03-11-2004, 07:06 PM
Almost all of the cavalry art that are wall carvings in Iran depict the saddles. As for handling the artifacts. hahahahaha not on your life. The are well preserved and protected.<br>
<br>
As for Cyrus the Great, yes, he was pretty amazing. He was a Zoroastrian Persian, so am I. I have researched and studied him and Acheaminian Persia, Parthian Persia and Sassanian Persia quite a bit.<br>
<br>
What is interesting to me about western approaches to Persia is how the separate the Parthians from the Persian. They were Persians. We dont make that distinction in our history nor our language. Same with the Saramations. They were an Iranian People. So it amazes me when I read the way they are presented.<br>
<br>
Origionaly, the Persians were a sect of the Iranian peoples. Which Iran can literally be translated as "land of the Aryans". Once the Achamenid Persians consolidated their powers, the name Persia or Parsa to be accurate was implanted as the name of the empires or empires. The main difference that forced the Sassanians into heavy anti Parthian actions was that they were Mithrix and the Sassanians viewed this as a bastardization of Zoroastrian. They believed that Mithra was Ahura Mazda and not one of the Angels for lack of a better explanation.<br>
<br>
Also, in ancient Persian we have 48 letters in the alphabet, in moder Persian we have 32. In Modern Persian, there are three S's one of which is actually pronounced TH if pronounced properly, which Persians do not. In Anceint Persian we say Parta to the Parthians, or refer to them by the dynasty name that founded them as the Ashkan or Ashkanian. But as a whole they are referred to as Parta, which in itself is a dialect pronounciation of Parsa.<br>
<br>
Anyway, I just wanted to clear that up. Much of the Saramation, Parthian, Sassanian armor is the same, just depends on the era, and the contingent in the Cavalry that you are looking at. They had, Super heavy cavalry, heavy cavalry, Medium armored cavalry, light cavalry, and unarmored cavalry which would consist of archers, ropers, messengers, or scirmish troops. The heavy and medium cavalry also had archers. Finally there were the Immortals and the Fedayeen Cavalry. Those were the elites, kinda like our special forces. Then, there were the wealthy and aristocratics of extreme wealth and rank that were throughout the different divisions. As for their equipment, it depends on which section your looking.<br>
<br>
Cataphracts and high impact groups would use saddles that have much more leverage for high impact and close quarter battling. Light cavalry needs a more manuverable saddle. One of the reason that the four horned saddle is so effective is that it supplys both. The saddles like the McClelland also do the same. By the way, that design saddle was invented in the region, not necessarily by the Persians. Also, to get a great idea of Persian/Roman heavy cavalry, you can look at Byzantine heavy cavalry, it was in exact copy of the Roman/Persian Cavalry. In fact, that is all that it was. And it didnt change much for many hundreds of years. In fact, clear up to the Mongol era, they were still using some of the same equipment. Minor changes such as the addition of stirrups. Which were actually in use at the end of the Sassanian Empire. But there is much reference to Byzantine stuff and that is a fantastic source for research. <p></p><i></i>
<br>
As for Cyrus the Great, yes, he was pretty amazing. He was a Zoroastrian Persian, so am I. I have researched and studied him and Acheaminian Persia, Parthian Persia and Sassanian Persia quite a bit.<br>
<br>
What is interesting to me about western approaches to Persia is how the separate the Parthians from the Persian. They were Persians. We dont make that distinction in our history nor our language. Same with the Saramations. They were an Iranian People. So it amazes me when I read the way they are presented.<br>
<br>
Origionaly, the Persians were a sect of the Iranian peoples. Which Iran can literally be translated as "land of the Aryans". Once the Achamenid Persians consolidated their powers, the name Persia or Parsa to be accurate was implanted as the name of the empires or empires. The main difference that forced the Sassanians into heavy anti Parthian actions was that they were Mithrix and the Sassanians viewed this as a bastardization of Zoroastrian. They believed that Mithra was Ahura Mazda and not one of the Angels for lack of a better explanation.<br>
<br>
Also, in ancient Persian we have 48 letters in the alphabet, in moder Persian we have 32. In Modern Persian, there are three S's one of which is actually pronounced TH if pronounced properly, which Persians do not. In Anceint Persian we say Parta to the Parthians, or refer to them by the dynasty name that founded them as the Ashkan or Ashkanian. But as a whole they are referred to as Parta, which in itself is a dialect pronounciation of Parsa.<br>
<br>
Anyway, I just wanted to clear that up. Much of the Saramation, Parthian, Sassanian armor is the same, just depends on the era, and the contingent in the Cavalry that you are looking at. They had, Super heavy cavalry, heavy cavalry, Medium armored cavalry, light cavalry, and unarmored cavalry which would consist of archers, ropers, messengers, or scirmish troops. The heavy and medium cavalry also had archers. Finally there were the Immortals and the Fedayeen Cavalry. Those were the elites, kinda like our special forces. Then, there were the wealthy and aristocratics of extreme wealth and rank that were throughout the different divisions. As for their equipment, it depends on which section your looking.<br>
<br>
Cataphracts and high impact groups would use saddles that have much more leverage for high impact and close quarter battling. Light cavalry needs a more manuverable saddle. One of the reason that the four horned saddle is so effective is that it supplys both. The saddles like the McClelland also do the same. By the way, that design saddle was invented in the region, not necessarily by the Persians. Also, to get a great idea of Persian/Roman heavy cavalry, you can look at Byzantine heavy cavalry, it was in exact copy of the Roman/Persian Cavalry. In fact, that is all that it was. And it didnt change much for many hundreds of years. In fact, clear up to the Mongol era, they were still using some of the same equipment. Minor changes such as the addition of stirrups. Which were actually in use at the end of the Sassanian Empire. But there is much reference to Byzantine stuff and that is a fantastic source for research. <p></p><i></i>
