07-05-2010, 10:18 PM
Wow Giannis I wrote a reply to your post and it did not post. So I will see if I can remember what I wrote. What I basically said was that I absolutely agree with you. You are dead on. Very much so. The only thing that I would add is that I have a tendency to look at the leaders and generals and I think that in fact Miltiades and Thomesticles are two that have not received the credit they truly deserve. But I think you put all of it exactly as I believe. And with respect to the Phalanx, I absolutely agree with you as well.
HOPLITE14GR
I also agree with what you are saying as well. With regards to the helmets under the Tiara, I do not know, nor want to say that they did or not did. What I am saying is that there are some things that do not make sense. We are told they were heavy infantry. We also see the Cavalry with helmets, we are also told that they are armored and received the best that the empire had to offer. But to me it just does not make sense that they would go into combat without head gear but heavy body armor and leg and arm defenses and hard shields. Then someone else in the units, auxiliary or Persian levy would have helmets.
Also, something that I was saying in the prior post that did not get posted, is the following: With respect to Miltiades and Thomesticles, it is not so much the Hoplite or the Immortal, or Greek or Persian or General vs General. But the specific ability of key figures in history, in an advantages or disadvantaged position to recognize their foe and properly address it. Both at Marathon and at Thermopylae, the Greek generals built on past experience and a full, let me be clear on this, a full understanding of what they were made of, strengths and weakness, and the strengths and weakness of their enemy, and also, the strengths and weak points of the particular battle they are forced to commit to. Marathon and Thermopylae were perfect examples of Greeks being able to Dictate the terms of battle and recognizing the proper moment to take advantage of a battle field gift.
We know that at Marathon, neither Persian or Greek would engage. We know that when they did engage, it was fierce and deadly. We also know that the Greeks waited and bated the the Persians. Finally when the famous Hoplite run was made, they waited till the mass of cavalry and perhaps elite troops were already boarded to launch their second attack towards the troops boarding ships.
At Thermopylae, we know that the Greeks did the same, waited and bated the Persian into their form and field of battle. Furthermore, in both cases prepared the battlefield. At Marathon with logs and rocks to make any cavalry attempt futile. With regards to each warrior, I dont think ferocity is a virtue that is gifted only to a specific culture or warrior group. I believe that every warrior culture has virtues that are present in other cultures. But what fascinates me is how certain battles change course. How they are made to come to victory. What I dont like is when we turn real history in to macho Rambo crap that disrespects the warriors involved. To simply think that the Greek won because of the Phalanx is ridiculous because we know of many cases where it did not work, Greek to Greek, Greek to Scythian or Greek to Persian. What we need to consider is how was it used, how was it taken in to greater effect against perhaps a more superior group or more vast group. Then and only then can we see the real brilliance and achievement in these battles and wars. The Greeks brilliantly used what they had and fabricated the extra strength they needed to win.
I play polo professionally, and I have been on many teams that were stronger and many that were weaker and have seen first hand the intensity of Victory and Loss. Here is a perfect example of using combat related tactics in a real world. And to see how teams are made and formed and employed is amazing. To see generals command their teams to victory in such a fierce game at such speeds is quite an insight into combat. Furthermore, even this level of competition has an unbelievable factor that can not be accounted for which exists in combat. LUCK. How many a fierce warriors from Thermopylae to Agincourt never made it to a foe because they tripped and were hammered to death or took an unlucky shot from behind or from an arrow they never saw. I believe these factors were brilliantly taken into consideration by the Greeks not only for years prior to the coming war, but also on a moment by moment basis during the war. Add in luck such as the storms that sunk a large number of the Persian Navy and you have the makings of such a history as Thermopylae.
Also, on a note for you guys, interesting note. There was a group of us that were archers and armorers on a specific tv show that I can not make mention of myself here. But we decided to test something. We took the bronze gauge used in Greek shields and Greek armor. I used a 60lb bow with leaf shaped arrowheads, not even the armor piercing heads of the Persian to shoot. We wanted to test to see if the arrows would actually stick in the metal of a hoplon the way often thought that they did and also could they pierce armor. I shot with a 60lb bow right into the armor to about 3-6 inches. On the shield, shot and stuck right into it and the wood backing of the hoplon. We did some math about how many arrows in a real combat setting would the Persians have launched at the Greeks. On a large army it would have been about 6-8 million arrows, on a smaller army than recordered about 2-3 million arrows.
Anyway, I really appreciate the info and the respect to the Immortals from you guys. Fantastic to have a legitimate and educated conversation about this. You guys are awesome and wish you guys were closer or I was so that we could do an Impression together. I will be posting more photos on my site www.radpour.com I would love to post a photo facing a Spartan. That would be awesome
Ardeshir
HOPLITE14GR
I also agree with what you are saying as well. With regards to the helmets under the Tiara, I do not know, nor want to say that they did or not did. What I am saying is that there are some things that do not make sense. We are told they were heavy infantry. We also see the Cavalry with helmets, we are also told that they are armored and received the best that the empire had to offer. But to me it just does not make sense that they would go into combat without head gear but heavy body armor and leg and arm defenses and hard shields. Then someone else in the units, auxiliary or Persian levy would have helmets.
Also, something that I was saying in the prior post that did not get posted, is the following: With respect to Miltiades and Thomesticles, it is not so much the Hoplite or the Immortal, or Greek or Persian or General vs General. But the specific ability of key figures in history, in an advantages or disadvantaged position to recognize their foe and properly address it. Both at Marathon and at Thermopylae, the Greek generals built on past experience and a full, let me be clear on this, a full understanding of what they were made of, strengths and weakness, and the strengths and weakness of their enemy, and also, the strengths and weak points of the particular battle they are forced to commit to. Marathon and Thermopylae were perfect examples of Greeks being able to Dictate the terms of battle and recognizing the proper moment to take advantage of a battle field gift.
We know that at Marathon, neither Persian or Greek would engage. We know that when they did engage, it was fierce and deadly. We also know that the Greeks waited and bated the the Persians. Finally when the famous Hoplite run was made, they waited till the mass of cavalry and perhaps elite troops were already boarded to launch their second attack towards the troops boarding ships.
At Thermopylae, we know that the Greeks did the same, waited and bated the Persian into their form and field of battle. Furthermore, in both cases prepared the battlefield. At Marathon with logs and rocks to make any cavalry attempt futile. With regards to each warrior, I dont think ferocity is a virtue that is gifted only to a specific culture or warrior group. I believe that every warrior culture has virtues that are present in other cultures. But what fascinates me is how certain battles change course. How they are made to come to victory. What I dont like is when we turn real history in to macho Rambo crap that disrespects the warriors involved. To simply think that the Greek won because of the Phalanx is ridiculous because we know of many cases where it did not work, Greek to Greek, Greek to Scythian or Greek to Persian. What we need to consider is how was it used, how was it taken in to greater effect against perhaps a more superior group or more vast group. Then and only then can we see the real brilliance and achievement in these battles and wars. The Greeks brilliantly used what they had and fabricated the extra strength they needed to win.
I play polo professionally, and I have been on many teams that were stronger and many that were weaker and have seen first hand the intensity of Victory and Loss. Here is a perfect example of using combat related tactics in a real world. And to see how teams are made and formed and employed is amazing. To see generals command their teams to victory in such a fierce game at such speeds is quite an insight into combat. Furthermore, even this level of competition has an unbelievable factor that can not be accounted for which exists in combat. LUCK. How many a fierce warriors from Thermopylae to Agincourt never made it to a foe because they tripped and were hammered to death or took an unlucky shot from behind or from an arrow they never saw. I believe these factors were brilliantly taken into consideration by the Greeks not only for years prior to the coming war, but also on a moment by moment basis during the war. Add in luck such as the storms that sunk a large number of the Persian Navy and you have the makings of such a history as Thermopylae.
Also, on a note for you guys, interesting note. There was a group of us that were archers and armorers on a specific tv show that I can not make mention of myself here. But we decided to test something. We took the bronze gauge used in Greek shields and Greek armor. I used a 60lb bow with leaf shaped arrowheads, not even the armor piercing heads of the Persian to shoot. We wanted to test to see if the arrows would actually stick in the metal of a hoplon the way often thought that they did and also could they pierce armor. I shot with a 60lb bow right into the armor to about 3-6 inches. On the shield, shot and stuck right into it and the wood backing of the hoplon. We did some math about how many arrows in a real combat setting would the Persians have launched at the Greeks. On a large army it would have been about 6-8 million arrows, on a smaller army than recordered about 2-3 million arrows.
Anyway, I really appreciate the info and the respect to the Immortals from you guys. Fantastic to have a legitimate and educated conversation about this. You guys are awesome and wish you guys were closer or I was so that we could do an Impression together. I will be posting more photos on my site www.radpour.com I would love to post a photo facing a Spartan. That would be awesome
Ardeshir
Ardeshir Radpour
