Men of Bronze: Hoplite Warfare in Ancient Greece (41 page)

Eliot, C.W.J., and Mary Eliot. 1968. “The Lechaion Cemetery near Corinth.”
Hesperia
37:345–67.

Fagan, Garrett. 2009. “ ‘I Fell upon Him like a Furious Arrow’: Toward a Reconstruction of the Assyrian Tactical System.” In
New Perspectives on Ancient Warfare
, ed. Garrett G. Fagan and Matthew Trundle. Leiden: Brill, 81–100.

Furley, William D., and Jan Maarten Bremer. 2001.
Greek Hymns: Selected Cult Songs from the Archaic to the Hellenistic period
, 2 vols. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Gabriel, Richard A., and Donald W. Boose, Jr. 1994.
The Great Battles of Antiquity: A Strategic and Tactical Guide to Great Battles that Shaped the Development of War
. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood.

Goldsworthy, Adrian K. 1997. “The
Othismos
, Myths and Heresies: The Nature of Hoplite Battle.”
War in History
4:1–26.

Gomme, A. W. 1937.
Essays in Greek History and Literature
. Oxford: Blackwell.

———. 1945–56.
A Historical Commentary on Thucydides
, 3 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Greenhalgh, P.A.L. 1973.
Early Greek Warfare: Horsemen and Chariots in the Homeric and Archaic Ages
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Grote, George. 1869–70.
A history of Greece; from the earliest period to the close of the generation contemporary with Alexander the Great
, 12 vols. London.

Grundy, G. B. 1948.
Thucydides and the History of His Age
. Oxford: Blackwell.

Hanson, Victor Davis, ed. 1991.
Hoplites: The Classical Greek Battle Experience
. London: Routledge.

———. 1999.
The Other Greeks: The Family Farm and the Agrarian Roots of Western Civilization
, 2nd ed. Berkeley: University of California Press.

———. 2000.
The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece
, 2nd ed. Berkeley: University of California Press.

———. 2004.
Wars of the Ancient Greeks
. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian.

Helbig, Wolfgang. 1879.
Die Italiker in der Poebene
. Leipzig.

———. 1909. “Ein homerischer Rundschild mit eine Bügel.”
Jahreshefte des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes in Wien
12:1–70.

———. 1911. “Über die Einführungszeit der geschlossenen Phalanx.”
Sitzungsberichte der Koniglichen Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-philologische und historische Klasse
. Munich, 3–41.

Hornblower, Simon. 1991–2008.
A Commentary on Thucydides
, 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Jameson, Michael H. 1991. “Sacrifice before Battle.” In Hanson 1991:197–227. Keegan, John. 1976.
The Face of Battle
. New York: Viking Press.

Krentz, Peter. 1985. “The Nature of Hoplite Battle.”
Classical Antiquity
4: 50–61, trans. Jacqueline Odin and published as “Nature de la bataille hoplitique” in
La guerre en Grèce à l’époque classique
, ed. Pierre Brulé and Jacques Oulhen, Rennes, 1999, 205–17.

———. 1994. “Continuing the
Othismos
on
Othismos
.”
Ancient History Bulletin
8:45–49.

———. 2000. “Deception in Archaic and Classical Greek Warfare.” In
War and Violence in Ancient Greece
, ed. Hans van Wees. London: Duckworth and Classical Press of Wales, 167–200.

———. 2002. “Fighting by the Rules: The Invention of the Hoplite
Agôn
.”
Hesperia
71:23–39, reprinted in E. Wheeler, ed.,
The Armies of Classical Greece
(Burlington: Ashgate, 2007), 111–27.

———. 2010a.
The Battle of Marathon
. New Haven: Yale University Press.

———. 2010b. “A Cup by Douris and the Battle of Marathon.” In
New Perspectives on Ancient Warfare
, ed. Garrett G. Fagan and Matthew Trundle. Leiden: Brill, 183–204.

———. 2011. “Marathon and the Development of the Exclusive Hoplite Phalanx.” Forthcoming in a
BICS
supplement edited by C. Carey.

Kromayer, Johannes, and Georg Veith. 1928.
Heerwesen und Kriegführung der Griechen und Römer
. Munich: C. H. Beck.

Lazenby, John F. 1991. “The Killing Zone.” In Hanson 1991:87–109.

Lazenby, John F., and D. Whitehead. 1996. “The Myth of the Hoplite’s Hoplon.”
Classical Quarterly
n.s. 46:27–33.

Lorimer, H. L. 1947. “The Hoplite Phalanx.”
Annual of the British School at Athens
42:76–138.

Luginbill, Robert D. 1994. “Othismos: The Importance of the Mass-Shove in Hoplite Warfare.”
Phoenix
48:51–61.

Marshall, S.L.A. 1950.
The Soldier’s Load and the Mobility of a Nation
. Washington, D.C.: Combat Forces Press.

Matthew, Christopher A. 2009. “When Push Comes to Shove: What Was the
othismos
of

Hoplite Combat?”
Historia
58:395–415.

Mitford, William. 1823.
The History of Greece
. Boston: T. Bedlington and C. Ewer.

Müller, Karl Otfried. 1839.
The history and antiquities of the Doric race
, trans. G. C. Lewis and H. Tufnell, 2nd ed. London.

Nierhaus, R. 1938. “Eine frühgriechische Kampfform.”
Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts
53:90–113.

Nilsson, Martin P. 1929. “Die Hoplitentaktik und das Staatswesen.”
Klio
22:240–49.

Pittman, Allen. 2007. “’With Your Shield or On It’: Combat Applications of the Greek Hoplite Spear and Shield.” In
The Cutting Edge: Studies in Ancient and Medieval Combat
, ed. Barry Molloy. Stroud: Tempus, 64–76.

Pressfield, Steven. 1998.
Gates of Fire: An Epic Novel of the Battle of Thermopylae
. New York: Doubleday.

Pritchett, W. K. 1971–91.
The Greek State at War
, 5 vols. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Raaflaub, Kurt, and Nathan Rosenstein, eds. 1999.
War and Society in the Ancient and Medieval Worlds: Asia, the Mediterranean, Europe, and Mesoamerica
. Washington, D.C.: Center for Hellenic Studies.

Rawlings, Louis. 2000. “Alternative Agonies: Hoplite Martial and Combat Experiences beyond the Phalanx.” In
War and Violence in Ancient Greece
, ed. Hans van Wees. London: Duckworth and Classical Press of Wales.

———. 2007.
The Ancient Greeks at War
. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Rüstow, W., and H. Köchly. 1852.
Geschichte des griechischen Kriegswesens von der ältesten Zeit bis auf Pyrrhos
. Uarau: Verlags-comptoir.

Rutherford, Ian. 1995. “Apollo in Ivy: The Tragic Paean.”
Arion
3:112–35.

Santosuosso, Antonio. 1997.
Soldiers, Citizens, and the Symbols of War: From Classical Greece to Republican Rome, 500–167 B.C
. History and warfare. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.

Schwartz, Adam. 2002. “The Early Hoplite Phalanx: Order or Disarray?”
Classica & Mediaevalia
53:31–64.

Seiterle, G. 1982. “Techniken zur Herstellung der Einzelteile (Exkurs zum Schild Nr. 217).” In
Antike Kunstwerke aus der Sammlung Ludwig, II. Terrakotten und Bronze
, ed. Ernst Berger. Mainz: von Zabern, 250–63.

Snodgrass, Anthony M. 1964.
Early Greek Armour and Weapons
. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

———. 1965. “The Hoplite Reform and History.”
Journal of Hellenic Studies
84:110–22.

———. 1993. “The ‘Hoplite Reform’ Revisited.”
Dialogues d’histoire ancienne
19:47–61.

———. 1999.
Arms and Armor of the Greeks
. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

———. 2006.
Archaeology and the Emergence of Greece
. New York: Cornell University Press. Snyder, Zach, et al. 2007.
300
. Burbank, Calif.: Distributed by Warner Home Video.

Strauss, Barry S. 1996. “The Athenian Trireme, School of Democracy.” In
Dēmokratia: A Conversation on Democracies, Ancient and Modern
, ed. Josiah Ober and Charles W. Hedrick. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 313–25.

Van Wees, Hans. 2000. “The Development of the Hoplite Phalanx: Iconography and Reality in the Seventh Century.” In
War and Violence in Classical Greece
, ed. Hans van Wees. London: Duckworth and Classical Press of Wales, 125–66.

Van Wees, Hans. 2004.
Greek Warfare: Myths and Realities
. London.

Wheeler, Everett. 2007. “Battle: (A) land battles.” In
The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Warfare
, 2 vols., ed. Philip A. G. Sabin, Hans van Wees, and Michael Whitby. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1:195–202.

CHAPTER 8

Large Weapons, Small Greeks: The Practical Limitations of Hoplite Weapons and Equipment

ADAM SCHWARTZ

Physical Characteristics of the Hoplite Shield

During the entire period when hoplites held sway over Greek land warfare, they were defined above all in terms of their primary offensive and defensive weapons, namely, the spear and the peculiarly characteristic shield; indeed, it is nearly impossible to conceive of the idea “hoplite” without these. Of these weapons, it was first and foremost the hoplite’s shield that was his defining characteristic; and it was this shield that effectively set him apart from any other troop type in the Greek world. Moreover, whereas all other items in the hoplite’s equipment were subject to differing degrees of change and development over time, the shield and the spear were the only items to remain essentially unaltered throughout the entire hoplite era. The fact that they did not undergo any larger-scale structural change is significant: evidently their design was eminently suited to their purpose right from the outset, and it continued to be so successful that it needed few or no adjustments later on.

Consequently, attempting an assessment of the shield’s measurements, weight, and handling characteristics is of crucial importance for an understanding of what could be done with hoplite armor and weapons. What knowledge can be obtained about hoplite shields is largely derived from two types of sources. First, although shields, unlike other arms and armor, were invariably made chiefly of perishable materials and thus have largely vanished, a few have been at least partly preserved. Among these is the famous Spartan shield captured by the Athenians during the fighting at Pylos in 425; an Etruscan shield of the hoplite type found at Bomarzo in Italy; the Basle shield, found in Sicily; and a bronze shield facing, recovered at Carchemish on the Euphrates.
¹
To this should be added numerous bronze shield covers excavated at Olympia.
²
Second, there are many representations of shields in iconography—representations that are frequently quite detailed and revealing, and which therefore allow a great measure of accuracy in determining shield measurements.

Based on this, it may be laid down that the shield was circular, noticeably concave, and on average 90 cm to 1 m across. These characteristics are also particularly evident
from the large amount of vase paintings of hoplites holding their shields in different ways, offering good views of the weapon from all angles.
³

The shield core was invariably made of wood,
⁴
and while almost all original shield cores have therefore long since disintegrated, there are a few archaeological shield finds with some wood still preserved. This is the case with the Bomarzo shield, inside which were found remains of wood identified as poplar, as well as with the Basle shield, which had a core made of willow.
⁵
The fact that this type of wood was especially suitable for shields is corroborated by Pliny the Elder, in whose
Naturalis Historia
both poplar and willow, and in fact all hardwoods in the group
aquatica
, are described as the most suitable wood for shields (
scutis faciendis aptissima
), because they are not only tough but also comparatively pliable, and thus very resistant to breaking.
⁶
Several Greek sources, however, indicate that willow (
itea
, also reckoned among the
aquatica
) was in fact the normal material.
⁷
Its characteristics lent the wood durability and resistance against penetration while at the same time allowing the wood to contract somewhat in the event of a penetration (
plaga contrahit se protinus cluditque suum vulnus
), and so helped minimize damage from edged weapons sustained during combat. In addition to these characteristics, poplar is also suitable for shield making because of its very light weight compared with, for example, oak or ash.
⁸

The shield core was made by fastening wooden laths to the rim, running from side to side. The laths would be joined to each other by a system of grooves and tongues that were glued together in order to achieve a maximum of structural stability.
⁹
According to Adolf Rieth, some shield cores may even have been made from several very thin layers of laths, with each new layer running at right angles to the preceding one.
¹⁰
It is obvious that this manufacturing process would have yielded a gain in resilience: a modern parallel is ordinary plywood, which is extremely durable and nearly impossible to break. While it is possible that the views offered of the inward-facing surfaces of shields on the Chigi olpe—those held by the advancing phalanx on the left-hand side—reveal just such a manufacturing technique, it cannot have been ubiquitous, as the Bomarzo shield had only one layer of wood. In this case, then, it was obviously advantageous to affix the handle grips in a way that ensured that, with the shield held correctly, the grain ran
horizontally
across the shield, offering much better flexibility in case of simultaneous pressure on both sides of the shield (rather than simultaneous pressure on the “top” and “bottom” of the shield, an unlikely scenario). This measure would have increased the shield’s combat effectiveness in no small degree.
¹¹