Army and Weapons of Ancient Greece

In this video, I will talk about the organization of the army in ancient Greek city-states. Researchers count a total of 1,035 such states and it is not possible to discuss each one. Therefore, I will focus on describing the army of ancient Athens and highlight the most significant innovations in the armies of other city-states. The Athenian army was a militia of citizens aged 20 to 59. All citizens underwent military training. Every young man, Ephebe, upon reaching 18 years of age, would undergo a year of military training in Athens, after which he would receive weapons at a review and take an oath. In his second year of service, he would be included in the border patrol units, where he would receive field training. After this service, an Athenian was part of the military reserve until the age of 60. The defense of Athens was upheld by a powerful fleet and a very competent army, consisting of cavalry, in which the wealthiest citizens served, heavy infantry hoplites, and light infantry peltasts, recruited from the poorest citizens. All weaponry and equipment were acquired at the warrior's own expense. A very strong aspect of the Athenian army was its high sense of patriotism and a certain disdain for the armies of the eastern barbarians. A weak point of the Athenian army was the absence of unified command. The army was governed by a board of ten strategoi, elected from each philae for a year. Decisions were made collegially, and no strategos had more authority than another. Moreover, the strategoi commanded the army in turns, rotating daily, and if a battle fell, on the day when command was held by a complete incompetent, the Athenians faced a hard time. However, outright incompetence rarely made it into this board, although most magistrates in Athens were chosen by lot, strategoi, and magistrates in charge of finances were elected by open vote, and the people voted for those with at least some military experience. So, I'll begin my account with the infantry. The striking force of the Greek army in the described era was the phalanx of heavily armed warriors, the hoplites. It was usually formed in eight ranks deep, although if necessary, they could form a phalanx in four ranks, as Miltiades did with the center of his forces at the Battle of Marathon, or they could significantly increase the number of ranks. For example, Epaminondas increased the number of ranks on one flank to 50 at the Battle of Leuctra. The distance between ranks on the march was two meters. During an attack, one meter, and when repelling an attack, half a meter. An important part of the hoplites' equipment was the shield, called a hoplon, from which the name hoplite actually derives. However, according to another version, hoplon is a general term for the hoplites' equipment, and the shield itself was called an aspis. This was a round, slightly convex shield made of wood, and entirely covered with bronze, with a diameter of 80 to 100 centimeters. It had a double handle, consisting of a leather strap, or metal strip in the center, under which the arm was inserted up to the elbow, and a rope or leather handle at the opposite edge. The shield could be secured on the forearm, and its convex shape allowed it to be carried on the shoulder. This type of shield was easier to carry than a shield with a single handle, although it could not be manipulated as freely. The hoplon was invariably decorated with emblems, faces of Gorgons, Minotaurs, and other monsters known to the Greeks. The Spartans, however, introduced strict uniformity. They placed only a lambda, the initial letter of the name Lacedaemonians, on their shields. Another distinctive feature of the hoplites' equipment was the helmet. Several types of Greek helmets are known. The most common was the Corinthian helmet, which completely covered the head and face. It had a T-shaped opening for the mouth and eyes, and later a projection for nose protection. In the later Corinthian version of the helmet, openings were made for the ears to improve hearing. The Attic helmet did not fully cover the face, but had attached plates to protect the cheeks. Additionally, there was the Illyrian type helmet, which protected the head and cheeks, but not the face. Among the defensive equipment, two types of armor should be noted. The first type is the so-called muscle cuirass, designed to emphasize, sometimes in an exaggerated manner, the musculature. It consisted of chest and back plates fastened with hinges, sometimes with a semicircular plate hanging from the front to protect the groin. A later type of cuirass was made from several layers of linen fabric glued together about five centimeters thick. It consisted of a corset covering the torso and shoulders, and a skirt covering the lower abdomen, usually divided into teruges, flaps, to allow freedom of movement. The defensive armor of the hoplite was completed by bronze greaves, often reproducing the musculature of the leg. The primary weapon of the hoplite was a spear, the dory, with a diameter of five centimeters and a length of up to two-and-a-half meters, with a shaft made of ash or Cornell wood, and an iron leaf-shaped tip. To balance it, another iron tip was placed at the rear end of the shaft. This served as a counterweight, as well as for finishing off fallen enemies, and, in addition, it could be used in combat if the main tip broke. The hoplite's armament was complemented by a sword. Two types of swords were used. The cyphus, a straight, double-edged sword, about 60 centimeters long, and the copes, a sword, sharpened on the inner edge of the blade for slashing blows. Swords were used as secondary close combat weapons, and were used in exceptional cases, with the primary weapon of the hoplites remaining the spear. The main strength of the armies of the Greek city-states was provided by the aforementioned phalanx, a battle formation of heavy infantry, consisting of several ranks of soldiers. The hoplite shield only covered the left side of the warrior, but the protruding part of the hoplite covered the neighbor to the left, resulting in a dense line with overlapping shields, where each warrior's shield also protected the unshielded right side of his neighbor. This formation, bristling with spears, would press against the enemy with its entire mass, and if the enemy's soldiers were not formed in a phalanx, it would invariably push through the enemy's front line, leaving them with no choice but to flee or perish, unable to inflict any significant damage on their opponents. The Achilles heel of the phalanx was its flanks. If the enemy struck the flank of the phalanx, its formation would break, and it would be doomed to defeat. Therefore, the flanks were either protected by cavalry or, even better, positioned on a battlefield that allowed both flanks of the phalanx to be anchored against natural obstacles, such as ravines, rivers, swamps, and the like. In reality, the battle unfolded as follows. The phalanx would advance steadily. The enemy, seeing a wall of spears against which short swords and small spears were utterly useless, would try to retreat, but it was futile. The rear ranks would push forward. Thus, the phalanx would cold-bloodedly kill defenseless opponents, finishing off the fallen with the reverse side of the spear. Panic would inevitably ensue, command would be lost, and it would be every man for himself. Everyone would flee to save their lives. In close combat, the chances of withstanding the pressure of the Greek phalanx were extremely low, and no army that did not form a phalanx could withstand a determined attack by heavy infantry. The only way a well-organized infantry could counter the phalanx was by fighting from a distance. Using bows, they could defeat the phalanx, as depicted in the old movie, The Three Hundred Spartans. Therefore, when many films show Greek hoplites heroically fighting the enemy alone with spears and swords, and then winning the battle, it's not true. Try it yourself. Fight with a sword while carrying a heavy, cumbersome shield on your left arm, which fully occupies your arm to hold it. Even in individual combat, a professional warrior would be stronger than a Greek militiaman, and the primary opponents of the Greeks were the Persians. I can't guarantee that all Persian soldiers were highly skilled professionals, but the Persian immortals certainly were much stronger in individual combat than Greek militiamen. Remember my video about Socrates? In his youth, he was a sculptor, but he participated in several battles as a hoplite, and, in one of them, he even distinguished himself. It's clear that he had little chance of defeating a professional Persian warrior in single combat, who did nothing but fight, and had an extremely inconvenient shield for single combat. So, if it came to individual skirmishes, as shown in the movies, it's a sign that the phalanx formation has been broken, and that this phalanx will most likely be destroyed. The armies of other Greek city-states were very similar to that of Athens. Among them, the Spartan army stands out. It differed favorably from the Athenian army by ensuring unified command. The army was always led by one of the two kings, but the main difference was that the Spartan army, unlike the armies of other Greek city-states, was professional. Let me explain. The population of Sparta consisted of full citizens, the Spartiates, dependent peasants, the Perioeci, and the Helots, who were something between serfs and slaves. The Helots fiercely hated the Spartiates. Therefore, to maintain their power, the Spartiates engaged exclusively in military affairs. They were trained for war from the age of seven, when a child was taken from the family. And a Spartiate would engage in military affairs until old age, if he lived that long. Here is an example from Spartan history. Once, Sparta called on its allies for a campaign. The allies complained that Sparta demanded more warriors from them than it provided itself. That is not so, said the Spartan king. He seated the Spartan army to his right, and the allies to his left, then commanded, metal workers, stand up. Among the allies, some stood up. Among the Spartans, none did. Potters, stand up. Carpenters, stand up. By the end, almost all the allies were standing, while the Spartans remained seated as they were. You see, said the king, we alone provide true warriors. Another important innovation introduced into the combat actions of the phalanx was by the Thebans, or more precisely, the outstanding Theban commander, Epaminondas. He invented the so-called oblique formation. In the Battle of Leuctra in 371 BC, he deployed the army unevenly. On the left flank, he arranged the phalanx in 50 rows, while in the center and on the right flank, the formation remained in eight rows. The powerful left flank of the Thebans broke through the Spartan phalanx, and they were defeated. It is probably needless to mention that this new formation significantly enriched military science, and henceforth, many commanders used the concentration of forces on one of the flanks. In addition to heavy infantry, the armies of ancient Greek city-states also employed light infantry, peltasts. This type of troops derived its name from the crescent-shaped wicker shield covered with goat or sheepskin. The pelta had a hand grip in the center and a strap for carrying. Peltasts were armed with two, three javelins, up to one and a half meters long, often with throwing straps that allowed for increased force application when throwing. In most cases, they also carried close combat weapons, such as daggers and long knives. The position of light infantry was not precisely defined. It could be placed in front of the phalanx formation, on the flanks, behind it, or interspersed with hoplites. It all depended on the situation. Usually, peltasts served in a supporting role, but there were cases when they made a decisive contribution to the outcome of the battle. For example, in 391 BC, a detachment of peltasts, under the command of the talented strategist Iphicrates, attacked the Spartan phalanx. The heavily armed Spartan infantrymen could not harm the more agile peltasts who fled from the advancing Spartans. But as soon as the hoplites stopped, the peltasts immediately attacked them, from the front and flanks, hurling javelins at them. The hoplites were forced to halt and retreat. The Spartans' subsequent counterattack also failed. The peltasts managed to repel the Spartan cavalry, which also suffered significant losses. The Athenian phalanx of hoplites, arriving towards the end of the battle, finished the job. Demoralized and weakened by the encounter with the peltasts, the Spartans were completely defeated. Among the lightly armed warriors, it is worth mentioning slingers and archers. While slingers were eagerly used and brought considerable benefit to the army, good archers were scarce among the Greeks, except for the Cretan archers, who were somewhat more qualified. Greeks considered the bow to be a barbarian weapon and treated it quite disdainfully. There is not much to say about the Athenian cavalry, which, according to Pericles' estimates, numbered 1,200 horsemen. The cavalry played a supportive role in the Greek army and was used to guard the flanks of the phalanx, primarily the right, where hoplites were not protected by shields. Typically, horsemen engaged only with other horsemen and only decided to attack infantry when their ranks were disrupted. The usual weapons of a horseman were a sword and a long spear. The real heyday of cavalry came only in the army of Alexander the Great. According to researchers, most of the victories of the great commander were the result of the masterful use of cavalry. However, I won't be discussing Alexander the Great in this video. His activities deserve a separate discussion. And finally, about the Athenian fleet. Although I am discussing the fleet last, it undoubtedly played a crucial role and not only formed the basis of Athens' power, but even defined the foundation of Athenian society. Think about it. If the army were the main force in Athens, the wealthiest segments of the population, from which hoplites were recruited, would represent the main political power. However, if the Navy were the primary military force, as it was in reality, the poorest segments, from which ship crews were drawn, since sailors did not need to buy expensive equipment, would dominate in the political life. Therefore, in Athens, an unrestricted democracy prevailed. Athenian warships in the 5th century BC were divided into combat vessels, the so-called longships and transport ships, intended for the transportation of troops and military materials. The main type of combat vessel was the trireme, a three-decked warship. The bow of the trireme was sheathed in copper. The crew of a trireme consisted of 170 individuals. 62 in the upper row and 54 rowers in each of the two lower rows. In addition to rowers, the ships also had sailors who managed the sails and marine infantry, hoplites. The trireme was commanded by a trier arch, chosen from among wealthy citizens who financed the ship. Athenian citizens served as helmsmen and sailors. Most rowers were recruited from the medics and by the end of the Peloponnesian War from slaves. In naval combat, Athenians aimed to ram the enemy ship with the metal sheathed prow. Sometimes, by disabling oars and the helm on enemy ships, Athenians would board, throw bridges, and engage in hand-to-hand combat, aiming to capture the enemy vessel. The main naval port was Piraeus, protected from both landward and seaward attacks. With this, I conclude the story about the ancient Greek army. Goodbye.