Sassanian rider

[Roxofarnes]

Kings are depicted with globes/korymbos on the helmets. Most likely officers/commaders/courtiers or nobles were allowed to have similar decoration. Some deeds might have been awarded with the right to wear the ribbon on helmet. I have no idea about exact rules regulating employment of these decorations. My feeling is that its supply was strictly controlled by state however there might have been different grades marked by colour. Armenian general Manuel was granted golden ribbon for his helmet. Generally I would say: no. The late sasania helmets themselves were decorated with silver sheets or shallow relief and painting.

[Gäiten]

Interesting.

Due your comment to Savaran of the later era (post Khosrau I ?) do you believe that Savaran of the earlier era when only the high nobility was allowed to be member of the Savaran caste used them more?
IMHO it might have been because these units were independently raised and equipped by the Great Noble Clans?

[Roxofarnes]

Being honest I can hardly believe the depth of Khusro Anushirvan's refroms with regard to military matters. Something seems wrong about the very idea of such radical switch in entire state within one reign. Firstly as was pointed by Pourashariati in her ground breaking work the power of great agnatic clans was not abolished or weakened. Secondly one can hardly imagine military idleness of the entire class of so called lesser nobility beforoe Khusro's reign. The idea of clan recruited armies can not by any means ruled out as clans were in position to wage wars with kings or help them unexpectedly, however kings must have had armies independent from the Families before Khusro Anushirvan.
IMHO the basic confusion is made when it comes to the military role of dehqanan. I believe that the current idea of Persian nobility of several vertical echelons might not be fully correct. Azatan i.e. free ones cold be a general term for "aristocracy" or "nobility", dabiran, artestaran and dehqanan would be functional terms i.e. writers/jurists, warrior, land administrators. Vuzurgan, for instance, would be one of teh titles of vertical stratification. So one could imagine a boy o noble birth who had been trained to become a dabir but was dissatisfactioned with the duties, joined the gund and became artestaran, while after his father died and left no male heir the "boy", now mature man could settle as dehqan to administrate land property. Just a theory but seems to fill some gaps in mainstream view of the Sasanian society: firstly - what were the members of "lower gentry" doing before Khusro, secondly - how did the lesser nobility survived pressure of great agnatic clans, thirdly - if only the clans were able to recruit heavy cavalry than why in almost all Classical/Byzantine and Arabic sources all Persian horse units wear armor, fourthly - can you imagine the king having no control over the army and totally depending on magnates (surely this might have took place during Parthians but Sasanians are usually perceived as more centralized - wouldn't that be a contradiction in theory supporting socila change within the army during KhusroI?) ? Also the "hard service" of noble Persian youth under Shapur II mentioned by Ammianus doesn't seem to regard just the members of teh great families. And yet one more thing - the social change within the army is rather modern conclusion based on the fact that military equipment and pay were supplied to the warriors (or perhaps maybe rather just pay? Rulers used to give gifts of weapons before). My guess is that this enhanced army's uniformity and standarized the units. The positions of army commanders remained within great clans. So the idea of drastical change in social policy by Khusro Anushirvan seems a blunder to me. Especially that he was forced to face radical religious mazdakite movement at the beginning of his reign. Would he be a keen social experimentator or conservative bringer of "status quo"? Sources seem to point the latter.

[Roxofarnes]

In the wand drawning of Panjakent some late armored Sughdian Cavalry are displayed.
It seems that one or two wear a facemask. So I think given the near influence of the Sassanians even some of the late Savaran units might have worn such mask.

The Pendjikent frescoes show mail face masks i.e. identical as the one from sasanian Taq-e Bostan equestrian figure. Practically the same type of face protection was depicted on Kizil fresco (though it might not be mail but segmented stripes of materia - theis however seems too peculiar to me)

These helmets with ram rods are especially interesting
I remember reading in Ammianus Marcellinus that Shapur II wore such a helmet when the sassanian invaded Roman territory in late 350ies.

Ammianus writes about the king in headgear decorated with ram horns. Some tend to believe that it was Bahram (who is shown in such headgear) Kushanshah not Shapur himself. I don't know myself equally possible would be employment of the crown of the conquered state by Shapur. A recent trophy might be a kind of memento for Bezabde's inhabitants, saying: look, I wear the crown I took in the East, now it could be your turn. :twisted:

[Gäiten]

Very Interesting. Thank you for sharing your thought. Had to think about.

One of my ideas so far has been that especially due the very radical (almost communist) Mazdakite movement and the king could have undertaken such radical reforms too. However, as you wrote,

Furthermore I think besides the normal nobles to be—ennobled families that pass their titles by heredity to their children and hold their landholds in perpetuity unless seized by the State or lost in conflict to the realm’s enemies, Khusrau I ennobled people as rewards for outstanding service. It is possible that he made the titles apply only to the person holding them, so their heir had to prove himself as worthy to keep the estate with serving the state

• firstly - what were the members of "lower gentry" doing before Khusro,

IMHO, militarily they formed the backbone of the medium cavalry. Well armoured and capable of fighting with both melee and missile weapons.
The Great Clans and the Royal households troops (as the Zâyedân) were the superheavy “Ironmen” lancers.

I think the dramatic defeats of the Sassanians against the Hephtalites in the 5th century could be partly originated to the decreased number of these units. IMHO, the Spah lost much of its flexibility.

• secondly - how did the lesser nobility survived pressure of great agnatic clans,

That might have been a major problem for them. We can read that their importance had been decreasing since Shapur II, maybe because many lost their independence and land to the agnatic clans and had now to follow them.

So Khosrow`s reforms might have given them sufficent estates back, especially to the landless nobles?

• thirdly - if only the clans were able to recruit heavy cavalry than why in almost all Classical/Byzantine and Arabic sources all Persian horse units wear armor,

Because they made the most lasting impression?
No, I think with ongoing time the Sassanians were capable of equipping more and more of their cavalry with armour. Given their far better developed state-controlled military-industrial complex that is very possible.

• fourthly - can you imagine the king having no control over the army and totally depending on magnates (surely this might have took place during Parthians but Sasanians are usually perceived as more centralized - wouldn't that be a contradiction in theory supporting social change within the army during Khusro I?) ?

I agree.
However, IMHO, the mightier the agnatic Clans got and the more of the Azatan they had under their control, the less the control of the Shahanshah was.

[Roxofarnes]

Furthermore I think besides the normal nobles to be—ennobled families that pass their titles by heredity to their children and hold their landholds in perpetuity unless seized by the State or lost in conflict to the realm’s enemies, Khusrau I ennobled people as rewards for outstanding service. It is possible that he made the titles apply only to the person holding them, so their heir had to prove himself as worthy to keep the estate with serving the state

Quit interesting and reasonable however I can't recall any source of such supposition. It assumes that Mazdakites were indeed really succesful

IMHO, militarily they formed the backbone of the medium cavalry. Well armoured and capable of fighting with both melee and missile weapons.
The Great Clans and the Royal households troops (as the Zâyedân) were the superheavy “Ironmen” lancers.

Agree - these were quite rare and had no big impact on the shape of Sasanian army as observed by for instance by Maurice

I think the dramatic defeats of the Sassanians against the Hephtalites in the 5th century could be partly originated to the decreased number of these units. IMHO, the Spah lost much of its flexibility.

I wander why we tend to think that covered with metal, heavy i.e. not agile troops were any better than armored "action" cavalry

• secondly - how did the lesser nobility survived pressure of great agnatic clans,

That might have been a major problem for them. We can read that their importance had been decreasing since Shapur II, maybe because many lost their independence and land to the agnatic clans and had now to follow them.

But the Clans were holding power throughout the existance of the dynasty. Poor old Khusro Parvez except fighting Byzantines had to face the civil wars in the eastern part of the empire. Cland members were holding the highest positions right to the end.

So Khosrow`s reforms might have given them sufficent estates back, especially to the landless nobles?

To give something to someone usually you need to take from somebody else... Was he powerful enough to take from the clans?

[/quote]

Because they made the most lasting impression?
No, I think with ongoing time the Sassanians were capable of equipping more and more of their cavalry with armour. Given their far better developed state-controlled military-industrial complex that is very possible.

Why would state controlled industry be better from the private one?

[Gäiten]

IMHO, militarily they formed the backbone of the medium cavalry. Well armoured and capable of fighting with both melee and missile weapons.
The Great Clans and the Royal households troops (as the Zâyedân) were the superheavy “Ironmen” lancers.

Agree - these were quite rare and had no big impact on the shape of Sasanian army as observed by for instance by Maurice

Given the Strategikon it is interesting that he describes the Sassanian cavalry equipped exclusively with bows and swords and that they are very vulnerable to attacks by lancers. About that I have been wondering because I have thought (and still think) that the late Sassanians did field lancers too. The Strategikon is somewhat contradicted that my view.

Even the equestrian statue of Khosrow II Parwaz showing him holding a lance could be one of more symbolism.

I wonder why we tend to think that covered with metal, heavy i.e. not agile troops were any better than armored "action" cavalry

Because they look so cool ?
However, such „Iron Men did make the most remarkable impression to people. Even the Romans concentrated their descriptions on them and not on the „standard“ Asavaran.
However, IMHO they were excellent crack specialist troops. Fighting in concert with standard Asavaran make the Sassanian cavalry even more deadly.
I believe even at the end of the Sassanain era there were such Iron Men in the Spah. I remember that wonderful iron gauntlet you can visit in the Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum in Mainz (Germany).

• secondly - how did the lesser nobility survived pressure of great agnatic clans,

That might have been a major problem for them. We can read that their importance had been decreasing since Shapur II, maybe because many lost their independence and land to the agnatic clans and had now to follow them.

But the Clans were holding power throughout the existance of the dynasty. Poor old Khusro Parvez except fighting Byzantines had to face the civil wars in the eastern part of the empire. Clan members were holding the highest positions right to the end.

I believe he tried to binding them stronger to the state than before by giving them duties for the state and salaries. However, Clan loyalities were stronger and it was a pity that Khosrow`s successors were not of the same calibre as him and missed his political acumen. The Barham Chobin civil war was a disaster for the realm because it destroyed the band of trust between royal house and the nobility.

A question, besides the Six Clans of Parthian origin, what about the Persian nobles Clans (as the Zikh, Varazes and Andagan)? Did they oppose the Shahanshah as the Parthian Clans?

So Khosrow`s reforms might have given them sufficent estates back, especially to the landless nobles?

To give something to someone usually you need to take from somebody else... Was he powerful enough to take from the clans?

I think he was and could have done it.
However, maybe rather than taking the Clans their land away he „convinced“ them to give the estates to people he trusted and chose and not the Clans.

Because they made the most lasting impression?

No, I think with ongoing time the Sassanians were capable of equipping more and more of their cavalry with armour. Given their far better developed state-controlled military-industrial complex that is very possible.

Why would state controlled industry be better from the private one?

Not better but if you control the arms production, you control the access and so you control the warriors. Furthermore you can more standardize, give more uniformity to the equipment and increase the quantity.
IMHO, reasons are to be interesting for the realm.

[Roxofarnes]

I wonder why we tend to think that covered with metal, heavy i.e. not agile troops were any better than armored "action" cavalry

Because they look so cool ?
However, such „Iron Men did make the most remarkable impression to people. Even the Romans concentrated their descriptions on them and not on the „standard“ Asavaran.

You must be right here. It is the matter of imagination not efficincy. I wouldn't start my Sasanian study without vision of living metal statue as they were called by occidental literature. It must indeed be influence of literary topic.

However, IMHO they were excellent crack specialist troops. Fighting in concert with standard Asavaran make the Sassanian cavalry even more deadly.
I believe even at the end of the Sassanain era there were such Iron Men in the Spah. I remember that wonderful iron gauntlet you can visit in the Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum in Mainz (Germany).

Gauntlet is a piece of metal which could be used by every melee trooper. You might remember late mediaeval depictions of soldiers having gauntlets, helmets and no other metallic armor. My modist fencing experience also convinced me that it is good to have hand protected.

[quote] I believe he tried to binding them stronger to the state than before by giving them duties for the state and salaries. However, Clan loyalities were stronger and it was a pity that Khosrow`s successors were not of the same calibre as him and missed his political acumen. The Barham Chobin civil war was a disaster for the realm because it destroyed the band of trust between royal house and the nobility.

But there were other big civil wars during the reign of Khusro Parviz

A question, besides the Six Clans of Parthian origin, what about the Persian nobles Clans (as the Zikh, Varazes and Andagan)? Did they oppose the Shahanshah as the Parthian Clans?

I don't know.

[quote]I think he was and could have done it.
However, maybe rather than taking the Clans their land away he „convinced“ them to give the estates to people he trusted and chose and not the Clans.

Pourashariati presents radically different view. I strongly recomend that book - even if it would not convince you, you would find it inspiring.

[quote] Not better but if you control the arms production, you control the access and so you control the warriors. Furthermore you can more standardize, give more uniformity to the equipment and increase the quantity.
IMHO, reasons are to be interesting for the realm.

Any evidence of Sasanian "fabricae"? Obviously there must have been royal workshops however could the state afford equipping the army of still "feudal" character?