I recall reading a number of sources for Sarmatian cavalry fighting for the Romans, including a contingent of 6,000 cavalry that inspired a very bad King Arthur movie. I recently looked at the Early Imperial and Imperial ROman lists and was surprised t find no possible Sarmatian contingents.
Has the notion of these troops becoming Roman allies off the steppe when forced into Roman territory by Turks and Magyars been debunked? Or is this something else?
IIRC Marcus Aurelius settled a load of Sarmatians in Britain, however, that does not mean they were military (caveat I'm not sure what the wording of the historical source is on this).
They were a cavalry cohort in Hadrian's wall hinterland, and are already listed as the catafract lancers in the list. :)
Sarmatians (along with many others, Germans etc) were recruited into the Roman military, but I don't believe there is any example of Romans allying with the Sarmatians to justify a Sarmatian allied contingent.
Richard
OK, no ally, fine. I am not sure the 'cataphract' unit listed would work for Sarmatian, though. The listed Cataphracts are Roman lancers, or I thought they were. If they are intended to be Sarmatian, is there any harm in calling them Sarmatians in my army list?
Equites ala sarmatia will do nicely... 8)
I believe the attested unit is the ala I Sarmatarum - although the "I" may not be correct, I've seen it listed without that.
Yup, few sources point at Ala I Sar... As attested. So: cavalry unit, Ist Sarmatians.
Equites is cavalry, ala is unit size (cavalry unit, about 500 strong), I is unit number to those who don't speak epigraphic sources or funerary inscriptions.