the whole point of the spartan not needing all the armor was becuz his 3 foot in diameter round shield was enough defence to cover his whole body when in the right stance
Untrue if you're only going on the movie. Hoplites were said to have worn chest armor and armor below the knees. History says they were heavily armored units. Still, perhaps the spartans themselves didn't. Still, you could dress as a hoplite and claim yourself a spartan. Couldn't hurt.
I'm surprised the spearman won. Anywho, spartan weren't heavily armored..Well they wore a chest piece(bronze plate), knee and shin protection, and some sort of bracer leather or bronze. I guess it was just heavy considering the armor they went up against..like whicker, and thing leather.
@000majorwinters000 Well Spartan hoplites should be nothing drastically different to any other Greek hoplites - to be noted, it was Argives that brought forward phalanx warfare in late 8th, early 7th century (decades after Homer), though certainly even Mycenaeans must had tight phalanx-like formations. The question was more of a social rather than purely military nature: did oligarchies wanted an armed middle class or not?
Phalanxes of cities started diverging only by late 5th century.
@000majorwinters000 At the times of the Persian invasions most Greek armies were still on the heavier side, only slightly less heavy than the super-heavy archaic hoplites. Spartans certainly wore bronze armour, they had all the gear. The main difference with other armies most noted had been nothing else, other than their relatively shorter sword, Spartan swords were seen rather as big knifes though Spartans knew how to use them very effectively.
@000majorwinters000 By Pelopenesian war, the increased mobility needs for the armies as well as the plunging economies meant that the phalanxes were alleviated for the most of it keeping only parts of the army on the heavier side and having mostly the type of light hoplite (i.e. only helmet, shielf & legs but no armour) - only difference with a peltast being the use of a full round shield on phalanx formation rather than a crescend light shield protecting the hand only for freestyle warfare.
@000majorwinters000 further divergence was imposed by thebes who had the side-phalanx system where we can guess the front line was full of fully-clad hoplites but the back side pushing part would be all about light hoplites mainly pushing with their shield rather than doing anything else, thus a shield, a helmet and a short spear to finish off fallen enemies would do the job. And then Philip II developed the most complex Greek formation, the Macedonian phalanx.
really good fight!
mjdjoy 1 year ago
the whole point of the spartan not needing all the armor was becuz his 3 foot in diameter round shield was enough defence to cover his whole body when in the right stance
dantejosephmorelli 2 years ago
Sparta!
mortelli7 2 years ago
Whats your shield made from?
Greenacres88 2 years ago
Wow he is pretty bad ass
HammerHeavy 4 years ago
Damn right they kick arse! Never see them in SCA for some reason.
000majorwinters000 4 years ago
i think its cause they're hard to portray....spartan wore vary little armor and in the SCA thats never gonna happen
broodwarcd 4 years ago
Untrue if you're only going on the movie. Hoplites were said to have worn chest armor and armor below the knees. History says they were heavily armored units. Still, perhaps the spartans themselves didn't. Still, you could dress as a hoplite and claim yourself a spartan. Couldn't hurt.
000majorwinters000 4 years ago 6
I'm surprised the spearman won. Anywho, spartan weren't heavily armored..Well they wore a chest piece(bronze plate), knee and shin protection, and some sort of bracer leather or bronze. I guess it was just heavy considering the armor they went up against..like whicker, and thing leather.
w0rrLord 4 years ago
for ancient times, they were extreamly heavy troops.
000000AEA000000 3 years ago 7
@000majorwinters000 Well Spartan hoplites should be nothing drastically different to any other Greek hoplites - to be noted, it was Argives that brought forward phalanx warfare in late 8th, early 7th century (decades after Homer), though certainly even Mycenaeans must had tight phalanx-like formations. The question was more of a social rather than purely military nature: did oligarchies wanted an armed middle class or not?
Phalanxes of cities started diverging only by late 5th century.
notgodsemigod 11 months ago
@000majorwinters000 At the times of the Persian invasions most Greek armies were still on the heavier side, only slightly less heavy than the super-heavy archaic hoplites. Spartans certainly wore bronze armour, they had all the gear. The main difference with other armies most noted had been nothing else, other than their relatively shorter sword, Spartan swords were seen rather as big knifes though Spartans knew how to use them very effectively.
notgodsemigod 11 months ago
@000majorwinters000 By Pelopenesian war, the increased mobility needs for the armies as well as the plunging economies meant that the phalanxes were alleviated for the most of it keeping only parts of the army on the heavier side and having mostly the type of light hoplite (i.e. only helmet, shielf & legs but no armour) - only difference with a peltast being the use of a full round shield on phalanx formation rather than a crescend light shield protecting the hand only for freestyle warfare.
notgodsemigod 11 months ago
@000majorwinters000 further divergence was imposed by thebes who had the side-phalanx system where we can guess the front line was full of fully-clad hoplites but the back side pushing part would be all about light hoplites mainly pushing with their shield rather than doing anything else, thus a shield, a helmet and a short spear to finish off fallen enemies would do the job. And then Philip II developed the most complex Greek formation, the Macedonian phalanx.
notgodsemigod 11 months ago
Great Work Spartan! kick ars! (^_^)
Komnene777 4 years ago 3