Traditional persian archery?
- 主题发起人 Ludial
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
You might find it helpful to try looking up Indian archery. I understand there was a fair exchange of ideas between the two (in fact I know I've seen Indian archers referenced as fighting in the Persian style, though I'm buggered if I can remember where it was now).
Ludial
Knight at Arms
excuse me? we're talking about a huge empire with a myriad of nations comprising it.Allegro 说:
I think the most infamous were the Persian Kataphraktoi and archers(they're also the ones depicted the most on different artworks of the time)
The reason I'm interested in Persian archery is because I heard they used a kind of particularly powerful early composite bows(I'd guess comparable to the war bows in the game)
Hietala
Grandmaster Knight
well, archery is an interesting subject in medieval history of warfare. But about the persians, as well said, i think they actually did count basely on numbers. If they had an army of 100000 men vs 10000 let's say egyptians, they wouldn't mind if they had kataphracts, parthian horse archers, scythians, indian archers, kung fu immortals straight from hollywood...Ludial 说:yep, that interests me tooHietala 说:looking at the korean bow, it seems like the perfect balance between power and compact size.
you're right on the point that they had a big well functioning empire expanding over many cultures, so they had many choice in their troop selection, and since they didn't had that much scary enemies at their borders, their units didn't had to be the best armoured/well trained. Why have one heavily armoured and well trained kataphract that costs you 200 denars a month while you can have 5 semi well trained spearmen with some leather armor that costs you about the half of that kataphract?
Ludial
Knight at Arms
point. but such a huge empire would still need its elite crack troops. since those five poorly trained and equipped spearmen are not necessarily loyal, you still need some very dangerous and utterly loyal troops to defend you and your interests(including protect you from said spearmen).Hietala 说:well, archery is an interesting subject in medieval history of warfare. But about the persians, as well said, i think they actually did count basely on numbers. If they had an army of 100000 men vs 10000 let's say egyptians, they wouldn't mind if they had kataphracts, parthian horse archers, scythians, indian archers, kung fu immortals straight from hollywood...Ludial 说:yep, that interests me tooHietala 说:
you're right on the point that they had a big well functioning empire expanding over many cultures, so they had many choice in their troop selection, and since they didn't had that much scary enemies at their borders, their units didn't had to be the best armoured/well trained. Why have one heavily armoured and well trained kataphract that costs you 200 denars a month while you can have 5 semi well trained spearmen with some leather armor that costs you about the half of that kataphract?
So I can imagine that expert archers, especially horse ones, were quite a valuable and feared kind of soldier.
Hietala
Grandmaster Knight
pointLudial 说:point. but such a huge empire would still need its elite crack troops. since those five poorly trained and equipped spearmen are not necessarily loyal, you still need some very dangerous and utterly loyal troops to defend you and your interests(including protect you from said spearmen).Hietala 说:well, archery is an interesting subject in medieval history of warfare. But about the persians, as well said, i think they actually did count basely on numbers. If they had an army of 100000 men vs 10000 let's say egyptians, they wouldn't mind if they had kataphracts, parthian horse archers, scythians, indian archers, kung fu immortals straight from hollywood...Ludial 说:yep, that interests me tooHietala 说:
you're right on the point that they had a big well functioning empire expanding over many cultures, so they had many choice in their troop selection, and since they didn't had that much scary enemies at their borders, their units didn't had to be the best armoured/well trained. Why have one heavily armoured and well trained kataphract that costs you 200 denars a month while you can have 5 semi well trained spearmen with some leather armor that costs you about the half of that kataphract?
So I can imagine that expert archers, especially horse ones, were quite a valuable and feared kind of soldier.
ofcourse for yourself you would like a bodyguard of 10000 elite troops, but since the empire hasn't got much competent enemies, numbers will do the trick, but since these low class troops are only fighting for the money, you will need some elite fighters to protect you when they go striking and start some revolt
Ash_Mantle
Veteran
Have you looked up anything related to the campaigns of Alexander the great - he did conquer persians, after all - or perhaps something those ink-stained Greeks wrote about Persian military power and methodology? Might give you a new keyword to stick in your google (Stick that in your google! I have found a new forumwarcry XD).
Merlkir
Allegro 说:
hoho, I missed this. You're a retard. Shut the **** up if your only source of information is 300 the movie..
edit: on the topic of archery, seems to me the guy in Aqtai's article is using the eastern thumb-draw...
Merlkir
Allegro 说:
yeah, good job showing us how retarded you really are. My English is just fine, probably much better than yours, inbred pigspawn..
Its not your English its your communication skills. Thinking that Persians relied on quantity isnt something like denying gravity so you cant go pms and call someone retard or tell them to shut the **** up over it. If you are gonna keep swearing I can and will do that much better than you mister angry history nerd.
And your mom sucks sweaty Iranian ****.
And your mom sucks sweaty Iranian ****.
Merlkir
Allegro 说:
ech, at least I'm mostly insulting you and not your mother. Seriously, what's with that?!
As for your "idea" about Persians, if you post something this silly, don't be surprised when someone flames you. Maybe next time when you don't know all that much about something, don't post. Or suggest that your opinion might be wrong.
Archonsod 说:Why don't you both shut the **** up. Bloody foreigners
oh, shush you white western devil.
Opinions are not facts, by stating alone that something is your opinion you accept that you dont claim its something unshakably true. And no, what i said was not unbelievably silly nor surprising. From what I know Persians werent famous for their warfare tactics and innovations and I think they(except Sassanids and Parthians) had the worst military among the nations that set foot on Middle East. So if you wish to object please do so without flaming and provide knowledge if you can.Merlkir 说:
Merlkir
Yeah, sure. They just built that empire using their superior toothbrushing technique, it had nothing to do with military skill. And the Immortals were a bunch of pussies wearing women dresses.
No, not really.
Also, why exactly are you excluding the Sassanids and Parthians? So just the achaemenids were ****?
Oh yeah..roman legions sucked ass! Look at Varus, he got beat up so baaaad in Teutoburg forest, even naked Germans kicked their asses easily, Romans must've been such weaklings!
No, not really.
Also, why exactly are you excluding the Sassanids and Parthians? So just the achaemenids were ****?
Oh yeah..roman legions sucked ass! Look at Varus, he got beat up so baaaad in Teutoburg forest, even naked Germans kicked their asses easily, Romans must've been such weaklings!
