The Immortal

“They have served the dark will of Persian kings for five hundred years.  Eyes as dark as night... teeth filed to fangs... soulless.  The personal guard to King Xerxes himself: the Persian warrior elite.  The deadliest fighting force in all of Asia... the Immortals.”

-         David Wenham (Dilios in 300)

            Well, not quite, actually the name Immortals…

            No, not this either, the name Immortals comes from a mistranslation of the word Anûšiya ('companions') with Anauša ('Immortals') by the Greek historian Herodotus.  The "Immortals", "Ten Thousand Immortals", or "Persian Immortals" were said to be an elite force of soldiers who fought for the Achaemenid Empire.  This force performed the dual roles of both Imperial Guard and standing army during the Persian Empire's expansion and during the Greco-Persian Wars.

The Immortals were described as being heavy infantry led by Hydarnes that were kept constantly at a contingent of exactly 10,000 men.  Herodotus claimed that the unit's name stemmed from the custom that every killed, seriously wounded or sick member was immediately replaced with a new one, maintaining the cohesion of the unit.  This procedure, coupled with the mystery of an unknown culture could have given rise to the belief that the Immortals were truly incapable of being killed.

Aha, now that is more like it!  Herodotus describes the Immortals being armed with wicker shields, short spears, swords (or large daggers), with bow and arrows.  This would seem to indicate that the Immortals were expected to be able to adapt to various military situations, such as long-range against cavalry, medium range against spear-wielding infantry, and short range against swordsmen.  Their shields could also protect them from enemy arrows.

Unfortunately, wicker shields offer little to no protection against weapons of iron or bronze, which caused more than a few problems at the Battle of Thermopylae.

Underneath their robes they wore scale armor coats. The spear counterbalances of the common soldiers were of silver, and higher ranks used spears capped with golden ends.  A caravan of covered carriages, camels, and mules, followed the regiment and transported their supplies; concubines, attendants, and special food that was reserved only for their consumption.  This conjures forth the image of a truly decadent and prosperous army to the enemies of the Persians, and creates an immediate desire to enter the ranks of the Immortals in the ranks of common soldiers.

The headdress worn by the Immortals is believed to have been the Persian tiara, but the actual form is uncertain, as some sources describe it as a cloth or felt cap.  A cloth hood could be pulled over the face to keep out dust in the arid Persian plains, which admittedly would be useful in that climate.  Surviving stone carvings represent the Immortals as wearing elaborate robes and gold jewelry, though these garments and accessories were most likely worn only for ceremonial occasions.

            From their armaments, their support, and their strict attention to cohesion, the Persian Immortals seem a force and display of wealth to demoralize enemies.  They were soldiers, but with the aid of superstition and vast numbers, the enemies of the Persians would need great courage to continue fighting a line of guards seemingly without end.

On a minor note, the previous post on the Viking Berserker was difficult to read because of a technical issue, which I do not understand.  When I previewed the page, the text was supposed to be white on a dark gray background.

  

References:

The above are promotional images for the 300 and Immortals motion pictures

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immortals_(Persian_Empire)

http://ancientiran.blogspot.com/2006/02/persian-immortal-army.html

http://www.livius.org/ia-in/immortals/immortals.html

Viking Berserker

Cattle die
kinsmen die
all men are mortal.
Words of praise
will never perish
nor a noble name.

- The Havamal or Book of Viking Wisdom

This entry will focus on the weapons and armor of a warrior so fierce, all of Europe once called them Demons.  The Viking Berserkers, who are the origin of the term berserk, were to have fought in a nearly uncontrollable, trance-like fury.  Due to this seemingly inhuman rage, intimidating fighting style, and proclivity for sea raids, the Vikings have been romanticized the world over.

Some believe that berserkers worked themselves into a rage before battle, while others think that they might have consumed drugged foods.  I remember reading about a Norse maiden boiling moss to create a broth for warriors that would “Give them the strength of the bear”.  Whether or not this story was accurate, one of the distinguishing characteristics of the berserkers was their use of bearskins and skulls in their attire.

 So the first weapon I will submit as part of the Viking arsenal was fear.  Striking from the mists up and down the coasts of Europe and Scandinavia, wearing the faces of fierce creatures, and looting churches, made the Berserkers more than men in the minds of their adversaries, they were terrifying creatures from the depths of Hell.

The second weapon, if you will, was the longship, or “dragonship” as the English called them.  While not techncially a ship designed for naval combat, it was light, fast, and shallow enough to sail and beach just about anywhere, giving the Vikings the ability to explore and conquer.

The first physical instrument of Viking warfare was the reliable… the classic… Spear!  The spear consisted of a metal head which could measure between twenty and sixty centimetres, which was mounted on wooden shafts of two to three metres in length. The barbed throwing spears were often less decorated than the ostentatious thrusting spears, as the throwing spears were often lost in battle.  Most evidence indicates that spears were used with one hand, and that warriors would remove the head of the spear to prevent a foe from re-using the weapon.

The second standby of the Viking Berserker was the sword, which was a modification of the Roman spatha, evolving into what most of us would recognize as the classical knightly sword in the 11th century.  Blade length varied from 28 to 33 inches, and posessed a single wide fuller, and later on, multiple narrow fullers.  Fullers are the indentations down the length of the blade, and were used to increase the strength of the sword while reducing its weight, which would allow the wielder to swing faster with more powerful strokes.

The last of the Viking melee weapons mentioned here is the axe, the same tool used for chopping wood.  These axes could also be thrown or swung with head-splitting force, and depending on the design, could be wielded with one or both hands.  An axe head was mostly wrought iron, with a steel cutting edge. This made the weapon less expensive than a sword, and was a standard item produced by blacksmiths, making them highly accessible to most Vikings.  There is some debate as to whether or not the axe was more common than the spear, but this is difficult to tell because of the ease of training with the spear as a hunting implement and the availability of the axe for logging.

The chainmail shirt is interpreted as elbow-and-knee length, from the single specimen recovered from Ringerike in central Norway.  It was likely worn over thick clothing, and protects the wearer from being cut, but offers little protection from blunt trauma. Mail was very expensive in early medieval Europe, and would likely have been worn by men of status and wealth.  Expensive mail armour was also seen as cumbersome and uncomfortable in battle. Traditionally, Vikings have been thought to have opted for leather body armour, as it was both more flexible and cheaper. However, there is no archeological evidence to support this.

The shield was the most common means of defence, as it was cheaper to produce than full armor. The Viking epic sagas specifically mention linden wood for shield construction, although finds from graves show mostly other timbers, such as fir, alder and poplar. These timbers are not very dense making them light and easy to manuever.  They are also not inclined to split making them very durable and reliable for more than one battle.  Round shields seem to have varied in size from around 18 to 48 inches, but those ranging from 30 to 36 inches are the most common.

References:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berserker
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_Age_arms_and_armor
http://genes.mit.edu/burgelab/vikingquotes.htm

Egyptian Chariot Archer

By 3000 B.C. the art of Egypt was so ripe and so far advanced that it is surprising to find any student of early culture proposing that the crude contemporary art of the early Babylonians is the product of a civilization earlier than that of the Nile.

-James H. Breasted

This third blog will center on a warrior from the past, who is instantly recognizable the world over, even though their armaments and tactics were taken from the very cultures that beset Egypt in ancient times.

When one thinks of the ancient Egyptians, they immediately call to mind the Pyramids at Giza, the Sphinx, the temple of Ramses at Abu Simbel, and usually, this image…

Which is interesting, because the Egyptians did not invent the chariot, they observed, defeated, and recreated it from their conflicts with the Hyksos invaders in the 16th century BC.  The chariot comes from 3000 BC in Mesopotamia, as an adaptation of the eariliest form of wheeled vehicle.  The four best specimens of Egyptian chariots are those recovered from the tomb of Tutankhamun.

Other cultures and civilizations made use of the chariot in ancient times, but due to the rocky terrain in Europe and Asia, it was used more as a vehicle of royalty or sport instead of warfare.  The fact that it was also an prone to structural failures probably further limited its military use outside of the fertile crescent.

We can infer that the ancient chariots were also somewhat unstable due to their single axel, and considering this, along with the vast number of images depicting chariot archers, that their tactical use was simple, but effective.  If a large enough number of chariots armed with archers were able to ride towards a target enemy formation of foot-soldiers or cavalry, the archers would simultaneously fire toward the enemy formation in an arching pattern, thereby increasing the likelyhood of an arrow stiking home.

If the archers were unable to halt the advance of opposing foot-soldiers, the horses could simply trample them, and if the opponents were riding horses, the charioteers would likely have been able to outrun enemy cavalry briefly, allowing the archer a closer shot.  The Battle of Kadesh has been theorized to have been the largest chariot battle in history, with some 5000 or 6000 chariots participating.

The Egyptian longbow, also known as the angular bow, was the primary reason behind the success of the chariot in Egypt.  After all, you cannot have an archer, without a bow.  The following is a video on the construction and power of the angular bow.

Egyptian arrows, which have been recovered in large numbers, and often in a very good condition, are very intriguing. They were usually about 0.35-0.5 ounces, between 30 and 33 inches long, and made of a slender reed giving a large deflection.  The ability of the arrows to make deep and lethal wounds is vouched for in several tests, and is believed since they remained the standard equipment of the Egyptian army for several centuries.  Although some suggest that since the arrows were so light, and the bows not quite as powerful as those found today, that the reason behind the chariot archers’ destructive force, was the skill of the archer in shot placement.  Considering the strain of the bow, the instability of the moving chariot, and the unpredictable movement of the enemy, I would consider the Egyptian chariot archer quite skillful indeed.

References

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariotry_in_ancient_Egypt

http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/weapons/

http://margo.student.utwente.nl/sagi/artikel/egyptian/egyptian.html