Hoplite
Hoplites (
In the 8th or 7th century BC, Greek armies adopted the
The word hoplite (
Warfare
The fragmented political structure of Ancient Greece, with many competing city-states, increased the frequency of conflict, but at the same time limited the scale of warfare. Limited manpower did not allow most Greek city-states to form large armies which could operate for long periods because they were generally not formed from professional soldiers. Most soldiers had careers as farmers or workers and returned to these professions after the campaign. All hoplites were expected to take part in any military campaign when called for duty by leaders of the state. The Lacedaemonian citizens of Sparta were renowned for their lifelong combat training and almost mythical military prowess, while their greatest adversaries, the Athenians, were exempted from service only after the age of 60. This inevitably reduced the potential duration of campaigns and often resulted in the campaign season being restricted to one summer.[clarification needed]
Armies generally marched directly to their destination, and in some cases the battlefield was agreed to by the contestants in advance. Battles were fought on level ground, and hoplites preferred to fight with high terrain on both sides of the phalanx so the formation could not be flanked. An example of this was the Battle of Thermopylae, where the Spartans specifically chose a narrow coastal pass to make their stand against the massive Persian army. The vastly outnumbered Greeks held off the Persians for seven days.
When battles occurred, they were usually
The military structure created by the Spartans was a rectangular phalanx formation. The formation was organized from eight to ten rows deep and could cover a front of a quarter of a mile or more if sufficient hoplites were available. The two lines would close to a short distance to allow effective use of their spears, while the
At this point, the phalanx would put its collective weight to push back the enemy line and thus create fear and panic among its ranks. There could be multiple such instances of attempts to push, but it seems from the accounts of the ancients that these were perfectly orchestrated and attempted organized en masse. Once one of the lines broke, the troops would generally flee from the field, sometimes chased by psiloi, peltasts, or light cavalry.
If a hoplite escaped, he would sometimes be forced to drop his cumbersome aspis, thereby disgracing himself to his friends and family (becoming a ripsaspis, one who threw his shield).[11] To lessen the number of casualties inflicted by the enemy during battles, soldiers were positioned to stand shoulder to shoulder with their aspis. The hoplites' most prominent citizens and generals led from the front. Thus, the war could be decided by a single battle.
Individual hoplites carried their shields on their left arm, protecting themselves and the soldier to the left. This meant that the men at the extreme right of the phalanx were only half-protected. In battle, opposing phalanxes would exploit this weakness by attempting to overlap the enemy's right flank.[13] It also meant that, in battle, a phalanx would tend to drift to the right (as hoplites sought to remain behind the shield of their neighbour). The most experienced hoplites were often placed on the right side of the phalanx, to counteract these problems. According to Plutarch's Sayings of Spartans, "a man carried a shield for the sake of the whole line".[14]
The phalanx is an example of a military formation in which single combat and other individualistic forms of battle were suppressed for the good of the whole. In earlier
As important as unity among the ranks was in phalanx warfare, individual fighting skill played a role in battle. Hoplites' shields were not locked all of the time. Throughout many points of the fight there were periods where the hoplites separated as far as two to three feet apart in order to have room to swing their shields and swords at the enemy. This led to individual prowess being more important than previously realized by some historians. It would have been nearly impossible to swing both shield and sword if the man next to you is practically touching.[15][full citation needed] One piece of evidence of this is the picking of individual champions after each battle was fought. This is most evident in Herodotus' account of the Battle of Thermopylae. "Although great valor was displayed by the entire corps of Spartans and Thespians, the man who proved himself best was a Spartan Officer named Dienekes".[16] The brothers Alpheos and Maron were also honored for their battlefield prowess as well. This is just one example of an ancient historian giving credit to a few individual soldiers and the individuality of phalanx warfare.
Equipment
Body armour
Each hoplite provided his own equipment. Thus, only those who could afford such weaponry fought as hoplites. As with the Roman Republican army it was the middle classes who formed the bulk of the infantry. Equipment was not standardized, although there were doubtless trends in general designs over time, and between city-states. Hoplites had customized armour, the shield was decorated with family or clan emblems, although in later years these were replaced by symbols or monograms of the city states. The equipment might be passed down in families, as it was expensive to manufacture.
The hoplite army consisted of heavy infantrymen. Their armour, also called
By contrast with hoplites, other contemporary infantry (e.g.,
Shield
Hoplites carried a large concave shield called an aspis (sometimes incorrectly referred to as a hoplon), measuring between 80 and 100 centimetres (31 and 39 inches) in diameter and weighing between 6.5 and 8 kg (14 and 18 lb).[17][18] This large shield was made possible partly by its shape, which allowed it to be supported on the shoulder. The shield was assembled in three layers: the center layer was made of thick wood, the outside layer facing the enemy was made of bronze, and leather comprised the inside of the shield. The revolutionary part of the shield was the grip. Known as an Argive grip, it placed the handle at the edge of the shield, and was supported by a leather fastening (for the forearm) at the centre. These two points of contact eliminated the possibility of the shield swaying to the side after being struck, and as a result soldiers rarely lost their shields. This allowed the hoplite soldier more mobility with the shield, as well as the ability to capitalize on its offensive capabilities and better support the phalanx. The large shields, designed for pushing ahead, were the most essential equipment for the hoplites.[19]
Spear
The main offensive weapon used was a 2.5–4.5-metre (8.2–14.8 ft) long and 2.5-centimetre (1 in) in diameter spear called a doru, or dory. It was held with the right hand, with the left hand holding the hoplite's shield. Soldiers usually held their spears in an underhand position when approaching but once they came into close contact with their opponents, they were held in an overhand position ready to strike. The spearhead was usually a curved leaf shape, while the rear of the spear had a spike called a sauroter ("lizard-killer") which was used to stand the spear in the ground (hence the name). It was also used as a secondary weapon if the main shaft snapped, or for the rear ranks to finish off fallen opponents as the phalanx advanced over them. In addition to being used as a secondary weapon, the sauroter doubled to balance the spear, but not for throwing purposes. It is a matter of contention, among historians, whether the hoplite used the spear overarm or underarm. Held underarm, the thrusts would have been less powerful but under more control, and vice versa. It seems likely that both motions were used, depending on the situation. If attack was called for, an overarm motion was more likely to break through an opponent's defence. The upward thrust is more easily deflected by armour due to its lesser leverage. When defending, an underarm carry absorbed more shock and could be 'couched' under the shoulder for maximum stability. An overarm motion would allow more effective combination of the aspis and doru if the shield wall had broken down, while the underarm motion would be more effective when the shield had to be interlocked with those of one's neighbours in the battle-line. Hoplites in the rows behind the lead would almost certainly have made overarm thrusts. The rear ranks held their spears underarm, and raised their shields upwards at increasing angles. This was an effective defence against missiles, deflecting their force.
Sword
Hoplites also carried a sword, mostly a short sword called a xiphos, but later also longer and heavier types. The short sword was a secondary weapon, used if or when their spears were broken or lost, or if the phalanx broke rank. The xiphos usually had a blade around 60 centimetres (24 in) long; however, those used by the Spartans were often only 30–45 centimetres long. This very short xiphos would be very advantageous in the press that occurred when two lines of hoplites met, capable of being thrust through gaps in the shieldwall into an enemy's unprotected groin or throat, while there was no room to swing a longer sword. Such a small weapon would be particularly useful after many hoplites had started to abandon body armour during the Peloponnesian War. Hoplites could also alternatively carry the kopis, a heavy knife with a forward-curving blade. The scabbard of the sword was called koleos (κολεός).[20]
Theories on the transition to fighting in the phalanx
Dark Age warfare transitioned into hoplite warfare in the 8th century BC. Historians and researchers have debated the reason and speed of the transition for centuries. So far 3 popular theories exist:
Gradualist theory
Developed by Anthony Snodgrass, the Gradualist Theory states that the hoplite style of battle developed in a series of steps as a result of innovations in armour and weaponry.[23] Chronologically dating the archeological findings of hoplite armour and using the findings to approximate the development of the phalanx formation, Snodgrass claims that the transition took approximately 100 years to complete from 750 to 650 BC.[24] The progression of the phalanx took time because as the phalanx matured it required denser formations that made the elite warriors recruit Greek citizens.[25] The large amounts of hoplite armour needed to then be distributed to the populations of Greek citizens only increased the time for the phalanx to be implemented. Snodgrass believes, only once the armour was in place that the phalanx formation became popular.[24]
Rapid adoption theory
The Rapid Adaptation model was developed by historians Paul Cartledge and Victor Hanson.[26] They believed that the phalanx was created individually by military forces, but was so effective that others had to immediately adapt their way of war to combat the formation.[26] Rapid Adoptionists propose that the double grip shield that was required for the phalanx formation was so constricting in mobility that once it was introduced, Dark Age, free flowing warfare was inadequate to fight against the hoplites only escalating the speed of the transition.[23] Quickly, the phalanx formation and hoplite armour became widely used throughout Ancient Greece. Cartledge and Hanson estimate the transition took place from 725 to 675 BC.[26]
Extended gradualist theory
Developed by
History
Ancient Greece
The exact time when hoplite warfare was developed is uncertain, the prevalent theory being that it was established sometime during the 8th or 7th century BC, when the "heroic age was abandoned and a far more disciplined system introduced" and the Argive shield became popular.[29] Peter Krentz argues that "the ideology of hoplitic warfare as a ritualized contest developed not in the 7th century [BC], but only after 480, when non-hoplite arms began to be excluded from the phalanx".[30] Anagnostis Agelarakis, based on recent archaeo-anthropological discoveries of the earliest monumental polyandrion (communal burial of male warriors) at Paros Island in Greece, unveiled a last quarter of the 8th century BC date for a hoplitic phalangeal military organization.[31]
The rise and fall of hoplite warfare was tied to the rise and fall of the city-state. As discussed above, hoplites were a solution to the armed clashes between independent city-states. As Greek civilization found itself confronted by the world at large, particularly the Persians, the emphasis in warfare shifted. Confronted by huge numbers of enemy troops, individual city-states could not realistically fight alone. During the Greco-Persian Wars (499–448 BC), alliances between groups of cities (whose composition varied over time) fought against the Persians. This drastically altered the scale of warfare and the numbers of troops involved. The hoplite phalanx proved itself far superior to the Persian infantry at such conflicts as the Battle of Marathon, Thermopylae, and the Battle of Plataea.
During this period,
Many famous personalities, philosophers, artists, and poets fought as hoplites.[32][33]
According to Nefiodkin, fighting against Greek heavy infantry during the Greco-Persian Wars inspired the Persians to introduce scythed chariots.[34]
Sparta
Sparta is one of the most famous city-states, along with Athens, which had a unique position in ancient Greece. Contrary to other city states, the free citizens of Sparta served as hoplites their entire lives, training and exercising in peacetime, which gave Sparta a professional standing army. Often small, numbering around 6000 at its peak to no more than 1000 soldiers at lowest point,[35] divided into six mora or battalions, the Spartan army was feared for its discipline and ferocity. Military service was the primary duty of Spartan men, and Spartan society was organized around its army.
Military service for hoplites lasted until the age of 40, and sometimes until 60 years of age, depending on a man's physical ability to perform on the battlefield.
Macedonia
Later in the hoplite era, more sophisticated tactics were developed, in particular by the
While
Hoplite-style warfare outside Greece
Hoplite-style warfare was influential, and influenced several other nations in the Mediterranean. Hoplite warfare was the dominant fighting style on much of the
Early in its history, Ancient Carthage also equipped its troops as Greek hoplites, in units such as the Sacred Band of Carthage. Many Greek hoplite mercenaries fought in foreign armies, such as Carthage and Achaemenid Empire, where it is believed by some that they inspired the formation of the Cardaces. Some hoplites served under the Illyrian king Bardylis in the 4th century. The Illyrians were known to import many weapons and tactics from the Greeks.
The Diadochi imported the Greek phalanx to their kingdoms. Though they mostly fielded Greek citizens or mercenaries, they also armed and drilled local natives as hoplites or rather Macedonian phalanx, like the Machimoi of the Ptolemaic army.
Hellenistic period
The
References
- ^ "hoplite | Definition of hoplite in English by Oxford Dictionaries". Oxford Dictionaries | English. Archived from the original on November 15, 2018. Retrieved 20 April 2019.
- ^ "Definition of Hoplite". www.merriam-webster.com.
- ^ "hoplite". www.dictionary.com. Retrieved 5 May 2019.
- OCLC 745332893.
- ISBN 978-0199236633.
- ISBN 978-1-317-75050-5.
- ISBN 978-1-62139-001-5.
- ^ Cartwright, Mark (9 February 2013). "Hoplite". World History Encyclopedia. Retrieved 1 December 2016.
- ^ Schwartz, Adam (2009). "Reinstating the hoplite. Arms, Armour and Phalanx Fighting in Archaic and Classical Greece". Historia Einzelschriften 207: 25.
- Perseus Project.
- Perseus Project.
- ISBN 9780199651917.
- ^ Kagan, Donald (2013). Men of Bronze: Hoplite Warfare in Ancient Greece. Princeton University Press. p. 10.
- ^ Hanson, Victor Davis (1993). Hoplites: Classical Greek Battle Experience. Routledge. p. 303.
- ^ Creators, Conquerors, and Citizens
- ^ Herodotus on Thermopylae
- ^ Zimmel, Girard, Jonathan, Todd. "Hoplites Arms and Armor". Archived from the original on 26 October 2017. Retrieved 22 April 2013.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ISBN 9780786479733.
- ^ Sage, Michael M (1996). Warfare in Ancient Greece: A Sourcebook. London, GBR: Routledge. p. 281.
- ISBN 978-1164537380.
- ^ ISBN 9781848322226.
- ^ "IGII2 6217 Epitaph of Dexileos, cavalryman killed in Corinthian war (394 BC)". www.atticinscriptions.com.
- ^ a b c d "Theories on Development | Hoplite Battles". sites.psu.edu. Retrieved 2016-11-30.
- ^ a b c "Gradualism | The Hoplite Battle Experience". sites.psu.edu. Retrieved 2016-11-30.
- ^ Kagan, Donald (2013). Men of Bronze: Hoplite Warfare in Ancient Greece. Princeton University Press. p. 8.
- ^ a b c "Rapid Adoption | The Hoplite Battle Experience". sites.psu.edu. Retrieved 2016-11-30.
- )
- ^ Tyrtaios. Fragment 1.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location (link) - ^ Peter Connoly, Greece and Rome at War, p. 37.
- ^ Peter Krentz, Fighting by the Rules – The Invention of the Hoplite Agon.
- ^ F. Zafeiropoulou and A. Agelarakis, "Warriors of Paros", Archaeology 58.1(2005): 30–35
- ^ Socrates as a hoplite: Plato, Symposium 219e–221b.
- Diogenes Laërtius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, Book X.
- ^ Nefiodkin, Alexander K. (2004), "On the Origin of the Scythed Chariots", Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, 53 (3): 371−378
- ISBN 0-465-02496-3.
Bibliography
- Crowley, Jason (2012). The Psychology of the Athenian Hoplite: The culture of combat in classical Athens (hardcover ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-02061-0.
- Goldsworthy, A.K. (1997). "The Othismos, myths and heresies: The nature of hoplite battle". War in History. 4 (1): 1–26. S2CID 159816282.
- ISBN 0-520-21911-2.
- ISBN 0-520-21596-6
- ISBN 0-520-20935-4.
- Kagan, Donald; Viggiano, Gregory (2013). Men of Bronze: Hoplite warfare in ancient Greece. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Krentz, Peter (2002). "Fighting by the rules: The invention of the hoplite agôn". Hesperia. 71 (1): 23–39.
- O'Connell, Robert L. (2002). Soul of the Sword. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 0-684-84407-9.
- Roisman, Joseph (2011). Ancient Greece from Homer to Alexander. Translated by Yardley, J.C. Blackwell Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4051-2776-9.
- Cartledge, P. (1977). "Hoplites and Heroes: Sparta's contribution to the technique of ancient warfare". The Journal of Hellenic Studies. 97: 11–27. S2CID 161418816.
External links
- Association of Greek Hoplites Historic Studies Club "KORYVANTES"
- Perseus Digital Library database:
- Sparta Pages – web page on Sparta and the Hoplite.
- The Phalanx Hoplite
- Classical Greek Shield Patterns