Week 4 Lecture 2 03/28/2014
Week 4 Lecture 2
03/28/2014
CLST 330 – Jan. 30th Ancient Greek Warfare: War and Society: In all societies there is a two=way relationship between the ethics of war and culture in general War was not an exceptional event, but a component of the ancient Greek lifestyle The study of the “sociology of war” is an important field of modern Greek history War and Politics: The Greeks themselves considered war (between states, parties, irregular groups, etc.) a part of politics and economics The Origins of Greek warfare Homer: Because of their nature, the poems of Homer are not historically correct The world they describe is a work of poetic imagination However, they is evidence for what their audience knew, believed, and imagined about the age of heroes Heroes and Chariots (Iliad, 11.210): “And Hector leapt in his armour from his chariot to the ground, and brandishing his two sharp spears went everywhere throughout the host, urging them to fight, and roused the dreadful din of battle” Heroes and Soldiers in Homer: Contrary to traditional view, in the Homeric poems the mass of soldiers is important and frequently decisive The poet focuses on the duels of the heroes, but they rarely determine the outcome of the battle Homer and the Hoplites: In Homer, there are mass battles and sometimes soldiers fight in close formation However, this does not mean the true hoplite phalanx was known, and the fats movement of troops is not compatible with it Contradictions and inconsistencies in the Homeric description of battles may be the result of the long process of oral composition and of the artificial nature of the world they describe There is also the ideological factor – the combat they describe allows the heroes to stand out and play the role of models for the aristocratic audience of the poems Hoplite reform? Traditional view – an important change in military tactics took place between c. 750 and 600 BC in a large part of the Greek world and this change also had important consequences in politics Revisionist view – there was no important change in warfare, and military tactics had no role in the process of polis formation
Archaeology and the Hoplites: Archaeological evidence confirms that starting from the end of the 8 th century BC, the large round shield with double handle (hoplon or aspis) was adopted by Greek warriors Such a shield is not suitable to any tactics other than the phalanx Other part of the armour also appear, which increase the defensible ability of the infantry warrior E.g. Bronze armour from the tomb of Argos, end of 8 th century BC Why a Military Reform? Between the end of the Bronze Age and the Persian Wars, Greek warfare is mostly within the Greek world There was no need to adapt to enemies who used different tactics – fairly consistent and effective The reforms must be the result of factors other than technical advancements of the military The view of Aristotle (Politics, 1297b): “And although it is proper that the government should be drawn only from those who possess heavy armour, yet it is not possible to define the amount of the propertyqualification absolutely and to say that they must possess so much, but only to consider what sort of amount is the highest that is compatible with making those who have a share in the constitution more numerous than those who have not, and to fix that limit. Also people have a way of being reluctant to serve when there is a war if they do not get rations and are poor men, but if somebody provides food they want to fight. In some states the citizenbody consists not only of those who are serving as heavyarmed soldiers, but also of those who have so served; and at Malea the citizenbody consisted of these, while the magistrates were elected from those who were actually on service. And indeed the earliest form of constitution among the Greeks after the kingships consisted of those who were actually soldiers, the original form consisting of the cavalry for war had its strength and its preeminence in cavalry, since without orderly formation heavyarmed infantry is useless, and the sciences and systems dealing with tactics did not exist among the men of old times, so that their strength lay in their cavalry; but as the states grew and the wearers of heavy armour had become stronger, more persons came to have a part in the government.” Summary of the view of Aristotle: Military structure and political structure mirror one another: those who play the most important role in warfare also rule the state A change in military tactics is also a political change The view of modern historians: The process of polis formation also caused the proliferation of frontier wars, to expand or defend the territory Hoplites are actually defensive soldiers whose function was the defense of the agricultural plains Hoplites provided their own armour There must have been enough citizens wealthy enough to do so, and willing to fight
The political and social developments of the early polis were not caused by changes in military tactics; rather, it is the social and political context that influences warfare Military structure and Political Structure: Athens: the top 2 classes of Solon are also the most important component of the army – the 10 tribes of Kleisthenes are also units of the city army Greek War until the Persian Wars: Predominance of relatively limited warfare, both in the frequency of wars and in their scope Raids for booty, usually private initiatives, and limited border conflicts were the rule Allout war for the destruction of the opponent seems to have been rare Given the limited scale and intensity of war, only a part of the fighting potential was employed Full hoplites were a minority of the potential warriors, but their place in the first rank of the formation, their superior armament, and probably their social status made them the warriors of choice Soon, they became the standard fighter of Greek wars Hoplite War and Mentality: Highly ritualized Accompanied by religious rituals Regulated by a code of honour and a mentality based on discipline, endurance, selfcontrol, solidarity and the subordination of the single individual to the collective success Tyrtaeus: “Let each man hold, standing firm, both feet planted on the ground, biting his lip with his teeth, covering with the belly of his broad shield his thighs and legs, his breast and shoulders…let each man, closing with the enemy, fighting handtohand with long spear or sword, wound and take himl and setting foot against foot, and resting shield against shield, crest against crest, helmet against helmet let him fight his man breast to breast, grasping the holt of his sword or of his long spear” Strabo, Geography: “Now in general these cities (Eretria and Chalcis) were in accord with one another, and when difference arose concerning the Lelantine Plain they did not so completely break off relations as to wage their wars in all respects according to the will of each, but they came to an agreement as to the conditions under which they were to conduct the fight. This fact, among others, is disclosed by a certain pillar in the Amarynthium, which forbids the use of long distance missiles” There were sacrifices before battles and readings for omens E.g. hoplite reading the destiny in the liver of the victim – attic amphora, 530 BC The goddess Nike (Victory) before a trophy (trophaion) Trophaion – monument to celebrate victory over a foe A tree or stakes with the foe’s enemy hung upon it Dedicated to god in thanksgiving for the victory
The custom of setting up trophies where had turned back and fled dates probably to the 5 th century BC Plutarch – Sayings of Spartan Women: “Another woman handed her son his shield, and exhorted him: “Son, either with this or on this” Honourable to die in battle – no one was to flee No one was to leave their shield behind either Archilochus, Fragment 5: “Some Saian is very glad to have my shield which I was forced to abandon near a bush. A splendid weapon. – But I saved myself. Who cares about their shield? I’ll get another, a better one!” Throwing away shield was an indication of cowardly flight – disgraceful act Hoplite Tactics – Pros and Cons: The (ideal) traditional hoplite warfare: Expression of the archaic and early classical polis (until the Persian wars) Seasonal Decided by a pitched battle in an open field Based on discipline, endurance, collective action, trust in other citizensoldiers Does not require long professional training Only those who could afford armour upper classes play a decisive role Estimated 1/3 of adult males Phalanxstyle warfare was only effective when both sides were engaging in it Warriors and selfrepresentation: From the end of the 8th century BC, weapons quickly disappear from tombs, but they are decorated in sanctuaries The image of the warrior is used in art – small bronze figured offered in sanctuaries, tombstones, figured vases, etc. – as a suitable means to express status This image is frequently highly idealized E.g. warriors fight in “heroic nudity” and there are anachronistic and/or unrealistic details in their armament Athens, funerary stele of Aristion, 510 BC Hoplites are depicted on grave markers until the end of the 6 th century BC Athens, funerary stele of Chairedemons and Lykeas, late 5 th century Warriors reappear in the last year of the Peloponnesian War Public funerary relief, 431/30 BC The dead is one of the first casualties of the Peloponnesian War
03/28/2014
CLST 330 – Jan. 30th Ancient Greek Warfare: War and Society: In all societies there is a two=way relationship between the ethics of war and culture in general War was not an exceptional event, but a component of the ancient Greek lifestyle The study of the “sociology of war” is an important field of modern Greek history War and Politics: The Greeks themselves considered war (between states, parties, irregular groups, etc.) a part of politics and economics The Origins of Greek warfare Homer: Because of their nature, the poems of Homer are not historically correct The world they describe is a work of poetic imagination However, they is evidence for what their audience knew, believed, and imagined about the age of heroes Heroes and Chariots (Iliad, 11.210): “And Hector leapt in his armour from his chariot to the ground, and brandishing his two sharp spears went everywhere throughout the host, urging them to fight, and roused the dreadful din of battle” Heroes and Soldiers in Homer: Contrary to traditional view, in the Homeric poems the mass of soldiers is important and frequently decisive The poet focuses on the duels of the heroes, but they rarely determine the outcome of the battle Homer and the Hoplites: In Homer, there are mass battles and sometimes soldiers fight in close formation However, this does not mean the true hoplite phalanx was known, and the fats movement of troops is not compatible with it Contradictions and inconsistencies in the Homeric description of battles may be the result of the long process of oral composition and of the artificial nature of the world they describe There is also the ideological factor – the combat they describe allows the heroes to stand out and play the role of models for the aristocratic audience of the poems Hoplite reform? Traditional view – an important change in military tactics took place between c. 750 and 600 BC in a large part of the Greek world and this change also had important consequences in politics Revisionist view – there was no important change in warfare, and military tactics had no role in the process of polis formation
Archaeology and the Hoplites: Archaeological evidence confirms that starting from the end of the 8 th century BC, the large round shield with double handle (hoplon or aspis) was adopted by Greek warriors Such a shield is not suitable to any tactics other than the phalanx Other part of the armour also appear, which increase the defensible ability of the infantry warrior E.g. Bronze armour from the tomb of Argos, end of 8 th century BC Why a Military Reform? Between the end of the Bronze Age and the Persian Wars, Greek warfare is mostly within the Greek world There was no need to adapt to enemies who used different tactics – fairly consistent and effective The reforms must be the result of factors other than technical advancements of the military The view of Aristotle (Politics, 1297b): “And although it is proper that the government should be drawn only from those who possess heavy armour, yet it is not possible to define the amount of the propertyqualification absolutely and to say that they must possess so much, but only to consider what sort of amount is the highest that is compatible with making those who have a share in the constitution more numerous than those who have not, and to fix that limit. Also people have a way of being reluctant to serve when there is a war if they do not get rations and are poor men, but if somebody provides food they want to fight. In some states the citizenbody consists not only of those who are serving as heavyarmed soldiers, but also of those who have so served; and at Malea the citizenbody consisted of these, while the magistrates were elected from those who were actually on service. And indeed the earliest form of constitution among the Greeks after the kingships consisted of those who were actually soldiers, the original form consisting of the cavalry for war had its strength and its preeminence in cavalry, since without orderly formation heavyarmed infantry is useless, and the sciences and systems dealing with tactics did not exist among the men of old times, so that their strength lay in their cavalry; but as the states grew and the wearers of heavy armour had become stronger, more persons came to have a part in the government.” Summary of the view of Aristotle: Military structure and political structure mirror one another: those who play the most important role in warfare also rule the state A change in military tactics is also a political change The view of modern historians: The process of polis formation also caused the proliferation of frontier wars, to expand or defend the territory Hoplites are actually defensive soldiers whose function was the defense of the agricultural plains Hoplites provided their own armour There must have been enough citizens wealthy enough to do so, and willing to fight
The political and social developments of the early polis were not caused by changes in military tactics; rather, it is the social and political context that influences warfare Military structure and Political Structure: Athens: the top 2 classes of Solon are also the most important component of the army – the 10 tribes of Kleisthenes are also units of the city army Greek War until the Persian Wars: Predominance of relatively limited warfare, both in the frequency of wars and in their scope Raids for booty, usually private initiatives, and limited border conflicts were the rule Allout war for the destruction of the opponent seems to have been rare Given the limited scale and intensity of war, only a part of the fighting potential was employed Full hoplites were a minority of the potential warriors, but their place in the first rank of the formation, their superior armament, and probably their social status made them the warriors of choice Soon, they became the standard fighter of Greek wars Hoplite War and Mentality: Highly ritualized Accompanied by religious rituals Regulated by a code of honour and a mentality based on discipline, endurance, selfcontrol, solidarity and the subordination of the single individual to the collective success Tyrtaeus: “Let each man hold, standing firm, both feet planted on the ground, biting his lip with his teeth, covering with the belly of his broad shield his thighs and legs, his breast and shoulders…let each man, closing with the enemy, fighting handtohand with long spear or sword, wound and take himl and setting foot against foot, and resting shield against shield, crest against crest, helmet against helmet let him fight his man breast to breast, grasping the holt of his sword or of his long spear” Strabo, Geography: “Now in general these cities (Eretria and Chalcis) were in accord with one another, and when difference arose concerning the Lelantine Plain they did not so completely break off relations as to wage their wars in all respects according to the will of each, but they came to an agreement as to the conditions under which they were to conduct the fight. This fact, among others, is disclosed by a certain pillar in the Amarynthium, which forbids the use of long distance missiles” There were sacrifices before battles and readings for omens E.g. hoplite reading the destiny in the liver of the victim – attic amphora, 530 BC The goddess Nike (Victory) before a trophy (trophaion) Trophaion – monument to celebrate victory over a foe A tree or stakes with the foe’s enemy hung upon it Dedicated to god in thanksgiving for the victory
The custom of setting up trophies where had turned back and fled dates probably to the 5 th century BC Plutarch – Sayings of Spartan Women: “Another woman handed her son his shield, and exhorted him: “Son, either with this or on this” Honourable to die in battle – no one was to flee No one was to leave their shield behind either Archilochus, Fragment 5: “Some Saian is very glad to have my shield which I was forced to abandon near a bush. A splendid weapon. – But I saved myself. Who cares about their shield? I’ll get another, a better one!” Throwing away shield was an indication of cowardly flight – disgraceful act Hoplite Tactics – Pros and Cons: The (ideal) traditional hoplite warfare: Expression of the archaic and early classical polis (until the Persian wars) Seasonal Decided by a pitched battle in an open field Based on discipline, endurance, collective action, trust in other citizensoldiers Does not require long professional training Only those who could afford armour upper classes play a decisive role Estimated 1/3 of adult males Phalanxstyle warfare was only effective when both sides were engaging in it Warriors and selfrepresentation: From the end of the 8th century BC, weapons quickly disappear from tombs, but they are decorated in sanctuaries The image of the warrior is used in art – small bronze figured offered in sanctuaries, tombstones, figured vases, etc. – as a suitable means to express status This image is frequently highly idealized E.g. warriors fight in “heroic nudity” and there are anachronistic and/or unrealistic details in their armament Athens, funerary stele of Aristion, 510 BC Hoplites are depicted on grave markers until the end of the 6 th century BC Athens, funerary stele of Chairedemons and Lykeas, late 5 th century Warriors reappear in the last year of the Peloponnesian War Public funerary relief, 431/30 BC The dead is one of the first casualties of the Peloponnesian War
