The hoplite issue...

As an amateur military historian the nature of the hoplite has me confused. If I am correct the Southern Greek hoplites used short spears overhand and large shields as their primary fighting stance. They would make shield walls and stab over their shields ( Like in the film Troy).

Macedonians used the sassara (sp) type of fighting stance which was a lng pike held by 2 hands, with a shield strapped to one hand.

Am I corrct in both these assumptions? Did either Greek state change their fighting stance over time? Any feedback would be greatly appreiciated.

for all I know, only spartans stabbed overhead, corintians, athenians etc all stabbed underhand. macedonia indeed had a small strapped on shield and a long ( very long ) spear.

The Macedonian style (i.e. Long pikes, little strap on shields…) was not introduced till sometime in the reign of Philip II (mid 4th century), it’s not really clear when he mad the reform.

People don´t seem to realize the span of time in which cultures used hoplite/phalanx tactics. These tactics probably appeared in the 8th century BC and were used up until 1st Century AD! Thats´s like 900 years!

So inevitably it evolved. The classical hoplites fought with a short overhand spear behind a large shield and used bronze armour (if they could afford it). Eventually the shape of the helmet changed, and so did the armour, being mostly made of linen, the linothorax, by the 5th Century. There is some discussion about further evolution of the equipment, and some authors state that Iphicrates (4th Century) , reformed the hoplites by increasing the size of the spear and and decreased that of the shield, but it is common assumption that these were gradual and far from complete reforms. Others disagree altogether...conon384 for example ~;) ...and say that reforms could only have been made on peltasts (light javelinmen) . I argue that because hoplites replaced the Argive shield with a a smaller one, the pelta, they were consequently called peltastai instead of hoplitai, even if they retained the same role, heavy infantry, but with different equipment.

As for the Macedonian phalanx, there are strong evidences that Philip of Macedonia (Alexander´s father), took ideas from Iphikrates who was his adoptive brother. They used similar equipment, only Philip´s was a more radical transformation (even longer spear, and smaller shield).

I´ll shut up now. :bow:

Phillip might have not change the shield. The shield the Macedonian hoplites used was introduced between 413 and 400 by the reforms of Archelaos. This sheild was 60-75cm and Phillips seems to have changed the shield grip, so that the palm of the shield-arm was at the edge of the rim. This means that the sarissa could be hold with two hands.

Something like this. Perhaps the shield was a little smaller than that.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v...is/phalanx.jpg

We are told in sources that Macedonians used smaller shields attached to their arms, so they must have done so. Part of the great cost reduction of the Macedonian infantry arm, to be able to field a semi-professional army, was changing the shield (among other things).

But if this way of holding a shield of that size can be achieved, then it could be another way of looking at Iphikratean hoplitai..... :book:

Smaller shields than which though? The Argive ones or the Iphicratean ones? (of which we are not even sure what they were, peltai or argive shields without the rim)

I was saying smaller than the argive shield represented in the picture. The shield carried by the Macedonian phalanx, presumably, carried an even smaller shield than the so-called Iphikratean hoplitai, (reformed hoplite as Unramma calls it), or at least not bigger than that which they used.

An argive shield weights something like 8 kg and about 1m across.....I think thats too much weight and diameter to strap it on your forearm, even with the help of neck straps (which are not represented in your pic), although I haven´t used one personally, so I´m just guessing.

If they used an even smaller shield that the Iphicratean one (which was already small) then why would they need to strap it to their neck?

read my post again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cataphract_Of_The_City

If they used an even smaller shield that the Iphicratean one (which was already small) then why would they need to strap it to their neck?

---

The argive shield as it was said before weighted about 8 or more kilos (the whole armor and weapons 30) it was supported by arm and shoulder
(thats why there was the rim). Iphikrates introduced not a reformed hoplite but a new unit. Something between the staying power of hoplites and mobility of peltastes. They were something like reformed ekdromoi. Boots were introduced for first time to increace mobility, smaller shield without rim, longer spear so it would strike from safe distance the heavier hoplites, linothorax or leather armour, thracian helmet for better view and hearing. They became very popular after they defeated spartan ''mores'' more than one time. Some say that Phillipos took the idea of phalangites from them. They had even longer spear 6-9 meters smaller shield supported by hand and a neck strap. If anybody here being in army will know how tiring can be to hold something even as light as 3 kilos by hand for too much time.

My point exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idomeneas

If anybody here being in army will know how tiring can be to hold something even as light as 3 kilos by hand for too much time.

---

In that case how exactly do you explain classical hoplites holding their 8kg shields with one hand for extended period of times?

Either you have a small shield that can be tied to your forearm (which would make neck straps superfluous) or you have a 60-75 cm shield that does need a neckstrap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cataphract_Of_The_City

In that case how exactly do you explain classical hoplites holding their 8kg shields with one hand for extended period of times?

Either you have a small shield that can be tied to your forearm (which would make neck straps superfluous) or you have a 60-75 cm shield that does need a neckstrap.

---

The argive shield as I said before had the rim exactly for supporting the extra weight on shoulder. The weight was making the first piece that a soldier running away would drop. From there comes the insulting characterization ''Ripsaspis (Ριψάσπις)''= shield dropper. You can also see an example of how soldiers complained about its weight in Xenofon when leading a unit uphill shouted to a soldier who was slow and he responded that its easy for him to say cause he is on horse back and carries no shield. Offcourse then Xenofon dismounted took the shield from him and started walking fast uphill until the insults of the whole unit forced the lazy soldier to take back the shield.

Iphicrates almsot certainly reformed his peltasts to make them "cheap" hoplites - a mercenary peltast was paid only half the rate of a hoplite IIRC!

His defeat of the Spartans outside corinth was not achieved by these new troops, but by tradisional peltasts throwing javelins.

the later presence of "Peltasts" as elite pikemen in the Macedonian army defeated at Pydna is probably nothing more than a bit of typical military naming history - the British army still has "Fusileers", who do not use the Fusil, the American Army has "Rangers", who are not frontier scouts, etc - military names can sometimes have little or no bearing on the nature of the unit that carries them!

Possibly the later Peltasts became elite by way of mercenary peltasts beign an elite in eth army, then the guard troops adopting their name - but that's just supposition on my part.