Altgriechische Waffen

[Quintus Fabius]

Es ist mir eine Freude:

Werter LORD:

Wenn du den ganzen Text ließt, findest du folgende Stelle:

359 v Chr revolutionierte Phillip v Makedonien die makedonischen Heere. Er trennte aber die Iphicratischen Peltasten die beide Rollen, die der Phalanx und die von besonderen leichten Truppen einnehmen konnten wieder auf und schuf bei sehr ähnlicher Ausrüstung die Phalanx wie die Hypaspisten als getrennte Truppen aber mit exakt der Ausrüstung. Nun wurde erneut die Länger der Lanzen erhöht um wiederum einen Vorteil gegenüber den anderen griechischen Stadtstaaten zu haben, die ja auch ihre Truppen umgerüstet hatten.

Wie du also siehst ist da kein Wiederspruch zu deiner sehr richtigen Aussage, daß Phillip die Lanzen dann wieder verlängert hat. Genau das hatte ich hier geschrieben.

Warum also wurden die Lanzen überhaupt länger ?!

Der Grund liegt in der leichteren Rüstung, die den Kämpfer viel empfindlicher gegen feindliche Speere machte. Andererseits war die alte Hoplitenrüstung zu schwer, die alte Phalanx zu unbeweglich und nur für die Kriegsführung in Griechenland selbst wirklich geeignet.

Die klassische Phalanx wurde von den Persern im Osten in Kleinasien immer wieder geschlagen und konnte sich nur in der Heimat behaupten, der Grund liegt darin, daß die Perser ihre Überlegene Kavallerie in den weiteren Arealen und Ebenen ausspielen konnten und daß dort bedingt durch den vielen Raum Bewegungskriege möglich waren, die Schlachten vermeidbar machten, die Perser verweigerten einfach den Kampf wo er ungünstig war und operierten an den Griechen vorbei.

Auf diese Weise ging auch der ionische Aufstand gegen die Perser in mehreren verlorenen Landschlachten unter, obwohl selbst Spartiaten dort mitkämpften. In dem begrenzten und gebirgigen Raum Griechenlands aber, vor allem bedingt durch die Enge des Raumes konnten die Hopliten die Perser immer vernichtend schlagen wenn diese den Hopliten nicht ausweichen konnten bzw diese nicht umgehen konnten.

Bei den Kämpfen der griechischen Söldner in persischen Diensten wurden dann die Rüstungen leichter, folglich mußten die Hopliten um sich zu schützen mehr Abstand zum Gegner gewinnen und machten die Lanzen länger, was wiederum bei den alten Hopliten mit ihren schweren Rüstungen unnötig war den 1 deckte die Rüstung und der Hoplon derart nach vorne daß ein kurzer Speer ausreichte 2 konnte man mit diesem besser fechten und stechen.

Kaum bekannt ist, daß die Lanzen der Perser bei den Thermophylen LÄNGER waren als die der Griechen !! die angreifenden Perser hatten im ersten Perserkrieg noch längere Lanzen als die Griechen, das nützte ihnen aber wegen des Hoplon und der starken Armierung der Hopliten nichts und die Perser hatten keine Formationen und fochten in lockerer freier Aufstellung (mit Ausnahme der Unsterblichen Garde) und daher hatten sie keinen taktischen Druck als militärischer Körper gegen die Phalanx.

Die klassische Phalanx wurde und war aber dann zu defensiv und die Peltasten gewannen immer mehr die Konflikte. Bis die Phalanx durch die Reformen von Iphicrates und deren konsequente Umsetzung dann durch Phillip wieder beweglich wurde und nun auch offensiv in Angriffskriegen über lange Distanzen wieder einsetzbar war.

The Phalanx is considered a Spartan invention

Die Phalanx ja, die klassische Phalanx die aus (Achtung) Hopliten gebildet wurde. Die ist eine Spartanische Erfindung die aus der Zeit der Messener Kriege resultiert.

Der Phalangit aber ! der nicht mehr mit dem Hoplon ausgerüstet war ist eine Erfindung eben nicht von Phillip ! sondern von Iphicrates. Der Phalangit ist im Gegensatz zum Hopliten eben nicht mit einem schwereren, größeren Hoplon sondern mit einer schwereren Pelta ausgerüstet. Daher nannte man die Truppen von Iphicrates auch noch Peltasten, obwohl sie keine klassischen Peltasten (=leichte Speerwerfer) waren.

zu spaeterem zeitpunkt wurden diese meistens von einem griechischen Anfangs buchstaben ersaetzt wie A..fuer Athen insignia fuer die absatmmungs stadt...

Und Lambda für Sparta, daß ist der Winkel auf den spartanischen Schilden. Wobei es trotzdem individuelle Schilde dazu gab.

Aus welchen Materialien bestanden die Schilde der griechischen Hopliten bzw. Peltasten und der persischen Truppen?

Werter Tiger:

Hier die Bauanleitung eines Hoplon:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.larp.com/hoplite/hoplon.html">http://www.larp.com/hoplite/hoplon.html</a><!-- m -->

Die Hopliten, daher der Name führten den Hoplon, dieser war aus Holz aber hatte einen Bezug mit Rohhaut. Sehr häufig liest man Leder, der Punkt ist aber, daß Leder da es ja gegerbt wurde nur eine geringe Schutzwirkung und gegen Schnitte so gut wie keine Schutzwirkung bot. Der Hoplon hatte dazu noch massive Bronzebeschläge.

Wenn man daher immer von Lederschilden liest, so handelt es sich in Wahrheit um Schilde aus Rohhaut.

Die Pelta war ebenfalls aus Holz und Rohhaut, es gab auch versionen der Pelta die aus Flechtwerk bestanden, also aus z.B. Weidenruten geflochten waren und mit Rohhaut bezogen waren.

Die Perser hatten verschiedene Schildformen: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://members.ozemail.com.au/~ancientpersia/org_frm.html">http://members.ozemail.com.au/~ancientp ... g_frm.html</a><!-- m -->

Die Verbände der Infanterie kämpften mit primär zwei sehr unterschiedlichen Schildformen, der Spara und dem kleinen Schild. Die Spara war im Endeffekt KEIN Schild sondern eine Pavise, also eine kleine mobile Schutzwand die man zum Schutz gegen Geschosse und Pfeile aufstellen konnte, sie wurde von einem Extra Mann getragen und kam nur bei der Einleitung des Kampfes zum Einsatz. Sie war aus Flechtwerk und mit Rohhaut überzogen.

Die kleinen Schilde der Perser waren ovalrund, meist hatten sie einen Ausschnitt in Halbmondform oder eine begrenzte Achtform, deshalb nannte man den Haupttypus Violinenschild, wie man aber inzwischen weiß war bei den Persern die Schildform viel individualistischer, es gab keine genormten Typen bis auf die Spara. Diese Schilde waren auch aus Flechtwerk und Rohhaut. Während und nach den Kämpfen gegen die Griechen wurden die Schilde schwerer und zur Zeit Alexanders waren die persischen Schilde im Endeffekt identisch mit denen der Makedonen, die Perser rüsteten ihre Truppen dann mit Nachbauten griechischer Schilde aus, die Spara kam nur noch bei Schützengefechten bei den Fernkämpfern und Plänklern vor.

Und hier noch ein paar Links:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.hoplites.co.uk/">http://www.hoplites.co.uk/</a><!-- m -->

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncl.ac.uk%2Fshefton-museum%2Fgreeks%2Farmour.html">http://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/dyna ... rmour.html</a><!-- m -->

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncl.ac.uk%2Fshefton-museum%2Fgreeks%2Farmour.html">http://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/dyna ... rmour.html</a><!-- m -->

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.holycross.edu%2Fdepartments%2Fclassics%2Fdawhite%2F">http://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/dyna ... dawhite%2F</a><!-- m -->

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/greekweapons/">http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/greekweapons/</a><!-- m -->

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.larp.com/hoplite/weapons.html">http://www.larp.com/hoplite/weapons.html</a><!-- m -->

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://digilander.libero.it/tepec/falange.htm">http://digilander.libero.it/tepec/falange.htm</a><!-- m --> !!!

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.sikyon.com/Sparta/history_eg.html">http://www.sikyon.com/Sparta/history_eg.html</a><!-- m -->

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.larp.com/hoplite/photos.html">http://www.larp.com/hoplite/photos.html</a><!-- m --> !!

[Quintus Fabius]

Hier ein längerer englischer Text zur Armee der Makedonier, den es im Netzt nicht mehr gibt:

THE MACEDONIAN ARMY

For much of Classical history Macedonia was a back-water territory on the fringes of the Greek world. During the Persian Wars the Macedonian cavalry were forced to fight on the Persian side, and were defeated by the Greek’s at the battle of Plataea in 479 B.C. Little is known about Macedonian history before the time of Philip II, except for the continuous wars with various tribal enemies that surrounded them. The Macedonians were originally a Doric people who, through many generations of isolation from Greek culture tended to identify more with their tribal neighbors rather than the Greeks to the south, whom they felt were snooty and pompous. These neighbors included Paeonians, Triballians, Thracians, and Illyrians, all of these were tough barbarian tribes, difficult to contain let alone subdue.

But the more enlightened Macedonians understood that they must eventually be able to compete with the expanding Greeks, as they were the real ultimate threat. Various Kings attempted to "Hellenize" the Macedonians, but this was mostly rejected by the Macedonian people and more importantly, the army. Yet suddenly, incredibly, in the middle of the fourth century B.C. the Macedonians became rulers of Greece and immediately thereafter conquered the huge Persian Empire. All of this can be attributed to the innovations and actions of one man, Philip II, who became king of Macedon in 359 BCE. Almost single handedly he turned the "Backward" Macedonians into the most organized and efficient fighting force the world had yet seen. Only his son, Alexander the Great was able to eclipse Philip’s fame with even more amazing feats of conquest.

This army forged by Philip and Alexander was centered around Philip’s own invention- the Macedonian Phalanx; a battle formation that was to dominate Mediterranean warfare for the next one hundred and fifty years. Armies that included Macedonian Phalanx's eventually dominated vast territories- from the fringes of India, throughout the former Persian Empire, Greece, and even Egypt formed armies based on serried ranks of pikemen. Finally one by one, the pike armies were eventually destroyed by the Roman Legions, which replaced the phalanx as the dominant fighting formation of ancient warfare.

PHILIP II OF MACEDON

In 359 BCE, Macedonia was thrown into disarray when their King (Perdiccas III) was killed in a battle with their old enemies the Triballians. Because Perdiccas’ son Amyntas was an infant, his brother Philip was made regent. Philip’s position was precarious indeed. Not only were there the usual tribal enemies surging on Macedon’s frontier borders, but the Greeks were once again trying to eat away at Macedonia’s weak frontiers. Athens was playing power politics in the Chersonese peninsula in an attempt to win back some of her empire and prestige lost in the Pelopponessian War. Almost directly to the south, the Thebans, by virtue of their great victories over Sparta by the military genius Epaminondas, were the "Hegemons" of Greece and at the peak of their military power.

As if these threats were not bad enough, Philip had to deal with five other claimants to the throne. (It appears that usually the last contender standing would be rewarded with the Macedonian crown!). Philip’s energy and skills soon overpowered his rivals, and he quickly threw back the barbarians ravaging the countryside. The Macedonians were so impressed with this vigorous leadership that they acclaimed him King Philip II, dumping the young Amyntas.

South of Macedon, the ancient city of Thebes had gained control of Greece by the sheer will and presence of one man. Epaminondas of Thebes was the greatest general to come from the era of the Greek city state. He had re-invented tactics and by brilliant maneuvers and stratagems defeated even the lofty Spartans- destroying not only Sparta’s era of invincibility, but causing irreplaceable losses to her manpower. However at his crowning moment Epaminondas was killed in battle- leading his Thebans in battle at Mantinea in 362 B.C. Without Epaminondas’ savvy leadership the Thebans were not able to hold onto their gains and almost immediately Greece began to fragment once more into city state squabbling. Philip knew Epaminondas well as he was a hostage to the Theban Oligarchy when he was fifteen. Being able to learn first hand the revolutionary tactics of the Thebans was very fortunate, not having to face a general of Epaminondas’ quality was probably the key factor that allowed Philip’s run of luck, guile, and brashness that eventually allowed him to conquer and become "Hegemon" of all Greece. Ultimately this prepared the way for Philip’s son Alexander, to become the west’s most famous conqueror.

REFORMING THE ARMY

Philip II inherited a polyglot army of Royal guardsmen, tribal levies and noble cavalrymen. He had already been reorganizing the army since his return from Thebes in 364 B.C. , but shortly after consolidating his reign, he could muster 600 Cavalry and 10,000 foot. The Macedonian cavalry were notably his best troops and were called Companions. Unlike the skirmishing cavalry favored by most Greek states, the Macedonian Companions preferred to fight as shock troops and wore armor, greaves, helmets, and carried a nine foot thrusting spear called a Xyston. The Agema Companions (Royal Guard), were the Kings own bodyguard and numbered 300. Philip recruited many of these from the lesser nobility obviously as a hedge to the other "nobles". Philip’s army in many ways reflected the politics of Macedonian society and he strove to consolidate his power by re-inventing his army.

The Macedonian infantry force was another matter. Aside for the Hypaspists (shield bearers), the territorial levies of infantry originally were somewhat unreliable troops. For the most part it is known that they sometimes fought in Greek style phalanxes but were most comfortable and useful as peltasts and favored "hunting" style tactics and equipment . The Agema Hypaspists were more seasoned and reliable troops. These became Philip’s "Royal" bodyguards and they were constantly kept mustered, unlike the rest of the Macedonian foot troops. The new Macedonian King knew that his task of consolidating his position in Macedon would one day lead to conflict with Athens, Thebes, and even Sparta, thus he would need a force of infantry that could match the discipline and drill of the Hoplites that these City States could field. Philip set about to reorganize the drill and training of his army, this "momentous innovation" was unheard of at the time. He forced all of his army to learn complex tactical maneuvers, he ordered them to go on 35 mile marches with full packs and provisions, and he outlawed baggage carts that would slow down his army. The number of slaves and retainers was reduced to the bare minimum to keep this new army lean on the march. He delivered inspiring speeches to his weary and tired troops. All in all his efforts were similar to putting his whole army through boot camp!

Philip, like the Romans later on, had a knack for copying things from others and then improving upon them and creating a revolutionary new style of warfare. As a hostage of Thebes he was exposed to the innovations of Epaminondas’ and grasped how the "oblique order" of Thebans tactics was the key factor in their defeats of Spartan Hoplite armies. (the historian and general Xenophon preferred to blame Spartan drunkenness on their disasters!). Not only did these "tactics" confound the foe but the Thebans also preferred to fight in phalanxes of much greater depth than the usual Greek battle line. This allowed the less fighting skilled, and trained Thebans to put enormous pressure on one spot of the enemy line, and in fact allowed them to break through even the Spartan Guards and then roll up the Spartan phalanx from the flank. This knowledge obviously had an impact upon him as he changed the Macedonian tactics to mirror this oblique order, only instead of leading from the left as the Thebans did, the Macedonians would punch from the right flank and drive a wedge into the enemy lines with their Companion cavalry. Not only did Philip copy Theban tactics, but he increased the depth of his infantry formations to give them added punch and moral stamina. Philip was also well versed with "Thessalian tactics" which was a well known ruse used by disciplined troops to feign flight and then turn upon a straggling pursuing force (the Spartans used this ruse famously at the battle of Thermopylae).

The other innovation that completed this brilliant "New-Model" army was the lengthening of the infantryman’s spear to 12-15 foot length. This idea was copied from the famous Greek Mercenary General Iphicrates who had created a body of specialized troops of lightly armored, but well drilled pikemen that were trained to fight in a looser formation than traditional Hoplites. These "Iphicrataean" Hoplites were most famous for being involved in the destruction of a Spartan Mora (regiment) of 600 Hoplites at the battle of Coronaea in 300 B.C. The combination of these two changes in armament not only gave the Macedonian footmen a reach advantage over their spear armed Hoplite foes, but also greater depth in the Macedonian phalanx gave them the morale boost needed to stand up to and defeat the barbarian tribesmen currently threatening Macedon, and later the Greek Hoplites themselves. Because of Philip’s innovations the pike phalanx became a dominant style of warfare, one that would be copied and used by many ancient armies for the next two hundred years.

Organization of the Macedonian Phalanx

The Macedonian army Philip inherited seemed to be based on the common Doric and barbarian division by ten man files. Sometime during or shortly after Philip’s reign almost all units in his army were restructured on a more "Greek-like" 8 man file. Officers fought to the front and brought up the rear of each file. Eventually the base unit of the Pezhetairoi (foot Companions as they became known) evolved into the 256 man Syntagma formation that most ancient sources describe. A Syntagma was formed 16 ranks wide by 16 ranks deep for most situations. Two of these composed a 512 man Lochos. By Alexander’s time three Lochoi would form a Taxeis or battalion of nominally 1536 men and officers. The Taxi was led by a "Taxiarch" and some of these became Alexander’s best known officers.

Besides re-arming and re-structuring the infantry force, Philip’s insisted on drilling his troops to a degree unheard of in Greece (except maybe in Sparta). This was most effective for him since in 356 B.C. he had secured the gold mines of Mount Pangaeus which gave him a huge revenue of 1000 talents per year which allowed him to keep his army on constant operations. Except in Sparta where their warrior society was slowly attempting to rebuild their numbers of diminished Spartiates, the Greek armies were at best militia forces brought together for a campaign then disbanded in winter to tend their crops and businesses. The Greeks abhorred the expense of training their troops, and keeping them in the field for year long operations was rare, one reason why Greek sieges were usually failures. Philip changed this forever by paying his troops. He could keep them mustered and the trained cadre of his formations were always under arms to indoctrinate the new recruits. Although not the first professional army in history, the Macedonians again would prove that trained, highly drilled veterans would prove to be more than a match for their unprepared foes.

It appears that the pike armed, 16 man deep formation was quite maneuverable when compared with the Greek Phalanx. The self contained Syntagmas were able to face to the rear, or face to any flank reasonably quickly by counter marching. In emergencies the phalanx could about face, but this is undesirable as it would leave the officers at the rear. Phalangites gripped their Sarissas (pikes) in two hands and raised them when marching or maneuvering. Because of this they carried a smaller shield than the Greek Hoplite’s Hoplon. This shield was bronze faced but didnt have the broad rim that could rest on the shoulder, instead it had straps that slung it over their backs and around their necks. The Pezhetairoi would carry their shield on their backs when not in use but could swing them around quickly when close to action.

The Phalangite wore a helmet, most commonly of the Thracian style popular at the time, the two foot bronze faced shield, and the Sarissa. The front rankers possibly wore heavy armor, either composite style Hoplite cuirasses, or Muscle cuirasses of bronze. Other ranks may have been unarmored as Arrian many times relates that Alexander took "the lightest armed of the Phalanx" on many of his fast marches. After being repulsed at the Persian Gates, Alexander threatened to only replace the Phalangites lost armor with half-corselets covering only the front- so they would be less likely to turn their backs next time! Many would have worn bronze greaves on their legs, although most wouldn’t be able to afford the form fitted kind, but cheaper models secured by straps. Much of the armor was made of iron, and some armor was silvered. When the army received new armor in preparation for the invasion of India the old cuirasses were burned, implying they were composite linen panoplies. It is speculated that the Phalangites wore red tunics. Helmets were often painted blue, red or silvered. Sometimes designs or wreaths were painted on. Stars bursts and crescents seemed to be the favored shield designs of infantrymen. It is very possible that helmets displayed battalion colors.

[Quintus Fabius]

The Phalanx’s tactics were based on it’s weapons and formation. The men formed up with a spacing of one yard per man. Up to three and maybe four ranks of spear points could stick out through the front of the unit which was usually the 16 x 16 man Syntagma. The back ranks would hold their pikes at a forty five degree angle which helped deflect arrows and also gave the formation an imposing height on the battlefield. Since six Syntagma were arrayed in line, a 1536 man Taxei would cover a front of a little over 100 yards. In some circumstances the phalanx would close up to 8 ranks deep and halve each man’s space. This "locked shields’ formation made the phalanx ponderous to move but almost impossible to close with frontally. However this formation could only move forward and was unable to quickly react to flank threats.

Philip and Alexander’s Phalangites marched onto the battlefield in complete silence with pikes held upright. Once closer to the enemy the Pikemen would swing their shield into place with a loud clang. The Phalanx would finally level their pikes and then charge, yelling their war cry to Ares, ‘Alalalalai!" This sudden outburst of noise after a silent advance must have been unsettling to all but the most steady troops.

Even so this formidable mass of men with a seemingly impenetrable wall of Sarissas was actually a defensive force and not expected to deliver the decisive stroke in a Macedonian victory. Although the phalanx could be arrayed in depths up to 16 men deep, it’s strength was in it’s wall of spears creating a long barrier that pinned the enemy in place. This wall of pikes could cover the deployment of reserves or create a base from which the Macedonian cavalry could spring out into gaps that the enemy would create when trying to reach around to the flanks of the Macedonian line. Cavalry were unable to close with a well ordered phalanx from the front at all, and rarely even attempted to hit it’s flank or rear even when such opportunities were presented. The phalanx was accustomed to light troops moving in and out through its files to screen it from enemy skirmishers, or seek the protection behind the pike units.

Later descriptions of the phalanx give it the capacity to form into many shapes based on current threats. Thus the Phalanx could form a hedgehog for all around defense against cavalry, or it could open lanes and allow chariots to drive harmlessly through. Wedges could be formed , or crescents, in effect the phalanx was drilled to be able to execute these measures quickly and with a minimum of confusion. For a period of 30 years during Alexander’s and Philip’s campaigns, the Macedonian phalangites and Hypaspists became the most drilled and seasoned infantry the world had yet seen. Later generations of Phalanx’s retained the same armament and tactics but declined in quality of drill and experience becoming more ponderous and inflexible, especially in the hands of generals who miss-interpreted the lessons of Alexander’s victories.

The Phalanx was always susceptible to disorder on hilly or broken ground and especially so in "locked shield" formation. It is not clear whether the phalanx pushed their foes like a rugby scrum, or used their spears to pin the enemy front ranks while others behind attempted to pierce at the enemy unprotected faces and underarms. Polybius’ description of the opening of the battle of Pydna in 168 B.C. tells us how an allied Roman contingent of Peligni was overthrown by a phalanx, sticking their spears into their shields and pushing them back. But we’ll save this for later.

The Hypaspists

Unfortunately the armament of the Hypaspists (shield-bearers) is not well documented. However we are given plenty of descriptions of their role in the Macedonian army. They are, to say the least, some of the most flexible troops in any ancient army. They could form up in a phalanx with armor and pikes, or carry thrusting spears and javelins and skirmish with equal skills. They were constantly involved in raids or forced marches to pursue the enemy or grab key objectives. Philip taught the Hypaspists how to maneuver with their pikes as his adopted brother Iphicrates had taught his peltasts. The Hypapsists were capable of retiring in the face of an enemy then reforming and charging over eager pursuers. In Alexander’s great battles the Hypaspist regiments would form on the right flank of the phalanx, there superior maneuverability allowed them to keep closer to his decisive Companion Strikes into the guts of the enemy line.

The Three regiments of Hypaspists consisted of a thousand men each. The Premier Regiment or Agema (Guards) was composed the most seasoned veterans in the Macedonian army. Although lesser nobles sons that couldn’t afford horses would become Guardsmen, the regiments were kept up to strength by transfers from the phalanx. Later on in Alexander’s campaigns some the Hypaspists were given silver shields and armor which then caused them to be called the Argyaspids. These troops became as famous in antiquity as Caesar’s Tenth legion, or as Napoleon’s Old Guard is to us now.

The Macedonian Cavalry

The new Macedonian army was from the very first a "combined arms force". Unlike the Greeks who relied on their Hoplite Infantry almost totally, the Macedonians, up to the time of Philip, had always relied on the irresistible charge of their noble cavalry to carry the day. But Philip knew that cavalry alone could make little headway against the Hoplite shield wall. His efforts to create a solid infantry phalanx made his Companion cavalry even more effective, as he learned to use the phalanx as a screen for his horsemen or as a solid wall to pivot around and find the enemy flanks, or find gaps in their battleline that they could quickly dash through. The small squadrons of 200-300 horsemen in highly maneuverable wedges could quickly face in any direction an either exploit enemy weaknesses and flanks, or scurry back to the protection of the infantry if things got tight. There are many descriptions of the Macedonian wedges "breaking up" formations of much larger (and more heavily armored) enemies time and time again.

The main thing that set Macedonian cavalry apart from all their contemporary foes was their desire to close in hand to hand combat. During this period most cavalry forces had given up bows but many still used javelins as their main weapon and closed with hand axes or swords for the brief and uncomfortable "melees".

The Companions used the nine foot long Xyston made of stout cornel wood. Aside from the point the back end had a useful butt spike that was used when the spear shattered during the initial clash. Macedonian cavalrymen weren’t shy about using their Kopis (cutting swords) when their spears were rendered useless. A weapon which is vividly described as being able to cleave through a shoulder and lop off an arm clean.
When Philip inherited Thessaly during the "Sacred War" he also gained access to Thessalian cavalrymen who were the best horsemen in Greece. They were similarly armed as the Companions but they also seemed to use javelins equally. They preferred the Rhombus over the wedge as it was perfectly suited for their "Thessalian" tactics of fire turn in place and retire. Just like a wedge the Rhombus had an officer on each apex, when the formation right/left or about faced then all they had to do was follow the officer who now led the whole squadron.

Besides these "Heavies", the Macedonian army relied on numerous units of light cavalry as scouts, skirmishers, and battle cavalry. The most famous units of these were the Prodomoi (scouts) and Sarissaphaori (Lancers). The scouts regiments were crack units of Paeonian and other horsemen usually led by Macedonian Officers. Their role was to cover the deployment of the army, chase off enemy scouts, and find the enemy. In most of Alexander’s battles they fight in the opening stages of the battle to delay, harass with javelins, and break up the enemy charges. In the pursuit of defeated foes they were swift and relentless.

The Sarissaphaori squadrons were similar to the scouts, however they became known as the "Lancers" because they were armed with pikes. This unusual armament is unique to Alexander’s army, and, although described as effective overthrowing foes many times their number, no later army seems to have used this type of troop again.

After this period it did become common for heavy cavalry to adopt the longer spear which became known as the Kontos which is just another name for a cavalry pike. It is interesting that Alexander is depicted using a sarissa on horseback also, although this isn’t described in the written histories. It is possible that the lancers were Alexander’s "pet" regiment and thus he favored being depicted as one in paintings or on statues—much like later Cavalrymen would like to adopt the garb of the dashing Hussars. For some time these Lancers were thought to have been recruited from Thrace, where other Lancer cavalry originated, but they could also have been composed of Macedonians as well, or even mixed. The Macedonian army was a very diversified force, it’s hard to fathom with so many different languages and troop types the army could have cooperated at all!

The other Cavalry units in the army were composed of Thracian, Odrysian, and even some Illyrian horsemen. These were mostly skirmishing types armed with javelins, but many of them could stand up to a hand to hand fight on occasions. Alexander had some Greek light cavalry, and one unit of Greek heavy cavalry supplied to him for the Persian invasion. The rest of the cavalry were mercenaries, either light or heavy.

One part of the Macedonian army is often overlooked, these were the Royal pages and Grooms that formed ad hoc regiments on the battlefield. Similar to the role of Squires, these young men’s duties were to serve the Royal camp, and to learn the ways of becoming a Macedonian officer or guardsman. On the battlefield they hung back behind the lines and provided re-mounts for the heavy cavalry. On one occasion the pages rounded up and destroyed enemy chariots that had broken through the battleline., but normally they rounded up stragglers, delivered messages, and probably guarded prisoners.
The large and maneuverable Macedonian cavalry force was the perfect complement to the massive but slower moving phalanx. When Philip began his wars of conquest in 359 B.C. he started with 600 cavalry out of a total of 10,000 troops, by 331 B.C. at Gaugamela, Alexander was able to field about 7500 horsemen, which was almost exactly 25% of his total force, a massive amount of cavalry by Greek army standards.

[Quintus Fabius]

Peltasts and Archers and other Mercenaries

The unusual thing about the rise of the Macedonian army was that all aspects of the army were reorganised at once, especially the missile support and light infantry. In the past, new tactics or new ways of equipping troops came sporadically and focused on one type of troop in an army at a time. Iphicrates was able to fight tradition and create a new peltast style of fighting that became more popular in Greece- but this was going against the grain of Greek tradition. His new style troops defeated the Spartans in a running fight and the "Iphicratean" mercenaries became sought out and employed as mercenaries, especially in Persia. Epaminondas showed that cavalry and light troops had a role in pitched battles even against the most disciplined Hoplites. Further in the past there were anecdotal instances where light forces had beaten heavy troops all on their own.

During the Peloponnesian War, Athenian light infantry had forced Spartan Hoplites to surrender at Spacteria island. The disasterous Athenian rout at the hands of Aetolian skirmishers in 426 B.C. further showed that heavy troops needed to have plenty of skirmishers and missile troops of their own to keep these Psiloi at bay, especially in rugged terrain where phalanxes had difficulty.

Philip, absorbed all these lessons of military history (unlike most ancient generals) and began to create through alliances and hiring mercenaries a strong light infantry screen and missile support for his heavy troops. He at once gained close ties with Crete and hired their archers, who were the best in Greece.

They used a composite bow and fired a broad bladed arrow. Cretans are noted as wearing red tunics. They also carried shields, unusual for archers, and were noted for their ability to go hand to hand with enemy light troops---something that must have been rare for other archers. Cretans were also noted for being into everybody else’s business. Philip created a mercenary archer regiment which became known as the "Macedonian archers". But Macedon isnt famous for it’s archery heritage, so these fellows were probably recruited from other provinces.


The close proximity to Thrace meant that Macedon was constantly at war with them. Many Thracians also fought on the Macedonian side as allies or mercenaries. In earlier days the Thracian carried small semi-circular or round wicker shields called Peltas, hence their name. Greek light skirmishers without shields were driven off by the showers of javelins from these Peltasts and a number of Hoplite armies suffered from the inability to close with them in hand to hand. Peltasts had become a standard troop type in all Greek armies by the time of Philip. Many Thracian Peltasts carried an unusual weapon called a Rhomphaia which was a sickle shaped blade attached to a pole, apparently there was a longer and heavier version which was wielded in two hands and was as effective as an axe.

The Thracians in the Macedonian army wore helmets and now carried a larger oval shield called a Thureos, some of them still wore their long decorated cloaks as seen on Classical Greek vase art, but most now wore regular tunics for practical day to day mercenary work.
The most important light infantry contigent in the Macedonian army were the Agrianians. Alexander had a small body of these- usually less than a thousand strong but their effectiveness far exceeded their numbers.

They were related to the Paeonians but were hillmen rather than horsemen. Noted for their fierce hand to hand charges and their accurate javelin fire these troops were the first line, screening the "heavies" from harassing enemy skirmishers, chariots and other threats. The Agrianians are described as having tatooed bodies like the Celts, and they also dyed their beards blue. They carried swords, a thureos shield, and a bundle of cornel wood javelins. Some Agrianians also served as slingers.

Throughout Alexander’s campaigns he constantly created "task forces’ for lightning raids, and the Agrianians were always picked to join the guardsmen and the cavalry on these missions. The Agrianians stuck close to the Companions and would infiltrate into their melees and pull the enemy horsemen from their mounts.

Solid infantry combined with numerous elite cavalry made the Macedonian army a formidible foe, but the addition of crack units of light infantry made this army the first ever to have a true combined arms force. This made the Macedonians the most flexible army up to that time, and in the hands of extremely capable generals like Philip, Alexander, Antipater, and Antigonus almost unbeateable.

[Quintus Fabius]

Sry fürs mehrere Beitrage hintereinander posten aber die Erklärung ist einfach das der Text zu lang ist: Und da man ev daß mit Iphicrates überliest: das ist der Absatz hier:

"The other innovation that completed this brilliant "New-Model" army was the lengthening of the infantryman’s spear to 12-15 foot length. This idea was copied from the famous Greek Mercenary General Iphicrates who had created a body of specialized troops of lightly armored, but well drilled pikemen that were trained to fight in a looser formation than traditional Hoplites. These "Iphicrataean" Hoplites were most famous for being involved in the destruction of a Spartan Mora (regiment) of 600 Hoplites at the battle of Coronaea in 300 B.C."

(wobei ich meine Infor weniger aus diesem Text als aus folgenden Büchern beziehe, Quellen:

The Persian Army 560 - 330 BC

The Spartan Army

Greek Hoplite 480 - 323 BC

The Army of Alexander the Great

Warfare in the Classical World

[LORDanonymous]

Wie immer sehr gut quintus

Hast mich angeregt mich ueber Iphikrates specifisch zu informieren.
Sobald Ich fragen haette wende Ich mich gerne an dich...zurueck.
Bin dabei einige zeilen vopm Thoukidides zu uebrsetzen...(gibt es davon eigentlich eine Deutsche version ?)

Regards

Lord

[Turin]

Bin dabei einige zeilen vopm Thoukidides zu uebrsetzen...(gibt es davon eigentlich eine Deutsche version ?)

Meinst du die Schilderung vom Peloponnesischen Krieg? Davon gibts auf jeden Fall eine Reclam-Ausgabe in sehr gelungener Übersetzung.

[LORDanonymous]

Hallo Turin

Unter anderem...haettest Du einen Link..oder nur als Buch...?
Ich dachte eher and das werk Thoukidides "Geschichte"...

Regards

[Tiger]

Es ist bemerkenswert, welchen Erfolg die Hoplitenausrüstung und -taktik hatte. Sie wurde nicht nur von den Etruskern übernommen, sondern hat auch die Kelten beeinflußt. Die Kelten setzten teilweise wohl auch importierte griechische Waffen ein, so zeigt die Statue des Fürsten von Glauberg offensichtlich einen griechischen Leinenpanzer.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.hallstattzeit.de/Rekonstruktion/Vorgeschichte/vorgeschichte.html">http://www.hallstattzeit.de/Rekonstrukt ... ichte.html</a><!-- m -->

Dieser Link enthält ein Bild, daß die Statue des Fürsten von Glauberg zeigt. Man beachte den danebenstehenden Text!
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.hassiaceltica.de/reko/rekonstruktion.htm">http://www.hassiaceltica.de/reko/rekonstruktion.htm</a><!-- m -->

Bezüglich der altgriechischen Panzerungen, wie etwa des Linothorax, habe ich nun zwei Fragen: Welche Typen gab es, und wie gut war ihre Schutzwirkung?

[Quintus Fabius]

Ein Linothorax war eigentlich primär ein Panzer aus versteiftem Leinen.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.larp.com/hoplite/linothor.html">http://www.larp.com/hoplite/linothor.html</a><!-- m --> (eine larp seite aber trotzdem gut)

Hier eine Bauanleitung:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.myblog.de/linothorax">http://www.myblog.de/linothorax</a><!-- m -->

Es gibt eine sehr heftige Diskussion darüber, ob ein solcher Panzer im Inneren mit Schuppen oder Lamellen anderer Materialien versehen war. Das sind die in dem von dir geposteten Link genannten Kompositpanzer. Da wir aber keine solchen Schuppen im keltischen Raum gefunden haben, gehen manche davon aus, daß der klassische Linothorax mit Holzstreifen !! im Inneren verstärkt war, daß ist aber Spekulation.

Wir haben aber aus dem Grab Phillips einen Kompositpanzer aus Griechenland der mit Metall verstärkt war: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.directupload.net/images/050411/68VKMhwB.jpg">http://www.directupload.net/images/050411/68VKMhwB.jpg</a><!-- m -->

Es gab also zumindest in Griechenland und daher wahrscheinlich auch in Etrurien Leinenpanzer und Leinenpanzer die im Inneren verstärkt waren, dafür steifer und unbeweglicher und schwerer waren.

Angesichts der günstigen Eigenschaften von Rohhaut, kann man annehmen, daß manche Linothoraxe auch partiell oder im Inneren abschnittsweise mit Rohhaut verstärkt wurden, aber auch das ist wieder Spekulation.

Typen des Linothorax:

Panzer aus reinem Leinen

Selten Panzer mit Bronzeschuppen oder Lamellen im Inneren

Selten Panzer aus Metall der im Brust und/oder Rückenbereich aus Metall war, die Schulterklappen aber waren nur Leinen, das Metall mit Leinen überklebt

Eventuell mit Holzstreifen oder Rohhaut (spekulation)

Die Schutzwirkung war selbst bei der reinen Leinenvariante ähnlich der eines mittelalterlichen Gambeson sehr gut, bei den Typen mit Metallverstärkung im Inneren, und selbst wenn es nur im Brustbereich war, war die Wirkung wie die eines Küraß.

Da man ja mit Lanzen kämpfte, mußte ein solcher Panzer Stiche aushalten, und hier kommen wir zu einem wichtigen Punkt, außer in der der Küraß Variante hielt der Linothorax eine mit Wucht gestoßene Lanze nicht auf.

Er schützte aber vorzüglich Schnittverletzungen sowie sehr gut vor stumpfen Verletzungen.

Vermutlich sollte er nicht zuletzt den Kämpfer vor der Einwirkung der eigenen Waffen in dem Gedränge einer Phalanx schützen während der Schutz vor gegnerischen Lanzen vor allem durch den Hoplon gewährt wurde.

Die Etrusker tränkten ihre Linothoraxe in Leinöl um Zitat: den Schutz gegen Schwerter zu erhöhen. Das deutet darauf hin, daß der Linothorax vor allem vor Schnitten und Schlägen im engem Handgemenge was dem Aufprall folgte schützen sollte.
Die Griechen verwendeten Essig und Salz.

Ein Linothorax schützt auch sehr gut vor Pfeilen die ihn nicht richtig durchschlagen können.
Daher war er immer besonders im Gebrauch wenn vor allem gegen die Perser gekämpft wurde, in der Zwischenzeit in der die Griechen vor allem untereinander kämpften kam der Linothorax während der Peloponnesischen Krieg sogar außer Gebrauch und die Hopliten kämpften nur mit Hoplon, Helm und Beinschienen.

Die Söldner in persischen Diensten führten ihn dagegen noch und die Makedonen führten ihn dann auch wieder in Griechenland ein.


Zur Einheitlichkeit und Ähnlichkeit der Bewaffnung in der Hallstattzeit:

Der ganze Typus des Hopliten stammt ursprünglich aus dem Donauraum. Die frühkeltischen Völker führten schon eine den Griechen ähnliche Bewaffnung bevor man enge Handelskontakte hatte. Im Verlauf der Zeit und mit dem Beginn der La Tene Zeit änderte sich dann die keltische Bewaffnung und Kampfweise zunehmend, wobei zugleich der Handel mit den Griechen zunahm. D.h. daß eine Beeinflußung der Griechen im Bereich der Waffen sehr gering war und diese Bewaffnung mit Rundschild und Lanze und die Körperpanzerung. genuin zu diesen Völkern gehörte. Die Kampfweise der Phalanx entwickelte sich aber dann erst in Griechenland.

Von dort wurde sie mit der griechischen Expansion und Auswanderung in den Mittelmeerraum nach Italien und Karthago exportiert. Man vergißt gern daß die Karthager auch in griechischer (später makedonischer) Phalanx kämpften.

Die Kampfweise der Kelten wie auch anderer Völker mit einer den Hopliten sehr ähnlichen Bewaffnung war dagegen eine andere, die mehr auf den Einzelkämpfer und lockere Schwärme sowie eine andere Gliederung der Einheiten setzte. Auch die Perser adoptierten die Bewaffnung der Hopliten in der Spätzeit ihres Reiches, aber nicht die Kampfweise der Phalanx.

Hier hab ich noch ein paar Phalanxbilder:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.directupload.net/images/050411/kPl9wAXE.jpg">http://www.directupload.net/images/050411/kPl9wAXE.jpg</a><!-- m -->

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.directupload.net/images/050411/dXikyT4b.jpg">http://www.directupload.net/images/050411/dXikyT4b.jpg</a><!-- m -->

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.directupload.net/images/050411/bW7seORT.jpg">http://www.directupload.net/images/050411/bW7seORT.jpg</a><!-- m -->

[Wolf]

Quintus Fabius posteteDie Etrusker tränkten ihre Linothoraxe in Leinöl um Zitat: den Schutz gegen Schwerter zu erhöhen. Das deutet darauf hin, daß der Linothorax vor allem vor Schnitten und Schlägen im engem Handgemenge was dem Aufprall folgte schützen sollte.
Die Griechen verwendeten Essig und Salz.

Das klingt nach Desinfektion und sicher nicht nach irgendeiner Art von struktureller Verstärkung.

[Quintus Fabius]

Das klingt nach Desinfektion und sicher nicht nach irgendeiner Art von struktureller Verstärkung.

Das ist eine wirklich interessante und vor allem neue Idee die ich so noch nirgends gehört habe. Dazu passt, daß Nachbauten wenn man sie nicht sauber verklebt hat häufig Feuchtigkeit ziehen und dann anfangen zu schimmeln.

Aber bei dem Leinöl heißt es explizit daß es die Schutzwirkung erhöht haben soll.

Das ist zumindest auch wissenschaftlich nachvollzogen worden, weil die Oxidationswirkung des Leinöls wie bei Ölfarben wirkt und das Öl das Leinen weiter versteift wenn es getrocknet ist.

Bei den Griechen wurde das mit Essig und Salz getränkt und dann gewalzt was das Leinen wohl verfilzt hat und so wurde da die Festigkeit erhöht.

Der Gedanke aber dazu, daß es auch eine desinfizierende Wirkung (z.b. gegen Schimmel gehabt haben könnte ist wirklich neu und gut, ich werde den andernorts mal vortragen.

[Wolf]

Quintus Fabius postete

Aber bei dem Leinöl heißt es explizit daß es die Schutzwirkung erhöht haben soll.

Das ist zumindest auch wissenschaftlich nachvollzogen worden, weil die Oxidationswirkung des Leinöls wie bei Ölfarben wirkt und das Öl das Leinen weiter versteift wenn es getrocknet ist.

Freut mich, dass dir meine Idee gefällt. Allerdings sehe ich beim nicht weiterverarbeiteten Leinöl ein Problem: Es wird schnell ranzig. Wenn man also nicht durch seinen herben Duft und einem, mit gelben Klumpen übersähten, Panzer beeindrucken wollte, musste man das Leinöl doch vorher verfeinern - ?

[Quintus Fabius]

Die Idee ist wirklich neu !! und gut.

Die Frage ist auch, in wie weit diese Panzer nicht Kurzlebige Produkte waren, die für einen kurzen Zeitraum gefertigt und getragen wurden.

[Tiger]

Wie lange braucht man eigentlich für die Fertigung eines Leinenpanzers, und wie aufwendig ist sie?