Scholarly Debate

As with many topics in the ancient world, there is much debate on the authenticity of sources and information. This lack of information leaves behind a vacuum for much debate, speculation, and interpretation of ancient sources by modern scholars. The goal of this section is to identify some conflicting viewpoints on hoplite battle and provide sides opposing the traditional viewpoint with some representation.

One of the modern scholars who is vigorously opposing the orthodox view of the hoplite is Peter Krentz. He argues that the weight of a hoplite’s equipment is much lighter than those of the orthodox view. In the orthodox view of weight, the equipment is a combined total of 72 pounds (Delbrück). This view on weight is hypothetical but was largely accepted because it was a universal belief that hoplites were heavily armored. Krentz however, argues that the maximum hoplite equipment would be no more more then fifty pounds and the minimum as low as seventeen (Krentz). This readjusted figure for weight makes more since for the supposed mile long charge of marathon. However, the old belief of hoplites in fifty plus pounds of armor is still widespread. Modern reenactments of men in hoplite armor has displayed that hoplites could not have run at full speed for a mile and it is more likely that the marched until they were within distance of the Persian encampment. It is not so easy to disclaim ancient sources such as Herodotus though, so it seems likely that the hoplites either jogged in heavy armor or they actually wore much lighter armor then we initial thought.

Looking at examples from the battle of Marathon, several aspects of the fight are debated. We know from Herodotus that Miltiades waited for his turn in command to start the assault (HDT 6.110.1). Herodotus mentions Persian cavalry as being there, but he says nothing of it in the battle itself. Scholars typically take this one of two ways. The first is that the cavalry was out to get supplies and scout the land. This would mean that Miltiades was waiting and observing the Persians for an opening  to attack. Another view is that the cavalry was in the battle, however the light armed Persian archers wouldn’t be able to break the phalanx.

After the charge into battle, what happens after the run at Marathon is also debatable. Herodotus in his great Histories states that center of the Greek line was broken but the flanks won their respective battles and “brought their wings together” (HDT 6.113.2). Richard A. Gabriel would argue that this is a tactical decision. One that fools the enemy into being surrounded and engineered by Miltiades (Gabriel). Herodotus makes no mention of this tactical decision, but it would be hard to pull off in the heat of a battle. Especially with the Corinthian helmet, which constricted view and hearing and that most hoplites were highly inexperienced. Some would argue that this wasn’t planned but the hoplite army turned to help the center and the Persians panicked. This debate has lead the notable scholar Hans van Wees to dismiss the tactic as “a story of ideal hoplite behavior pushed to the extremes” (Wees). 

A lack of detailed accounts in ancient history means that without interpretation we cannot get the full picture. Keep in mind that these are just some of the many examples of debate within the Greek world and you should always rely on multiple sources.

Leave a Reply