Reconstructed Persian weapons

[hoplite14gr]

Well done Ardeshir!

About time we see some proper reconstruction of Persians!

If you have contacts in Sydney the documentary Marathon 490 B.C. will be shown for the Greek community
When it is finished I will sent you some stills of the Persian Army.
I am the first to admit that we probably show a mix of "wrong" and "correct" images of Persian troops.
Hopefully better than the history channel. We tried to be as visually correct as possible.

Kind regards

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Wow,Ardeshir,at last some Persians! Please post more photos if you have! You know,greek re-enacting is so much more interesting if there are Persians! But no matter how numerous they have once been,now it's too difficult to find them.
Do you have a group or are you a lonely re-enactor in this era?
I suppose you are Persian in origin,because you also look the part! Correct and forgive me if i'm wrong,
Actually there might be some people willing to do Persian,so it would be great if an Achaemenid group showed up!
Khaire
Giannis

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

This round shield looks like based on the Alexander sarcophagus ones. It is round and dished with a porpax and antilave,but smaller than the hoplite shield and shallower. Is that right?
And also,this is a nice persian style kopis,how did you make it? Is it based on something more than the greek representations of persian arms?
Khaire
Giannis

[SassanianPersian]

Hello Guys, Ok I hope I can answer all of the questions. The shield is based on the Alexander Sarcophogus, but with the appropriate Achaemenid crest on it. As far as the completion of the outfit, it is not fully complete, but complete enough to represent it. He would have arm guards or bracers and leg defenses. Also, perhaps a helmet. It is often said that they wore only the tiara, but that conflicts with other reports that they were heavily armored and the best armored troops and also the finds of the Persian Helmets. So I went with the Tiara. Furthermore, Herodotus said they had a soft cap on, but often in Middle Eastern armies, even into the Sassanian periods we see felt or cloth covers for the metal helmets to help keep them cool and out of the sun, so we are not sure if there were helmets under the covers. What everyone basis everything off of us Alexander Sarcophogus. The Kopis is the best representation off of Greek paintings. Let me tell you it was a pain, I mean a pain to make, but fun too. It is soft steel so that it is more like Iron, brass handle with Antler inlays. I will have it posted later. The sagaris in one of the other photos is steel and wood, with leather wrap on the handles lower portion. The armor is leather with scales on it and the leather is tooled. It was made for a TV show with Persian motifs on it. The next one will be scales on the sides as well. The shield is the smaller domed version of the hoplon. Wood covered in fabric, later I will cover it in leather perhaps. I have a spear as well, with the ball on the bottom, but it is not in the photos. As for me, I am the only one I know of that is representing the Achaemenid Persians and I do it with what little funds I have to do this, as I am sure the rest of us do. I also have my Sassanid outfit which is posted on the Roman section of this board. Anyway, thank you guys. I am in Los Angeles and I think that most everyone else is in other parts of the world or this country. And as for me, yes that is me, and the beard was added in later. haha, but I am a Zoroastrian Persian. Full Blooded. So as authentic as it gets. I would love to have a photo of a Greek and a Persian facing off, to make a proper representation of these two fierce warriors.

Many are under such false notions that the Immortals suffered heavy losses to the Spartans and that is just not the Case. Hollywood and movies like 300 (even though I loved it) do nothing but ruin real history. All of the studies I have done the past 20 years regarding their conflicts showed that the Immortals and the Spartans faced off in some of the most fierce fighting in history, without either gaining or losing ground or willing to back down. There is no record of any losses of the Immortals such as been stated. It is all guess work. But we know that they were signaled to retreat a few times and were not willing to give up combat with the Spartans.

Furthermore, what is interesting is that every real Spartan I have met, I mean the real deal Greek from that region has a completely different respect for those wars. So my whole intention is to bring to light the real history of what happened, so that real credit is not only due to the Persians, but also the Greeks, and the genius in their battleplans. And also more accurate light and respect to those like the Greek General themistocles or Mitiades and what they really did. Not some Hollywood Rambo crap. There was true genius there that has gone discredited throughout history in favor of a more macho version.

Anyway, I hope you guys like it and I will post more as soon as I can and get them taken. I will also be posting photos on my website at www.radpour.com
Ardeshir Radpour

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Believe it or not,what i also thought was that i'd like a photo of me facing you! Haha! I guess only photoshop can bring us closer at this moment.
But let me inform you that in August 2011 some of us are planning to informally meet in the field of Marathon itself to commemorate the 2500 years of the battle. To have some Persians there would be wonderful!
If you want some ideas of how to make the cuirass that we here in rat call tube & yoke, you can see the thread "spolas-thorax ek dermatos". Persians and greeks are often shown wearing almost identical body armour. Some times the only differences seem to be stylistic.

Unfortunately people are very biased today concerning the "Persian Wars" and they're biased in many ways. Even more unfortunately,the ancient sources were biased also! So it's really hard to trace the truth but we're into it!

Welcome in RAT and keep what you're doing! And keep us posted too.
Khaire
Giannis

[Astiryu1]

I am glad to see someone looking deeper into the Persian warriors. I have found alot of material that seems suspect when it comes to Persia and because of sources being biased it is hard for me to discern anything regarding them. I naturally tend to dial back the levels of one force(the winners or hometeam) and dial up the levels of the others (invaders or losers) because like said very often "The Winner Writes the History". If there is more equality between Greeks and Persians than I definitely want to know! Thanks! Besides the Warrior relief at Persepolis is one of my favorite of the ancient world.

[rocktupac]

Hello guys, wow, this sounds fantastic. I would love to find out more about this. Here is an accurate representation of the Persian. This is Me in my armor with a Sagaris. But I also made the Kopis as well. I will up post both images for you to see. The wicker shield is an inaccurate use in virtually all shown images. Those were shield walls. The actual Persian Citizen Levies and the Immortals carried either the Solid Violin shaped shield or the Crescent Shield or the Hoplon style shield. This is the round shaped hoplon style shield. I would love to know more about this project.

Ardeshir Radpour
[email protected]

Yes, well done Ardeshir! These are great. Your corselet is wonderful.

[Dain II.]

Ha! And I thought me and my comrades of hetairoi and gentes danubii are the onliest one who want to do an accurate achaimenid impression. Well done I like your impression very much, good to see that there are other people to who are interessted in persian reenactment. Looking forward to see more photos of you.

We are working on our impression now nearly a year, rest of the clothes is in work, not finished now but we look forward to have to at our next event in August.
Here are pictures of Rene and Marco:
















lg Stephan

[SassanianPersian]

Hello and Wow everyone. Thank you for having an interest and at least a respect for the Persians. Thank you, it really means a lot. Also, what is great is that even though history has a biased account, that none of my actual Greek friends do. It is so funny to me. Anyway, wonderful Persian Impressions. Thank you. You guys look great. Im sooooo tired of seeing black eyed turbaned beasts that somehow are trained in enough ballet just to fly through the air to land on Greek Spears. hahaha

As far as history being biased, well we all know that. But the winner writes history. But what is funny to me is the missing common sense. I have a little fun drill for everyone out there to see if you can get a realistic and accurate account for yourselves.

First, read the Spartan Army, The Spartan Way of War and The Life of Lycurgus. You will get a very very detailed account of real hoplite warfare. Now, take into consideration the pass at Thermopylae. About 2 chariots wide. Two Persian Chariots which are much much larger than Greek or Roman Chariots. So, lets give it an advantage, with Scythes. Lets say 4 foot blades. That is 8 feet just in blade width. Then the chariot is said to have been able to have 3-4 people in it not including a driver. Driver armored to the point where he was unkillable unless he was pulled off and beaten to death. So lets have the driver with a man on either side and one behind. Javalineers and Archers. Lets say 1 foot space between the guys and the guys are huge (just giving an advantage to the Greeks) the guys are 3 feet wide. Ok so now we have guys totaling 9 feet with another three feet added for spacing, makes it 12 feet, plus 8 feet in blades. Makes it 20 feet wide. So two of them makes it 40 feet wide.

So we have a 40 foot wide path, with roughly 7000 Greeks shoved in it, heavily armored. Tops of their feet armored, thighs armored, shins armored, forearms armored, mid arms armored and shoulders armored, and ofcourse head armored and a massive hoplon, shield to shield. If you had 7000 grandmothers with knives in that pass, trained modern military could not get past them. Because once you begin the killing at some point the bodies pile up so high that you cant even see the next round of men to kill. This is now completely explained in Life of Lycurgus and Spartan Army and other very well known Greek Accounts. That the Hoplites had to crawl over piles of dead to fight, which at some point stopped their advance. Now having said that, take the following into consideration.

The Persian side: At what point do you as a Greek Hoplite, in Particular a Spartan who relies on his unit strength say, I can not break Spartan Rank and meet Persians in Open Battle. We know that they were considered fierce equals through other accounts of their battles. But more importantly, they are commanded by Thomesticles at all costs to buy time, to hold the pass so that Athens can be evacuated. So you cant risk the weakening of the Pass. So, at what point, are the bodies so piled up that you cant see the other Persians to kill. So the absurd numbers of dead are soooo exaggerated that it is ridiculous. Remember, the Greeks gave us some of the best myths and legends. I love Greek Mythology and Legend. So take into consideration, that if the Greeks killed a few hundred or a few thousand that how easily that can be inflated to absurd numbers.

So now, do your own test, take the depth measurement of a body and ask yourself, how many bodies would pile up and how wide in a exaggerated (by me) 40 foot wide path, before you cant even see your next enemy to kill. How far do you reach out or climb up before you are at risk as a hoplite. Furthermore, especially if by all accounts, Spartans are no better than Thespians, Athenians or Thebans. We hold them to be super humans but they were not. Remember, they lost to the Thebans, to the Athenians and also to Persians many many times. Now that is not to discredit them as fierce warriors, quite the opposite. But we do need to keep it realist that they were human beings, not gods.

So having said that, do the math, see how many bodies will pile up before it is such an absurd pile that you cant even comprehend who would be able to engage. Remember, they held the pass, that is what they were entrusted to do. 7000 Greeks. 7000 Noble Greeks who fought hard. But at somepoint, I think the fighting just stopped and was unable to proceed.

Furthermore, amongst a lot of people now in the Academic world there is a debate that the signal for the Immortals to retreat was in time with the information of Ephialtes. What I did hear in a Classics Seminar and unfortunately keep looking for the source and cant find it again, was that the Immortals were signaled 3-5 times to retreat and they would not, they were engaged in the most ferocious fighting with the Spartans, neither gaining ground and both suffering equal losses. This makes an accurate logical account of realistic warfare.

Finally, the initial attack was of conscripts backed by Persian levies. The second wave was the Immortals. We have no account of any losses by the Immortals. What is stated is that they faired no better in gaining ground.

One of the things that is now widely accepted is that Herodotus numbers were inaccurate. Even in the size of the Army. What he said is mass numbers. What he did not account for was who made these numbers up. Take this into account, the Pesians had two grooms per horseman. So if you brought 20,000 horsemen, that number is now up to 60,000 men. The Immortals brought their wives and sons, who were not allowed to engage in combat, and a groom. so lets say 1 wife, 1 son and 1 groom. So that number is now up to 40,000. Remember that they brought a large number of conscripts, ok, so large in these means what, lets say 50,000. Probably another 20,000 Persian Conscripts. Also, remember they had a massive Navy that took up quite a bit of soldiers as well. Further more, they brought beds, tents, chairs, chaplet weavers, perfume makers, pastry makers and cooks. Again, try and even figure that number out. But we know that it took them a minimum of 5 years to prepare the food dumps and troops and more importantly the supply personal for this.

Hans Delbruk has a wonderful way to explain this. He says clearly, the most organized marching discipline in history is that of the German Army in WWII. If the Persians marched in such tight order, taking into consideration Herodotus numbers, the first Persians of Herodotus' account would be arriving in Athens, when there were still troops leaving Persepolis.

I highly recommend the books, Warfare in Antiquity by Hans Delbruk, for Roman and Greek and Persian accounts of Military numbers and Tactics.

Finally, also remember, there was a Greek attempt to erase the history of a very famous figure, Thomesticles by the Athenians. Why? After the Persian Wars, after his brilliance led them to victory, they exiled him. He left Greece and lived in the Persian Empire and worked for Xerxes. This was a massive betrayal in the eyes of the Athenians, and they have done all they could to put the focus of their victories in particular a focus on Thermopylae and Lionades. This discredits Thomesticles, Makes the Persians seem very weak and beatable and enforces Athens ability to Lead the Region, not one man in Thomesticles. This was all put to rest with the coming of Phillip of Macedon.

So for me, it is not so much that the Greeks or Persians won or lost that war. There was no winner or loser. It swayed back and forth. But how we have disrespected even the Greeks by heroworship and not crediting them in the Military Genius that they employed to save them from a much larger and superior force that they confronted. So in crediting properly the battles and wars of that time, you appropriately credit the proper warriors and military genius of that time.

There is my brief account of the bias. Sorry for the long write, but I get tired of wikipedia and 300 being the source of historical data for people that is fueled by the Ultimate Fighter and RedBull. hahaha

Ardeshir Radpour

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

My own view is that hoplite warfare was superior in the context in which the battles in Greece itself have been fought. What we see from the Persian side,which in all cases had superior numbers (i won't elaborate how much superior)is reluctance to fight hand to hand with the phalanx. We see it in Thermopylae where this reluctance is understandable in any case since the greeks are holding a pass. But we have also seen it in Marathon and in Plataia. Later the same reluctance is evident in the battle of Kunaxa where most probably the engagement with the phahalx was denied and it wasn't a rout. And also in the campaigns of Agesilaos. In many of these battles there were crack persian troops,and yet they didn't opose the phalanx or they tried to avoid it.
It is also evident that the phalanx itself,without support of cavalry and light troops (something that the greeks lacked in the persian Wars) was unable to face the persian armies-even levy ones,in Persian ground.
Thus i see the armies as a product of what they were made to face. The fierce phalanx was designed to face itself! And since it was the ultimate weapon in hand to hand combat,nothing could face it. It's normal that even elite Persian troops failed to face the phalanx head on,something they learnt not to do later on. This doesn't mean that the Persians weren't elite soldiers highly trained, probably much better trained than the greeks,save for the Spartans. Herodotos says that they faught bravely,but they lacked the equipment to opose the phalanx. And since the equipment is what determines the way of fighting(or the oposite), i find it very rational to say that any Persian heavy troops weren't designed to crash on the Phalanx.
I won't support that greek leadership wasn't inspired,but i tend to favor those who give it less credit. On the contrary, if we see the Persian advance in some depth of time,we come to appreciate their leadership much more than any greek one before the time of Philip and Alexander! The answer to this is probably the Monarchy and the total leadership. The Greeks of course were right in all their choises on where and when to fight,and even if in Plataia it was almost a disaster, the superiority of the Phalanx,and much more the discipline and training of the Spartans proved enough to win the day. It is after the loss of the battle where the Persians suffered great casualties. and they continued suffering them all the way to home through land. What happened in Salamis is of a different chapter...
Khaire
Giannis

[hoplite14gr]

Ardeshir, I like the fact that you are among the few people who bothered to check combat mechanics.
Greeks seem to get the better of "immortals" or satrapal elite troops due the weight and mass of their shields.
Being armored is not enough in phalanx fight and Giannis is right when he says that the phalanx evolved against itself.

But Aisxylos talks of the alsos (grove) of Marathon. In the grove that phalanx could not be formed and the Athenian logada who were sent to clear it suffered heavy casualties from the Persians.

Based on Plutarch, Pausanias and Photius Epitome I agree that you are right when you say that "immortals" were probably comited the second day. These authors use Ktesias as a source and Ktesias was a doctor in the Persian court and probably better informed.

I find your idea on the helmets rational but Sassanid and later Islamic art shows clearly the covered helmet.
But helmets under the tiara for the Achaemenides? Is there any excavated evidence in Iranian site from so small helmets?
There is only one helmet that might fit this idea. It belonged to the Axel Gutman collection and it is being described as "Middle Eastern"

Kind regards

[SassanianPersian]

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

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

I know how frustrating this can be,it has happened to me that i lost a long typed text some times!

May i ask the thickness of metal on the experiments? And of wood. Helmet bowls would be as thin as 0,8-1mm bronze or less.Shield faces were less than 0,5mm and the wood behind it 0,5 - 0,7 cm in the biggest part of the shield. There is indication and literary evidence that these shields could be pierced by arrows and wound -even kill- the man bearing them.
The Spartans suffered losses under the shower of arrows crouched behind their shields in Plataia, the Tegeans beside them on their left couldn't sustain anymore and they were the first that charged! One wonders how many of those losses were achieved through shields and armour.
Also,were the samples beaten bronze,plate bronze or brass?
Khaire
Giannis

EDIT: I'd also like to add that "heavy infantry" doesn't always mean heavy in armour. I think it mostly means heavy duty. The corpse that will actually engage with the enemy and will win the day. Hoplite armied might occasionally have been very lightly armoured,save for the big shield. Hoplites,however,no matter how well armoured they would be,they were always the "heavy infantry". "They were given the best" might not only mean the best armour or the most of it. They were certainly given the best services for instance! And tradition is some times stronger than logic. That said,some Persians on the small side of the Alexander Sarcophagus wear cuirass,but clearly no head protection other than the soft tiara. Accurate???
About cavalry being more armored,i believe that even if the "immortals" were picked men,the mounted guard was even higher status. The pezaiteroi of the Macedonians were picked men,but the Hetairoi were the real upper class.

And something else. You mentioned leg and arm protection many times. What evidence is there for this? Any actual finds-photos?

[hoplite14gr]

Ardeshir,
One thing that has been established in the 15th Australasian Historical Conference 2009 was the archerw (Olympic class athlets) among them had serious defficulty
aiming at fast advancing hoplites with most arrows falling in ground that has been cleared from target due to the rapidity of the advance.

Please also if you have scientifically collected data on armor penetration tell us so we can revise some things.
If you have the patience to go through the linothorax threads you will find experiments that showed that liner armor was tough to penetrate.

I wrote an article on these subject based on the info available but I am willing to revise views if there is enough to oppose them

Thanks

Kind regards

[immortal]

Let me first say that the Achaemenid Persian army is my main area of research, I recently visited Iran and didn't want to come back!

I am dubious as to whether the 'Immortals' actually existed. The only references we have to them are from Herodotus.
Xenophon, who is much more reliable, makes no mention of them. Instead he talks about 'Table companions' and 'Spear bearers'.
I don't doubt that there was an elite corps of Persians, but the title 'Immortals' is certainly Greek.

I am also sure that this elite unit would have operated on horseback, not on foot.

The main problem with every modern reconstruction that I have seen of a Persian is the leg wear. Achaemenid Persians did not wear trousers but hoes, with the feet attached. These are shown very clearly at Persepolis. All clothing for rank and file should really be made from woollen cloth, the tiara should be felt.
I doubt very much that infantry wore a helmet under the tiara, or even wore body armour. Their role was not as front line combatants and as such this equipment was not necessary.

Ardeshir: your reconstruction is very nice, but you are dressed as an Anatolian and not a Persian or Mede. The sword, shield and cuirass are all eastern Greek in design. While a member of the Persian Empire, it is not native.

I am very dubious that a Persian arrow could pierce bronze armour. We know that typical the heads were very small (I have some) and the shafts were reed. Casualties would be caused by hitting unprotected areas such as the face, neck, arms and feet. Arrows ricochet like bullets also, so hitting unprotected areas is not that unlikely, even when taking cover behind your shield.