Mykale, a naval battle?

[immortal]

I (and my fuzzy memory) stand corrected on the displays at the British museum being Assyrian rather than Babylonian, though I suspect that the Assyrian way of war was so dominant in its day that it did indeed colour all later Middle Eastern systems including that of Babylon and Media/Persia. Indeed, Nick Sekunda explicitly made the Assyrian archer-pair to Persian sparabara connection in his piece in Hackett's Warfare in the Ancient World, p. 82), where he proposes that the Persians adjusted their ratio of shield-bearers to bowmen as needed to best match a given tactical situation.

This is all speculation, there is no evidence that the Assyrian army did this, or that the Persian army did this. As I have said, the Persian army is based on the Elamite model. The Median army is based on the Skythian and Assyrian one. The Achaemenid force was based on a combination of the three, with its own styles mixed in.

As for Herodotus' various references to shield walls/barricades, I believe that these are consistent with a barrier being held in place by hand. Frankly, a 'free-standing' row of propped Spara would seem to make no sense at all once 'shock' fighting began. Given the hard data that Paul Bardunias has published on the great force applied by othismos from crowds, it seems clear that a shield wall not being actively held up by 'sparabara' would surely have fallen like a house of cards at its very first contact with Greek heavy infantry.

It’s quite clear from the language Herodotus is using that they were not held in place. A Spara with a prop, possibly rammed into the ground would be very sturdy. Also, Persian infantry was not intended for close combat, they were a ranged force primarily. Not wishing to get into it on this thread, but I don’t believe a word of the othismos theory, so this is not a factor.

As for the Persian spear, it looks on displays from Susa (see the aforementioned Hackett text for a nice illustration of Arstibara or 'King's Spear bearers' on p. 83) to be slightly shorter than the Greek dory at perhaps 6-7 feet. Thus, it was almost certainly designed for use with one hand like the dory (of course, an unshielded man could have used two if desired, though undoubtedly a suicidal technique against a hoplite). Also, one of the Persian spear's most notable features is a round counter-weight opposite the 'business' end. These famously took the form of fruit cast from precious metals for the Immortals or Amrtaka, thus their nickname of 'apple-bearers'). While the equivalent Greek sauroter had potential as a back-up weapon in addition to its weight value, this Persian device seems to have been exclusively used to counter-balance the spear for a longer thrust, thus indicating that the spear was not primarily used as a missile.

Look at Persepolis, not Susa (even better look at the picture I have posted in this thread!). There are no Sparabara at Susa. Also, look at the many Persian cylinders that have been found which depict combat. Long spears were used two handed on occasion.
First, not all Persian spears would have the 'Apples'. These are only mentioned as being used by the "Immortals" of dubious existence. Assyrian spears had a counter weight, but we know for a fact that they were thrown.