovanni di Plano Carpini). The History of the Mongols Whom We Call the Tartars. Translated by Erik Hildinger. Boston: Branden, 1996.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Account by a Dominican friar who was sent by the pope as his emissary to the court of the Mongol Khan in 1247. He describes the Mongol army, its organization and tactics, as well as their weapons and the construction of their armor. The work is also available in another translation in Dawson 1955, cited in this section.
Find this resource:
Gonzalez de Clavijo, Ruy. Embassy to Timur, 1403–1406. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1928.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Account by a Spanish diplomat of his embassy to the Emir Timur (Tamerlane) at the start of the 15th century. Gonzalez de Clavijo vividly describes the use of terror, in particular the construction of towers set with the skulls of the inhabitants of cities Timur had taken. He visited the emir’s workshops and discusses Turco-Mongol armor.
Find this resource:
Gordon, Colin D. The Age of Attila: Fifth-Century Byzantium and the Barbarians. Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor Paperbacks, 1966.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Priscus’s History survives only in fragments but contains his account of the embassy sent by the Emperor Theodosius II, of which he was a part, to the court of the Hunnish King Attila in the middle of the 5th century. His account contains the only eyewitness description of the Atilla.
Find this resource:
Herodotus. The Histories. Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt. London: Penguin, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Herodotus of Halicarnassus, the 5th-century BCE Greek historian, devotes Book 4 of his work to the Scythians in which he recounts the Persian King Darius’s unsuccessful 6th-century military campaign against them. In the course of the book, he describes to some extent their equipment, weaponry, and strategy. Revised edition.
Find this resource:
Maurice. Maurice’s Strategikon: Handbook of Byzantine Military Strategy. Translated by George T. Dennis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1984.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The 6th-century CE military manual attributed to the 6th-century Byzantine Emperor Maurice. Book 11 of the manual treats the tactics and characteristics of the East Roman Empire’s enemies, among them steppe nomads such as the Avars.
Find this resource:
Polo, Marco. The Travels of Marco Polo. Edited by Peter Harris. London: Everyman, 2008.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Gives a contemporary description of Mongol military equipment.
Find this resource:
Procopius of Caesarea. History of the Wars. Translated by H. B. Dewing. 5 Vols. London: William Heinemann, 1914–1940.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This account of 6th-century CE battles and wars describes the remnants of the Huns serving as auxiliaries to the East Roman army, and, perhaps more importantly, describes the Byzantine cavalry, which had adopted steppe-style equipment and tactics.
Find this resource:
Timur. Political and Military Institutes of Tamerlane. Recorded by Sharfuddin Ali Yezdi, translated by William Davy. Delhi: Idarah-i Adabiyat-i Delli, 1972.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In this work the Emir Timur, commonly known as Tamerlane, sets out the regulations for his army. The work deals with armament, even to details of the color of the equipment of different tumens (regiments). This book is particularly valuable as having been written by one of the most successful, if brutal, conquerors of central Asia, for the instruction and regulation of his own army.
Find this resource:
Modern Works Treating Specific Peoples

What follow are the most useful works, from the standpoint of military history, that deal with the most significant of the steppe peoples. Maenchen-Helfen 1973, by an Austrian academic, is the most scholarly general treatment of the Huns, and, though incomplete at the time of the author’s death, it is useful for the information it contains and for the sources cited on many topics. It also treats in detail the construction of composite bows generally and the Hunnish bow in particular. He does not exaggerate the weapon’s range, a fault common to many writers. Chambers 1979 is a well-written popular history of some of the Mongols’ military campaigns into Europe and therefore focuses on equipment, strategy, and tactics. Morgan 2007 is less in the popular vein but contains information about the Mongol military, as does Ratchnevsky 1991, a biography of Genghis Khan. Sinor 1990, a Cambridge History, has superseded Grousset 1970 (cited under General Overviews), which had been the standard general work in the field. Grousset 1970 (cited under General Overviews), however, is widely available and accurate about steppe military techniques, apart from some exaggeration about the range and effect of horse archery. The late Tadeusz Sulimirski, professor at the University of London, was probably the foremost expert on the history and archaeology of the Sarmatians, a steppe people distinguished from most others by their predilection for fighting in full armor with lances and swords, a practice they passed on to Germanic peoples and Romans. See Sulimirski 1970. John Ross was a Scottish missionary to China during the 19th century who wrote a detailed account of the Manchus and their conquest of China in Ross 1880.

Chambers, James. The Devil’s Horsemen: The Mongol Invasion of Europe. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1979.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A vivid and detailed account of the Mongol conquest of the Russian principalities 1236–1238 and of the Mongols’ subsequent incursions further west into Hungary and Poland in 1240–1241. There are detailed descriptions of the major battles.
Find this resource:
Maenchen-Helfen, Otto J. The World of the Huns: Studies in Their History and Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The chapter on warfare is detailed and explains what is known of Hunnish equipment, such as bows, from archaeological finds. The lacuna in this chapter can be filled in from the work Arabic Archery (cited under Bows), a work that Maenchen-Helfen almost certainly intended to quote. He states that the Hunnish bow, unlike other steppe bows, was asymmetric.
Find this resource:
Morgan, David. The Mongols. 2d ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Up-to-date general work on the Mongols. Scholarly and succinct.
Find this resource:
Ratchnevsky, Paul. Genghis Khan: His Life and Legacy. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1991.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Concentrates, as the title suggests, on the rise of Genghis Khan, necessarily covering his military campaigns. Quite detailed and therefore useful as an introduction to the conqueror.
Find this resource:
Ross, John. The Manchus, or the Reigning Dynasty of China, Their Rise and Progress. London: F. Paisley and R. Parlane, 1880.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A rather extensive work that treats the Manchu army and its 17th-century conquest of China in some detail. Valuable because, even in the 19th century, parts of it remained largely equipped and organized as it had been when the Manchus succeeded in seizing the Chinese throne. Interesting too, as a work on the last steppe-style warriors to overcome a major settled state.
Find this resource:
Sinor, Dennis, ed. The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
DOI: 10.1017/CHOL9780521243049Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Detailed treatment of most of the significant steppe nomads with sections about specific peoples written by specialists.
Find this resource:
Sulimirski, Tadeusz. The Sarmatians. London: Thames & Hudson, 1970.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The only scholarly treatment available in English of the Sarmatians, a steppe people who favored a different approach to cavalry warfare: the use of heavy armor, lances, and swords.
Find this resource:
Thompson, E. A. The Huns. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A revised edition of Thompson’s 1948 work on the Huns, long a standard history. From the standpoint of military history it is unusual in asserting that the Huns developed infantry. In a similar vein, see Lindner 1981 (cited under Effects of Contact and Conquest). For the conventional, contrary view, see Maenchen-Helfen 1973.
Find this resource:
Weapons

The composite recurve bow has historically been by far the most important weapon of the nomad. The most sophisticated and efficient of hand bows, its performance continues to impress historians, even to the point of leading to serious exaggeration of its capabilities. Many of the works in this section discuss the construction, use, and performance of these bows. Some of the sources are from settled societies that either adopted the weapon from steppe nomads or independently developed it. Texts such as Maenchen-Helfen 1973, Chambers 1979, and Hildinger 1997 (all cited under Armor) discuss secondary armament and equipment such as lances, swords, shields, and armor.

Bows

The texts in this section are the most significant of those that pertain to the construction and use of the recurve composite bow. Klopsteg 1987 is the most detailed on Turkish bows and construction and contains interesting information on the sport of long-distance shooting. However, the reader is cautioned not to assume that the performance of special bows and light flight arrows reflects the performance of ordinary war bows propelling heavy war arrows. Similarly, a reading of Karpowicz 2007, about the performance of surviving Turkish bows in the Topkapi Museum, while illuminating, should be tempered by considering whether these bows survived precisely because they were of especially heavy draw weight and therefore seldom used. Arabic Archery is of particular interest as a practical manual in the use of the composite bow from the period when the use was common, and its statements about effective range and accuracy are illuminating: while impressive, neither are as great as supposed by modern writers. Paterson 1966 is realistic in this regard as well.

Arabic Archery: An Arabic Manuscript of about A.D. 1500—A Book on the Excellence of the Bow and Arrow and the Description Thereof. Translated and edited by N. A. Faris and R. P. Elmer. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1945.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A practical guide to the use of the recurve composite bow both on foot and from horseback from a time and place when the weapon was in everyday use. It is undoubtedly the work that Maenchen-Helfen meant to discuss in the lacuna in the section on bows in Maenchen-Helfen 1973 (cited under Armor).
Find this resource:
Karpowicz, Adam. “Ottoman Bows—An Assessment of Draw Weight, Performance and Tactical Use.” Antiquity 81 (September 2007): 675–685.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The author examines thirty-nine surviving Turkish bows and estimates their draw weight and performance, drawing conclusions about their use and effect. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Klopsteg, Paul. Turkish Archery and the Composite Bow. Manchester, UK: Simon Archery Foundation, 1987.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The most detailed work on the subjects of Turkish archery and the composite bow. Contains interesting information about the Turkish sport of long-distance shooting, which should not be taken as support for exaggerated claims about the range of war bows. The book is rare but may be found in university libraries.
Find this resource:
McEwen, E., R. L. Miller, and C. A. Bergman. “Early Bow Design and Construction.” Scientific American 264.6 (June 1991): 76–82.
DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican0691-76Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A useful and purely technical discussion of the construction and performance of bows in general and of composite bows in particular, replete with illustrations of historical examples and a discussion of the mechanics behind bow performance. Explains why and how a composite bow functions more efficiently than a self-bow. Available online by subscription.
Find this resource:
Paterson, W. F. “The Archers of Islam.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 9 (November 1966): 69–87.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Discussion of the practical range and use of the composite bow on foot and on horseback. Parts 1 and 2. Available online by subscription.
Find this resource:
Other Weapons

The sources in this section should guide the reader on the topic of other weapons used by steppe-style warriors. Maenchen-Helfen 1973 (cited under Modern Works Treating Specific Peoples) discusses the use of lances by Sarmatians and Huns and of the sword and the lasso by the latter. Ammianus Marcellinus 1986 (cited under Significant Primary Sources) remarks on the Huns’ use of the lasso in warfare. The Munyatu’l Ghuzat is a medieval manual of cavalry warfare written for the instruction of Egyptian Mamluks, who formed the elite troops of that state. It was written in Turkish and thus reflects the Kipchak origins of the Mamluks of the period. Snodgrass 1999, written by a retired professor of classical archaeology at the University of Cambridge, is based to a large extent on archaeological finds. It touches on Scythian military equipment and costume. Ostrowski 2010 (cited under Military Response of Sedentary Peoples) has interesting things to say on the shift from bows to firearms in the Russian cavalry.

Munyatu’l Ghuzat: A 14th Century Mamluk-Kipchak Military Treatise. Translated by Kurtulus Oztopcu. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This medieval work from Egypt intended for the use of Mamluks discusses, besides the use of the bow, the choice and use of swords and lances.
Find this resource:
Snodgrass, Anthony M. Arms and Armor of the Greeks. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Contains a brief description of the Scythian military equipment such as the Scythian bow and their peculiar battle ax.
Find this resource:
Armor

Most steppe warriors throughout history have fought as light horsemen and protected themselves with little armor and sometimes none at all. By contrast, the nobility or specialized troops often wore armor, and this armor varied in type in different times and places. Whatever the type of armor, however, it tended to be light and flexible. The works in this section describe or discuss the armor of different steppe warriors. The classical Greek geographer Pausanius describes Sarmatian scale armor (see Description of Greece); Maenchen-Helfen 1973, by an Austrian academic, treats the armor of the Huns; Giovanni da Pian del Carpine 1996, by an envoy to the court of the Mongol Khan, described Mongol armor in some detail; and Chambers 1979, by a modern writer, also treats the subject. Gonzalez de Clavijo 1928, by a Spanish ambassador to the Turko-Mongol Emir Timur, briefly describes Timurid armor and characterizes it as brigandine. Dien 2000 looks broadly at Asian armor, particularly lamellar and scale. Ross 1880 describes Manchu armor made from layers of fabric. Hildinger 1997 discusses the armors of various steppe peoples in various chapters.

Chambers, James. The Devil’s Horsemen: The Mongol Invasion of Europe. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1979.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Discusses the armor of the Mongols in some detail.
Find this resource:
Dien, Albert E. “A Brief Survey of Defensive Armor across Asia.” Journal of East Asian Archaeology 2.3–4 (September 2000): 1–22.
DOI: 10.1163/156852300760222038Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This well-illustrated article on Asian armor devotes itself in part to the armor of Sarmatians and Scythians and discusses the general popularity in Asia of scale and lamellar armor, widely worn by steppe nomads. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Giovanni da Pian del Carpine (Giovanni di Plano Carpini). The History of the Mongols Whom We Call the Tartars. Translated by Erik Hildinger. Boston: Branden, 1996.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This informant describes the construction of flexible Mongol armor as he observed it while on an embassy to the Mongol capital of Karakorum in 1247. He also discusses helmets and horse armor.
Find this resource:
Gonzalez de Clavijo, Ruy. Embassy to Timur, 1403–1406. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1928.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Spanish diplomat Gonzalez de Clavijo visited the armory of the Great Emir Timur (Tamerlane) and describes the Turco-Mongol armor he saw there, in particular brigandine armor.
Find this resource:
Hildinger, Erik. Warriors of the Steppe: A Military History of Central Asia, 500 B.C. to 1700 A.D. New York: Sarpedon, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Describes and discusses the different armors of different steppe peoples in the chapters relating to them.
Find this resource:
Maenchen-Helfen, Otto J. The World of the Huns: Studies in Their History and Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
See chapter 5 for the author’s argument that the Huns wore armor of iron.
Find this resource:
Pausanias. Description of Greece. 4 vols. Translated by W. H. S. Jones. London: Heinemann, 1918.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Writing in the 2nd century CE, the author describes Sarmatian scale-armor made from the split hooves of horses. The relevant passage may be found at 1.21.6 and also at page 242 of Maenchen-Helfen 1973.
Find this resource:
Ross, John. The Manchus, or the Reigning Dynasty of China, Their Rise and Progress. London: F. Paisley and R. Parlane, 1880.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Contains a description of Manchu armor made from many layers of cloth stitched together.
Find this resource:
Tactics and Strategy

Sarmatians came to rely on heavy cavalry fighting with lance and sword, but they were the exception among steppe nomads. The tactics of the other and most successful nomads were fairly uniform for about two thousand years and involved, for the most part, mounted archery, encirclement, and feigned flight and ambush, sometimes in combination with support from a smaller contingent of more heavily armored horsemen. The sources cited in this section describe these techniques as used in battle. Procopius of Caesarea was a 6th-century Byzantine historian and secretary to the general Belisarius, whom he accompanied on campaign. In the course of his work on the wars of the Emperor Justinian (see Procopius of Caesarea 1914–1940), he describes the equipment and tactics of the Roman cavalryman of his period, which was derived from experience fighting steppe nomads such as Huns and Avars, and contrasts the cavalryman of his day with the legionary of the earlier empire. Anna Comnena was the daughter of the Byzantine Emperor Alexius Comnenus, whose principal enemies were the Turks. Comnena 2003, the author’s account of her father’s reign, The Alexiad, thus treats the warfare of the Turks, as well as that of the Europeans of the First Crusade who went up against them. Guy Le Vasseur de Beauplan traveled through Ukraine in the 17th century and wrote of his experiences in great detail in Beauplan 1990, describing, among other things, attacks upon him and his Cossack entourage by Crimean Tatars. Further details about Crimean Tatar equipment and military technique can be found in Collins 1975, as can some discussion of the response of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth to their raiding. Chambers 1979 (cited under Modern Works Treating Specific Peoples) describes in detail the Mongol strategy involved in the conquest of the Russian states and the defeat of armies in central Europe. The military techniques described in these works have general application to the study of the other major steppe peoples.

Beauplan, Guy Le Vasseur de. La déscription d’Ukrainie. Ottawa, Canada: Les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa, 1990.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The passage and diagram describing how Crimean Tatar raiders evaded the detection or pursuit of the Polish army is useful and particularly interesting.
Find this resource:
Collins, L. J. D. “The Military Organization and Tactics of the Crimean Tatars during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.” In War, Technology and Society in the Middle East. Edited by V. J. Parry and M. E. Yapp, 257–276. London: Oxford University Press, 1975.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Very useful description of the equipment and tactics of the Crimean Tatars in their raids upon and wars with the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. A useful and detailed text about an important antagonist of central Europe and an ally of the Ottomans. The authors note that the Crimean Tatars, though relying on the bow, occasionally carried pistols or arquebuses.
Find this resource:
Comnena, Anna. The Alexiad. Translated by E. R. A. Sewter. London: Penguin, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The 11th-century account by the daughter of the Byzantine Emperor Alexius Comnenus of his reign. A contemporary account of the First Crusade, it contains passages dealing with Turkish mounted archery.
Find this resource:
Maenchen-Helfen, Otto J. The World of the Huns: Studies in Their History and Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Chapter 5 discusses Hunnish tactics, characterizes the Huns as light cavalry, and remarks on their consistent tactics throughout their contact with the Roman Empire.
Find this resource:
Marshall, Christopher. Warfare in the Latin East, 1192–1291. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Valuable, and complements Smail 1995, though it concentrates more on the European defensive practice of castellation. The passages on the Turks are of interest to those researching this subject.
Find this resource:
Procopius of Caesarea. History of the Wars. Translated by H. B. Dewing. 5 Vols. London: William Heinemann, 1914–1940.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Contains a 6th-century description of Byzantine cavalrymen whose equipment, both arms and armor, was closely modeled on that of the empire’s nomadic enemies.
Find this resource:
Smail, R. C. Crusading Warfare, 1097–1193. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A standard work, as its title suggests, on the warfare of the Crusades. It treats the tactics, strategy, and equipment of the Turks, nomadic warriors who had left the steppe to settle in Anatolia and who often served as cavalry for the Muslim powers in their contests with Crusaders.
Find this resource:
Training

The life of the steppe nomad suited him to warfare, but there was some military training on the steppe, often in the form of large organized hunts, such as that described by the 13th-century Persian historian Juvaini in Juvaini 1958 on the Mongols. The hunt as training is described in May 2006. The Mamluks, who by contrast fought for settled states such as Egypt, also practiced steppe-style warfare as described in manuals such as the Munyatu’l Ghuzat, which treats in detail many different aspects of steppe-influenced cavalry warfare.

Juvaini, Ala-ad-Din Ata-Malik. History of the World Conqueror. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1958.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Contains an account of the hunt used to train Mongol troops.
Find this resource:
May, Timothy. “The Training of an Inner Asian Nomad Army in the Pre-Modern Period.” Journal of Military History 70.3 (July 2006): 617–635.
DOI: 10.1353/jmh.2006.0179Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Describes the training of the Mongol army in the steppe before campaigns, thus illustrating the qualities that the nomads judged necessary to perfect and use in warfare. Available online by subscription.
Find this resource:
Munyatu’l Ghuzat: A 14th Century Mamluk-Kipchak Military Treatise. Translated by Kurtulus Oztopcu. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This medieval text on horsemanship and fighting on horseback served as an instructional manual for Mamluk cavalry in Egypt. These slave-soldiers, purchased from the steppe, often nomadic Kipchaks, were trained in nomadic horse archery techniques in the maidans or training fields of Egypt. The work also discusses swords and lances, how to choose them, and how to use them.
Find this resource:
Major Campaigns and Battles

The campaigns and battles of the various steppe nomads illustrate their military techniques. The sources in this section treat those campaigns that are most significant or illustrative from the standpoint of military history.

Primary Sources

The sources in this section are primary and thus require interpretation on the part of the researcher. Herodotus of Halicarnassus, the 5th-century Greek historian, wrote the first Western account of steppe-style warfare in his treatment of the Scythians (Herodotus 2003). Plutarch, a Greek historian writing during the first and second centuries CE, wrote an account of the Life of Marcus Crassus, the triumvir who, in 53 BCE, suffered a defeat at the hands of a mounted Parthian army employing steppe tactics. Jordanes, the 6th-century historian of the Goths, deals in part with their relations with their enemies the Huns and with the struggle between the Huns and the Romans in the 5th century (see Getica). Zenkovsky 1974 is a medieval Russian history.

Herodotus. The Histories. Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt. London: Penguin, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Book 4 contains an account of Darius’s campaign against the Scythians in the 6th century BCE. Although not highly detailed, this first Western account of steppe warfare illustrates the difficulty of coming to grips with a nomadic enemy and the nomad’s tendency to delay and flee in the face of the enemy in hope of finding a fit opportunity to attack. Revised edition.
Find this resource:
Jordanes. Getica. Translated by Charles C. Mierow.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Sixth-century account of the history of the Goths. It contains the earliest account of the defeat of Attila in 452 by the combined Roman-Gothic army led by Flavius Aetius. Available in various collections of late antique authors and online.
Find this resource:
Plutarch. Life of Marcus Crassus. In Plutarch’s Lives. Vol. 3. By Plutarch, 21-39. Translated by Aubrey Stewart. London: George Bell & Sons, 1892.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Describes in detail, and apparently with accuracy, the destruction of a Roman army at Carrhae in 53 BCE at the hands of a Parthian cavalry army composed of horse archers supported by Parthian nobility mounted as lancers. This account, though it treats a battle between two settled powers, is illustrative of nomadic steppe-style warfare.
Find this resource:
Zenkovsky, Serge A., ed. and trans. “Battle on the River Kalka.” In Medieval Russia’s Epics, Chronicles, and Tales. Edited and translated by Serge A. Zenkovsky, 193–195. New York: Penguin, 1974.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Contemporary account of a major Russian defeat by Mongols. Originally published in 1963.
Find this resource:
Secondary Sources

These are significant works are of modern scholarship dealing with major campaigns or battles. Bivar 1983, a modern treatment of the Parthian war, complements the famous classical account by Plutarch. Delbrück 1982, by the German military historian famous for realistically assessing the numbers involved in ancient conflicts, describes the Magyars’ defeat at the hands of the German Emperor Otto I’s knights at the Battle of the Lechfeld. Although the work by Cambridge classicist Bury (Bury 2011) recounts a colorful story of intrigue between the Roman princess Honoria and Atilla that is no longer taken seriously, it does treat credibly the defeat of Atilla by a combined Roman-Gothic army in 452. Alexandrescu-Dersca 1977 focuses on Timur’s war with Sultan Bayazet, a conflict in which both sides practiced steppe-style warfare. Amitai-Preiss 1995 treats the conflict between the Mamluks of Egypt and the Mongols advancing from Persia. Both sides fought in the steppe style, the Mongols receiving their first significant defeat at the hands of a sedentary state. Chambers 1979 and Ross 1880 (both cited under Modern Works Treating Specific Peoples), Juvaini 1997 (cited under Major Personalities), and Morgan 2007 (cited under Modern Works Treating Specific Peoples) all contain accounts of illustrative campaigns and battles. Perdue 2005 is highly detailed and useful in illustrating the expansion of China to the west, though it is more a political than a military history.

Alexandrescu-Dersca, Marie-Mathilde. La campagne de Timur en Anatolie (1402). London: Variorum, 1977.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Concentrates on Timur’s war with Sultan Bayazet.
Find this resource:
Amitai-Preiss, Reuven. Mamluks and Mongols: The Mamluk-Ilkhanid War, 1260–1281. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511563485Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A detailed treatment of the campaign leading up to the defeat of the Mongol army by Egyptian Mamluks in 1260.
Find this resource:
Bivar, A. D. H. “The Campaign of Carrhae.” In The Cambridge History of Iran. Vol. 3, The Seleucid, Parthian, and Sasanian Periods. Edited by E. Yarshater, 48–56. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A detailed modern treatment of the campaign leading up to the Battle of Carrhae, with a detailed description of the battle.
Find this resource:
Bury, J. B. History of the Later Roman Empire from the Death of Theodosius I to the Death of Justinian. Vol. 2. New York: Dover, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Chapter 8 focuses on the campaigns of the Hunnish king Attila, with some attention given to the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains (Battle of Chalons or of Locus Mauriacus) in 452. The story of the intrigue of the Imperial Princess Honoria with Attila is no longer taken seriously.
Find this resource:
Delbrück, Hans. History of the Art of War: Within the Framework of Political History. Vol. 3, The Middle Ages. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1982.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The Battle of the Lechfeld is here treated, in which German knights successfully defeated their more mobile Magyar (Hungarian) horse archer opponents. Delbrück’s work is, as usual, insightful.
Find this resource:
Perdue, Peter C. China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Useful, though essentially a political and cultural history.
Find this resource:
Major Personalities

A number of original sources treat the major nomadic steppe leaders whose activities have proven significant, and a few are firsthand accounts of meetings. Priscus of Panium (see Gordon 1966) was a 5th-century envoy of the Eastern Roman Emperor to Atilla; Giovanni da Pian del Carpine (see Giovanni da Pian del Carpine 1996), an envoy to the court of the Mongol Khan in 1247; Juvaini (see Juvaini 1997), a 13th-century Persian historian; and Gonzalez de Clavijo (see Gonzalez de Clavijo 1928), a Spanish ambassador to the Turko-Mongol Emir Timur. Rashīd al-Dīn Tabīb’s history, Jāmiʿ al-tawārīkh, written during the Mongol rule of Persia, is particularly valuable as a contemporary document and as a source of detailed illustrations, some of them showing Mongol military equipment and actions. The Secret History of the Mongols is the only contemporary Mongol account of their history. Thorau 1995, Kehren 1988, and Ratchnevsky 1991 are useful contemporary treatments of important military leaders who practiced steppe-style warfare either as nomads (Genghis Khan) or as sedentary rulers (Baybars and Timur).

Giovanni da Pian del Carpine (Giovanni di Plano Carpini). The History of the Mongols Whom We Call the Tartars. Translated by Erik Hildinger. Boston: Branden, 1996.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Contains an account of an audience with Batu Khan, leader of the Golden Horde.
Find this resource:
Gonzalez de Clavijo, Ruy. Embassy to Timur, 1403–1406. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1928.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Contains an eyewitness description of the Great Emir Timur (Tamerlane).
Find this resource:
Gordon, Colin D. The Age of Attila: Fifth-Century Byzantium and the Barbarians. Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor Paperbacks, 1966.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Priscus recounts the events surrounding an East Roman embassy to the court of Attila and includes the only description of Attila by an eyewitness.
Find this resource:
Juvaini, Ata-Malik. Genghis Khan: The History of the World Conqueror by ʻAla-ad-Din ʻAta-Malik Juvaini. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Thirteenth-century account by a Persian court official of the Mongol conquests resulting in the establishment of the Il-Khanate. Translated from the text of Mizra Muhammad Qazvini by J. A. Boyle.
Find this resource:
Kehren, Lucien. Tamerlan: L’empire du Seigneur de Fer. Paris: Payot, 1988.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Useful biography which treats the Anatolian campaign of Timur against Sultan Bayazet Yildirim, which culminated in Ottoman defeat at the Battle of Ankara in 1402.
Find this resource:
Rashīd al-Dīn Tabīb. Jāmiʿ al-tawārīkh. In The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. Vol. 3, The Muhammadan Years. Edited from the posthumous papers of H. M. Elliot by John Dowson, 1–23. London: Trübner, 1871.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A major primary source for the history of the Ilkhanate written at the command of the Il-khan Mahmud Ghazan to preserve the memory of the Mongols’ nomadic origins and history. The various manuscripts contain valuable illustrations.
Find this resource:
Ratchnevsky, Paul. Genghis Khan: His Life and Legacy. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1991.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Well-researched, standard text focusing on Genghis Khan and his rise.
Find this resource:
Thorau, Peter. The Lion of Egypt: Sultan Baybars I and the Near East in the Thirteenth Century. Translated by P. M. Holt. London: Longman, 1995.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Well-regarded treatment of the life of this Mamluk Sultan. Revised and reorganized from the original German edition. Treats one of Baybars’s greatest achievements: defeating the Mongol army at the Battle of Ayn Jalut.
Find this resource:
Waley, Arthur. Secret History of the Mongols, and Other Pieces. Translated by Arthur Waley. London: Allen and Unwin, 1963.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Thirteenth-century Mongol account of the life of Genghis Khan some time after his death. Essentially the only Mongol account of the life of Genghis Khan.
Find this resource:
Effects of Contact and Conquest

Contact with, or conquest by, steppe nomads had a number of effects upon settled peoples. From the standpoint of military history, the effect was often to cause the adoption of some steppe-style military equipment or tactics either through emulation or, as in the case of the Russian states, being forced to serve as auxiliary troops in nomad armies. This latter effect is addressed in the section on the Military Response of Sedentary Peoples. Professor Peter Heather of King’s College has written widely on the relationship between barbarians and Romans during the Late Empire. Heather 1995 argues that the Huns were more of a threat to the empire while on the steppe because they drove barbarians, primarily Germans, into the empire in larger numbers than could be easily accommodated. In further support of this claim, Heather notes that the Roman Empire generally could defeat Huns in set-piece battles. Heather’s assertion that the Huns were less of a direct military threat than is often assumed would seem buttressed by the interesting observations in Lindner 1981 that the Hungarian plain, where the Huns finally settled, could not support enough horses for large cavalry armies of the sort found on the steppe. Lindner’s conclusion is that the Huns must finally have become infantry, but the same evidence could support the conclusion that after settling on the Hungarian plain Hunnish armies were still mounted, as Maenchen-Helfen asserts, but smaller or equipped with fewer remounts and, for either of these reasons, less effective than they had been. Halperin 1987 concentrates on the effect of the Mongol conquest on the medieval Russian states and notes in passing that Russian armies of the period resembled Mongol (Tatar) armies in equipment, something clearly illustrated in Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii (cited under Military Response of Sedentary Peoples). Weatherford 2004 argues for a more positive view of the effects of the Mongol conquests.

Gordon, Colin D. The Age of Attila: Fifth-Century Byzantium and the Barbarians. Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor Paperbacks, 1966.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Contains a debate between a Roman and a now-free Roman slave who has chosen to live among the Huns, each expounding the virtues of his preferred society. Almost certainly a literary effort, but useful, perhaps, in showing a late Roman view of both societies.
Find this resource:
Halperin, Charles J. Russia and the Golden Horde: The Mongol Impact on Medieval Russian History. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A detailed examination of the effect of the Tatar yoke on many aspects of Russian culture.
Find this resource:
Heather, Peter. “The Huns and the End of the Roman Empire in Western Europe.” English Historical Review 110.435 (February 1995): 4–41.
DOI: 10.1093/ehr/CX.435.4Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Professor Heather argues persuasively that the Huns were most damaging to the Roman Empire while they were still on the steppe: a direct effect of their migration west was to drive German tribes into the empire.
Find this resource:
Lindner, Rudi Paul. “Nomadism, Horses and Huns.” Past & Present 92 (1981): 3–19.
DOI: 10.1093/past/92.1.3Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This author discusses the importance of large numbers of horses to nomad armies and argues that the Hungarian plain could not support as many as the Huns had had while on the steppe. He concludes that the Huns must as a result have taken up infantry warfare. The conventional view, which is to the contrary, is expressed in Maenchen-Helfen 1973 (cited under Modern Works Treating Specific Peoples). Available online by subscription.
Find this resource:
Weatherford, Jack. Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World. New York: Three Rivers, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A detailed account of the rise of Genghis Khan that argues for a more sympathetic view of his activities and the effects of his conquests than has been generally held.
Find this resource:
Military Response of Sedentary Peoples

Sedentary people adopted a number of responses to the incursion of steppe nomads until the advent of gunpowder weapons made them less threatening. Castellation was a response under Charlemagne; another was to adopt the equipment and military techniques of the nomads, as did the East Romans, the Russians, and the Poles, or to retain them where they were part of the heritage of a people, such as with the Ottoman Turks or Crimean Tatars, who had come off the steppe and settled. Procopius, the 6th-century Byzantine historian and secretary to the general Belisarius, gives a description of the Roman cavalryman of his day in Procopius of Caesarea 1914–1940: an armored, mounted archer clearly influenced by steppe warriors such as Huns and Avars. This description shows clearly that one late Roman response to steppe-style warfare was to adopt some of the techniques. This response is further illustrated in the Strategikon attributed to the Emperor Maurice (see Maurice 1984). The adoption of such techniques by sedentary Middle Eastern states (in this case Egypt) is shown in the Munyatu’l Ghuzat, which focuses on the training of individual cavalrymen in steppe-style fighting, and Sigismund Herberstein’s 16th-century account of his experiences in Russia (see Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii) shows much the same response—Russian armies acting much as Tatar armies of the period did—though he does discuss the Russians’ use of cannon and the building of forts along the frontier. Ostrowski 2010 discusses in detail the replacement of the bow with firearms in the Russian cavalry and ties it to changes in Russian strategy and tactics against their Tatar enemies.

Heberstein, Sigismund. Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii. Frankfurt: Minerva, 1964.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This diplomat to the court of the Russian Czar in the 16th century describes the Russian army of the period. The text shows how closely it resembled the forces of the Mongols and the successor Tatar states that it faced. He also discusses the establishment of forts along the frontier to discourage their raiding.
Find this resource:
Maurice. Maurice’s Strategikon: Handbook of Byzantine Military Strategy. Translated by George T. Dennis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1984.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Book 11 of this 6th-century military manual describes the East Roman cavalry as clearly modeled on that of the better-equipped steppe nomads whom they had been encountering since the advent of the Huns.
Find this resource:
Munyatu’l Ghuzat: A 14th Century Mamluk-Kipchak Military Treatise. Translated by Kurtulus Oztopcu. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This Mamluk military manual describes the steppe-style military techniques taught to and practiced by Egyptian Mamluk cavalry.
Find this resource:
Ostrowski, Donald. “The Replacement of the Composite Reflex Bow by Firearms in the Muscovite Cavalry.” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History 11.3 (Summer 2010): 513–534.
DOI: 10.1353/kri.0.0176Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that the replacement of the composite bow by much less effective firearms in the Russian cavalry was the result of a shift in the use of cavalry from an offensive to a defense arm. Available online for purchase or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Procopius of Caesarea. History of the Wars. Translated by H. B. Dewing. 5 Vols. London: William Heinemann, 1914–1940.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This 6th-century text describes the equipment, tactics, and battles of the East Roman army, the cavalry of which had adopted steppe-style equipment and tactics. Consistent with the slightly later description of the same in Maurice 1984.
Find this resource:
Steppe Nomads as Auxiliaries

Settled states often employed steppe nomads as auxiliary troops. The sources in this section provide significant instances. The 6th-century Byzantine historian Procopius records the employment of steppe nomads as auxiliaries by his patron, the general Belisarius, in Procopius of Caesarea 1914–1940. Maenchen-Helfen 1973 discusses Huns in Roman service in chapter 5 and argues that, although most must have been enrolled as numeri barbari, two regular army units may have been composed of Huns. In contrast to steppe nomads serving as auxiliaries in the armies of settled states, Halperin 1987 remarks on the Mongol use of Russians as auxiliaries in their armies.

Halperin, Charles J. Russia and the Golden Horde: The Mongol Impact on Medieval Russian History. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Chapter 9 discusses Russian-Tatar military alliances and arrangements for the support of Tatar princes as military allies.
Find this resource:
Maenchen-Helfen, Otto J. The World of the Huns: Studies in their History and Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Chapter 5 discusses Huns in Roman service and argues that, though most must have been enrolled as numeri barbari, two regular army units may have been composed of Huns.
Find this resource:
Procopius of Caesarea. History of the Wars. Translated by H. B. Dewing. 5 Vols. London: William Heinemann, 1914–1940.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Numerous references to Massagetae (Huns) as auxiliaries in the Byzantine Army.
Find this resource:
Nomadism

Nomadism imposes a number of hardships that have formed steppe people into hardy, practical fighters. Some reading into the subject is helpful. Fletcher 1986 ties ecology to the actions of the Mongols; Johnson 1969 is a detailed study of nomadism.

Fletcher, Joseph. “The Mongols: Ecological and Social Perspectives.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 46.1 (June 1986): 11–50.
DOI: 10.2307/2719074Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A thought-provoking examination of the relationship between the ecology of the steppe and the activities of the Mongols. Available online by subscription.
Find this resource:
Johnson, Douglas L. The Nature of Nomadism: A Comparative Study of Pastoral Migrations in Southwestern Asia and Northern Africa. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Department of Geography Research Papers, 1969.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Generally useful, this book makes the interesting observation that sedentary populations are more easily subject to government control; thus the efforts of the Turks to discourage nomadism in Anatolia.
Find this resource:
Horses

A few sources discuss the horses favored by steppe nomads, usually to praise them for the hardiness that particularly distinguished them. Giovanni da Pian del Carpine 1996 (cited under Significant Primary Sources) discusses Tatar (Mongol) horses and their particular fitness for winter work. Lindner 1981 (cited under Effects of Contact and Conquest) discusses the importance of several horses for each steppe warrior, and Beauplan 1990 (cited under Significant Primary Sources) recounts how Crimean Tatar warriors always led several horses on campaign and changed mounts often. More on the horses of the Crimean Tatars can be found in Collins 1975 and Vegetius’s Digesta Artis Mulomedicinae, by the 5th-century CE Roman writer who discusses the hardiness of Hun horses. Maenchen-Helfen 1973 (cited under Modern Works Treating Specific Peoples) argues that Vegetius wrote from personal knowledge and gives a précis of the relevant passage.

Collins, L. J. D. “The Military Organization and Tactics of the Crimean Tatars during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.” In War, Technology and Society in the Middle East. Edited by V. J. Parry and M. E. Yapp, 257–276. London: Oxford University Press, 1975.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Indicates that Crimean Tatar nobles, in contrast to commoners, rode barbs and Arab horses.
Find this resource:
Vegetius, Flavius Renatus. Digesta Artis Mulomedicinae. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2010.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A 5th-century Roman work that discusses the qualities of Hun horses. The work is difficult to find in print but is available in Latin online by subscription through the University of Michigan libraries.
Find this resource:
Representations

Various historical works represent nomadic warriors and their equipment, horses, and armament with varying degrees of accuracy, for example that noted in this section from the Detroit Institute of Arts (Ardashir Fighting Bahman). Greek vases, for instance, often portray Scythians (and others) in Scythian dress. See, for example, the plates in Snodgrass 1999 (cited under Other Weapons). That work also presents other contemporary illustrations in the form of low relief and metalwork. The other works in this section depict other, later, steppe or steppe-style warriors with some accuracy. Trajan’s Column, a victory monument to the Emperor Trajan in Rome, depicts his campaigns in Dacia. It illustrates, in a stylized way, the equipment of Sarmatian horsemen. The work of Rashīd al-Dīn Tabīb, a 13th-century Persian historian, contains valuable illustrations (see Jāmiʿ al-tawārīkh). Sigismund Herberstein’s 16th-century account of his diplomatic experiences in Russia, Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii, contains an illustration of the Tatar-influenced Russian cavalry of the period. Beauplan 1990 (cited under Significant Primary Sources) gives a diagram to help explain how Crimean Tatars moved about on the steppe in such a way as to foil pursuit.

“Ardashir Fighting Bahman.” Detroit Institute of Arts.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A particularly clear Persian painting in the Detroit Institute of Arts depicting warriors in 13th–14th-century Mongol lamellar armor.
Find this resource:
“Colonna di Traiano.” In Rome-Roma.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Trajan’s column depicts helmeted, scale-armored Sarmatian warriors, probably Roxolani, mounted on scale-armored horses. Although not presented with great realism, it is good evidence of the type of armor worn by these steppe people and does present early evidence for the Spangenhelm. Good, clear images of the entire column may be found at this website.
Find this resource:
Herberstein, Sigismund von. Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii. Frankfurt: Minerva, 1964.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A well-known woodcut from this work depicts 16th-century Russian cavalry equipped in the manner of the Tatars they faced: they wear pointed helmets and long quilted coats as armor and are armed with recurve, composite bows, sabers, and maces.
Find this resource:
Rashīd al-Dīn Tabīb. Jāmiʿ al-tawārīkh. In The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. Vol. 3, The Muhammadan Years. Edited from the posthumous papers of H. M. Elliot by John Dowson, 1–23. London: Trübner, 1871.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The various contemporary manuscripts (or their reproductions) depict Mongol warriors and military operations. This work is the source of some of the most widely reproduced contemporary illustrations of Mongol warriors.