Achaemenian reenactment

[Pharnabazos]

Hello,

Ingenious source for the cloth! What period are you aiming for?

A period as broad as possible (500-330), although more specifically the time of Artaxerxes II. 404-359

Is there something in the Takabara impression that I need to take care regarding the period?

I'm not sure if the shield should be so small and concave.

Yes, I thought about that, too. It is my first attempt at a shield.
It's experimental, and I will definitely make a larger (and rounder) one.

There is also a discussion recently that Achaemenid leggings were probably hose (with two separate legs) rather than trousers (with the legs joined together) based on the reliefs at Susa and pictures of tribute-bearers at Persepolis.

I am aware of that speculation, however until I made the long underpants, I will stick with trousers for comforts sake.
Separating the legs will be no problem.

All the Achaemenid metal body armour I know of is scale not lamellar ie. the scales were attached to the backing but not to each other. There are good drawings of surviving scales in Erik Schmidt's book on the excavations at Persepolis. The cut of the armour is either tube-and-yoke or hard to tell. A distinctive feature is the very tall guard for the back of the neck, especially on the armours which don't look like tube-and-yokes.

Thanks for this most helpful information. Do you have a link or images of Achaemenid armor? I searched this forum for the Persepolis scales, but so far I found nothing.

Thanks a lot for helping improve my efforts.

[Sean Manning]

You can download Schmidt's books (OIP 68, 69, and 70) from the Oriental Institute at https://oi.uchicago.edu/research/pubs/c ... ersia.html . Look for pictures of seals (several seal impressions show armoured warriors fighting) and the fragments of armour found in the treasury. The volume on the treasury (OIP 69) has most of these.

I'm 99% complete a reconstruction of a scale armour, but I need to add a leather edging and take photos. I posted my progress at the Bronze Age Center.

A British Museum publication, "Forgotten Empire: The World of Ancient Persia" has excellent colour photos of fragments of glazed brick reliefs from Susa. Lots of the fragments show feet and ankles, so they are good if you ever want to make a pair of Persian shoes. And there are a few more seals with warriors published there too.

You could also look up a sarcophaus from Canakkale in Turkey which shows an armoured cavalryman riding down some takabara. I don't have a link handy, but there were photos posted on this forum.

[Ron Andrea]

Please post photos of the completed scale armor here.

[hoplite14gr]

The "Hetairoi" have really done great advances in Persian re-enactment.
Enjoy
http://picasaweb.google.com/11485221884 ... 0236241842
http://picasaweb.google.com/Nitzi79/Gri ... 2594601426
http://picasaweb.google.com/Nitzi79/Gri ... 9036874962

[Dan D'Silva]

It's recently occurred to me to ask... don't know why not sooner... um, does anyone know the primary sources for the words sparabara and takabara? They look like transliterations from Old Persian, but I can't find any references to what inscriptions identify them. (Only database I have is Google Books an' it's kind of a blunt instrument.)

[Sean Manning]

Ron, I just moved to grad school and don't have a photo of the armour handy but will post one when I can. I was hoping to add the edging first but events got in the way ... leatherworking is a seperate process and I never figured out the best way to get working on it.

It's recently occurred to me to ask... don't know why not sooner... um, does anyone know the primary sources for the words sparabara and takabara? They look like transliterations from Old Persian, but I can't find any references to what inscriptions identify them. (Only database I have is Google Books an' it's kind of a blunt instrument.)

I think there is no primary source, but Greek lexicons say spara is a Persian word for the Greek gerrha (woven shield) and taka is used in the Behistun inscription and seems to mean "small shield" (or a Macedonian sunhat!) So careful writers will write *takabara and *sparabara with the asterisk meaning "this word is not attested, but we think it was in the language." Several of the Persian words for units and officers which people throw around come from the same source.

I think the words were first suggested in Nicholas Sekunda, “Achaemenid Military Terminology.” Archaeologische Mitteilungen Aus Iran 21 (1988) pp. 69-77. But my copy is in a different province right now, so I can't check.

[Paul Elliott]

A couple of years ago I started carrying out research to create an impression for this period, wanting to focus on the 5th century rather than the 4th. But other things got in the way, I got distracted and nothing came of it. So it is a real treat to see these reconstructions. Fabulous work! I'm very jealous! D

[Wringher]

Unlike Sean, I am lucky to have the necessary books and articles at hand. This is my first post on RAT, so I hope that I format this properly. Takabara is a known Old Persian word, so an asterisk is inappropriate. Takabara appears in DNa 29, DSm 10-11, and A?P 26. Neither takabara nor taka appear in the Behistun inscription. All of this is from "Old Persian: Grammar, Texts, Lexicon" (1953) by Roland G. Kent.

DNa 29 is line 29 of inscription "a" at Naqš-i-Rustam by Darius I.
DSm 10-11 is line 10 of inscription "m" at Susa by Darius I.
In both of these inscriptions, Darius lists the lands subject to him including Yauna Takabara. Both of the words have long marks over the final "a" indicating that these are plural words thusly: Yaun? Takabar?. I don't know if that will appear correctly on this board. Kent translates Yauna Takabara as "petasos-wearing Ionians". The Greek word petasos means "broad-brimmed hat". The Old Persian suffix -bara is found in several Old Persian words and means "bearing or wearing".

A?P 26 is line 26 of an inscription at Persepolis thought to be by either Artaxerxes II or III.
It says "iyam Yauna takabara" which Kent translates at "This is the Petasos-Wearing Ionian.".
This caption is attached to a relief carving of the Yauna Takabara throne-bearer on Artaxerxes' tomb. The headwear of this Yauna Takabara is described as "conoid petasos with projecting curved brim and prominent knobby tip" by Erich F. Schmidt in "Persepolis III" (1970) on the descriptive page following figure 49 (which is a photo) between pages 118 and 121. There is another photo of this Yauna Takabara on plate 67 at the end of the book.

In addition to the above photo illustrating that takabara means "petasos-wearing", both Kent and Schmidt note that the Akkadian version of the inscription says "who bear shields on their heads" (Kent, p. 185) and "the second Ionians bearing shields on their heads" (Schmidt III, page 109). Apparently, the Babylonians didn't have a word for broad-brimmed hat, so they called the Greek petasos a "shield on the head"!

Now enter Nicholas Sekunda's article "Achaemenid Military Terminology" in Archaeologische Mitteilungen Aus Iran 21 (1988) page 75: "A number of passages in the Old Persian inscriptions, when enumerating the peoples of the Empire, mention the Yauna takabara, or "The Ionians who wear the kausia": the kausia being a large round beret, especial worn by the Macedonians. It seems that the Persian [sic] were so struck by the strangeness of this headgear they were moved to compare it with a shield. That taka- means shield and not hat is confirmed, it seems, by the Akkadian version of the ethnic, which qualifies these Ionians as those 'who bear shields on their heads'." Sekunda then goes on to suggest that takabara was the name of a Persian troop type bearing a small, leather shield.

I disagree. If the Old Persian word takabara means “bearing light shields”, then Yauna Takabara means “Ionians who bear light shields”. That is not really a very distinctive ethnic description. Most nationalities in the Persian empire carried light and heavy shields. I think that the Akkadian version confirms that taka means hat. It wasn’t the Persians who were struck by the strangeness of the Yauna Takabara’s headgear. The Persians apparently had the word taka that they applied to the Ionian’s broad-brimmed hat whereas the Babylonians didn’t have an appropriate word and so the Babylonians looked at the Yauna Takabara and wrote that they were wearing a shield on their heads! Personally, I think that the Old Persian taka- means hat and that there was no Persian troop type called takabara.

I could write more on the word *sparabara, but I have to go.

[Paul Elliott]

Excellent research, and a very compelling argument there. And .. welcome to RAT!

[Wringher]

It's recently occurred to me to ask... don't know why not sooner... um, does anyone know the primary sources for the words sparabara and takabara? They look like transliterations from Old Persian, but I can't find any references to what inscriptions identify them. (Only database I have is Google Books an' it's kind of a blunt instrument.)

Sean is correct that *sparabara should be written with the asterisk meaning "this word is not attested, but we think it was in the language." Sean is also right that it comes from a Greek lexicon and appears to have been first popularized by Nicholas Sekunda.

Ancient Greek lexicographers compiled glossai or glosses of obscure words. The lexicographer Hesychios of Alexandreia—who probably lived in the fifth century CE—wrote ??????????· ?? ???(?)?????? or sparabarai = hoi ger(rh)ophoroi.

*Sparabara is apparently a Greek transcription of an Old Persian word which can be reasonably reconstructed as Old Persian singular: *sparabara and plural: *sparabar?. Though the word *sparabara does not appear anywhere in Old Persian literature, there are several known -bara compound words such as takabara (‘hat wearing’), arshtibara (‘spear bearer’), vatsabara (‘bow bearer’ ?), and asabara (‘horse borne’ i.e. horseman). So, *sparabara is with little doubt an Old Persian word meaning ‘spara bearer’. We have to look to the ancient Greek word gerrhophoroi for an explanation of the meaning of spara.

The etymology of the Greek word gerrhophoroi is clear and simple. Gerrhon is 'wickerwork' or 'wicker shield' and -phoroi is a common suffix meaning ‘bearers’. Consequently, in ancient Greek gerrhophoroi means ‘wicker shield bearers’.

According to Hesychios’ gloss, the Old Persian word *sparabara then must also mean ‘wicker shield bearers’ or something very close to that by which I mean that Old Persian *spara may not be 100% equivalent to ancient Greek gerrhon. Words in different languages rarely are. *Spara may not necessarily have an association with wicker and it may not only apply to large shields, which is often assumed. So, *sparabara may also be bearers of small shields and/or bearers of non-wicker shields. We really don't know for sure how broadly ancient Persians applied the term. I think what we can reasonably say is that Persian troops carrying large wicker shields were probably called *sparabara, but who else could be called *sparabara (for example the Persians on the so-called Alexander sarcophagus), we just don't know.

I disagree with a lot that Nicholas Sekunda writes, but so far as I know Sekunda was the first to popularize the use of *sparabara for which he should be given great credit.

[Dan D'Silva]

Thanks everyone, very useful to know. Things getting more qualified and complicated with every step forward. Footed trousers, reconstructed words... and I thought it would be tricky two years ago!

[Sean Manning]

First, welcome to the forum!

This seems to hinge on what that Akkadian speaking scribe was thinking 2500 years ago. Did he use an Akkadian word for “shield” because that was the normal meaning of taka (Sekunda's hypothesis), or did he use it because he didn't know a better Akkadian word for a low round cap with a pointed top (your hypothesis)?
You've left out Sekunda's supporting argument, namely the frequent use of “-phoroi” (especially doruphoroi and peltophoroi but also the gerrophoroi of the glossaries and aichmophoroi, melophoroi, and toxophoroi) by Greek writers describing Persian troops. Sekunda suggests that most of these are literal translation of various “-bara” words in Old Persian, especially since I suspect both words have the same Proto-Indo-European origin (like L. fero and Gr. ????). He specifically suggests that taka has a root meaning of “leather” and by extension “leather shields” or “leather hats”. Now I agree that its speculative, and that if the core meaning of taka is “shield” then Yauna takabara would be confusing to a Persian who didn't know the joke, but I don't think that's so unlikely. Any confusion would take a few seconds to sort out: “Yauna Takabara? You mean their soldiers?” “Oh, they're like our Yauna, but they don't live in cities and they wear these funny hats like shields.”

I notice that Erik Schmidt (Persepolis III p. 157) rendered Takabara as “Petasos-wearing” but referred to the “shield-shaped hat” of the Yauna Takabara. So he agreed that these hats look like shields. For readers without the relevant Iranological books, the petasoi in Achaemenid art are all flattened cones, rather like the straw hats used in southeast Asia today, not the “ten gallon” shape which is common in southern Greek art.

[Wringher]

First, welcome to the forum!

This seems to hinge on what that Akkadian speaking scribe was thinking 2500 years ago. Did he use an Akkadian word for “shield” because that was the normal meaning of taka (Sekunda's hypothesis), or did he use it because he didn't know a better Akkadian word for a low round cap with a pointed top (your hypothesis)?
You've left out Sekunda's supporting argument, namely the frequent use of “-phoroi” (especially doruphoroi and peltophoroi but also the gerrophoroi of the glossaries and aichmophoroi, melophoroi, and toxophoroi) by Greek writers describing Persian troops. Sekunda suggests that most of these are literal translation of various “-bara” words in Old Persian, especially since I suspect both words have the same Proto-Indo-European origin (like L. fero and Gr. ????). He specifically suggests that taka has a root meaning of “leather” and by extension “leather shields” or “leather hats”. Now I agree that its speculative, and that if the core meaning of taka is “shield” then Yauna takabara would be confusing to a Persian who didn't know the joke, but I don't think that's so unlikely. Any confusion would take a few seconds to sort out: “Yauna Takabara? You mean their soldiers?” “Oh, they're like our Yauna, but they don't live in cities and they wear these funny hats like shields.”

I notice that Erik Schmidt (Persepolis III p. 157) rendered Takabara as “Petasos-wearing” but referred to the “shield-shaped hat” of the Yauna Takabara. So he agreed that these hats look like shields. For readers without the relevant Iranological books, the petasoi in Achaemenid art are all flattened cones, rather like the straw hats used in southeast Asia today, not the “ten gallon” shape which is common in southern Greek art.

Sean, thanks for the welcome and for the discussion. Okay, what I don't understand is if takabara means "who bears a [leather?] shield" in Old Persian and the scribe writing the Akkadian version knew that taka meant "shield", why did the scribe write "bearing shields on the head"! That doesn't make any sense to me. How did "Ionians/Greeks who bear [leather?] shields" in Old Persian become "Ionians/Greeks bearing shields on their heads" in Akkadian? or vice versa?

You didn't address my second point namely: Is "Ionians/Greeks who bear [leather?] shields" really a distinctive name or even an appropriate name for any group? Couldn't there be "Baktrians who bear [leather?] shields", "Egyptians who bear [leather?] shields", or "Saka who bear [leather?] shields", etc., etc. Just about every ancient people had leather shields. It is almost as universal as saying "Ionians/Greeks who have feet".

By the way, I am not particularly happy with the translation of Yauna Takabara as "Ionians/Greeks who wear hats". Most Greeks wore hats, so it is not really distinctive at all. In fact, modern scholars can't agree about to which Greeks it refers. However, the translation "hat" is at least supported by the Akkadian version that says "shields on the heads" and by the Persian reliefs showing the Yauna Takabara wearing hats. Those two points are fact (or at least as close to fact in ancient history that we can get) and not speculation.

Reading between the lines of what you wrote, it seems that what you are saying about "the joke" is that a Babylonian scribe first described this people as "Ionians/Greeks bearing shields on their heads" in Akkadian as a joke and then another scribe not getting the joke mistranslated that into "Ionians/Greeks who bear [leather?] shields" in Old Persian. Scribes did make mistakes and there were very, very few Persians who could have actually read the Old Persian cuneiform. This theory is possible I guess, but highly speculative.

As for Sekunda's point about Greek -phoroi words being borrowed from Persian -bara words, I simply don't buy it. But I have to admit that I have not researched phoros in depth and I am not really qualified to be a serious etymologist. Nonetheless, I would have to see much more detailed analysis of these two words by a serious etymologist in order to be convinced of Sekunda's theory.

I agree with you that Sekunda's theory on Old Persian taka = "leather" is speculative. In my humble opinion, his entire argument is one speculation stacked on top of another speculation, which is fine if it is remembered and emphasized that it is speculation. Speculation stimulates our minds. However, in his subsequent popular books, I remember Sekunda presenting his theories as established facts. I haven't checked my memory on this point, so perhaps I should give Sekunda the benefit of doubt and say that he presents his theories with little emphasis that they are theories not fact. We would not be having this learned yet esoteric discussion except for the fact that Sekunda has led many wargamers to accept a Persian troop type called takabara as indisputable fact. To give Sekunda the benefit of doubt once again, perhaps his editors are responsible for removing any emphasis on theory versus fact in his popular books.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Welcome from me too,Larry! I don't have anything to add to the discussion,but i enjoy it much. Nice research.
I think i have seen "flattened cones" hats in greek art,but it's doubtful if they qualify as the usual petassos,being shorter brimmed. Then again,the petassos seemed to have some variation in shape anyway,at any given period.
Khairete
Giannis

[Sean Manning]

Hi Larry,

Just a quick reply. I thought Sekunda hypothesized that taka had two meanings: “(small leather) shield” and “(shield-like) hat”. The fact that Yauna Takabara both wore hats like this and fought with the taka would be a pun in Old Persian. Then the scribe who translated from Old Persian to Akkadian (assuming that this was the order) didn't understand the double meaning, was told “these Ionians wear taka on their heads” and translated taka as “shield” when in this context it meant “hat”.

Also, we don't know how many words for "hat" there were in Old Persian. So if "taka" did mainly mean "hat" as you suggest, it probably referred to a familiar style of hat which resembled the Greek petasos. The obvioius parallel is the Sakâ tigraxaudâ which Persian linguists think is literally “Saka with Pointed Hats” (found in Old Persian lists of nations like DNe). Or the comments by American soldiers in the 1960s that the Vietnamese wore "pyjamas" (which they found worthy of remark because American pyjamas were nightclothes, but the similar-looking Vietnamese outfits were outdoor clothes).

I addressed your argument that “targeteers” was not a very unique epithet here:

Now I agree that its speculative, and that if the core meaning of taka is “shield” then Yauna takabara would be confusing to a Persian who didn't know the joke, but I don't think that's so unlikely.

I'm not familiar with any argument that the Yauna Takabara were anyone but Macedonians. Can you elabourate? I agree it is confusing that most Yauna in Persepolitanian art wear similar hats.

I agree its a pity that lots of people think that *sparabara were definitely troops with big rectangular sticks-and-leather shields, and that takabara were definitely soldiers with small shields. I don't know of much that Sekunda has written on the Persians in the last decade: just The Persian Army (Osprey, 1992), “Achaemenid Military Terminology” (1988), “Some Notes on the Life of Datames” (1988), and Marathon 490 BC (Osprey, 2002). I agree that the 1992 Osprey isn't very nuanced, but that is their house style. Were you thinking of anything more recent? Its hard to find things because recent bibliographies on Achaemenid warfare are thin on the ground, and both the English books on the subject are 20 years old and weren't allowed a full bibliography.