Persian Immortals

Any chance of seeing them in the next version of EB? I've seen one other request for them before, but the request was shot down with the reason being that they were disbanded after Alexander had defeated the Persian Empire.

However, if I'm not mistaken, the Immortals were brought back several times under several Empires. The third Persian Empire under the Sassanid dynasty and the Eastern Roman Empire had brought back the Immortals.

Perhaps Hayasdan players can have the option of recruiting the Immortals through the Persian Reforms?

No. Or at least, I sure hope so. Both the Sassanid and ERE are waaaay after EB´s timeframe, and besides, I´m not sure how elite these reborn Immortals actually were.

the Zhayedan (sassanid immprtals) were dammn good-but they were cataphracts, not footsoldiers, like the Anusiya (companians, the persian word for the 5th century BC immortal)

what did the real immortals actually use for weaponry and armor? im gonna make a crazy assumtion and say that it is not 2 katanas and metal face masks like off 300 :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quackingduck

what did the real immortals actually use for weaponry and armor? im gonna make a crazy assumtion and say that it is not 2 katanas and metal face masks like off 300 :P

---

It was kind of unimpressive...a spear and a wicker shield. I don't know about armor, but I know that much.

From what I've read on the Persian Immortals,they wore very light scale mail armor in the form of a tunic that was about as thick as a playing card.

You may want to check the city of the Persi?

http://itchy-wheels.exploder.org/ima...g2_itemId=1281

However I believe this was a class of warrior, of which there were several discrete formations each armed with a different set of weapons. Overall, they formed the core of the Persian standing army, which was not that large in itself. One must remember that the Achaemenid Empire was a centralized feudalistic type of government and the vast majority of troops needed for a given campaign were provided by the various vassal states.

If you really want them, there are already some finished units in the Total War center download section. You just have to implement them in the game and make them available for the faction you want.

i had the impression that they would have had a bow (due to the general eastern love of it) and may have fought have fought in the phalanx formation (again, the east). and true enough, im pretty sure they weren't around in the EB timeframe, since i can't imagine the Seleukids using something as hardcore Persian as immortals; they might rebel against the Hellens and declare independence for a new Persian Empire.

where is The Persian Cataphract? I am looking forward for his comment on this!

Persian immortals are just archer-spearmen. Maybe the things in EB are not exactly the same things but they would have been more or less identical to those in EB anywway, and served the same purpose.

i think the late pahlavan bodyguards are really enough for everyone who desire a sort of "Immortal" unit... marvelous graphics, hight letal sword, huge charge, tank armoured horse, armour piercing... really no motivation to miss any kind of immortals here...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matinius Brutus

where is The Persian Cataphract? I am looking forward for his comment on this!

---

Salve!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Copperknickers

Persian immortals are just archer-spearmen. Maybe the things in EB are not exactly the same things but they would have been more or less identical to those in EB anywway, and served the same purpose.

---

Not true. The Iranian archer-spearmen in EB are levies; The Immortals were professionals who were trained to use the spear both on foot and on horse-back, and to use the bow both on foot and on horse-back. This is verified by recorded accounts of Darius I The Great when he re-tells the days when he was the Royal Spear-bearer or "Arshtîbarâ" of the King of Kings Cambyses The Great. This is further verified by Herodotus' famed maxim of Achaemenid chivalry where they were "educated in three things only; Archery, equestrian sports and to speak the truth.

This call for versatility in using spear, bow and horse, is deeply rooted in Medean tradition, which Herodotus calls upon the enigmatic High King of the Medean empire, Cyaxares, or as Kurds and Medieval Persian bard Ferdôwsî call him, Kây-Khusrô, and Herodotus' claim of said character reforming the Medean army accordingly to the ranks of horsemen, archers and spears. This account is deemed dubious, because Herodotus suggests that the Medeans were the first in bringing such organization (Which is refuted by Assyrian military depictions); The Medeans probably were aware of the advantages of a proper military order prior to the ascendancy of Cyaxares.

During the sack of Nineveh, the most vividly portrayed military unit was the chariotry, omitted by Herodotus. But there you have it, a background explaining how this rudimentary basis of organization ended up becoming the staple material of the Iranian military elite. Combining all of them, and you'd get a very versatile force. Add this with an intricate decimal organization down to the very decimal companyof ten men under a junior officer, up to senior grades of a hundred men strong battalion, and a thousand strong division, up to the myriad, the ten-thousand strong baivârâbam (The most famed of the baivarâpatîsh was probably Hydarnes of the Thermopylae fame) and you've got a highly advanced, almost mindbogglingly complicated organization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartan198

From what I've read on the Persian Immortals,they wore very light scale mail armor in the form of a tunic that was about as thick as a playing card.

---

This is probably from what you have heard and seen, rather than read, per se. That is actually taken verbatim from a pretty sub-par documentary on the Spartan stand at the Thermopylae, courtesy of History Channel; Saying that the scales were about as thick as playing cards is to grossly err on the construct of scale-maille and the protective qualities against archery. Against determined spear-thrusts it was of lesser quality, especially when the thrust could easily lock into weak points in the armour. Archery has a low tolerance when it comes to disrupting stored energy, determined continuous thrusts from a high-quality doru however had a higher tolerance.

This is why for instance the barge-pole, or kontos, had such a tremendous effect even against armour when used by heavy cavalry. Against another horseman, armoured in scale, the armour would have been worthless (Instead efforts needed to be concentrated towards altering the course of the strike). Because so much energy would have to be stored, the horseman himself risked the great danger of getting unhorsed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyabedes of Aphrodisias

It was kind of unimpressive...a spear and a wicker shield. I don't know about armor, but I know that much.

---

This is a very trivialized depiction on the Iranian foot elites. Their complex organization would actually beg to differ. Each soldier was given a counter-weighted spear of quality, an acinaces and a bow, marking them as highly versatile troops trained as spearmen, horsemen and archers. Depending on the ranks, where the front ranks would likely have carried the large pavise of wicker, the flanks would carry a smaller but sturdier and embossed shield of the Boeotian figure-eight or dipylon shield, and maintaining a rectangular formation; The center-piece of this formation would consist of a thousand foot kinsmen who carried more elaborate and ceremonial uniforms, and in difference to the "silver-spears" carry spears counter-weighted by golden pomegranates.

In comparison to a heavily armed and armoured hoplite, the ten-thousand strong and the elite-de-elite thousand strong regiment are relatively light in their attire. Excepting cavalry, they did not wear helmets, and the lower body was unprotected. They were equipped for versatility, and would undeniably have been crucial as marksmen, and of high quality as horsemen. They had therefore both offensive and defensive value, as they could assume a wide range of roles in combat. They had an enormous relevance against Asiatic forces.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ibrahim

the Zhayedan (sassanid immprtals) were dammn good-but they were cataphracts, not footsoldiers, like the Anusiya (companians, the persian word for the 5th century BC immortal)

---

Correct, but the Achaemenid precursor regiments also featured a limited, but heavily armed cavalry regiment, which later would extend to the royal Hûvakâ heavy cavalry force. The Sassanian ten-thousand strong heavy cavalry force is named accordingly to Hellenistic naming convention (I should probably say miscalculation), as Zhâyedân is a Middle-Persian cognate to the modern Jâvedân, which means "Immortal"; This is further emphasized by the elite de elite Jân-Âvspa (Or Gyan-Avspa depending on the nomenclature) or "Sacrificers of their lives"; Dr. Farrokh gives his personal addenda "Pêshmêrgâ" or "Pîshmargân" which means "Those Who Are Beyond Death", giving the one-hundred strong unit within the thousand strong "Pushtîghbân" (Royal vanguard) an ecclesiastical appeal to them.

The precursors were likely named Ânûshîyâ, which means "Companions" in its plural form. It is easy to confuse terms because the Old Persian term for 'companion' is very similar to that of 'immortal'; "Ânûsh" is actually designatory of immortality in Middle Persian and does indeed find a basis in an Old-Persian term.

Persian Immortals, ca 510BC

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...vre_AOD487.jpg

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

http://img34.picoodle.com/img/img34/...im_3ef8ac3.jpg

Oh noes, The Almighty Moustache has got something to say... <_<

... Why does it seem like the year of the 4Chan for the EB forums? ... Why?

*dies*

The individual scales of scale armour (and for that matter, lamellae of lamellar) were always kind of thin; this kind of armour didn't work that way. The protective effect came above all from the way they overlapped each other, creating at least double and in some designs triple thickness throughout - and "spaced" at that - over the backing, which usually was at least soft-armour strenght by itself, the way the overlpping metal plates diffuse the force of the blow over a wide area, and the fact this created a smooth, hard surface for blows to glance off of. There were also various ways to further strenghten the individual scales themselves without altering their weight, the most common being the addition of central "rib" or "spine" and embossing (which slightly altered the metallurgical qualities of the scales, and rounded surfaces are all other things being equal stronger).

Generally speaking, a pretty good solid type of defence, as attested to by its very long-lasting and widespread popularity. Compared to most other types of metal armour, simple and quick to make and repair too. Heck, some present-day body armour uses a similar construction scheme albeit with ballistic ceramics...

On the downside, upwards thrusts had a nasty tendency to slip under the scales and hence largely bypass the whole metal layer, although give the very shallow angles of attack involved this kind of attack probably had some trouble delivering a deep injury through the internal bracking. The Romans later devised a way around this - the so-called "locked scale", where each scale is also joined to the one below it, which had the downside of making the armour entirely rigid - and both the Chinese and Medieval Europeans came up with the "reversed scale" coat-of-plates version where the plates are on the inside instead.

That it couldn't really stand up to something like a kontos thrust, nevermind one delivered at charge, isn't really terribly surprising. A strong two-handed thrust with a solid heavy weapon, delivered by a strong man on foot, could potentially go through most Medieval steel plate armour... and the Romans claimed a charging cataphract could transfix two armoured infantrymen at once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

... Why does it seem like the year of the 4Chan for the EB forums? ... Why?

*dies*

---

what TH is this 4chan, and what is the meaning of this sentence? it's the second time i see people quoting this word on the Eb forums, and with a negative acception, is it something misterious? boh, im curious on this sort of forums words, i googled it and all i found is something related to manga, i hadn't the pacience to read it, cause i dont like mangas... so please enlightme.... (just without opening an off-topic discussion)

Replay to post below: there's not wiki.it voice for the word 4chan.
anyway i still haven't understand what is the sense, but it's not important, never mind.

Its one of several rectums of the internet, producing a very large percentage of the world's GDP of wrong and horrible in image macro form.

Why didn't you just go wikipedia it?

Nvm, no more OTness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

... Why does it seem like the year of the 4Chan for the EB forums? ... Why?

*dies*

---

Its because of me and some other people on the "Blame game" thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyabedes of Aphrodisias

It was kind of unimpressive...a spear and a wicker shield. I don't know about armor, but I know that much.

---

WHAT! You mean that a hollywood film was not historicaly acurat? but they would never sacrifice accuracy for entertainment..

The reason why I bring up the suggestion is that if the Hayasdan were indeed the rightful heirs to the Achaemenid throne, then bringing back the Immortals would be in line with their plan to restore as much of the old order as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olaf The Great

Its because of me and some other people on the "Blame game" thread.

---

Are you talking about ME? :curtain:
Obelics, why don't you like manga? It's a wonderful art for the most part.
But if we already discussing 4chan, I have to say that I hate the culture of the place. A lot of stupid people who hate everything. /c/, /u/, /w/ and occasionally /a/ and /jp/ are the only boards I spend time on.

I think we went a little bit off topic...

They would not need to re-instate a disbanded organization, when the Arkah already had a foot-guard, and the organization of infantry guardsmen was declining in favour of heavy cavalry, a transition already planted by the late Achaemenid hegemony; With the Parthian advent, this tradition was made to last throughout the years. The Sassanians claimed themselves to be the "rightful heirs" of the Achaemenids, yet made no attempt to reinstate the old Immortal guard infantry regiment; This tradition was instead further invested in Arsacid chivalry, and with Arsacid succession in Armenia, we would do history a gross injustice with this optimistic counter-factual reasoning.

We must also not forget that the Orontid dynasty formally ended after the Seleucid annexation of Antiochus III Megas; This was water-marked by the future ascendancy of the Artaxiads. Only in pockets of Sophene and Commagene did the Orontid dynasty continue to rule, and in the case of Commagene until the year 72 CE. By then the Greater Armenia was ruled by the cadet Arsacid branch and would continue to do so until the Medieval Marzpanate era in the 5th century CE. By then the entire sector had been thoroughly influenced by Partho-Sassanian military conventions. We find no reason to deviate from the natural course of the events; The Persian reforms for Hayasdan is only a means of cultural and military consolidation accordingly to proven and historically attested models, not a platform for conjectural counter-factual military units.

The Persian Cataphract have you increased your vigilance and redoubled your defenses for the release of the new movie? I hear this will be a factual unflattering treatment and that out of fear the release date will not be provided before hand; it will just happen.

Enlighten me of this new movie, please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badg3r

WHAT! You mean that a hollywood film was not historicaly acurat? but they would never sacrifice accuracy for entertainment..

---

You can't blame them, it is their business after all.

The soon to be 15 min Dutch movie.

Are you talking about the movie made by Theo Van Goth (RIP)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cmacq

The soon to be 15 min Dutch movie.

---

Ah, you mean "Fitna" by Geert Wilders. If the Swedish government manages to dig deep enough to find their own balls in order to show it on the local cinemas, I'll definitely go to see it, but most likely it will not only be banned but also shunned for "offending muslim sensibilities". From what I have heard it will be primarily released on the Internet.

I believe for one that this movie will arbiter the intellectual struggle between religious dogma and freedom of speech. Those who do not want to see it are free to turn their heads away.

Indeed, yet sadly most of humanity remain in the chains of fear that they forge for themselves.

Or realize that "exerting your freedom of speech" by telling a surly-looking bloke in the taxi queue on a Friday night rude things about his mother is, for one, a pretty damn stupid way to do it, for another, rude and boorish, and for a third, just plain picking a fight.

No, I've no particular reserves of sympathy for guys who do that, even if it isn't within the legal rights of the surly blokes to punch them in the nose for it (which they usually do, judging by what I've seen out in town and in the newspapers). I detest holier-than-thou asshats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Persian Cataphract

This is probably from what you have heard and seen, rather than read, per se. That is actually taken verbatim from a pretty sub-par documentary on the Spartan stand at the Thermopylae, courtesy of History Channel...

---

What documentary was that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartan198

What documentary was that?

---

This.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Persian Cataphract

This.

---

Never seen it.

Okay, well, the statement is still featured within, and the purported inefficiency of scale armour is still erronous; This is probably not the first time this misconception has been featured.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Persian Cataphract

This.

---

how is it that documentary? i cant understand a lot of spoken eng.
All i can see from the first 2 segments i saw, are just Buddist Bonzo Spartan young boy who are trained on the Shaolin temple of Ares, by sadomasochistic masters who whip at them all the time... and ah, i was forgetting... all the thing is located on the Planet Venus, as you can see from the deep blue atmosphere, and the hight density gas clouds...

Well, that's exactly what I'm talking about, these sort of things really set the mood for the documentary, for the worse. There's like hard-rock music in the background and a lot of stupid special effects for the suspense, and there is this bunch of scholars in Greek classics or book authors stating the obvious or perpetuating outdated nonsense. It's more of a documentary for fourteen year olds to get that quick C in the history essay than something worthwhile to those who know the historical intricacy down to the minute detail :egypt:

So a quick check-list...

* Label Sardis an Ionian city (When it in fact was capital of Lydia.) - Check
* Omit the historical fact of satrap Mardonius legalizing democracy in his jurisdiction 493 BCE - Check
* Turn the Achaemenids into slayers of democracy - Check
* Worthless speculation on the survival of democracy shall the Persians emerge victorious from the whole conflict - Check
* Omit the mention of fortifications at the site - Check
* Have Steven Pressfield yet again nag about "We will fight in the stupid shade" in a ploy to selling more books - Check
* Turn the Oracle of Delphi into the Ganja Hut - Check
* Turn the Persians into Bedouins - Check

...And there you have it, the cheapening of a great national event and a matter of great pride for the Greeks, at the hands of Classicists who yabber about Western philosophy and civilization in a gross instance trivializing Greek cultural achievement. This was the high moment of the Spartans, and none of their accolade deserves to be diminished with trivial laymen portrayals. The fame of the Spartans could never have materialized without the presence of a prestigious enemy. The Persians were the finest possible choice, but now for all the wrong reasons.

You forgot one:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Run away screaming - big check

All joking aside,though: I know there are individuals here that know more about these things than I do,and I'm more than happy to learn from you all. I love history just as much you guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obelics

how is it that documentary? i cant understand a lot of spoken eng.
All i can see from the first 2 segments i saw, are just Buddist Bonzo Spartan young boy who are trained on the Shaolin temple of Ares, by sadomasochistic masters who whip at them all the time... and ah, i was forgetting... all the thing is located on the Planet Venus, as you can see from the deep blue atmosphere, and the hight density gas clouds...

---

:laugh4: Props for the summary, Obelics. May your wit forever flow as freely. :2thumbsup:

...you're also braver man than me, as I could only stomach about the first one and half minutes of the tacky over-dramatic narration, bad fight scenes and talking-head BS. Ugh. :skull:

Also, the comments under it... :dizzy2: ...now that's something else too. Is YouTube commentary always like that ? For some reason "donorleone" sounds rather familiar in both name and tone...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

Also, the comments under it... :dizzy2: ...now that's something else too. Is YouTube commentary always like that ?

---

Unfortunately,yes. But I do hope the two comments that I (SpartanGlory1983) left are excluded from that statement,as I was speaking from a real world,historically-oriented context.
Believe me,I've made the mistake of getting into pointless arguements on there before,and for that I rarely post anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

For some reason "donorleone" sounds rather familiar in both name and tone...

---

That's strange,because I got that same feeling,too...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartan198

Unfortunately,yes. But I do hope the two comments I (SpartanGlory1983) left are excluded from that statement,as I was speaking from a real world,historically-oriented frame of mind.

---

No names were mentioned. Anyway, just goes to show - the entry requirements of Internet amount to a computer and the rudimentary literacy needed to deal with the interface...

Quote:

---

That's strange,because I got that feeling too...

---

Wonder why ? No, must be a coincindence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

No names were mentioned.

---

That's a relief.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

Anyway, just goes to show - the entry requirements of Internet amount to a computer and the rudimentary literacy needed to deal with the interface...

---

If only You Tube had moderators even remotely near the quality of those here on the .Org and over at TWcenter.
Edit: And a majority of intelligent users for them to moderate. I once ran upon a certain individual who claimed to be a university-educated expert on Classical Greek warfare,yet he had no clue what a Sloped Theban Phalanx was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

Wonder why ? No, must be a coincindence.

---

Yeah,maybe. But,still,it's difficult to pass off a gut feeling like that.
Amazing how it's possible for individuals who constantly interact through text to recognize eachother through the words we type. :book:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartan198

That's a relief.
Edit: And a majority of intelligent users for them to moderate. I once ran upon a certain individual who claimed to be a university-educated expert on Classical Greek warfare,yet he had no clue what a Sloped Theban Phalanx was.

---

Sounds strangely familiar...

Dude, the less you read Youtube comments, the more human you are.

Smartest thing I've heard all day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Dude, the less you read Youtube comments, the more human you are.

---

Yeah,that became obvious long ago.

where's discovery civilizations when ya need them?! H.channel sucks at history-the sadest thing on earth...:no: :no: :shame:
@P.cataphract: I had no clue about the cav. squadron-thanks!

Meh, they're trying to turn History Channel into a brand like they did with Discovery Channel every since they got super ratings form the original Walking With Dinosaurs.

As my English Teacher once said, this sort of thing could be summed up as 'intellectual pornography' since you're getting the quick instant gratifications of abbreviated knowledge rather than the actual substance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Persian Cataphract

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

http://img34.picoodle.com/img/img34/...im_3ef8ac3.jpg

Oh noes, The Almighty Moustache has got something to say... <_<

---

You just killed me with laughter. Seriously.

It kind of reminds me of this:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

https://i230.photobucket.com/albums/...nvis350449.jpg

Now, I'm running a forum game based on EB.

One of the factions ( AS, Ptolemies, Bactria) is attempting to remake the Persian immortals (to honor the Persian part of his society).
What sort of armor did they have, and what would be a likely reaction from the Greek part of there society.

Lol at pwn pic, though shouldn't that be one of those Byzantine little X on a stick crosses?

It appears to be based on some 1800s Romanticist work. Do yourself a favour and don't expect much any accuracy out of those - they were the prime purveyors of horned and winged Viking helmets and batwing axes after all... :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alatar

What sort of armor did they have, and what would be a likely reaction from the Greek part of there society.

---

Scale. (...did you actually read the thread...? :inquisitive:) Of the three realms mentioned though, the AS would seem like the only credible candidate for such a hypothetical project - being, after all, functionally the direct successor state of the old Achaemenid empire (although the Yervandunis up in the Caucasus might want to dispute that at lance-point...); hard to see what connection and interest the Ptolemies and Bactrians, based on quite different subject peoples and traditions, would have in such a specifically Persian institution.

Also, the Hellenes probably wouldn't whine any less than back when Alex started letting Iranians into the ranks of the Hetairoi...

Yeah, I read the thread but it descended into a sort of rabble.
Just wanted confirmation.

And the reason I said all the options was that the state in question wishes to remain secret.

Gentlemen, before we tread out too far out into an enchanting, though conjectural discussion on reinstating an Achaemenid regal institution, we must remember that in those ranks, the regiments consisted of soldiers descended from high nobility and in some cases even royalty, and they were exclusively drafted from Medeans and Persians (Some have recently begun to put Elamites into the addendum, but I would need to investigate this first before I am convinced). So, we have some sort of a parameter of pedigree forming a significant criterion. The Seleucids, were, more than usually of both Iranic and Hellenic blood (More so than Iranology usually admits; The Seleucids are something of a topic ridden with dogma in these circles), even though they championed Hellenism.

Not even the Vâzarangîg or Kamnaskirid/Ganzebrânâ frâtarâkân/clients of Persis or Elymaïs reinstated such a regiment, let alone the Atropatid dynasty of Atropatene; Instead the latter move towards a recorded force of heavy cavalry, apparently quite famed, though Antiochus III Megas had subdued them without a fight. The Atropatid kings were almost spun in legend as "invincible" and as "protectors of the Good Religion" (Zoroastrianism); To such degree that the Sassanians call Atropates "marzpêndân" or "protector of the faith". This means that even though the Seleucids or the Arvandîg/Yervanduni of Armenia could call upon themselves such a claim, in Iranian sensibility, the Medean dynasty of Atropatene were in the finest position, with the frâtarâkân of Elymaïs and Persis following up. Another fine candidate would have been the Gashnâsp of Tapuria.

None of them attempted to resurrect the institution; To the contrary, the Achaemenids, as previously mentioned planted the seeds for a royal cavalry squadron, and this was cultivated long before the Parthian advent; By the time of the Parthian succession, the equestrian traditions of Iran had been cemented and provided the backbone to the succeeding Sassanians; They reinstated the old institution, though probably with abrogated name causing problems in the nomenclature, but entirely as super-heavy cavalry of baivarâbâm/gund size.

Just a quick sidenote:

From what I've read the Seleukid Argyraspides or 'Silver Shield Corps' numbered around 10.000 men at all times.

Coincidence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krusader

Just a quick sidenote:

From what I've read the Seleukid Argyraspides or 'Silver Shield Corps' numbered around 10.000 men at all times.

Coincidence?

---

No, not at all, in fact this is a most excellent point emphasizing why there was no need to reinstate the old Achaemenid institution; The Seleucid corps came to partially adopt the otherwise very Iranian decimal organization, while retaining the proportions of the ile/ilai for cavalry (squadrons), and the Graeco-Macedonian "plate" for the phalangites. The Silver Shields were infantry elites, very closely attached to the Seleucid Basileus, but at the same time the Hetairoi, and the later Agema and particularly the latter consisted substantially of Iranians, if not outrightly predominantly. We find it very notorious that Elymaïs and Persis initially sided with the Seleucids during the great Parthian invasion by Mithradates I The Philhellene and his successor Phraates II. This of course is paired with the dominant equestrian culture of Medea and Atropatene which was a first-hand source of the heavy cavalry corpus of the Seleucids; The Nisaean pastures as we usually call it. Upon the Parthian capture of Medea and the reconquista of Medea after the battle of Ecbatana, was probably to the detriment of the "frâtarâkâ" clients.

Having a figure of ten-thousand foot elites means not only a highly capable reserve of significant size, but with many Iranian officers in the ranks, working with a gund or baivarâbâm-size force was probably a significant tactical feature. It would certainly be more friendly to native auxiliaries who more or less retained the decimal structure of their forces, especially archers. Allowing the diverse forces to retain their own features and tactical uniqueness is quite Achaemenid in philosophy, but this philosophy was never broken during the Seleucid succession; Galatian warriors, Iranic cavalry and archery, Steppen light horse, Thracians, Anatolian light infantry, Chaldean auxiliaries, Idumaeans... This is not a uniform military force. In fact, the Seleucids inherited a vast spectra, but also inherited its problems. Ten thousand strong body of royal guardsmen seems to be quite the magic number, and would beg to be unique to the dynasties that have ruled the Greater Iran; The Sassanids would themselves sponsor such a guard, but turned them into cavalry.

Being a Shâh of such a vast area calls for the loyalty of kinsmen, and ten thousand of them would deter any separate force to make any move; The Achaemenids seemed to be rather successful, where conflicts and revolt would become the staple when the King of Kings was campaigning. The great exception of course was the revolt of Cyrus The Younger, but it seems to be an exception to the rule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Meh, they're trying to turn History Channel into a brand like they did with Discovery Channel every since they got super ratings form the original Walking With Dinosaurs.

As my English Teacher once said, this sort of thing could be summed up as 'intellectual pornography' since you're getting the quick instant gratifications of abbreviated knowledge rather than the actual substance.

---

indeed...you heard of the History channel's "history of sex"? now that's "intellectual pornography"
no wonder the current generation is so messed up educationally in the state of Texas
@ persian cataphract: don't forget: Sparta and Athens were bitter rivals in 480BC? I thought that was afterwords..I dunno I could be wrong. can some one knowlegeble explain?
and why is hoplon mentioned? it's an Aspis!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ibrahim

why is hoplon mentioned? it's an Aspis!!!!!!!!!!!!

---

'Hoplon' has been mistakenly but continuously used to describe specifically the hoplite aspis,when the word was actually,I think,pretty generic for 'weapon'.

Wasn't it more like "arms", ie. the whole pile of weapons and armour ?

Its basically panapoly + weapons right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Persian Cataphract

Ah, you mean "Fitna" by Geert Wilders. If the Swedish government manages to dig deep enough to find their own balls in order to show it on the local cinemas, I'll definitely go to see it, but most likely it will not only be banned but also shunned for "offending muslim sensibilities". From what I have heard it will be primarily released on the Internet.

I believe for one that this movie will arbiter the intellectual struggle between religious dogma and freedom of speech. Those who do not want to see it are free to turn their heads away.

---

Yes, Fitna. Yet, I see those that ride over the herd may try a stampede instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cmacq

Yes, Fitna. Yet, I see those that ride over the herd may try a stampede instead.

---

actually you're right; that would cause just such a thing. some people will indeed want to cause an uproar; theo van gogh did that, but look at what happened to him

Ibrahim as you say, but what do you know about Invasio Barbarorum?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

Wasn't it more like "arms", ie. the whole pile of weapons and armour ?

---

Could be one or the other,I'm not sure. Could even be both at the same time. It's been mentioned elsewhere here in the EB forum that the ancient Greeks had multiple words for any one thing,often used in different contexts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartan198

'Hoplon' has been mistakenly but continuously used to describe specifically the hoplite aspis,when the word was actually,I think,pretty generic for 'weapon'.

---

Actually hoplo means "weapon" in modern Greek. When I was young I thought that hoplites meant "armed people" before I learned that hoplon was the hoplite's shield

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cmacq

Ibrahim as you say, but what do you know about Invasio Barbarorum?

---

plenty, afterall i do have 3 versions of it ( IBFD, Rio's IBFD (v7.0), and I. Julianorum)
~;) ~;) ~;)
I can even send you a few screenshots to compare :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Please, by all means do.

when I come home in about 4 hrs (I'm in the college, on their computer)-just wait:laugh4:
*my laptop is at home-needs to stay at home* :embarassed:

Hi! I'm, back-sorry for lateness-the internet at home is a pain:furious3: :furious3: :furious3:
just wait cmaq..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cmacq

You may want to check the city of the Persi?

http://itchy-wheels.exploder.org/ima...g2_itemId=1281

---

@ Cmacq. Are these your photos? I have many questions if they are...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Disciple of Tacitus

@ Cmacq. Are these your photos? I have many questions if they are...

---

No, but what are the questions?