Were the hoplites at Marathon "Bronze Clad"?

Hi guys,

I know this is a bit out of the time line of EB but when I read Persian Fire by Tom Holland (very good I thought with the way Persians, Assyrians + Medians used to execute/torture people, although at times his style of writing did mean you had to read a page 2-3 time to actually figure out what he was talking about at times) he mentioned at the battle of Marathon the Hoplites being "Bronze Clad".

Now of course the helmets, greaves + surface of the aspis were of course bronze. However with other things I had read I was lead to believe by this point (c'490 BC) that the linothorax was in dominant use by hoplites. Of course these were more than likely re-enforced with bronze scales.

So in a sense I've just answered my own question it seems that every part of a hoplites equipment would have had bronze attached to it (even the spear has a bronze butt on the back end).

I think it was that he "may have" (the book is currently back at my house in Manchester, so a couple of weeks before I get my hands on it to check) said that "with their bronze curriass's (sp) gleaming in the sun."

Well something along those lines anyway...

So what was more dominate armour at Marathon for the Athenian hoplites?

1. - The linothorax

or

2. - Bronze curriass's (sp)

Linothorax
Full bronze curiasses were WAY too expensive for the average farmer/soldier to get

I think you may have gotten it mixed with the Romans, hoplites were fairly well-to-do so they had a reason to fight to the death like that.

A shaped bronze cuirass was a personally tailored item, made to measure for the wearer.

The ancient equivalent of a Saville Row suit, if you like. (In case you don't know what a Saville Row suit is, look it up - you are talking $5,000-£10,000 worth of suit here!)

So only the very-well off could afford kit like that. For the average soldier, the most important items are spear, shield, sword, helmet, and body armor - in that order. You buy body armor with whatever funds you've got left after buying the rest.

Actually, armour was often passed from father to son, and the Saville Rw analogy is a bit faulty, because you can get a tailored suit for £240, with an extra pair of trousers and a matching hankerchief. Not every curiass was a particually pretty thing, and few in this period were muscled. I'm not sure, but from what I know of the period, artistic depictions from the early fifth century show breastplates, not linothrakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Very Super Market

I think you may have gotten it mixed with the Romans, hoplites were fairly well-to-do so they had a reason to fight to the death like that.

---

Very true. Our word "hoi polloi"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Hoi polloi (Ancient Greek: οἱ πολλοί), an expression meaning "the many" in Greek, is used in English to denote "the masses" or "the people", usually in a derogatory sense. Synonyms for "hoi polloi" include "...commoners, great unwashed, minions, multitude, plebeians, proletariat, rabble, rank and file, riffraff, the common people, the herd, the many, the masses, the peons, the sardines, the working class".[1]

---

is where the word "hoplite" comes from.

However, as we know, those who formed the ranks of the hoplitai had to provide their own weapons / armor etc, and thus had to be much more well to do than the rabble that comes to mind when we say that word.

As three people with Roman names have just posted in a row, I would like to say that your names are irritatingly long.

*AHEM*

Like people have said before, full bronze armor were probably only worn by elites/rich people. Most other would probably have had less extravagant armor. However, you would see nothing but the bronze shields and helmets of the greeks so that's probably a reasonable answer.

PS: Here's a cool marathon artifact:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RO...OfMarathon.png

And 'bronze clad' is more poetic than 'carrying a lot of bronze, but actually clothed in layers of linen, glued together to form a highly effective but light armour, except for some who couldn't afford that and one or two show-offs how really are bronze clad.'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maeran

And 'bronze clad' is more poetic than 'carrying a lot of bronze, but actually clothed in layers of linen, glued together to form a highly effective but light armour, except for some who couldn't afford that and one or two show-offs how really are bronze clad.'

---

Don't get all Homeric on us now.


Question: Were the hoplites upper-class, middle-class (if such a thing existed at the time), or a combination of both?

That's a question with a different answer in every era, generally the later you go the lower the property requirement, and hence often the quality.

As said already the bronze cuirass was to expensive for the average man. So when the book said the greeks were clad in bronze he probably meant the helmets, greaves, and the hoplon shield.

That probably could include lino reinforced with bronze scales as well.

Describing the greek line as clad in bronze also would have been very dramatic description of the enemy.

An important tidbit which I feel is slightly overlooked in this thread: These bronze cuirasses would mostly have been of the "bell" design, and not of the typical "muscular" appearance.

Hey, I said that.

It's worth saying again though, just because armour is bronze doesn't mean it is high quality in this period. From what I know the front-rankers would all have greaves and breastplate, as well as helm, sword, shield and spear. The less well equipped soldiers would be placed in the rear ranks.

We should suppose that the Greeks were well armoured, because by all accounts Persian archery had little dicernable effect.

Herodotus' verdict says a great deal about the ability of the Persian war-machine to deal with the Greeks in this ear,

Roughly, "They wore no armour, they carried no weapons, they did not understand and they did not know hoe to fight."

Yeah, but you didn't say bell-cuirass :clown:

You're just upset because I used my favourite Herodotean quote!:clown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Persian Cataphract

Yeah, but you didn't say bell-cuirass :clown:

---

THIS:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1131/...a5a51a.jpg?v=0

NOT:

http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/images...992.180.3a.jpg

Is what you're refering to right?

[QUOTE=Tribunus Tiberius Claudius Marcellus;2117273]Very true. Our word "hoi polloi" is where the word "hoplite" comes from.


thought it came from the word hoplon for a kind of shield or spear used

according to the history channel, the spartans at thermopoly had for the most part lamellar armor which if memory serves is a composite of linen and scale but that is the spartans at thermopolae and not the athenians at marathon

... What?

He is saying the Spartans used lamellar at Thermopylae, but that doesn't necessarily mean the Athenians wore it at Marathon. I think...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john

He is saying the Spartans used lamellar at Thermopylae-

---

A composition of linen and scale, he said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribunus Tiberius Claudius Marcellus

Very true. Our word "hoi polloi" is where the word "hoplite" comes from.

---

Actually, Tribunus Tiberius Claudius Marcellus, hoi polloi is not 'our word': οἱ πολλοί (hoi polloi) means 'the many': Pericles used it in his funeral oration to contrast with οἱ ὀλίγοι (hoi oligoi, think oligarchy), 'the few', and although I guess in English it looks like hoipolloi could be mutated into hoplite, in fact ὁπλίτης (hoplite) derives from ὅπλον (hoplon), meaning 'amour' or 'kit' or maybe 'tool'. Hoplite has nothing to do with hoi polloi, at least not in Greek. :wall:

Wikipedia gets this one right, but check out the LSJ online at perseus.

Spartan hoplites and lamellar?? I am rather doubtfull :inquisitive:

Since every Hoplite had to supply his own equipment isn't it possible that he choose what he could afford, and thought usefull so not necessary the heaviest bronze curiass but something more light.

He could just aswell think "me and the others use the dory overhand so we always hold the aspis before us and it almost covers us completaly (accept the head but thats the helm for)... so why would I need a heavy and expensive cuirass I can hardly afford which possibly just slows me down as the enemy will never gets past my aspis anyway..."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olaf Blackeyes

Linothorax
Full bronze curiasses were WAY too expensive for the average farmer/soldier to get

---

I'm afraid I have to prove you wrong here. In the battle of Marathon, the Athenian side numbered 10,000 citizen-hoplites, meaning they were of the highest class of Athenian society. Not only were they able to afford a full bronze armor, but they also had it created according to their height/weight and body analogy in general.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Actually, armour was often passed from father to son, and the Saville Rw analogy is a bit faulty, because you can get a tailored suit for £240, with an extra pair of trousers and a matching hankerchief. Not every curiass was a particually pretty thing, and few in this period were muscled. I'm not sure, but from what I know of the period, artistic depictions from the early fifth century show breastplates, not linothrakes.

---

Well, while this may be true up to some extent, we are very certain that every citizen hoplite (of at least Athens) had his own armor made by a blacksmith according to his proportions. Which basically defies what you say about equipement heritage, as not all sons are identical to their fathers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribunus Tiberius Claudius Marcellus

Very true. Our word "hoi polloi" is where the
word "hoplite" comes from.

---

I'm afraid you got it wrong here, sir. The word 'Hoplites' (ΟΠΛΙΤΗΣ in Greek) comes from the word 'hoplon' (ΟΠΛΟΝ in Greek) which means 'weapon'. So basically 'hoplites' means 'arms-bearer'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Megas Methuselah

Question: Were the hoplites upper-class, middle-class (if such a thing existed at the time), or a combination of both?

---

Upper-class deffinately. There were 10,000 Athenian hoplites that fought at Marathon, which is 1/2 of the total force of voting male citizens of Athens (20,000). When Athens went out to fight, they (as did all other poleis) sent out about 1/3 (when campaigning far from home) to 1/2 (when close to home, as with Marathon) of their total force.

Maion

Are the marine contingents on their ships counted in that fraction? Also what about expeditions like that one that utterly failed to take Syracuse and cost them like 5000 men? Would those be a % of their standard army or raised in addition to that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Are the marine contingents on their ships counted in that fraction? Also what about expeditions like that one that utterly failed to take Syracuse and cost them like 5000 men? Would those be a % of their standard army or raised in addition to that?

---

Why should they be? I mean, there was no naval battle. It was just 10,000 citizen hoplites. As for the Syracousan Expedition, by that time (Peloponnnesian Wars), the city-states started using more mercenaries and slaves.

Maion

Well you said 1/3 - 1/2 of total citizenry were usually mobilized for war with an implication that that was a generalization for that period. I'm asking whether or not marines are counted in that 1/3rd to 1/2 or if they were in addition to it.

I believe they do, not sure about it though. You see, my knowledge of Athenian marines is rather limited.

Maion

I am enjoying Antisocialmunkey's responses in these forums. Good pics too, very much to the point.

Just wiki'd Solons laws, which mentions the 4-fold military class system (hence "Classical") he proposed for Athens. Pentacosiomedimnoi remains my favourite Greek word.

I think the heavy spearmen who formed the core of Athen's army are equivalent to the middling/upper Romans who made up the Triarii. Perhaps they tended to be the older more solid guys (whose fathers were dead so they inherited the farm/boat/business) who might have fought as psiloi when they were younger.

Their income was listed as between 200-299 medimnoi, so there's a fair range of incomes, so I guess its fair to say they had a range of equipment. Knights had 300-499, and the top brass had 500+.

Is it fair to say they are equivalent to the small business owners, skilled tradesmen and middle managers of our society, middle to upper-middle class? The sort of guys who could afford 2 houses, or a decent sized boat?

I recall a post on one of these sites referencing the cost of equiping a knight in the middle ages. The armour was a huge fraction of the cost: a mighty weight of metal, costing more than his horse IIRC. I suppose it was similar in Athens. Armour was stripped from the vanquished and dedicated to the Gods, it was certainly highly valued.

Were the Hippeis present at the battle? There were the 10 Polemarchs, so there were some of the upper crusty present (only Pentacosiomedimnoi were eligible to be generals) but IIRC there was suspicion of a plot by the upper classes to let the Persians in to restore the oligarchs. Maybe it was just one faction, those naughty Pisitratids and their allies (or some retrograde Alcmaeonidae).

I guess there were psiloi were present at Marathon but they didn't rate a mention, in the same way the French didn't count the politically irrelevant at Poitiers, only the knights.

I think that the psiloi just weren't very common until the Peloponnesian War.

Yeah, I believe that someone said something about city states employing more mercenaries and slaves later on due to economic and other factors.

what exactly are psiloi?

Psiloi are the light and missile infantry regiments, called as such because of their 'light' equipment (Psilos in Greek meaning 'light'). So psiloi are basically javelineers (Akontistai), slingers (Sphendonetai), archers (Toxotai) and pre-Peloponnesian peltasts (Peltastai).

Maion

Thank you for the information

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Well you said 1/3 - 1/2 of total citizenry were usually mobilized for war with an implication that that was a generalization for that period. I'm asking whether or not marines are counted in that 1/3rd to 1/2 or if they were in addition to it.

---

At the time of Marathon, the Athenian navy is in its infancy and in all probability the "marines" would have just been ordinary hoplites on ships. They probably wouldn't even go on board until a naval battle was thought to be imminent (c.f. the behaviour of the Plataian hoplites at Artemision ten years later). However, later on, when Athens was a maritime power, her marines were her only standing army; though not necessarily professional, they would be mobilised all year round (though not necessarily two or more years in a row), regardless of whether the State made war or peace in that period.