Slitherine

With the release of the new FOG Empires DLC featuring the Persian Empire, I noticed in the notes that the Persian empire should be seen as a joint Persian and Median dynasty. The FOG2 notes on the Persians also state that the Median Empire was transformed into the Persian Empire.

So I started wondering why the Achaemenid Persian FOG2 army list does not include any Median spearmen. Prior to the conquest of the Medians, the Achaemenid Persians can ally with the Medians and makes an interesting army. But after the conquest of Media in 550BC, the Persians no longer have access to the Median spearmen. It seems logical that the Persians would call up native troops when forming their armies with the native Median regions continuing to contribute their standard mass troop type of MI spearmen. I am no expert at all on this period but I am curious as to why the Achaemenid Persians wouldn't have Median spearmen within their army list after the conversion of the Median empire into the Persian empire?

The assumption is that the Median units were converted to the Sparabara system. Herodotus make no distinction between the armament of Persian and Median units in the armies that invaded Greece.

Also the armament of the pre-Achaemenid Median army is highly speculative, as the evidence for the armament of the Median army is singularly lacking. The army list is based largely on a single remark that their spearmen and archers used to fight mixed together, but subsequently changed to being organised into separate units of spearmen and archers.

So we have evidence for Median units being the same as Persian units in 490 BC, and we have no direct evidence for their armament in 550 BC, let alone between 550 and 490 BC.

With that to go on, we assume that they would be converted to the Persian sparabara system fairly rapidly after their incorporation into the Empire of the Medes and Persians.

Ok that makes sense. Now I wonder why the unusual Sparabara formation developed in the first place.

I am trying to visualize this. So I assume if a Sparabara type unit decided to attack and melee, a thin line of spearmen would push forward while the bowmen would simply hang back. Almost like a firefight with bows until one side or the other wavers and then a quick charge to make them run? What if massed infantry didn't run or bows were ineffective?

During the Crusades, the crusader armies also created mixed spear and crossbow formations. Were they ever intended or used to charge into contact or primarily used as a bow formation with enough defensive spearmen for protection against cavalry.

It feels as if the Sparabara type unit is primarily a bow unit with very little melee capability vs infantry. So I am wondering how did the Persians deal with the Spartans at Thermopylae? Was the actual melee assaults done by specially formed spear units with the depth to melee? At some point, they had to have troops capable of fighting it out with massed infantry.

Thinking out loud and just wondering.

Not sure about Thermopylae, but no doubt Herodotos would tell you. At Plataea the Spartans charged the static sparabara line.

Jagger2002 wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 5:41 pm Ok that makes sense. Now I wonder why the unusual Sparabara formation developed in the first place.

It’s a good way to maximise bow power without leaving the archers defenceless. Later Chinese armies used similar formations.

Actually I have some time and started going through Xenophon's description of the Cyrus Lydian campaign. Very interesting. I noticed that the Persians used heavy chariots at Thymbra.

If anyone is interested, here is the link: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 3Abook%3D1

Xenophon references 30,000 Persians composed of 10,000 targeteers, 10,000 bows and 10,000 slingers supporting the Medes. Anybody know if the targeteers are sword and shield men? I think they are as in another section he describes men armed with shield and sword or scimitar. I am guessing they are melee support of the bow and slingers.

And here is another reference to Lancers.

"And they say that Artacamas, the king of Greater Phrygia, is coming at the head of 8000 horse and not fewer than 40,000 lancers and peltasts."

Since the lancers are not horse, they must be spears.

Jagger2002 wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 6:53 pm Actually I have some time and started going through Xenophon's description of the Cyrus Lydian campaign. Very interesting. I noticed that the Persians used heavy chariots at Thymbra.

If anyone is interested, here is the link: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 3Abook%3D1

Xenophon's Cyropaedia is generally considered to be a historical novel, so don't take the details too seriously.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyropaedia

I was wondering how he managed to record word for word the many long conversations. Actually a pretty good novel. So maybe I need to look up Herodotos.

Jagger2002 wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 8:43 pm I was wondering how he managed to record word for word the many long conversations. Actually a pretty good novel. So maybe I need to look up Herodotos.

My strongest recommendation is to get hold of a copy of

The Achaemenid Persian Army by Duncan Head. Montvert 1992

as it shows a lot of the contemporary pictorial evidence as well as discussing the textual evidence.

Jagger2002 wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 7:44 pm And here is another reference to Lancers.

"And they say that Artacamas, the king of Greater Phrygia, is coming at the head of 8000 horse and not fewer than 40,000 lancers and peltasts."

Since the lancers are not horse, they must be spears.

We know that the Chalybians were armed with pikes, Maybe these 'lancers' were as well? Chalybia is just next to Phrygia, after all.

The Achaemenid Persian Army by Duncan Head. Montvert 1992

Thanks! On my wish list.