Hoplite Arms and Armor
The foundation of the Hoplite warrior, along with the tactics that they used, were ultimately a derivation of the equipment they carried. The word Hoplite is derived from the Greek word “hopla” which literally translates to “stuff”, thus a Hoplite would be a man with “stuff”. Though this reliance on the equipment at hand to determine the tactics an army would use is nothing new and is still a fact today, along with the tactics themselves determining the equipment used. This leads to an evolution of arms that makes it very hard to pin point the exact equipment used by the Hoplites at any given time. Though for this study we shall view what was considered the ‘status-quo’ of an average Hoplite’s equipment, the earliest that we see a use of all the equipment would be in the 7th century BC by the last king of the Argine line, King Pheidon. The equipment that follows was considered the minimum of what a Hoplite needed to be properly fielded. The Hoplites of most city-states were a militia, which resulted in the soldiers providing their own armor. Thus there were variations from person to person that depended upon the individuals wealth, personal preferences, and armor that had already been in the family line [Bradford A With Shield, Sword, and Spear pg. 65].
The Hoplite was a heavy infantry, able to sustain a substantial beating thanks to their level of armor. The trade-off of which being that the armor would weigh down the individual soldier, both slowing and tiring them at a faster rate than a much less armored infantry. The panoply (all of the stuff) including weapons, clothing, and armor usually ranged from 50-60 pounds. The use of armor and shields was not foreign the Greeks, the tales of Homer are filled with the references to both, and how a fallen warrior’s armor was a trophy:
Homer, Iliad Book 13
Even so fell he, and about him rang his armour dight with bronze. And Teucer rushed forth eager to strip from him his armour, but Hector, even as he rushed, cast at him with his bright spear.
What Pheidon did do, was organize these armored men to work together [Bradford A pg. 65].
Armor
Hoplon shield
This round concave shield was constructed of wood with an outer layer of bronze. It featured two straps, one in the middle of the shield, and another on the outer edge which allowed a Hoplite to wear the shield on his forearm; putting the middle strap by his elbow and holding the outer strap in his hand. The shield could be made heavier and more formidable, than those that were held in one hand because the weight was distributed over an area, which allowed for the shield to weigh around 15 pounds. The dual strap design also made it harder for a soldier to have his shield knocked out of his hand by a particularly forceful blow. The hand hold being by the shields edge could give the soldier more coordination with the shield, and could also allow the Hoplite to deliver a ‘punch’ with his shield rim. A tactic such as this could also be reinforced by the fact that the bronze at the edge of the shield was also several tenth’s of an inch thicker at the outer rim. Considering the weight of the shield, a blow such as that could be rather potent, especially in a desperate situation [Krentz P The Battle of Marathon pg. 48].
The shield’s diameter (about a yard), covered most of the Hoplite, protecting an average man of that period from chin to knee. The concavity of the shield, along with its size, could then allow for one to press his knee, shin and/or shoulder into the shield for protection and for pushing over enemy Hoplites. The ability to use the hoplon shield in this way not only made it a very effective piece of armor, but also a very vital and potent weapon in combat [Bradford A pg. 65].
The disadvantages of it come from its design advantages. First and foremost being its weight would tire the wielder’s arm in combat if used for extended periods of time. The straps made the shield harder to drop if there was a decision to retreat and the location of the straps made the shield awkward to use if held parallel to the body. This required the Hoplite to reach over to the right in order to protect that side. The shield works much more efficiently when held perpendicular to the body with the shield pointing to the enemy. The left and right sides of the body would be equally protected, plus would allow it to be much more easily braced on the knee, shin and shoulder. The use of this stance gave the Hoplite a much smaller profile, and in turn a smaller target for their opponents as well, similar to how fencers point their flanks to their opponents to reduce their own profile.
Breastplate
The breastplate of the Hoplite was a completely enclosing piece of armor, protecting the front, back and sides of an individual. The construction of these vary from leather to full bronze, but remain the same in concept. When the hoplon was held perpendicular to the wielder, the breastplate would offer equal protection on both sides if an enemy came at an angle around the shield; if held parallel the armor in the back would add extra weight that wouldn’t often be used but would offer protection in the event of an attack from behind. The weight would tire out the wearer but that would vary with the construction, with leather being a much lighter (approximately 8 pounds), though weaker, choice than bronze (approximately 15 pounds) [Krentz P pg. 47].
Corinthian Helmet
The Corinthian helmet was, at the beginning, the most popular style of helmet used by Hoplites. The helmet protected the parts of the head that were left exposed by the hoplon, with cheek plates that covered most of the face leaving only a small gap below the nose to breathe and speak. This gap went up the helmet, separating at the nose, and ended at two eye holes. This gap is the only opening on the helmet, cutting off hearing and peripheral vision, in exchange for a high level of protection. Being constructed of only a single piece of bronze, they would of been incredibly sturdy, having no seams between pieces of bronze that could break under the duress of battle. They are also often shown with a crest the extends far above the helmet, this may have been symbolic as an indication of wealth, or it may have also been a visual trick that would make the wearer appear larger and more intimidating [Krentz P pg. 46].
The helmet may have worked similar to a horse blinder, keeping the soldier focused on what was directly in front of
them. This would keep an individual from knowing of his comrades to his immediate left and right, leading to a conservative but still stubborn soldier. The conservative nature from being unaware whether he was being supported or not, making him less likely to go on the offensive unless he could see his brothers-in-arms shield (being the point that would be closest to him and easiest to see). This sense of security would also encouraging units in each rank to stay in formation if not cohesion. The stubborn nature would be from not knowing if his army was being slaughtered, something that would surely increase the risk of taking flight. The lack of peripheral vision would have encouraged the Hoplite to keep the enemy in front of him where he can see them, keeping his defense up and allowing him to whither a hail of blows as they are absorbed by the bulwark of is hoplon. The desire to neither retreat nor advance would attribute to long drawn out battles, that could only be decided by the particularly skilled or the particularly brave
To a soldier, an opponent that does not waver nor make a mistake, and seems almost invincible would appear as a very daunting and courageous foe. On the other side of the same coin, an individual Hoplite would not be able to see if he was being flanked and would be susceptible to attacks from the sides, but trying to get around the shield of a Hoplite with others within attacking distance to either side would require a very brave (or perhaps reckless) individual. Over time the desire for peripheral vision and hearing won out to protection and the helmet became more open.
Greaves
Similar to the helmet, the greaves were used to protect areas that were not protected by the shield, the shins and calves. Usually made of bronze they had to be custom made to fit the wearer. The inability to make a ‘one-size fits all’ greave would make them less common on the battlefield being a more expensive piece of equipment. Nevertheless, its importance is evident. Unprotected, the shins could be easily be damaged or injured, since the shin is an already sensitive area, a strong enough or well placed attack would injure it and make the soldier easier prey. The greaves could also be used to help brace the shin against the shield and make it a more stalwart defense. This could, in theory, be done without the greave; but a strong enough attack on the shield would injure, or even in some cases break the bones, of an unprotected shin.
Weapons
Spear
A thrusting spear was the main offensive weapon of the Hoplite, light enough to be carried in one hand while leaving the other free to hold the shield. It was often carried in pairs in case one of the spears were to break [Mitchell]. They appear to be approximately 7 feet in length when compared to the the height of the men on the Chigi vase, with each man being around 5′-2″ to 5’-4″ [Bradford A pg. 65]. The spear comprised of two ends, an iron leaf shaped spear head at the front, as well as a bronze butt spike that could also be used if the main spear end was to break off in combat [Krentz, pg. 49]. This weapon was incredibly advantageous to Hoplite warfare, due to the fact that it could be used to attack ones opponent while still out of reach and while nestled behind the security of the shield. The spear gave the Hoplite the ability to attack warriors, equipped with shorter weapons, with impunity. The reach could also be used to get around the shield of an opposing Hoplite, attacking the weak points of the neck, quads, groin, and feet which could be achieved through under and overhand thrusts. When used underhand one would of run the risk of possibly hurting someone behind the Hoplite when the spear is drawn back to deliver a blow. To avoid this, a warrior in the following rank would have to stand a little over 4.5 feet behind the forward to avoid taking a blow from the butt spike, with the assumptions that the spear is held near the middle for balance and is brought back about a foot to deliver a thrust.
Short Sword
The short sword implemented by the Hoplites, usually carried as a sidearm, would have been used in worst case scenarios [Krentz P pg. 49]. The spear is a much more practical weapon and would give the wielder an advantage over someone with a short sword, but the wooden shaft could be broken with ease compared to metal. If both spears were to be broken, including head and butt spike, the short sword would have been a preferable alternative than resorting to the use of nothing more than fist and shield, at least until another spear could be found. In order to use the sword, the Hoplite would have to rotate his body about 45-90 degrees in order for the sword to reach. The hoplon would then be held near parallel to the body to protect from oncoming blows, which opens up the issues stated earlier about using the shield this way.