hopolite

[kristopherb]

What the hell is a hopolite? in games ive seen them and never uderstood the difference between hopolite and spearmen.

 

[Mongoloid Cow]

A phalanx (a group of hoplites) is a specific formation of spearmen. Generally, a phalanx was an 8 x 8 array of 64 "hoplites" armed with spears and weilding large shields (called hoplons, from where hoplite is derived) interlocked. A phalanx would descend upon the enemy and tear through them with their spears and guarded on the front and sides.

Phalanxes became obsolute when Sparta broke its laws designed to protect their military hegemony and went to war too often. Epaminondas of Thebes, the main city of Boeotia, in the face of constant defeat reformed his hoplites into something new, defeated Sparta with them and became the top dog in Greece. It didn't last long because the Macedonians copied and improved them, defeated Thebes, and gained the hegemony of Greece.

 

[Xen]

don't forget Iphicrates!

 

[scy12]

A phalanx (a group of hoplites) is a specific formation of spearmen. Generally, a phalanx was an 8 x 8 array of 64 "hoplites" armed with spears and weilding large shields (called hoplons, from where hoplite is derived) interlocked. A phalanx would descend upon the enemy and tear through them with their spears and guarded on the front and sides.

Phalanxes became obsolute when Sparta broke its laws designed to protect their military hegemony and went to war too often. Epaminondas of Thebes, the main city of Boeotia, in the face of constant defeat reformed his hoplites into something new, defeated Sparta with them and became the top dog in Greece. It didn't last long because the Macedonians copied and improved them, defeated Thebes, and gained the hegemony of Greece.

Indeed the word derives from Hoplon -οπλον. The word hoplon is also used in today's Greek and it actually means any Weapon or simply the word Weapon .(I.E Guns are called opla ). While a shield is called aspis , today aspida.

 

[Antilogic]

To answer your question as shortly as possible, hoplites refer to a specific kind of Greek soldier, whereas "spearmen" is a very general term. As mentioned above, Greek hoplites are called such due to their specific equipment.

@MC: You didn't even mention the wedge! It deserves special mention, as well as echeleon tactics...

And the Macedonians adopted but improved some Theban techniques. As well as thought about using siege equipment...

 

[Mongoloid Cow]

How much do you think I want to write? I really only wanted to say what they were, how they fought, where they got their name, and a very basic history.

 

[Antilogic]

How much do you think I want to write?

Not much. The rise of Macedon, though, always held a particular interest for me. Perhaps I should have mentioned Charaeona (sorry, bad spelling when I'm tired) in that other thread...

 

[Traitorfish]

Phalanxes became obsolute when Sparta broke its laws designed to protect their military hegemony and went to war too often. Epaminondas of Thebes, the main city of Boeotia, in the face of constant defeat reformed his hoplites into something new, defeated Sparta with them and became the top dog in Greece. It didn't last long because the Macedonians copied and improved them, defeated Thebes, and gained the hegemony of Greece.

What's more, the formation was later resurrected by the Swiss and Scots for use with medieval pikes (both hilly countries short on heavy cavalry), was adapted by the English into a combined arms formation using bill/pikemen and longbows, which was in turn take by the Spanish and turned into the Tercio formation, the pike and gun combined arms formation that dominated European warfare during the Renaissance. It fell out of use during the 1600s, though, and was replaced by more maneuverable formations.
[Edit: Changed "lobgows" to "longbow". "Lobgow"? What the hell is that?]

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

What's more, the formation was later resurrected by the Swiss and Scots for use with medieval pikes (both hilly countries short on heavy cavalry), was adapted by the English into a combined arms formation using bill/pikemen and lobgows, which was in turn take by the Spanish and turned into the Tercio formation, the pike and gun combined arms formation that dominated European warfare during the Renaissance. It fell out of use during the 1600s, though, and was replaced by more maneuverable formations.

The most natural evolution of the phalanx was the infantry fighting square, where an infantry regiment would form a sort of boxed phalanx with their bayonets, engaging enemies at point blank range, and holding a unit of cavalry within the square that would charge out to meet the enemy, and then retreat to the safety of the square, while the depth and array of the square helped to fend off cavalry charges, and to disperse them when they did dare to try and break a square.

As for the original topic, the tool that made the hoplite, and thus the phalanx, so formidable was the sarissa, a 13-foot spear that was actually two pieces jointed together in the middle. The rows of the phalanx would all point their spears forward, creating a sort of hedgehog formation. Sometimes, the spears were off increasing length the farther back you were, to as to present the enemy with a formidable "wall of spear points."

How two hoplite formations engaged was very simple. The two units formed up and closed upon the other head-on, whilst enduring attacks from both cavalry and skirmishers. Once the two phalanges (that's the plural of phalanx) met, they would begin to thrust with their spears, whilst still advancing. When they met, each row would push on the row in front of him, trying to break the other phalanx's line. Obviously, once a phalanx formation is broken, the hoplites in it become far more vulnerable.

Perhaps the most ironic part of Greek-on-Greek warfare was that not a lot of people died. Most often, the two armies, which met at an agreed-on spot in the countryside, would get tired, or take a few caualties, and then decide to just quit and go home.

 

[Antilogic]

Perhaps the most ironic part of Greek-on-Greek warfare was that not a lot of people died. Most often, the two armies, which met at an agreed-on spot in the countryside, would get tired, or take a few caualties, and then decide to just quit and go home.

While this is true of earlier bouts, the Peloponnesian War gets a little more bloodthirsty. And afterwards...well, you have innovations, like the Theban wedge, that change the tactics a bit.

You also forgot to mention the loser has to ask the winner the "favor" of burying their dead, and the winners erect a small monument declaring their victory on the field. Altogether, a funny way to wage wars. Very precise and orderly for "war", which could be defined as the lack of international laws applying (and so murdering and pillaging is just dandy ).

 

[shortguy]

As for the original topic, the tool that made the hoplite, and thus the phalanx, so formidable was the sarissa, a 13-foot spear that was actually two pieces jointed together in the middle. The rows of the phalanx would all point their spears forward, creating a sort of hedgehog formation. Sometimes, the spears were off increasing length the farther back you were, to as to present the enemy with a formidable "wall of spear points."

How two hoplite formations engaged was very simple. The two units formed up and closed upon the other head-on, whilst enduring attacks from both cavalry and skirmishers. Once the two phalanges (that's the plural of phalanx) met, they would begin to thrust with their spears, whilst still advancing. When they met, each row would push on the row in front of him, trying to break the other phalanx's line. Obviously, once a phalanx formation is broken, the hoplites in it become far more vulnerable.

Perhaps the most ironic part of Greek-on-Greek warfare was that not a lot of people died. Most often, the two armies, which met at an agreed-on spot in the countryside, would get tired, or take a few caualties, and then decide to just quit and go home.

I think you're making a few mistakes here. The sarissa is the implement of choice of the Macedonian phalanx; the Greeks themselves used a shorter (one-handed) spear and a larger shield. Also, in the archaic and early classical period, cavalry and skirmishers were not very important at all, except on the fringes of the Greek world (Thessaly, for instance).

You're absolutely right about the casualty figures, though. The heavy equipment made chasing fleeing enemies difficult, and (with the obvious exception of the Messenian Wars) Greek wars before the Persian Wars were not really prosecuted with an eye toward total victory. It was very important to win the battle--the honor of your city rested upon it--but there really was no "winning the war" to speak of.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

While this is true of earlier bouts, the Peloponnesian War gets a little more bloodthirsty. And afterwards...well, you have innovations, like the Theban wedge, that change the tactics a bit.

That's true. I was merely referring to the meeting of two simple phalanges, if only for simplicity's sake.

You also forgot to mention the loser has to ask the winner the "favor" of burying their dead, and the winners erect a small monument declaring their victory on the field. Altogether, a funny way to wage wars. Very precise and orderly for "war", which could be defined as the lack of international laws applying (and so murdering and pillaging is just dandy ).

It may be "funny" to us today, but I find it much more honorable than wars since.

Along those lines is a Winston Churchill quote: " If you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite."

I think you're making a few mistakes here. The sarissa is the implement of choice of the Macedonian phalanx; the Greeks themselves used a shorter (one-handed) spear and a larger shield. Also, in the archaic and early classical period, cavalry and skirmishers were not very important at all, except on the fringes of the Greek world (Thessaly, for instance).

My mistake. Thanks!

 

[cybrxkhan]

Quick Version: Greek soldier with a spear, shield, and some kind of armour and helmet.


Pop Culture (300) Version: Ridiculously buff guy with nice big beard; noble and fights for freedom, carries a bunch of random weapons, but shields, scimitars, and spears are just examples.

 

[Antilogic]

Quick Version: Greek soldier with a spear, shield, and some kind of armour and helmet.


Pop Culture (300) Version: Ridiculously buff guy with nice big beard; noble and fights for freedom, carries a bunch of random weapons, but shields, scimitars, and spears are just examples.

You forgot the part about hunting freaks of nature, possibly wearing silver masks, sent at them by a weird dude with body piercings.