|
Post by boleslawi on Feb 21, 2016 7:38:55 GMT 3
When it comes to finding books on the history of Khwarezm Shahdom, it is hard to find anything in English, except may be the Cambridge History of Iran and Turkestan down to the Mongol Invasion by Vasily Barthold.
Recently, I have finished reading Государство Хорезмшахов-Ануштегинидов by Ziya Bunyatov. Pretty good book but without critical analysis of primary sources.
Then in that book I read that the famed Turkish scholar Ibrahim Kafesoglu's book, I remember you can read Turkish, so I'd like to ask have you read this book? And are there any specific details on the military organization of this state.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Feb 21, 2016 16:13:00 GMT 3
Yes I have read Kafesoğlu's book. It is a narration of the political history of the Khwarazmshah Empire but it does not contain any chapters on the military organization of this state.
|
|
|
Post by boleslawi on Feb 21, 2016 19:26:47 GMT 3
Then do you know any monograph or articles describing the military organization of the Khwarezmshah in details in Turkish. My impression from reading Bunyatov is that they inherited most institutional instruments from the Seljuqs.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Feb 22, 2016 11:52:43 GMT 3
There are several books and articles in Turkish that deal with the topic of Seljuk armies, but unfortunately I don't remember any work that deals specifically with the armies of the Khwarazmshahs.
|
|
|
Post by boleslawi on Feb 25, 2016 21:37:06 GMT 3
Could you introduce to me some of those books and articles?
Are they available in ebook format, but if you could just provide titles that would be just fine.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Feb 25, 2016 23:54:42 GMT 3
Could you introduce to me some of those books and articles? Are they available in ebook format, but if you could just provide titles that would be just fine. Sure. I have not seen any e-book formats of these books but they ara available in printed forms: - Mehmet Altay Köymen, "Alp Arslan Zamanı Selçuklu Askerî Teşkilâtı", Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Tarih Bölümü Tarih Araştırmaları Dergisi, Vol. 5, No. 8-9, 1967, pp. 1-73. ( you can download it from here: dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/dergiler/18/818/10380.pdf ) - Mehmet Altay Köymen, "Selçuklu Ordusu", X. Türk Tarih Kongresi, Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara, 1991, pp. 1059-1068. - Salim Koca, "Türkiye Selçuklularında Ordu ve Askerî Kültür", Anadolu Selçukluları ve Beylikleri Dönemi Uygarlığı, 2006. - Salim Koca, Selçuklular’da Ordu ve Askerî Kültür, Berikan Yayınları, Ankara, 2007. - Erkan Göksu, Türkiye Selçuklularında Ordu, Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara, 2010. - Muharrem Kesik, At Üstünde Selçuklular: Türkiye Selçukluları'nda Ordu ve Savaş, Timaş Yayınları, 2011.
|
|
|
Post by boleslawi on Mar 2, 2016 3:19:44 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 2, 2016 13:14:38 GMT 3
You are welcome boleslawi.
Indeed it seems that they haven't received much attention. Especially the Khawarazmshahs.
Thankyou for the link, it seems to be very interesting.
Ah, unfortunately I don't have much free time to get into deep discussions on that topic. My first opinion is, however, that he seems to exaggarate that "Eastern Cavalry School" (if something like that ever existed). He says this "superior school" managed to defeat the "Western Cavalry School" (also such a thing does not exist - there was just one type of steppe mounted warfare) and gives the Battle of Qatwan as its example. However, the Seljuk army defeated by the Qara Kitans at that battle was very different from the much earlier Seljuk armies who founded the Seljuk Empire a century ago. While the early Seljuk armies were composed entirely of nomadic Turkmen cavalry (the earliest non-nomadic element to serve in the army was a group of runaway Ghaznawid ghulams who joined the army in 1040), by the time of Sanjar, Seljuk armies were composed mostly from guard units and sedentary native populations. The percentage of nomadic cavalrymen in Seljuk armies had dropped drastically over the decades as they either migrated westwards or rebelled against the sultanate.
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on Mar 3, 2016 0:24:17 GMT 3
unfortunately he only uploaded the table of contents, bibliography etc, but not the actual text at academia.edu..... as for this thread you're linking to. how about checking the link in the OP that leads to the old AllEmpires thread. you'll find that ihsan has already commented on it back in 2004... besides, i completely agree with ihsan on the topic. there was no such thing as "Eastern" and "Western Schools". the number/proportion of "cataphracts" as in armored cavalry (there was no "heavy" cavalry in steppe armies), it entirely depended on different fatcors. based on archaeology for example, the Huns in Europe and the Bulgars after them posessed relatively little to no heavily armored cavalry, while the Avars in between them were particularly known for their large numbers of armored cavalry, despite being a smaller (but longer lasting) empire than the preceeding Huns. other than that, as ihsan mentioned, usually the ascendancy to empire also increased the number/proportion of armored cavalry in steppe armies. decimal organization in steppe armies also existed for a long time, it has only been described in some detail from the Liao onwards, which leads to the imrpession it was invented back then and spread westwards from there. in reality probably all organized steppe confederacies/empires possesed some sort of organizational structure, whether decimal or not, from an early age already, and limited to the Western or Eastern Steppe either...
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 3, 2016 11:53:43 GMT 3
Yes I just noticed that later.
True that.
Indeed. The Persians had a decimal system back in the 6th-4th centuries BC and the Asian Huns (Xiongnu) also adopted a decimal system after the ascendency of Modu Chanyu.
|
|
|
Post by boleslawi on Mar 8, 2016 0:55:07 GMT 3
I checked on local libraries for this book but unfortunately they don't have it. The book of Dr. Kafesoglu was actually available and I would get it later. However, I have had a look online about the table of content of Erkan's book and it seems to be very detailed. Yet, since I can't read Turkish, my impression is that the focus of his research seemed to be more on the Seljuq of Rum instead of the Great Seljuq, is that correct?
From what I gather from English secondary literature such as "Continuity and Change in Medieval Persia" by the famed scholar Lambton, and from the newly written book "The Great Seljuk Empire" by A.C.S. Peathingy, it seems that sources on the fighting method of the ghulams under the Seljuq was quite scarce, is that correct?
Did the Seljuq ghulams were trained in similar fashion compared to the later ghulams of the Mamluk Sultanate?
Regarding the topic on Eastern vs Western cavalry, I had an exchange with Jubelu and think he was quite versed in Middle East medieval history. The guy nailed it by saying that warhead was just focusing on points that are unimportant. He told me that the main distinction between the army of the Jurchens and Mongols and that of the Seljuqs were that the former enjoyed some sort of centralization due to the Chinese bureaucracy. Seljuq armies tended to be fragmented, easily dispersed since it was a semi-feudal force. This obviously pushed us towards military administrative history rather than studies of particular tactics or army compositions, but it offered a better explanation.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 8, 2016 11:41:38 GMT 3
Indeed, Erkan Göksu's book is a study of the armies of Anatolian Seljuks. In Turkey it is now more widespread to call the Anatolian Seljuks as "Türkiye Selçukluları" meaning "Turkey Seljuks" instead of the old name "Anadolu Selçukluları" meaning "Anatolian Seljuks". I personally prefer the old version and always continue to use "Anatolian Seljuks" in my studies.
That is true as well. The only source I know that has detailed information about the selection and training of the ghulams among the Seljuks is the Seljuk grand vizier Nizam al-Mulk's Siyasatnama ("Book of Politics"), in which he actually describes the ghulam training of the former Samanids and shows it as an ideal model which the Seljuks should adopt. We don't know how much of it was adopted in real life, of course.
I agree with that too.
|
|
|
Post by boleslawi on Mar 11, 2016 7:42:12 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 11, 2016 11:20:59 GMT 3
Indeed it is the translation of the same text that I have read.
|
|
|
Post by boleslawi on Mar 12, 2016 21:42:31 GMT 3
Ihnsan, if you have free time, could you summarize what is available regarding the training and tactics of the ghulams under the Rum Seljuq? What does Erkan Göksu say about them? Were they similar to the ghulams under the Mamluk Sultanate?
|
|