Any history buff who watches Game of Thrones knows that the Dothraki are clearly based on the various groups of nomads from the central Asian steppes. The writers draw most directly from the Mongols, but they were just one of the more recent of a long history of central Asian steppe horsemen (Turks, Magyars, Huns, Scythians, Cimmerians, Parthians, Xiongnu, etc). From my understanding, all these groups shared a similar fighting style: namely a focus on light mounted cavalry and horse archers.
Game of Thrones is notable for their hyper-realistic Medieval-style battles (see the Battle of the Bastards, Hardholme, the Battle of Meereen, the Battle of the Blackwater, the Battle at the Wall, etc). We've seen the Dothraki in action before, but they've always been mounted light cavalry armed with their Arakhs (curved, sickle sword similar to a Khopesh ). Last night's episode was the first time we've seen Dothraki archers, though.
This is the only example in movies or TV I can think of where we see the fighting style of central Asian steppe nomads depicted so vividly. My question is multi-layered:
How accurate was that depiction of steppe horsemen fighting techniques?
Did steppe nomads use swords (or other bladed weapons like the Arakhs in the show) as much as is depicted in the show?
Is there any other movie, TV show, or documentary that depicts steppe horsemen fighting as well as, or better than, this episode of the show?
Game of Thrones is notable for their hyper-realistic Medieval-style battles
Nothing could be further from the truth. I've gone into more detail in the past, but GoT strays far enough from reality as to be frustrating, and this season has been particularly bad. While no show could be truly realistic - and neither should it even approach actual realism - battles and strategies should be believable. With all the teleporting armies, the severe lack of scouts, incomprehensible infantry formations and a general neglect of basic military principles, GoT is rarely believable when it comes to battles.
Ahem.
How accurate was that depiction of steppe horsemen fighting techniques?
The Dothraki are not attacking according to any principle of nomadic warfare. There are no repeated charges into and out of arrow range, no feigned retreats, no use of ambush and no flanking maneuvers. Their direct, conventionally suicidal attack goes against most principles of nomadic warfare, and only succeeded because the Lannisters only drew their foot up in two ranks, only armed one of these ranks and their archers did not loose their arrows until the Dothraki were right on them.
Had the battle gone down in a more typical steppe fashion, the Dothraki would have made repeated charges into close range, loosed arrows, and then retreated in an attempt to break the cohesion of the enemy lines and force them to give chase. If the arrows didn't have the intended effect, their next move would have been to make repeated, but limited, charges on the enemy lines in another attempt to make them break ranks and chase them.
If cavalry or infantry chased after them, the Dothraki would have eventually turned on them, with their heavy cavalry attacking from the flanks. Alternatively, they might have been deployed against a weak point in the enemy formation, especially if it was on their flanks.
Did steppe nomads use swords (or other bladed weapons like the Arakhs in the show) as much as is depicted in the show?
No. They mostly used straight swords or sabres curved little more than a 19th century cavalry saber.
Is there any other movie, TV show, or documentary that depicts steppe horsemen fighting as well as, or better than, this episode of the show?
I'm afraid this one falls outside of my knowledge banks.