Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

The Barbarian Invasions-Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates

frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior MemberPosts: 762Registered Users
edited December 2015 in Community Mods
CA7_F94_E9_CEA8_E68_A55043_E014365_D4_BE11_E76_A3_DCB1_FC88.png

A.)Introduction:
The Barbarian Invasions is Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign for Total War: Attila that Will Bring 8 Totally new Playable Historical Factions with highly Historical Unit Rosters and their Cultures.This mod Have been in the Working since Total War:Attila Came out.The Goal of the Mod to be the Most Historicaly Accurate Mod from the periods:395ad up unitl the 700ad.The Historicaly Accurate Campaign map that should have been when TW:Attila came out.10-20 new Historical Factions on the campaign map. Spawning From the late 4th century up until the late 7th Century this Mod will try to recreate All the Changes in Europe,Africa and Asia that Historically Happened with all the Settled and unsettled Factions:

1. From the Rise and Fall of the Hunnic Empire;
2. The Collapse of the Western Roman Empire;
3. The time of The Dark Ages in Britain that the story of king Arthur went into Legend(without compromising the Historic elements and the Focus of the mod);
4. The Formation of the Barbarian Kingdoms of the Merovingian Franks in Gaul,the Visigoths and the Suebi in Iberia,the Vandals in Northern Africa led by Genseric, the Ostrogoths who were led by Theoderic the Great in Italy and the Formation of Kingdom of the Lombards also in Italy led by Alboin;
5. The wars Between the Eastern Roman Empire and the Sassanid Persian Empire in the Middle East;
6. The Red and White Huns attacking the Sassanid Persian and the Gupta Indian empires and the forming of their Kidarite and Hefthalite Empires of their own;
7. The Migration of the Bulgars, Avars and Khazars from Central Asia westwerd into Europe and Forming Empires of their own;
8. The shift from a Latin to a Greek Speaking Byzantine Empire and the formation of the Thematic governing system in the empire;
9. And Lastly the Rise of Islam after the death of the prophet Muhammad and the Formation of the Arab Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphates that Conqured Most of the known world in that Time.


B.)The 8 new Playable Historical Factions:

1.The Gupta Indian Empire - the Guptas unified India and waged war with the Steppe Nomads that were Comming from Central Asia Like a Tidal Wave.
2. The Red Huns - also known as the Kidarites and waged war with the Sassanid and Gupta Empires for almost 200 years
3. The White Huns - also known as the Hepthalite Empire and waged war with the Sassanid and Gupta Empires for almost 200 years
4. the Avars - that were part of the Hephthalite Empire and after its downfall migrated west into the Pannonian plain on the Danube.
5. the Khazars - that were part of the Hephthalite and Turkic Empires in Cental Asia and migrated into Europe and Formed a Khaganate of their own with the Alans and other tribes.
6. the Bulgars - who migrated 100-200 years into Europe even before the arrival of the Huns(recorded by several Armenian Chronologist from Armenia) in Europe and joined the Hunnic Confederation
7. The Magyars - who were one of the first to join Hunnic Confederation just like the Bulgars and their Ugrian kin from the Volga Region settled on the edge of the known World in the Ural mountains
8. The Arab Caliphate (after 634ad)(work in progress) - that spread the Words of the prophet Muhammad by conquest from the lands on Atlantic ocean all the way to China and India - and across 3 Continents.
C.)Changes to the units So Far:
- 24 reskined vanilla units for the Hunnic units to look more Historically Accurate as Sarmatian,Scytian looking and to be used by some of the new Custom Factions.
- 146 new Custom units(half of of them are similar to the Vannila units in stats.)
- 170 in total reskined vanilla and new Custom units
- 96 new custom Unit Cards in total.
- no onager units are counted.No new onager or naval units are added.Pure land units for the armies.

D.)New Factions : Info

1.Gupta Empire:new 27 custom units - with eastern cities and buildings.
2.Avars
3.Bulgars
4.Magyars
5.Red Huns:
6.White Huns
7.Khazars


F.)Modding team
1.Frozenmen - Campaign map changes/Balancing/Researcher/Concept.
2.Sebidee - Unit Creator.
3.Obiron - Art.
4.Reptilicus - Balancing/Researcher/Concept.

If you are interested guys, and you want to help this Mod to be finished faster and be more polished contact us.
The Feadback will be the most welcome,Because the Time period is So rich with Modding opportunities to get something done. how stuff can be done and with Historical Documented Events.


Q&A:
A)Where are the Slavs?

B)We think that there will be a Culture Pack DLC for the 3 Slavic factions that are in the game,just like we got for the Celts in Britain.If there is no such Culture Pack DLC for the Slavs we will just add them as playable and give them new Historically accurate units.

A)Why dont you ,guys Overhaul the Vannila Alans Unit Roster?
B)We think that there will be a FLC update from Creative Assembly that will fix the problem. If they dont We will do it in the Future.
CA7_F94_E9_CEA8_E68_A55043_E014365_D4_BE11_E76_A3_DCB1_FC88.png

1.The Barbarian Invasions - 395ad - 4 turns per year

1_The_Barbarian_Invasions_395ad.jpg

2.The Barbarian Invasions - 410ad - 8 turns per year

2_The_Barbarian_Invasions_410ad.jpg

3.The Barbarian Invasions - 450ad - 12 turns per year

3_The_Barbarian_Invasions_450ad.jpg

4.The Barbarian Invasions - 475ad - 4 turns per year

3_The_Barbarian_Invasions_475ad.jpg

The_Dark_Ages.png

5.The Dark Ages - 533ad - 8 turns per year

5_The_Dark_Ages_533ad.jpg

6.The Dark Ages - 572ad - 4 turns per year

6_The_Dark_Ages_572ad.jpg

5_F1_E03038_CCF4_E95_AC6_E758_CEA8_A81_AEAA4_A75_AC4_FCACB9.png

7.The Rise of Islam 634ad - 8 turns per year

7_The_Rise_of_Islam_634ad.jpg

8.The Rise of Islam 681ad - 8 turns per year

8_The_Rise_of_Islam_681ad.jpg
This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
Post edited by frozenmenbg on

Comments

  • SebideeSebidee Senior Member Posts: 3,801Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    Yeah! Who's ready for some Bulgars! :D
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    And News for the Slavs:
    Reptilicus,a close friend of mine, who brought us the Patch 16 for Rome 2 aka. the Reptilicus Patch is joining the team to help speed the progresion of the mod.He is a Historian and Master at balancing Unit Rosters for Rome 2 and Attila. He is from Serbia and will work on a Slavic Rouster for the 3 slavic factions that are in the TW:Attila Base game. If there is no DLC for the Slavs from Creative Assembly we will do it.
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    Preview - Avars unit roster.They got 41 units.15 of them are Custom units.The units are done by Sebidee.

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?697864-WIP-The-Barbarian-Invasions-Overhaul-Mod-for-the-Grand-Campaign-with-8-New-Starting-Dates-from-395ad-681ad-And-new-Custom-Units&p=14685124&viewfull=1#post14685124

    Preview - Bulgarian unit roster.All 41 units and with their stats.39 custom + 2 vannila units. The units are done by Sebidee.
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?697864-WIP-The-Barbarian-Invasions-Overhaul-Mod-for-the-Grand-Campaign-with-8-New-Starting-Dates-from-395ad-681ad-And-new-Custom-Units&p=14684968&viewfull=1#post14684968

    Whats comming next: Reskinning of 24 of the Hunnic vannila units. Coming Soon.
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • GuerrilleroGuerrillero Senior Member EstaliaPosts: 543Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    This is going to be one of the best overhaul ever done
    Malekith is the true Phoenix King and Wood elves can suck my Widow-maker

    AZoReu8.png
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    Re-skinning of 24 of the Hunnic vanilla units to look More Sarmatian,Scytian.Dont worry - there are still 15 Hunnic units that got Asian sexy faces.Those units will be used also for the Avars,Khazars,White and Red Huns. The unit Re-skinning was done by Sebidee.

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?697864-WIP-The-Barbarian-Invasions-Overhaul-Mod-for-the-Grand-Campaign-with-8-New-Starting-Dates-from-395ad-681ad-And-new-Custom-Units&p=14685138&viewfull=1#post14685138
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    reserved
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • Castle-guardCastle-guard Junior Member Posts: 26Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    Hahahaha Khazars' and Bulgars' religion zoroastrianism? lmao
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    Hahahaha Khazars' and Bulgars' religion zoroastrianism? lmao
    it was a form of Zoroastrian.Because they were Indo-Europeans.The later Khazars were with Turkic heavy influence.And even in Medieval Bulgaria until the 850s they practiced zoroastrianism,Christianity,but not the Orthodox Christianity form.There was never a Tangra god for the Bulgars.
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    So this post will explain everything about the Nomadic Factions that will be playable in the mod and why it was choosen this Design Choice when making the mod.

    In the last 30 years there was a massive shift and a Big Rewriting of the History of Central Asia my most Scientists for the Period 3th-7th century.
    The the Hole concept of the Nomadic State in that time period have been overhauled.in the past it was viewed as a Horde moving from place to place and never settle.Now in the 21th century the Nomadic State as a structure is viewed just the same as a normal states like the Barbarian kingdoms in the Western Europe - with administration, oligarchy, stratified society,with even better military organisation and tactics and in the technological department and more advanced than the Barbarian kingdoms in Europe.This was one of the main Reasons even the Attila's Huns managed to be so sucsessfull in Europe.

    Those nomads had temples with build on the Zoroastrian Religion or some sort of nomadic Variant of the Teachings of Zoroaster.If their Nomadic religion was Tengri you dont need to build temples for your Gods - you just start praying in the middle of the steppes. Tengri as a religion is still alive Russia and central Asia and is well documented. The influence of Sassanid Persia over those land for the most of the 20th Century was neglected by the Scientists back then.Now in the last 30 years it got new life in with what is comming from the ground and what was written across the Centuries .The language of those Tribes was also Indo-European. It was so close with the Persian,proto-Slavic and the Baktrian ones back then as is The modern Polish and Russian languages today,because in the past the changes in languages were very slow and gradual.Not like in the past 1000 years most of the languages started to separate(example: french,spanish,italian from the Latin in the Western Roman Empire)

    With Evidence to back it up the Turkic tribes came in Central Asia and in Europe as early in the late 6th Century.Not in the 4th century.The Huns in TW:Attila look the most idiotic way done by CA where every unit that they got is Mongolid looking ones and that wasnt the case.A cheap way from Creative Assembly to make a buck in the marketing department.There may have been some Turkic infuence but it wasnt dominant.They may have been the ruling party but the mass of the people wasnt.Example:names - kids in todays Russia are named Elizabeths .Does this makes them Brittish?or naming your kids with a greek name like Alexander? No - it was the same back then:people with Turkic names like Organa doesnt show he was a Turk.It was the fashion back then. If after 5000 years archaeologists find those people in Russia and have no other records they will say that those Alexanders and Elizabeths were greek and english people in that region,not russians.

    The European Huns,The Chionites/Hephthalites/White Huns ,Kidarites/Red Huns,Bulgars,Avars,Khazars were Indo-European(not turkic bit with some minor turkic elements) nomadic tribes who formed states of their own and settled in Regions from the Pontic Steppe all the way to India.With the latest evidences from linguistics, archaeologists, anthropologists, historical documents ,expeditions in Central Asia,Southern Russia and so on the modern Historiographic Science community can say all those tribes were present from the time of 395ad when TW:Attila starts in Europe and in Central Asia without being biased by the Soviet Union's bias of the Pan-Slavism(invented by Catrine the Great in the 18th Century in the Russsian Empire back then) that the slavic culture was supiriour than the nomads.

    Even there is also such Overhauling and rethinking of the History of the Proto-Slavs from the first 1000 years after the death of Jesus.Right now the Leading theory is that the Slavs were settled settled Scytians.The Same Royal Scythians from Rome 2.

    Now lets go to each Faction specificaly.
    1.European Huns
    The 3 Leading Theories for the European Huns right now are

    1)That they were a minor Turkic tribe migrated into Europe and was formed a big Confederation withh the Ugrian Tribes(by ugrian we can add the Hungarians/Magyars as its their Official History By the Hungarian State, and we have to respect them),the Bulgars(the same as the magyars),the Ostrogoths,the Sarmathians, the Alans and many other Germanic tribes. - the most supported leading theory Around the world right now.

    2)That they were Pure 100% turkic and came from Mongolia. - This theory is one of the oldest and the most outdated due to sheer number evidences against it and almost nothing in its defense.

    3)That they were Pure 100% Sarmatian/Bulgar or Hungarian nation. - same as 2)

    2. Avars
    The Avar early history by being Overhauled is right now at this state: They were Indo-Europeans with european faces. that lived between the Altai Region and Northern Baktria and were part of the main White and Red Huns in Central Asia.After the Fall of the Hephthalite Empire by the Turkic Khaganate and the Sassanids they migrated West with most of the population of the White Huns and settled in Europe.It was recorded that they Lived in cities and were settled.

    3.Khazars
    The Khazars early history by being Overhauled is right now at this state: They were Indo-Europeans with european faces. that lived between the Altai Region and Northern Baktria and were part of the main White and Red Huns in Central Asia.After the Fall of the Hephthalite Empire and Kidarite Kingdom by the Turkic Khaganate and the Sassanids,and After the fall of the Turkic Khaganate by Tan China they migrated West with most of what was left of the Indo-European speaking population of the White Huns and settled in Europe.It was recorded that they Lived in cities and were settled.After that most of Central Asia started to Speak Turkic or call themselfs turks

    4.Red and White Huns - Indo-Europeans with european faces.Dominant in central Asia. And were the strongest of the nomads in central Asia for 200 years.

    5.Bulgars - this Faction is so full of info (at least 30 theories from where they came) that I have to write at least 50 000 words about it.so In short It was Documented by not 1 ,not 2 or 5 Armenian Chronologists that after the Fall of the Parthian Empire in the third Century that the Bulgarians migrated From Baktria/Balhara into the Pontic Steppes just north of the Caucasus Mountains in Sarmatia Asiatica by passing the land of the Armenians peacefully and some even settled on the shores on the lake Van in Armenia.The Armenians by being neignbours of the Bulgars and the Alans just south of the Caucasus Mountains reported that the Bulgars formed their own States,had highly developed civilisation with wall cities made of stone,some were settled in them others were migrating with their herlds. That the Bulgars were allies with the Armenians when going to war. That in the 380s ad they joined peacefully the Hunnic confederation and attacked the Grimean goths by crossing the Kerch straith.Until the death of Attila the Bulgars were united,but after that they formed 3 groups - the Onogondurians(the Inner Bulgars)the biggest mass of the bulgars and was the most peacefull but the most developed and forming a state living near the Caucasus Mountains ,the Utigurs (the outer Bulgars)living east of the Don river, and the Kutigurs(the few bulgars) the most warlike ones who were the most proud of the legacy of the European Huns living west of the Don river. Back then being part of the Hunnic Confedeation was like being proud being part of NATO in our time.


    In this Mod the Bulgars will be represented by using the Baktrian Origin theory with some elements of the Cimmerian Origin theory with 2 units.

    the Other Origin theories for the Bulgars will be left in the Shade for now.Like for example the Theory that the Bulgars were Thracians(Simmilar theory like the Modern Romanians are Dacians in Dacia.)
    and so on.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Balhara

    My observations on most of the supporters of the East Iranic theory , it seems no one has mentioned in the Hole CA's Forum the Iranic theory is actually split in two camps - Eastern/Bactrian and Western/Sarmatian), as well as the non-academic autochtonic (i.e. Thracian) theories, also makes me think that their motivations for supporting these theories mostly lie on non-objective reasons. However, - I'd say the main drive is to distance ourselves from the idea of the Bulgars being Turkic as a nation as a hole. Now, the reasons for that are several. The most obvious one is that due to the five centuries of Ottoman yoke, in Bulgaria we generally don't have a particularly positive image of the Turks, which most of us see as our "more recent archenemy" (the older, medieval and now outdated one being, of course, Byzantium). Although I'd say that the view on the Bulgarian Turks and Pomaks (Bulgarian Muslims) in particular is at least mixed at worst (not counting nationalist extremists), as I personally also have an image of the Bulgarian Turks as relatively poor (i.e. on our own level), somewhat conservative and extremely hard-working, honest people. Then again, maybe it's just me...


    Anyway, back to the point - besides the general anti-Turkicness most of us have grown up in Bulgaria with, another factor for distancing ourselves from the old Turkic theory is that the latter was artificially enforced as an actual dogma in our historiography during the communist regime. And now when that regime is gone, the dam is broken and all the pent-up "liberty" and ideas are pouring out, as far away from the old postulates as possible. Before an argument for that, I would first have to explain that, at least according to the common view, including of some of our historians, the reason why our communist authorities wanted to stress so much on the supposed Turkic origin of the Bulgars was itself "racist", as someone from the modern West would say. Namely, the idea was to portray the Bulgars as relatively primitive, but highly warlike "bow-legged Mongoloid savages", who conquered, but were then quickly assimilated by the more sophisticated and superior sea of Slavic tribes, thus underlining our Slavic nature and our natural brotherhood with "Mother Russia"*. Respectively, often the same more-nationalist circles which tend to go for those non-Turkic theories, at least according to my observations, have also started to deny the Slavic nature of modern Bulgarians** or even the existence of Slavs as a whole. So I think this comes to show that an even bigger factor for this tendency is simply the liberation from and revulsion of the old communist propaganda. Of course, that's certainly not the only factor in the psychological picture of this drive, just a big one.


    [*If you haven't seen it, I recommend watching our 1981 movie trilogy "Khan Asparuh", available with English subs on YouTube (apparently, currently as private videos, so you're left with the much worse short dubbed version of Warner Bros) or torrents (seeder available, even if it shows otherwise), which is both interesting and epic on one hand (50 000 real people from the Bulgarian People's Army "playing" the Byzantine army in the third movie) and is often nowadays blamed for being full of the aforementioned communist historical propaganda (though, to be fair, the Slavs, while mentioned as numerous, weren't really portrayed as all that more advanced or special)]
    [**This reminds me, btw, of one extraordinarily ironic "scientific" expedition to Afghanistan from several years ago, called the "Tangra expedition" (i.e. irony №1 - Iranic-theory-expedition under the name of the supposed Bulgar version of the Turkic Sky-God Bir Tengri), and a newspaper's title about it, which went like this: "DNA proved we're not Slavs, we come from Pamir, claims Dr. Slavyan Stoilov" - it makes me chuckle even today.]




    Now, as for my personal opinion on the origin of the Bulgars - as I was very recently discussing the same issue with other people in Total war center , my opinion is that we can relatively certainly trace the Bulgar thread as far back as their time and place in the 4th c. Caucasian-Pontic region. Before that, if there were any people who brought their Bulgar name from somewhere else (i.e. if that name wasn't adopted in the Caucasian region in the first place), their traces are too uncertain at this point. As far as I've been reading on this subject, definitely the absolutely messiest and most fiercely debated one in the whole Bulgarian history, I can safely say that every single person, professional historian or not, who's done some research on the matter, has his specific opinion about it, different from all the rest. Respectively, the proposed origins and homelands vary as wildly as the human imagination can allow - from them being Thracian colonists returning home from the East all the way to them being Koreans (ok, that isn't even serious, except for a few people, maybe), and everything in-between. Respectively, this is true not only among the laymen, like me, but also among the historians - some use sources A and claim they're from the Hindu Kush, others use sources B and claim they're from the Dinglins north of China, thirds go on about Oghurs and Huns, fourths about Balkharans, fifths about Tocharians, sixths about Sarmatians and so on and so forth. Too many Bulgars. It's really tiresome.


    http://www.kroraina.com/bulgar/rashev.html


    Rasho Rashev, arguably our best and most qualified archaeologist on the early Bulgar subject. Rashev actually doesn't support the East Iranic/Bactrian theory, but the West Iranic/Sarmatian one. I myself, very much agree with Rashev's opinion, which is very basically this - the Bulgars in their Caucasian period (Kubrat's Old Great Bulgaria in particular) were a tribal confederation of various tribes of different ethnic stock, most notably led by a Turkic/Hunnic aristocracy, while the majority of the other tribes were of a Sarmatian stock and possibly a few were Ugric. The arguments in favour of a Sarmatian origin of the majority of the Bulgars at this stage (and of the Danubian Bulgars later on) are indeed many, in my opinion, but I'll just mention that it was incorrect in listing Asparukh(the Father of Khan Tervel who leads the Danube Bulgaria in the Second siege of Contantinopol in 717-8) as a clearly Turkic name, when even in the times of the aforementioned communist Turkic dogma, Ivan Beshevliev (naturally a supporter of the Turkic theory http://www.kroraina.com/fadlan/besh.html ) in his 1967 study "Iranic elements in the Proto-Bulgarians" (sorry, available in Bulgarian only) clearly demonstrates that it, along with the majority of the names of the other Bulgarian rulers, are Iranic in origin, with a part of the rest being clearly Turkic, a few potentially Ugric and a part - uncertain, either Iranic or Turkic (in the same article he also argues, btw, that the Bulgar runes are "indivisible" from the Sarmatian ones).


    And if you're interested, in this site:
    http://www.kroraina.com/index.php?a=sr&fr=ct&id=2011


    you can find a few studies in English on the matter, showing several of the many theories for the origin of the Bulgars. A quick short guide - Petar Dobrev is the founder and leader of the East Iranic/Bactrian theory (although others have admittedly improved upon him, as Dobrev's arguments are mainly "linguistic", which is not really his specialty, i.e. economic history), while Gancho Cenov (alternatively, Gantscho Tzenoff, as he was known in Germany) was an early 20th century historian, founder and, thankfully, at least no longer leader of the autochtonist movement, whose claims and argumentation are exceptionally weak even by autochtonist standards (which says quite a bit; also, he whines a lot about how our more serious historians, like Zlatarski, have shunned him away).


    Ethnological traits of the ancient Iranian culture in modern-day Bulgarian culture
    http://samoistina.com/2/similarities.htm


    Scholars Claim Bulgarians Descended from Iran
    http://www.novinite.com/articles/117...nded+from+Iran


    On the origin of the Proto-Bulgarians
    http://www.kroraina.com/bulgar/rashev.html


    The Origins of Bulgaria: Myths and Facts
    https://blazingbulgaria.wordpress.com/2012/06/26/origins_of_bulgaria/


    Where did the Bulgarians came from, explains Bulgarian scientist's expedition to the lands of Bactria
    http://samoistina.com/2/wheredidwecamefrom.htm


    Bulgarian Expedition Travels to Iran in Search of Roots
    http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=117192


    The Origins of the Bulgars
    https://www.csc.kth.se/~dilian/bulgars.pdf


    Bulgarians Are Purely Indo-European, Not Turkic - Gene Study
    http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=131894


    Y-Chromosome Diversity in Modern Bulgarians: New Clues about Their Ancestry
    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...l.pone.0056779


    Inscriptions and Alphabet of the Proto-Bulgarians, by Peter Dobrev
    http://groznijat.tripod.com/pb_lang/

    Another site for more info
    http://protobulgarians.com/English%20translations/Eglish%20version.htm
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USAPosts: 18,767Registered Users, Moderators, Knights
    edited September 2015
    Posts deleted.

    Couple of reminders. First this is a Mod area, and the thread is describing a Mod, what it is and how it works. Second, let me remind everyone of this:

    13. Country, faction and culture threads have a regular tendency to break our forum rules and regulations. If a certain culture, faction or country is not included in the game it is purely due to design reasons and not due to any other factor such as politics or prejudice. If you find the fact we have not included a particular faction as playable upsetting then it is not an excuse for nationalistic rants that border on racism.

    All history is, to some degree, the received view of those who record or recount it. Any views expressed on these boards regarding a certain culture, faction or country will be by nature be in some way biased, so please remember that. When discussing culture, faction or country we expect a very high calibre of thread. Any thread that looks like it's going off course will be closed. Any persistent perpetrators of racist nationalistic rants will find themselves banned. So keep sweeping judgements off the boards. Remember if it's not in the game it's not the end of the world. Respect the opinions of others and discuss issues rather than make statements.


    Stay on thread topic and discuss or question. Don't hijack the thread into another discussion that will get the thread closed, or infractions handed out.

    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    Preview - White Huns unit roster.They got 3 Vannila Sassanid units and 33 Hunnic Vannila(some of them reskined,others not) units.13 Custom units with new unit cards.The units and the new unit cards are done by Sebidee.

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?697864-WIP-The-Barbarian-Invasions-Overhaul-Mod-for-the-Grand-Campaign-with-8-New-Starting-Dates-from-395ad-681ad-And-new-Custom-Units&p=14688320&viewfull=1#post14688320

    They gain the Sassanid units:
    1.Sogdian Warriors
    2.Sogdian Camel Raiders
    3.Indian Elephants - they are late game unit.To represent their Conquests in the Indian Sub-continent form the Gupta Empire with this unit.

    They loose from the Huns the units:
    1.Scirri Warriors
    2.Bosphoran Warriors
    3.Bosphoran Infantry
    4.Noble Acatziri Raiders
    5. Steppe Bows
    6. Steppe Shield Archers
    7.Hunnic Lancers
    8.Elite Hunnic Lancers
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    Preview - Red Huns/Kidarite Empire/Kidarites unit roster. They got 3 Vannila Sassanid units and 32 Hunnic Vannila(some of them reskined,others not) units.12 Custom units with new unit cards.The units and the new unit cards are done by Sebidee.

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?697864-WIP-The-Barbarian-Invasions-Overhaul-Mod-for-the-Grand-Campaign-with-8-New-Starting-Dates-from-395ad-681ad-And-new-Custom-Units&p=14688615&viewfull=1#post14688615

    They gain like the White Huns the unit:
    1.Imported Chinese Crossbows

    They gain the Sassanid units:
    1.Sogdian Warriors
    2.Sogdian Camel Raiders
    3.Indian Elephants - they are late game unit.To represent their Conquests in the Indian Sub-continent form the Gupta Empire with this unit.

    They loose from the Huns the units:
    1.Scirri Warriors
    2.Bosphoran Warriors
    3.Bosphoran Infantry
    4.Noble Acatziri Raiders
    5. Steppe Bows
    6. Steppe Shield Archers
    7.Steppe Warriors
    8.Hunnic Lancers
    9.Elite Hunnic Lancers
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    Preview - Gupta Indian Empire unit roster. 31 Custom new units + 4 custom units from the Red Huns + 2 Vannila units from Aksum.

    They gain from the White Huns the units:
    1.Imported Chinese Crossbows

    They gain from the Red Huns the units:
    1.Kushan Cataphracts
    2.Elite Kushan Cataphracts
    3.Kushan Herlers
    4.Kushan Slingers

    They gain from Aksum the units:
    1.Spice Warriors(we are thinking of renaming them to Spice Girls)
    2.Spice Guards

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?697864-WIP-The-Barbarian-Invasions-Overhaul-Mod-for-the-Grand-Campaign-with-8-New-Starting-Dates-from-395ad-681ad-And-new-Custom-Units&p=14688616&viewfull=1#post14688616

    They gain like the White Huns the unit:
    1.Imported Chinese Crossbows
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited September 2015
    We - The Barbarian Invasions Team decided to release the Hunnic reskin of the Vanilla Hunnic units on Steam as standalone mod.So feel free to use it when playing your Campaigns, guys :o:)

    http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=526473726

    Steam Link

    http://www.mediafire.com/download/0562494ckchavv7/european_looking_huns_reskin.pack

    non-Steam Link
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • SolInvictusSolInvictus Senior Member Posts: 936Registered Users
    edited October 2015
    I'm so excited for this mod. I particularly hope the Rise of Islam DLC will be good.
    I'm quite an hardcore fan of the Roman Empire in Dark Age. Will their unit roster be reskinned to evolve with the times and feel more Greek?
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited October 2015
    Update: The Khazars and Magyars units are done.(posting pics with the magyars later today) The Gupta unit roster needed some love and now they got good shock cav but week horse archers(no parthian shot) and some kushan units from the Red Huns.

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?697864-WIP-The-Barbarian-Invasions-Overhaul-Mod-for-the-Grand-Campaign-with-8-New-Starting-Dates-from-395ad-681ad-With-new-Custom-Units&p=14688620&viewfull=1#post14688620

    Preview - Khazars unit Roster.They got 14 new Custom units.They get 11 custom units From the Magyars and 9 vannila units from the Alans and 13 Vannila now reskined Hunnic units.The units are done by Sebidee.

    They gain from the Magyars the units:
    1.Ugrian Levies
    2.Ugrian Spearmen
    3.Ugrian Spear Masters
    4.Uralic Levy Swords
    5.Uralic Swordsmen
    6.Ugrofin Axemen
    7.Ugrofin Woodsmen
    8.Ugrofin Heavy Axemen
    9.Ugrian Ambushers
    10.Ugrofin Hunters
    11.Uralic Raiders

    They gain from the Alans the units:
    1.Sarmatian Spears
    2.Alani Spearmen
    3.Sarmatian Warband
    4.Sarmatian Mounted Skirmishers
    5.Sarmatian Cataphracts Archers
    6.Alani Horsemen
    7.Noble Alani Cavalry
    8.Sarmatian Cataphracts
    9.Elite Sarmatian Cataphracts

    Here are the Flags for the New playable Factions.The Flags are taken From Rome 2.

    Bulgarians:
    auima0.jpg or o851s6.jpg or 29c2xr9.jpg
    All 3 flags are done by Karmela. Why 3 flags? Because in the 681ad campaign there will be 3 Bulgarian factions and the bulgars were migrating to the Volga region,Italy and the Balkans - and for them none of the TW:Attila and Rome 2 flags were suitable

    Avars:
    mon_256.png
    Khazars:
    mon_256.png or mon_256.png
    White Huns:
    mon_256.png
    Red Huns:
    mon_256.png
    Magyars:
    mon_256.png
    Gupta Empire:
    mon_256.png
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • SebideeSebidee Senior Member Posts: 3,801Registered Users
    edited October 2015
    Really like the icons Frozenmen :)
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited October 2015
    Preview - Magyars unit roster.All 41 units and with their stats.41 custom. The units are done by Sebidee.

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?697864-WIP-The-Barbarian-Invasions-Overhaul-Mod-for-the-Grand-Campaign-with-8-New-Starting-Dates-from-395ad-681ad-With-new-Custom-Units&p=14688621&viewfull=1#post14688621


    With the Magyars done all the planed units are out.Maybe 1-2 more units(1 chariot unit will be one of them,if Attila allows the unit not to be with buggy animations ans unbalanced...) for the Gupta empire and thats it Folks.


    For the Alans and the Slavs we will see what to do in the Future. Oh and a Hint from CA from the last patch - DLC Slavs faction pack 2016


    The next update about the mod will be about Campaign map starting position changes.

    So stay tuned for the 395ad starting Date...
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    edited November 2015
    The mod is planned to come out in the first Week after the Age of Charlemagne DLC patch for Attila.

    Now Here is the Faction description for the new Playable Factions in the Grand Campaign panel in the Main Menu of the Game:


    1)Avars:

    History is written by the victors. This fits the most for the history of the Avars – Hunno-Scythian nation ,formed by the Uar and Honni tribes in Central Asia, founding a two centuries Empire on the territory of Pannonia and Vojvodina, and vanished after their Fall From Charlemagne and Krum the Fearsome in the late 8th and early 9th centuries.The Uar (also known Var or War) were one of the many ethnic components constituting the confederation known to the west as the Hephthalites and to the Chinese as Yanda and the dominant ethnicity of Khwarezm. Peoples with similar names had been present along the Silk Road for centuries, and several Central European family names actually derive from the names of these tribes. Theophylaktos Simokattes uses the name Uar, sometimes written as War or Var. According to the Chinese classic Liang Zhigongtu the name Huá was an endonym used by the Hephthalites themselves The appearance of the Avars in Europe has been an important event for Eastern Europe. The earliest clear reference to the Avar ethnonym comes from Priscus the Rhetor (died after 472 AD). Priscus recounts that, c. 463, the Šaragurs, Onogurs and Ogurs were attacked by the Sabirs, who had been attacked by the Avars. In turn, the Avars had been driven off by people fleeing "man-eating griffins" coming from "the ocean". Whilst Priscus' accounts provide some information about the ethno-political situation in the Don-Kuban-Volga region after the demise of the Huns, no unequivocal conclusions can be reached. In fact, Denis Sinor has argued that whoever the "Avars" referred to by Priscus were, they were different from the Avars who appear a century later, during the time of Justinian (who reigned (527-565) The next author of late antiquity to discuss the Avars, Menander Protector in the 6th century, details Gokturk embassies in Constantinople in 565 and 568 AD. Each time, the Turks appear angered at the Byzantines for having made an alliance with the Avars, whom the Turks saw as their subjects and slaves. Turxanthos, a Turk prince, calls the Avars "Varchonites" and "escaped slaves of the Turks", who numbered "about 20 thousand". Here is what is written by Theophylact Simocatta:"When the Emperor Justinian occupied the throne part of the Uar and Honi tribes migrated into Europe. They called their ruler and their leader - Khagan. We'll tell you why they changed their name. Tribes Barslet (Barsils) Unuguri (Onogurs) and Sabirs and other Honni tribes,when they saw the people of the Uarand Honni(Huns) fled, thinking that the true Avars came. Therefore they welcomed these refugees with significant gifts to ensure their own safety. Using the favorable situation the Uar and Honni started to call themselves Avars. They say that amongst the Scythian tribes the Avars were the most active and abled to wage war. Naturally, that in our time, these pseudo-Avars usurped their position of prime people continued to call themselves as usual – Uars and Honni" Theophan Wrote: ”In the same year came in Byzantium strange nation called Avars. And the whole town come to watch them, because they never had seen such people. Because they had very long hair at their backs, tied with ribbons and knit, and the rest of their cloths were similar to the other Huns. As they fled frm their homeland come in Scythia and Moesia and sent envoys to Justinian asking him to accept them (as federates).” Soon after the Avars settled in Moesia, they were forced to migrate again. Settled in distant Pannonia,held by the Langobards and the Gepids at that time. After the joint defeat the Gepids with the help of the Langobards in 567 AD,they were followed by part of the Kutrigurs and Onogurs who repeatedly mentioned as an essential part of the Avar Khaganate. The Anthropologist Istvan Erdelyi in its study "the Disapeard people – the Avars", mentions that in the cemeteries of the Avars, the most common subtype is the Mediterranean race, followed by less North-European (mainly Nordic) types, and single cases of Mongoloid. But the outdated official History today says that the Avars were Turkic ,not Indo-Europeans.


    2)Bulgarians:

    The origin of the Bulgarians from before the 460s AD is a problem that still provokes discussions among the Historians and Scientists even to the present day. The Bulgarians were mentioned for the First time and entered the European History by the name Bulgarians in the Chronography of 354 AD, writen by an anonymous Latin Chronographer, created for a wealthy Roman Christian named Valentinus. The Supposed proto-Bulgarian ethnicity was formed somewhere in Central Asia (East Kazakhstan) between the Caspian Sea and the mountain Imeon (Pamirs, Tian Shan and Hindu Kush). Other possible areas proposed by the Modern Historians are the mountain Altai or Western Siberia, the Tarim basin, western Mongolia, southern Siberia and upper reaches of the river Irtysh. There were multiple migrations from Central Asia into the steppes just north of the Caucasus mountain probably as early from the 3rd,4th,5th, till the late 6th century AD by the Bulgarian Kutigurs, Utigurs, Onogondurians and other minor tribes.Since the late 16th century there have been offered various hypotheses, some of which attract with their whimsicality and stubbornness in defending them. Most authorities reject the concepts of aboriginal (or Thracian), Slavic, Tatar and Finno-Ugric origin of the Bulgarians. More popular, but also challenged are the Hunnic and the Oguric options of the Turanian hypothesis. Some scientific papers and amateur research in the late 20th century revived another hypothesis according to which the Bulgars were mixed Hunic-Iranian speaking Scytian population.The various theories about the origin of the Bulgarians can generally be assigned to two directions - first to the Altaic ethnogenesis and, secondly the Arian/Baktrian ethnogenesis. Third thesis advocates their mixed formation as a nation. Each of the first two theories does not exclude participation as influences, assimilation, etc. population determined to be dominant than the other direction. Actually, the difference between them is not only whether the dispute are Arians or Proto-Turkic-Mongols,but what is the primary source. In this sense, the most accurate to speak of is the mixed origin theory - who first formulated by some serious scientists as a distinct third theory, that dont denies or contradicts the other two mutually challenging theories. It focuses not on how started the process and the result of it - The ancient proto-Bulgarians.The term Bulgars is a term coined in the 19th century by the historical science at that time (just like the Term Byzantine empire) to distinguish the people founded and ruled the First Bulgarian Empire – from 681 AD onwards and before they merged with the Slavs and the,the remains of the ancient Thracians and Gothic population and the formation of the Modern Bulgarian nation. Today its often replaced by the term Proto–Bulgarians, old Bulgarians and even just Bulgarians.It was Documented by the Armenian Chronologists Mouses Khorentsi, Vardan the Great, Michael the Syrian and others that after the Fall of the Parthian Empire(198ad) in the third Century that the Bulgarians "Onoghontor-Blgar" led by a ''Burdjan Shah'' (Bulgarian king) migrated From the Gorges of Baktria/Balhara/Pamir,Hundu-Kush,Tien Shan Mountains into the Pontic Steppes just north of the Caucasus Mountains in Sarmatia Asiatica by passing the land of the Armenians peacefully and some even settled on the shores on the lake Van in Armenia.The Armenians by being neignbours of the Bulgars and the Alans just south of the Caucasus Mountains reported that the Bulgars formed their own States,had highly developed civilisation with walled cities made of stone (same said for the Alans as well,this statement is quite unique for nations that were mentioned as nomads in that epoch) Some of them were settled and others were migrating with their herlds. That the Bulgars were also allies with the Armenians when going to war. That in the 370s AD with the arrival of the Huns in Eastern Europe, the Bulgarians were one of the first who joined the Hunnic Confederation ,with or without their own will is not known yet, but by the looking into the past - the Bulgarians then did the right choice and survived from the Hunnic wrath by being one of their most loyal allies till the Death of Attila in 453. That in the Bulgars 380s AD attacked the Crimean Goths by crossing the Kerch straith and also the Armenians in 395-8 AD with the Huns.Until the death of Attila the Bulgars were united,but after he died they formed 3 groups - the Onogondurians (the Inner Bulgars)the biggest mass of the bulgars and was the most peacefull but the most developed and forming a state living near the Caucasus Mountains ,the Utigurs (the outer Bulgars) living east of the Don river, and the Kutigurs(the few bulgars) the most warlike ones who were the most proud of the legacy of the European Huns living west of the Don river. The Bulgarians that Followed the Hunic Confederation since the 370s AD westwards migrating, went back to the eastern steppes near the northern Caucasus to their Relatives.The third son of Attila – Ernak after 454 AD as part of the disintegrating Hunnic Empire, unlike his brother Dengizich,he managed to come to peace terms with the Byzantine Empire and his domaign was known as Patria Onogunduria .Ernak is considered to have succeeded his brother Dengizich as king of from what was left of the Hunnic Empire in the Pontic Steppes. According to the Nominalia of the Bulgarian khans from the 8th century, where he is called Irnik, he lived the legendary 150 years ,while his father Avitohol - 300 years (153-453 AD),who is though to have been Attila Himself. In 479 AD the Roman Emperor Zeno paid the Bulgarian Kutigurs to attack Theoderic the Great, who was leading the Ostrogoths in the Balkans and by doing so he was forced to invade the Kingdom of Odoacker in Italy due to the Romans and their Roman Allies.After that from 493AD onwards the Kutigurian Bulgarians started raiding the Eastern Roman Empire across the Balkans each year for the next 50 years.The Kutigurs even started to settle in the Balkans as Foederati to the Romans and even helped the rebelious roman general Vitalian in Moesia.This process stopped only temporeraly when Justilian the Great started on one hand the civil wars between the Kutigurs and the Utigurs and the arival of the Avars from Central Asia from Another.


    3)Khazars:

    The tribes that were to comprise the Khazars were not an ethnic union, but a congeries of steppe nomads and peoples who came to be subordinated, and subscribed to a core Tűrkic leadership. Many Turkic groups, such as the Oguric peoples, including Saragurs, Ogurs, who earlier formed part of the Tiele confederation, are attested quite early, having been driven West by the Sabirs, who in turn fled the Asian Avars, and began to flow into the Volga-Caspian-Pontic zone from as early as the 4th century AD and are recorded by Priscus to reside in the Western Eurasian steppe lands as early as 463 AD. They appear to stem from Mongolia and South Siberia in the aftermath of the fall of the Hunnic/Xiongnu nomadic polities. A variegated tribal federation led by these Turks, probably comprising a complex assortment of Iranian Alans,Sarmatians, proto-Mongolic, Uralic, and Palaeo-Siberian clans, vanquished the Rouran Khaganate of the hegemonic central Asian Avars in 552 and swept westwards, taking in their train other steppe nomads and peoples from Sogdiana. The ruling family of this confederation may have hailed from the Ashina clan of the West Turkic tribes, though Constantine Zuckerman regards Ashina and their pivotal role in the formation of the Khazars with scepticism. Moving west, the confederation reached the land of the Akatziroi,also known as the Ak-Khazars (the White Khazars) who had been important allies of the Huns. David Marshall Lang identified the Kermikhion-Kidarites with the Khazars, involved in causing Hunnic migrations across the Volga into Europe around 463 according to their envoy Priscuss. An embryonic state of Khazaria began to form sometime after 630 AD, when it emerged from the breakdown of the larger Gokturk Khaganate. Gokturk armies had penetrated the Volga by 549, ejecting the Avars, who were then forced to flee to the sanctuary of the Hungarian plains. The Ashina clan whose tribal name was 'Turk' (the strong one) appeard on the scene by 552, when they overthrew the Rourans and established the Gokturk Khaganate. By 568 AD, these Gokturks were probing for an alliance with Byzantium to attack Persia. An internecine war broke out between the senior eastern Gokturks and the junior West Turkic Khaganate some decades later, when on the death of Taspar Khagan, a succession dispute led to a dynastic crisis between Taspar's chosen heir, the Apa Khagan, and the ruler appointed by the tribal high council, Ashina Shetu, the Ishbara Khagan. Later - the Khazars after defeating Great old Bulgaria,led by Kubrat, formed the Khazar Khaganate in its lands the in the late 7th Century just north of the Caucasus mountains and converted to Judaism.


    4)Magyars:

    The origin of the Magyars is still partly disputed. The most widely accepted Finno-Ugric theory from the late nineteenth century is based primarily on linguistic and ethnographical arguments, while it is criticized by some as relying too much on linguistics. There are also other theories stating that the Magyars are descendants of Scythians, Huns, Turks, Avars, and/or Sumerians. These are primarily based on medieval legends–whose authenticity and scientific reliability is strongly questionable–and non-systematic linguistic similarities. Most scholars therefore dismiss these claims as mere speculation.The Magyars or later known as Hungarians were part of the Finno-Ugric group of related languages,nations that were settled from modern Finland to the west to the Ural mountain and beyond into Siberia. Due to climatic changes in the early 1st millennium B.C.E., the Ugrian subgroup known as the Ob-Ugrians–until then living more in the north–moved to the lower Ob River, while the Ugrian subgroup that was the ancestor of the proto-Magyars remained in the south and became nomadic herdsmen. From the definitive departure of the Ob-Ugrians (around 500 B.C.E.), the ancestors of present day Magyars can be considered a separate ethnic group – the proto-Magyars.Location of their original homeland is subject to scholarly debates.Róna-Tas says the development of Hungarian started in the region of the rivers Kama and Volga, west of the Urals.The archaeologist István Fodor writes that the original homeland lay to the east of the Urals. During the following centuries, the proto-Magyars still lived in the wood-steppes and steppes southeast of the Ural Mountains, and they were immediate neighbors of and were strongly influenced by the ancient Sarmatians.In the 4th and 5th centuries AD, the Hungarians moved from the West of the Ural Mountains to the area between the southern Ural Mountains and the Volga River known as Bashkiria and Perm Krai.In the early eighth century, a part of the proto-Magyars moved to the Don River (to a territory between the Volga, the Don and the Donets), a territory called Levedia. The descendants of those proto-Magyars who stayed in Bashkiria were seen there as late as in 1241. Indeed, many historical references related both the Magyars (Hungarians) and the Bashkirs as two branches of the same nation. However, modern Bashkirs are quite different from their original stock, largely reduced in numbers during the Mongol invasion in the thirteenth century, and assimilated into Turkic peoples.The proto-Magyars around the Don River were subordinates of the Khazar Khaganate. Their neighbors were the archaeological Saltov Culture, i.e., Bulgars (Proto-Bulgarians, descendants of the Onogurs) and the Alans, from whom they learned gardening, elements of cattle breeding and of agriculture. The Bulgars and Magyars shared a long-lasting relationship in Khazaria, either by alliance or rivalry. The system of two rulers (later known as kende and gyula) is also thought to be a major inheritance from the Khazars. The word Hungarian is thought to be derived from the Bulgar-Turkic Onogur, possibly because the Magyars were neighbors (or confederates) of the Empire of the Bulgars in the sixth century.The H- sound in many languages (Hungarians, Hongrois, Hungarus etc.) is a later addition. It was taken over from the word "Huns," which was a similar semi-nomadic tribe living some 400 years earlier in present-day Hungary and having a similar way of life (or according to the older theories Huns were the people from which the Magyars arose). In ancient times, through the Middle Ages, and even today, the identification of Hungarians with the Huns has often occurred in history and literature, however this identification began to be disputed around the late nineteenth century, and is still a source of major controversy among scholars who insist that there could be no direct connection between the two.Like the Magyars,the Bulgars and the Turkic tribes also got major controversy among scholars to whom the Huns were the most closest relatives.

    5)White Huns:

    The question of the ethnic origins of the Chionites is very complex, especially as the names, Avestan X’iiaona/Pahlavi Xyōn and Hun/Chionite, are very close and the peoples in question inhabited approximately the same geographical region. The Chionites were known also with the Name White Huns .The Chionites in fact constituted one of several waves of eastern migration into Iran in late antiquity, though exactly which has been a matter of controversy.The Chionites (Chionitae) are first mentioned with Kushans by Ammianus Marcellinus who spent the winter of 356-57 CE in their Balkh territory. They arrived with the wave of immigration from Central Asia into Iran in late antiquity. They were influenced by the Kushan and Bactrian cultures, while patronizing the Eastern Iranian languages, and became a threat on the northeastern frontier of the Sassanid Empire.Simocatta, Menander, and Priscus provide evidence that the Chionites were somewhat different from the Hephthalites although, Frye suggested that the Hepthalites may have been a prominent tribe or clan of the Chionites.For many years, scholars suggested that they were of Turkic stock. Some have claimed that some groups amongst the Hephthalites were Turkic-speakers. According to the Encyclopedia of the Peoples of Asia and Oceania the ancestry of the Hephthalites is still uncertain but possibly Eastern Iranian within the larger Indo-European family for the majority. Some experts have also suggested the majority were of Turkic origins. They were certainly a mixed group who included peoples with many different origins.Probably dominated by Eastern Iranian language, but their mixed ancestry also led to multilingualism.Some White Huns may have been a prominent tribe or clan of the Chionites.one of them were the Hephthalites who Formed the Hephthalite Empire in 408ad.According to Richard Nelson Frye:Just as later nomadic empires were confederations of many peoples, we may tentatively propose that the ruling groups of these invaders were, or at least included, Turkic-speaking tribesmen from the east and north. Although most probably the bulk of the people in the confederation of Chionites and then Hephhtalites spoke an Iranian language... this was the last time in the history of Central Asia that Iranian-speaking nomads played any role; hereafter all nomads would speak Turkic languages.They displaced the Scythians and conquered Sogdiana and Khorasan before 425. After that, they crossed the Syr Darya (Jaxartes) River and invaded Persian lands. In Persia, they were initially held off by Bahram Gur but around 483–85, they succeeded in making Persia a tributary state by defeating the Sassanid forces at the Battle of Herat where they killed the Sassanid king, Peroz I. After a series of wars in the period 503–513, they were driven out of Persia and completely defeated in 557 by Khosrau I. Their polity thereafter came under the Göktürks and subsequent Western Turkic Khaganate.They also invaded the regions Afghanistan and present-day Pakistan, succeeding in extending their domain to the Punjab region.The Hephthalites were a vassal state to the Rouran Khaganate until the beginning of the 5th century.Between Hephthalites and Rourans were also close contacts, although they had different languages and cultures, and Hephthalites borrowed much of their political organization from Rourans. In particular, the title "Khan", which according to McGovern was original to the Rourans, was borrowed by the Hephthalite rulers.The reason for the migration of the Hephthalites southeast was to avoid a pressure of the Rourans. Further, the Hephthalites defeated the Yuezhi in Bactria and their leader Kidara led the Yuezhi to the south.Procopius claims that the White Huns lived in a prosperous territory, and that they were the only Huns with fair complexions. According to him, they did not live as nomads, did acknowledge a single king, observed a well-regulated constitution, and behaved justly towards neighboring states. He also describes the burial of their nobles in tumuli, accompanied by their closest associates. This practice contrasts with evidence of cremation among the Chionites in Ammianus and with remains found by excavators of the European Huns and remains in some deposits ascribed to the Chionites in Central Asia. Scholars believe that the Hephthalites constituted a second "Hunnish" wave who entered Bactria early in the 5th century, and who seem to have driven the Kidarites into Gandhara.Newly discovered ancient writings found in Afghanistan reveal that the Middle Iranian Bactrian language written in Greek script was not brought there by the Hephthalites, but was already present from Kushan times as the traditional language of administration in this region. There is also evidence of the use of a Turkic language under the White Huns. The Bactrian documents also attest several Turkic royal titles (such as Khagan), indicating an important influence of Turkic people on White Huns, although these could also be explained by later Turkic infiltration south of the Oxus.The last Hephthalite King, Yudhishthira, ruled until about 670, when he was replaced by the Kabul Shahi dynasty.Not long after that the Arab Invasions in Central Asia in the second half of the 7th century with the spread of Islam conquered the last Hephthalite domains in Baktria.

    6)Red Huns:

    The Kidarites, a nomadic clan, are supposed to have arrived in Bactria with the great migrations of the second half of the 4th century.They were also known with another name - the Red Huns. This caused the Chionites to encroach upon Khorasan and the frontiers of the Kushan state around 320 AD. The Kidarite king Grumbat mentioned by Ammianus Marcellinus was a cause of much concern to the Persians. Between 353 AD and 358 AD, the Chionites under Grumbat attacked in the eastern frontiers of Shapur II's empire along with other nomad tribes. After a prolonged struggle they were forced to conclude a peace, and their king Grumbat accompanied Shapur II in the war against the Romans. The southern or "Red" Kidarite vassals to the Kushans in the North-Western Indus valley became known as Kermikhiones. A "Kidarite dynasty", south of the Oxus, was at war with the Sassanids in the fifth century. Peroz I fought Kidara and then his son Kungas, forcing Kungas to leave Bactria. They entered Kabul and replaced the last of the Kushan Empire rulers. However, the Kidarites in turn were soon overwhelmed by the Hephthalites. David Marshall Lang identified the Kermikhion-Kidarites with the Khazar and Kutrigurs proto-Bulgarians involved in causing Hunnic migrations across the Volga into Europe around 463 according to their envoy Priscus.The Kidarite kingdom was created either in the second half of the 4th century, or in the twenties of the 5th century. The only 4th century evidence are gold coins discovered in Balkh dating from c. 380 AD, where 'Kidara' is usually interpreted in a legend in the Bactrian language. Most numismatic specialists favor this idea. All the other data we currently have on the Kidarite kingdom are from Chinese and Byzantine sources from the middle of the 5th century. They may have risen to power during the 420s in Northern Afghanistan before conquering Peshawar and part of northwest India, then turning north to conquer Sogdiana in the 440s, before being cut from their Bactrian nomadic roots by the rise of the Hephthalite Empire in the 450s. Many small Kidarite kingdoms seems to have survived in northwest India up to the conquest by the Hephthalites during the last quarter of the 5th century are known through their coinage. The Kidarites are the last dynasty to regard themselves (on the legend of their coins) as the inheritors of the Kushan empire, which had disappeared as an independent entity two centuries earlier. The Kidarites were the first "Hunas" to invade India. Indian records note that the Hūna had established themselves in modern Afghanistan and the North-West Frontier Province in present day Pakistan by the first half of the 5th century, and the Gupta emperor Skandagupta had repelled a Hūna invasion in 455. As a result of "Wusun vultures" descending upon them in Transoxiana, the Kidarite powerbase moved in 460 from southern "Red" Balkh to western "White" Khiva, where the Hephthalite dynasty was established by Khingila I. The Greek envoy Rhetor often referred to the "White Huns" as "Kidarite Chionites" when they united with the Uar under the Hepthalite clan. Although they fought against the Sassanians, early 5th century coins (thought to have been minted by Chionite rulers) imitate Sassanian drachmas.The Kidarite Chionites flourished under the Hephthalites, until something forced them to migrate from Khiva to Atil under Kandik in the mid-6th century. Not long afterwards, the Hephthalites remaining in Central Asia submitted to Gokturk rule in 567AD. The Kidarites kingdoms survived till the Arab Invasions in Central Asia in the second half of the 7th century with the spread of Islam

    7)Gupta empire:

    The origin of the Gupta kingdom is ambiguous and continues to be a topic of debate among many historians.The Gupta’s rose to power sometime around 240 AD. The founder of the Gupta Empire was Sri- Gupta. The Gupta Empire was named after the Gupta dynasty which ruled approximately between 320- 550 CE. He ruled from 240- 280 AD. During the reign of Sri- Gupta the Gupta Empire comprised of Bengal and some areas of Bihar.However, the Empire reached its zenith during the rule of Chandragupta I. Chandragupta I was the grandson of Sri- Gupta and ascended the throne as the ruler of the Gupta Empire after the death of his father, Ghatotkach. He was considered to be a powerful ruler who expanded the territories of the Empire. Chandragupta I had acquired the Lichchhavi dynasty Kingdom by virtue of his marriage to the Lichchhavi Princess. It comprised of area stretching from Ganges River to Prayaga (modern day Allahabad). Chandragupta I was succeeded by two most capable and powerful rulers like Samudragupta and Chandragupta II. The Gupta dynasty period is regarded as the ‘’Golden Age of India’’ in the areas – Architecture, Literature,Art, Astronomy,expanding Trade and so on..Chandragupta II the Great was very often also called as Vikramaditya or Chandragupta Vikramaditya in Sanskrit. He was one of the most powerful emperors of the Gupta Empire. He ruled between a span of 375BC to 415 BCE, during which the Gupta Empire reached the peak of its gloryChandragupta II the Great was the son of the previous ruler, Samudragupta the Great. He attained success by pursuing both a favorable marital alliance and an aggressive expansionist policy. In this his father and grandfather set the precedent.Chandragupta’s greatest victory was his victory over the Saka-Kshatrapa dynasty and annexation of their kingdom in Gujarat, by defeating their last ruler Rudrasimha III. Chandragupta II the Great controlled a vast empire, extending from the mouth of the Ganges to the mouth of the Indus River and from the present day North Pakistan to down to the mouth of the Narmada. The reasons for the fall of the Gupta Empire were both external and internal factors. The external factors were the continuous attempts of invading the mighty Gupta kingdom by the White Huns, Vakatakas and other emerging kingdoms.Skandagupta was regarded as the last great ruler of the Gupta Empire. However, the threats of invasion had begun during the reign of Kumaragupta I. The Pushyamitra tribe had made several unsuccessful attempts to invade the Gupta Empire but was every time defeated by the capable Gupta Empire leader, Kumaragupta. During the reign of Skandagupta, the Huns tried repeatedly to conquer the Gupta Empire territories but were defeated by Skandagupta. However, the successors of Skandagupta were weak and could not control the vast Empire. The invasion of the Gupta Empire by the Huns or the White Huns was one of the main reasons for the decline of this mighty Empire. The Huns were successful in invading the Gupta Empire after the death of Skandagupta. The Huns were able to conquer many provinces of the Gupta Empire like the Malwa, Gujarat and Thanesar. It is said that despite their continuously declining power the Gupta’s managed to fight the Huns for some time and thus prevented the enemy from taking over their Empire. Narsimhagupta of the Gupta dynasty formed an alliance with the independent kingdoms to avert the Huns from entering the northern Indian regions.The smooth functioning of the Gupta Empire was severely affected by Yasodharman, the Malwa prince. The reign of Yasodharman did not last for a long but it certainly challenged the Gupta authority and power. The Gupta Empire also suffered because of the invasion attempts made by Toramana and his successor Mihirakula. The Gupta Empire was affected by the expansion of the Vakataka kingdom. The management and control of the Gupta Empire was also seriously affected by the widespread unrest within the kingdom. Some states had declared their sovereignty owing to the inability of the Gupta rulers to control the vast territories of the empire. These were the factors that led to the decline of the vast and the powerful Gupta Empire in the late 5th and 6th centuries AD.After the Fall of the Guptas in the 7th century the Harsha Empire was the consolidated atemp by the Gupta created administration to revive the empire by holding the lands in Northern India united one more.After the fall of the Harsha Empire in 647 AD India wasn’t united for the next 1000 years once more.
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • TheBraveKnightTheBraveKnight Senior Member Posts: 1,657Registered Users
    How is progress towards release going? I am quite stoked for this mod to release!
    Current Top 3 Total War List

    1) Thrones of Britannia - Art style, soundtrack, aging portraits, sieges, politics, and trait system!
    (Prob 3 Kingdoms after I invest more hours. Awesome awesome game!)

    2) Warhammer 2 - Eye of the Vortex

    3) Shogun 2

    Honorable mentions - Medieval 1

  • mysterymanmysteryman Posts: 6Registered Users
    Is this coming out soon! Can't wait!
  • frozenmenbgfrozenmenbg Senior Member Posts: 762Registered Users
    The mod comes out in February after the next and probably final DLC and patch for Attila. In the meantime the Team released in early January the White Huns units as stand alone mod. the mod can also be used together with the

    http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=594460838

    Hunnic reskin of the Vanilla Hunnic units.So feel free to use it when playing your Campaigns, guys :o:)

    http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=526473726
    This is my +FrozenmenBG+'s Collector's Rome 2 Overhaul Mod Pack Edition In top 8 Highest voted Mod compilations for Rome 2 in the Steam Workshop.

    Check out The Barbarian Invasions - Overhaul Mod for the Grand Campaign with 8 New Starting dates(395ad-681ad) mod coming soon to TW: Attila. It adds several new factions to the game with their unique rosters .
  • PethomPethom Junior Member Posts: 10Registered Users
    Maybe give us a link to the mod on Mediafire?
  • TheBraveKnightTheBraveKnight Senior Member Posts: 1,657Registered Users
    Any word on the progress of this mod? Looking forward to its release
    Current Top 3 Total War List

    1) Thrones of Britannia - Art style, soundtrack, aging portraits, sieges, politics, and trait system!
    (Prob 3 Kingdoms after I invest more hours. Awesome awesome game!)

    2) Warhammer 2 - Eye of the Vortex

    3) Shogun 2

    Honorable mentions - Medieval 1

  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Posts: 21,275Registered Users
    Did you lose interest and abandoned this mod?
  • Radok91Radok91 Posts: 1Registered Users
    Как да сваля мода ?
Sign In or Register to comment.