Was the later Spartan hoplite (Peloponnesian wars onwards) distinguishable from other hoplites? I want to paint a 28mm Spartan army but I am filled with doubt as to whether they wore a crimson tunic, body armour, a pilos-style helmet or their shields even displayed the legendary lambda? The latest Osprey book, Pylos and Sphacteria, written by William Shepherd, depicts the majority of hoplites wearing the crimson exomis tunic and no body armour. I cannot find any evidence depicting a later hoplite from Lakedaimon – or identified as such. Although I could work on the premise it is a matter of opinion as "no-one knows" I am interested in historical accuracy and would welcome advice from members of the forum.
Robert Gargan
Well ... Thucydides, writing about Sphacteria, mentions:
... the Lacedaemonians could not pursue them with their heavy armour. - Thucydides IV.33.2
It looks as if at the time of the Peloponnesian War the Spartans should have at least linen body armour.
Following the Peloponnesian war, we switch from Thucydides to Xenophon.
Now the people in the city, observing from their towers that the enemy's posts were less carefully guarded than formerly, and that the men were scattered through the country, made a sally, capturing some of them and cutting down others. [18] When Mnasippus perceived this, he put on his armour and went to the rescue himself, with all the hoplites he had, and at the same time ordered the captains and commanders of divisions to lead forth the mercenaries. - Hellenica VI.2.18
Mnasippus is a Spartan commander (an admiral to be precise, but operating on land), so it looks as if they were still wearing armour as of 373 BC.
Forgot to mention: each Spartan hoplite carried a large letter Lambda on his shield. This looks like an inverted 'V' (see here (http://www.ancientmilitary.com/spartan-weapons.htm)).
Though I expect you already knew that. :)
Patrick,
Thanks for the significant evidence from Thucydides and the Hellenica.
I'm not so sure about the use of the lambda. I remember reading some Messenian troops seizing Elis by painting lambda on their shields but that was in the 3rd century. I wander if Lakedaimon used plain bronze shields, which would distinguish them from other nation's hoplites.
Robert
Robert
There was certainly something that marked out Spartan shields so I doubt it was that they were plain bronze. I have looked for the reference but have not yet been able to find it, there is one battle (in Asia Minor IIRC) where the Spartans get beaten because they are using borrowed shields and the Greeks fighting them don't realise they are Spartans.
Regards
Tim
Here - http://www.ancientgreekbattles.net/Pages/41850_SpartanShield.htm - is a good summary of the evidence for the lambda blazon. Basically we have a Byzantine author quoting a 5th-century Athenian poet. The same page quotes the theory cited by Duncan Campbell in the recent Osprey Spartan Warrior that Eupolis' reference was some sort of obscure pun and that the Spartans had plain bronze shields with no blazon (from memory I don't think it was Campbell's own theory, he was referring to someone else's article).
We know that earlier Spartans didn't use a uniform blazon, from the evidence of hoplite figurines from Spartan sanctuaries and other art, so one question is when was the lambda adopted. Rather than the theory proposed at http://www.ancientgreekbattles.net/Pages/41850_SpartanShield.htm, another is that freed helot hoplites like Brasidas' men were the first to use the lambda - see http://lukeuedasarson.com/Greek_shield_patterns_1.html
What then of the other signifiers of Spartan-ness I recall from my youth - the red tunic and the red cloak? And did they always have long hair?
On reflection I suppose Spartan shields were unlikely to progress from the earlier varied designs to a plain bronze surface.
However, did they wear red tunics? The famed scarlet cloak wouldn't be worn in battle so could the exomis tunic have been white or unbleached linen – given the Spartan pride in wearing plain clothing? I cannot find illustrations of hoplites than can be identified as Spartan or any written evidence – but then I missed the text relating to armour. Did Xenophon write something about mercenary hoplites all in red and bronze?
Robert
Yes he did.
"And the Greeks all had helmets of bronze, crimson tunics, and greaves, and carried their shields uncovered." - Anabasis I.2.16
This was a parade: if the crimson tunics (khitōnas phoinikous) were thus visible, armour was probably not being worn for the occasion.
More specifically Spartan, Xenophon also says (
Agesilaus II.7) that the Spartan king:
Quotebrought into the field an army not a whit inferior to the enemy's; he so armed it that it looked one solid mass of bronze and crimson (apanta men chalkon, apanta de phoinika)
So whatever they are wearing in the field (and "they" in this context appears to include the whole army - Spartiates, helot hoplites and mercenaries) it's red. The ancient descriptions of Spartan clothing are often unspecific about whether red tunics or red cloaks are meant; I have a list of passages somewhere and (from memory) both cloaks and tunics are explicitly described as red or crimson, but only in late sources. However note Plutarch,
Instituta Laconica 24:
QuoteIn wars they used red garments (phoinikisin) for two reasons: first, the colour they thought was a manly colour, and second, the blood-red hue causes more terror in the minds of the inexperienced. Also, if any one of them receive a wound, it is advantageous that it be not easily discovered by the enemy, but be unperceived by reason of the identity of colour.
As with the Xenophon passage,
phoinikisin ("crimson things", or "crimson clothing") does not explicitly state whether cloak or tunic is meant. But it's something worn in battle, and even if Spartiate hoplites did wear their cloaks in the phalanx, wounds are more likely to bleed on their tunics.
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on Sep 04, 2016, 07:12 PM
Now the people in the city, observing from their towers that the enemy's posts were less carefully guarded than formerly, and that the men were scattered through the country, made a sally, capturing some of them and cutting down others. [18] When Mnasippus perceived this, he put on his armour and went to the rescue himself, with all the hoplites he had, and at the same time ordered the captains and commanders of divisions to lead forth the mercenaries. - Hellenica VI.2.18
Mnasippus is a Spartan commander (an admiral to be precise, but operating on land), so it looks as if they were still wearing armour as of 373 BC.
Not really. "Put on his armour" is simply "exoplizeto" (ἐξωπλίζετο), "put on his
hopla"; and
hopla is generically arms or equipment, so the passage doesn't really say that he put on body-armour, merely that he donned whatever war-gear he used - helmet and shield and weapons would be enough, it doesn't really say anything about "armour" one way or the other.
(Indeed anyone who still thinks the Argive shield was called "hoplon" could translate the word as "picked up his shield" :).)
Were good red dies available?
Probably not (most dies were made from iron or steel for durability), but the characteristic red dye was madder (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubia_tinctorum). One can achieve several shades of red and orange with this.
Quote from: Dave Knight on Sep 06, 2016, 12:14 PM
Were good red dies available?
Madder would probably be the commonest, but kermes and Cretan lichens are also mentioned as sources of reds - https://lra.le.ac.uk/bitstream/2381/30797/1/U144548.pdf
Quote from: Dave Knight on Sep 06, 2016, 12:14 PM
Were good red dies available?
Oddly enough, I was reading up on dyes this morning in another context. A good red madder based dye would have been available and was fairly cheap. Wikipedia also says the Greeks used Kermes (an insect based dye) but this was a premium product, so unlikely to have been used for whole armies.
In Plutarch's Agesilaus, 34. 6-8, Isidas, son of Phoebidas is fined 1000 drachmae for not wearing his armour – or clothing - in the defence of Sparta. But if we are to take armour as arming with shield and helmet, defensive equipment, then that doesn't tell us much about the use of linothorax, metal cuirass, or spolas (whatever that was) by the later Spartans.
I am persuaded Spartans wore tunics a shade of red and the likely probability the shield displayed the lambda.
Robert
The trophies in Anderson's Plate 11 (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=OTW4E0Ti0_MC&pg=PA364&lpg=PA364&dq=anderson+age+of+xenophon+plate+11&source=bl&ots=uKHZsyl4uR&sig=I1m5FR9BomgPTS7Y6kI7hSxqYms&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwipn8mgyfvOAhUsI8AKHXSYDD4Q6AEIIDAA#v=onepage&q=anderson%20age%20of%20xenophon%20plate%2011&f=false) are what made me suspect that (at least some) Spartan hoplites of the Peloponnesian War period wore armour, in this case the linen or leather cuirass. But it's not certain: Athenian trophies from pilos-wearing enemies are not definitely Spartan gear.
Yes, that looks interesting but I noticed the pilos helmet was worn by Athenians and the Grave Stele of Stratokles (mfa.org/collections/object/grave-stele-of-stratokles-151068) shows unarmoured hoplites in combat: was this typical of the later period?
Quote from: RobertGargan on Sep 06, 2016, 09:48 PM
Yes, that looks interesting but I noticed the pilos helmet was worn by Athenians and the Grave Stele of Stratokles (mfa.org/collections/object/grave-stele-of-stratokles-151068) shows unarmoured hoplites in combat: was this typical of the later period?
The pilos becomes common everywhere, though perhaps less so in Athens than in many places. In the case of Stratokles, he is probably the Attic-helmeted victor; the bearded pilos-helmeted enemy might be a Spartan, or a Peloponnesian at least.
Unarmoured hoplites are very common in art after 440 or so. Some authors argue that only the younger age-groups - the ones who are sometimes described by Xenophon and others as "running out" against enemy light troops - dispensed with armour; others see the entire Spartan (for instance) army as unarmoured. Anderson's
Military Theory and Practice in the Age of Xenophon is still very good on this and related subjects; Nick Sekunda's Osprey
The Ancient Greeks and some of his other titles are also worth reading. He argues for a resurgence of body-armour, bronze muscled cuirasses, in the second half of the 4th century, based on a new crop of Athenian stelae showing these cuirasses and sometimes Thracian helmets, such as Aristonautes (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/NAMA_St%C3%A8le_d'Aristonautes.jpg), Prokleides (http://arts.monash.edu.au/publications/eras/edition-4/adamsimages/image4-large.jpg) and others. But it is hard to tell whether this reflects a real change in equipment or just a change in artistic preferences.
Some purple murex dyes are a dark blood red color - http://skemman.is/stream/get/1946/16925/39209/1/Purple_Murex_Dye_in_Antiquity.pdf
I think we've all been assuming that murex dyes were too expensive and luxurious for rank-and-file battledress; but Dave's link does provide a reminder that not all murex is royal "Tyrian purple".
I'm not sure if there is any strong argument to establish a definite look to the look of Spartan shields in the late 5th- to early 4th century BC. In my own project I'm opting to use a mix of gorgoneia and the petal/spiral/wheel-and-spoke motifs from 6th century BC votive offerings at the Sanctuary Shrine of Artemis Ortheia at Sparta. Several examples are here http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/dept/ant/greeceandrome/browsegallery/area2/object.html?ClassicalGreekWorldCase5Sec2&88185 (http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/dept/ant/greeceandrome/browsegallery/area2/object.html?ClassicalGreekWorldCase5Sec2&88185).
I don't recall seeing similar petal/spiral/wheel-and-spoke patterns elsewhere, so in the absence of strong contrary evidence I'm opting to use these as particularly Spartan designs.
I'm open to the idea of using the lambda for neodamodeis and possibly perioikoi, but I've come to accept that there is still no definite evidence for Spartan shield designs in the age of Xenophon.
I know both Plutarch and Xenophon wrote the Spartans polished their bronze faced shields before battle. Xenophon mentions the mass of red and bronze of the Spartan line of battle. All this points to bronze shields – a large amount of the surface of polished bronze – with or without a design. Like yourself I am inclined to go for the red lambda and maybe another "Spartan design" but this is based on very little evidence. It maybe the rim of the shield or some shields were bronze but that is conjecture.
Yes, the mention of "bronze-faced shields" suggests either a blank or minimalist - black outline on bronze? - approach.
Lakonians are a challenging bunch to model accurately. Their moustaches, for instance...
An interesting question there.
Are there any examples of partially painted hoplite shields?
Or are they all fully painted faces?
Which would suggest Spartans were just plain bronze, as described, with no painted lamda
There are no surviving hoplite shields with any traces of paint at all, AFAIK.
Although this may be a case of absence of evidence not meaning evidence of absence. Just prior to Second Mantinea, "the hoplites of the Arcadians painted [epegraphonto = marked, inscribed] clubs upon their shields, as though they were Thebans" and "all alike sharpened their spears and daggers and burnished [elamprunonto = brightened] their shields". (Hellenica VII.5.20)
It looks as if paint or something very similar (obtainable in a standard camp) was used, and this did not prevent the shield being brightened/burnished despite having a device applied.
That was easy
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on Oct 17, 2016, 08:41 PM
Although this may be a case of absence of evidence not meaning evidence of absence.
But in this case, given the number of surviving shields, it may be more reasonable to take the absence of proof as proof of its non-existence.
Quote from: Dangun on Oct 18, 2016, 08:43 AM
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on Oct 17, 2016, 08:41 PM
Although this may be a case of absence of evidence not meaning evidence of absence.
But in this case, given the number of surviving shields, it may be more reasonable to take the absence of proof as proof of its non-existence.
We would then have to explain all the visual images of what appear to be patterned shields and the literary references to painting shields. Given the nature of the physical evidence (excavated material where paint may not have survived), I think I would stick with "absence of evidence" in this case.
Yes, if paint wasn't a method of decorating shields then what method was used? Are the brightly coloured shield transfers now commercially available mere flights of fancy?
Quote from: Yin Shao Loong on Oct 18, 2016, 09:03 AM
Yes, if paint wasn't a method of decorating shields then what method was used? Are the brightly coloured shield transfers now commercially available mere flights of fancy?
Patrick's quote ought prove shields were at least sometimes painted (albeit not necessarily in bright colours).
There's at least one example of a Macedonian (non-hoplite) shield with a blazon (a Macedonian star) driven into the metal, however (there's some discussion of it in this thread (http://forum.soa.org.uk/index.php?topic=1960.0) - and when I say some discussion, I mean, it's at least mentioned and there's a link to an article (in German) where it's mentioned as a comparandum to the shield the article is about).
Although slightly off-topic, surviving Greek statues are in similar case to surviving Greek shields: usually, there is not a trace of paint on them. Yet there are various allusions and references - notably Cassander almost having a heart attack when he came face-to-face with the statue of Alexander at Delphi (see Plutarch Alexander 74.4 - and also 40.4 for how the statue got there) -which indicate that statues were painted to resemble life.
Ultra-violet spectroscopy examination of some surviving statues has detected traces of paint still adhering (see here (http://io9.gizmodo.com/5616498/ultraviolet-light-reveals-how-ancient-greek-statues-really-looked)). Shields made primarily of wood probably do not retain paint flecks as well as stone and metal, but we have evidence of Greek shield patterns from vase portrayals. This 'actual ancient Greek artwork' is a staple recourse for present-day makers of Greek shields (https://www.medievalarmour.com/c-809-greek-shields.aspx). As most of the original artwork is in black and white (or black and red) on account of pottery styles and colouring limitations, some of the colours are guesswork.
Thank you.
Has anyone seen anything else by Brinkmann on this period since those images came out six odd years ago?
On painted shields and statues - the Alexander Sarcophagus was painted of course, and it depicts very colourful shields (standard Argive shields from the looks of them) - the paint was still clearly visible at the end of the 19th C though it has faded greatly now. These shields are depicted in Sekunda's Osprey Army of Alexander.
Hellenistic Macedonian shields were always embossed with the hoops pattern (and/or with stars, writing or a god or king portrait). Whether they were painted as well ('White Shields', 'Bronze Shields') is a moot point, but Macedonian tomb paintings and Ayios Athanasios in particular show highly coloured shields.
There are no grounds for doubting that Greeks painted their shields. I don't know what sort of paint they might have used to cover bronze, but that's another question.
Patrick
If only I had 300 bucks spare... I wonder how my wife would react to a Spartan shield on the wall of her newly decorated entrance hall - cheaper than good quality pictures for sure.
All
We have to consider that a lot of our painted vase evidence (possibly almost all) is Athenian and largely for export to Italy so it is worth considering if they would have accurately represented Spartans. For most of the period we have surviving examples, Athens and Sparta were enemies. It might not change the representation but it is possible that the potters whose work had survived never actually saw a Spartan sheild.
I WISH that some of the outlanding examples were actual copies (probably painted on wood rather than bronze) and used colour in the same way as the Romans but I remain to be convinced.
Regards
Tim
If, as Xenophon claims, the bronze shield was chosen because it could be quickly polished and was slow to tarnish, would the Spartans be interested in covering it with paint? If the bronze was too thinly spread to significantly add much strength to the shield could its purpose be to impress on the enemy that the dreaded Spartan phalanx was present? It may have been common for hoplites from other states to have portrayed family or national blazons to a greater degree than those from Sparta.
Quote from: RobertGargan on Oct 18, 2016, 08:20 PM
If, as Xenophon claims, the bronze shield was chosen because it could be quickly polished and was slow to tarnish, would the Spartans be interested in covering it with paint? If the bronze was too thinly spread to significantly add much strength to the shield could its purpose be to impress on the enemy that the dreaded Spartan phalanx was present? It may have been common for hoplites from other states to have portrayed family or national blazons to a greater degree than those from Sparta.
As far as I know - I'm sure the classicists will correct me if wrong - all hoplites used the same bronze-faced shield. While the Spartans may have used a plain shield to distinguish themselves, it can't be because only they had bronze shields.
Quote from: RichT on Oct 18, 2016, 12:07 PM
the Alexander Sarcophagus was painted of course
One of the top ten reasons for any holiday in Istanbul!
Although earlier this year, that exhibit was closed for renovation.
Quote from: Erpingham on Oct 18, 2016, 09:00 AM
We would then have to explain all the visual images of what appear to be patterned shields and the literary references to painting shields. Given the nature of the physical evidence (excavated material where paint may not have survived), I think I would stick with "absence of evidence" in this case.
I actually meant just the spartan lambda shield design.
Some of the other designs I believe are confirmed by surviving examples where the design has been formed into the metal, whether or not they were painted.
Quote from: Erpingham on Oct 18, 2016, 09:44 PM
Quote from: RobertGargan on Oct 18, 2016, 08:20 PM
If, as Xenophon claims, the bronze shield was chosen because it could be quickly polished and was slow to tarnish, would the Spartans be interested in covering it with paint? If the bronze was too thinly spread to significantly add much strength to the shield could its purpose be to impress on the enemy that the dreaded Spartan phalanx was present? It may have been common for hoplites from other states to have portrayed family or national blazons to a greater degree than those from Sparta.
As far as I know - I'm sure the classicists will correct me if wrong - all hoplites used the same bronze-faced shield. While the Spartans may have used a plain shield to distinguish themselves, it can't be because only they had bronze shields.
During the Hellenistic era, historians had a simple description for troops with 'bare' bronze shields:
khalkaspides. Somehow a brass-faced shield with a red lambda looks right (http://www.larp.com/hoplite/JMhpln1.jpg) for Spartans. The one featured in the picture is a home-made reconstruction, but the effect is impressive and yes, the Spartans would definitely be interested in adding the 'red letter' for visual effect.
For literary references to shield devices, we are dependent upon
obiter dictu (by-the-way) mentions such as the following:
"Then the Argives, filled with overweening confidence on account of their numbers, advanced at once; and they defeated the Sicyonians, and breaking through the stockade pursued them to the sea and there killed many of them. But Pasimachus, the Lacedaemonian commander of horse, at the head of a few horsemen, when he saw the Sicyonians hard pressed, tied his horses to trees, took from the Sicyonians their shields, and advanced with a volunteer force against the Argives. The Argives, however, seeing the Sigmas upon the shields, did not fear these opponents at all, thinking that they were Sicyonians. Then, as the story goes, Pasimachus said: "By the twin gods, Argives, these Sigmas will deceive you," and came to close quarters with them; and fighting thus with a few against many he was slain, and likewise others of his party." - Xenophon,
Hellenica IV.10.
Without this single mention, we would not know that Sicyonians carried a sigma on their shields. This does at least indicate that certain Greek city-states used single-letter devices as standard, and it would be surprising if the Spartans did not follow this presumably Peloponnesian trend of identity through uniformity.
Patrick
Your point about the Sikyonians is interesting because it is one of the few references to a uniform blazon on hoplite shields from a single city state. I know there is mention of the letter M on Messenian shields and that Thrasyboulos' Athenian democrats painted their shields white in imitation of the Argives but there is very little evidence of independent minded Greeks showing an interest in uniformity.
However, Xenophon's Hellenica quoting the Arkadians painting the Theban club design on their shields shows that uniform blazons were not common otherwise they would have kept their own representations, displaying their distinctive identity. Arkadians like most Greek states simply did not have national uniform symbols.
Spartans described as "equals" colours our perception of the way they should be depicted. History describes their full citizens as homoioi, which encourages us to seek a mind-set that will jump at the opportunity of painting the lambda on all shields. I can see regiments of crimson and gleaming bronze, but I'm not sure they felt the need to own the same shield blazon. I suppose they knew who was on their side in battle because of the direction they were facing and their training.
I would dearly love to preserve the red lambda on my 28mm Spartans but I'm having doubts!
If in doubt paint them out, but I think there is reason enough to keep them - after all, who is going to complain? ;)
As far as I know, we have no overt statements that Spartans went into battle with bare metal shields, so your lambdas would get the benefit of the doubt.
Quote from: RobertGargan on Oct 25, 2016, 11:30 PM
Patrick
Your point about the Sikyonians is interesting because it is one of the few references to a uniform blazon on hoplite shields from a single city state. I know there is mention of the letter M on Messenian shields and that Thrasyboulos' Athenian democrats painted their shields white in imitation of the Argives but there is very little evidence of independent minded Greeks showing an interest in uniformity.
Some however would see the advantage of immediate identification on the battlefield, a point which might have been rubbed home as far as the Athenians were concerned following their unintentional fratricide at Delium while eliminating the Thespians.
Quote
However, Xenophon's Hellenica quoting the Arkadians painting the Theban club design on their shields shows that uniform blazons were not common otherwise they would have kept their own representations, displaying their distinctive identity. Arkadians like most Greek states simply did not have national uniform symbols.
Arkadians were a new composite state assembled largely from the old Messenians, who had for centuries been subjects of Sparta and hence were somewhat lacking in battlefield tradition.
To be frank, we do not really know how widespread 'national' shield symbols were; a few examples are given in literature, we might make out more from vase paintings (which would presumably be accurate in order to avoid negative reviews by customers) and we are left guessing about most of the rest. I am not sure we can say, at least with any pretence to accuracy, that most Greek states lacked national identification symbols.
Quote
Spartans described as "equals" colours our perception of the way they should be depicted. History describes their full citizens as homoioi,
Which is sometimes naughtily misrepresented, but does suggest a penchant for both conformity and uniformity.
Quote from: RobertGargan on Oct 25, 2016, 11:30 PMI can see regiments of crimson and gleaming bronze, but I'm not sure they felt the need to own the same shield blazon. I suppose they knew who was on their side in battle because of the direction they were facing and their training.
But it's not always obvious who's on whose side:
QuoteLearning this, the Lacedaemonians were preparing to assist their partisans in Elis. While they were being organized in squadrons and distributed in companies, a thousand picked Messenian troops arrived hurriedly at Elis with Laconian blazons (semeia ... lakonika) on their shields.
Seeing their shields, all the Laconising party in Elis thought their supporters had arrived and received them into the fortress. But having obtained admission in this way, the Messenians drove out the supporters of the Lacedaemonians and made over the city to their own partisans.
That's Pausanias 4.28.5-6, an incident set around or shortly after the time of the Lamian War - the end of the 4th century. It suggests, just like the Photios/Eupolis
lambdas, that there clearly was a recognizable Lakonian shield-blazon.
I came across an article by Bramwell Adams in Slingshot issue 92 on Spartan shield patterns with some reference to the lead votive offerings at the shrine of Artemis Ortheia. He also advances the argument that if the lambda was employed it would have been written differently in the late 5th century BC to how it is now. It would have it's angle in the lower left, ala the Latin L or the Phoenician Lamed.
For an example, see the top right of this image https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NAMA_Alphabet_grec.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NAMA_Alphabet_grec.jpg)
Was there any subsequent response to this?
Quote from: Yin Shao Loong on Nov 08, 2016, 09:48 AM
Was there any subsequent response to this?
Having checked as far as issue 95 on the basis that if people have not repsonded within six months they are not going to respond at all, the only reaction seems to be from the editor's comment in Bramwell Adams' article; this points to the 'LA' monogram for Larissa on p.29 of the same issue, which appears on a coin of Jason of Pherae, indicating that the 'baseless triangle' form of lambda we know had reached even the semi-barbarous Thessalians by the 4th century BC.
The 'Cadmeian alphabet' shown in the alphabet bowl image has a number of differences from the Greek norm, gamma being like the later lambda, an 'H' added between eta and theta, nu being like the Roman letter 'N', upsilon being like the later nu and xi being out of sequence (between upsilon and phi instead of being between nu and omicron). Whether this would have been reflected in 5th century shield patterns is questionable: it would seem more likely they would reflect whatever version of the alphabet Herodotus was using.
So - next question: do any of our more scholarly members know which version of the Greek alphabet Herodotus was using?
Herodotos is probably a red herring here as differences were regional as much as chronological, and a Halikarnassian working in Athens wouldn't necessarily use the same letter forms as a Spartan. This was, I think, the weakness in Adams' original suggestion.
Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_Greek_alphabetsThe letters Γ and Λ had multiple different forms that could often be confused with each other, as both are just an angle shape that could occur in various positions. ... L-like shapes of Λ were particularly common in Euboea, Attica and Boeotia.
Early Spartan inscriptions are not plentiful but
here is a discussion of a Lakonian inscription dated c.550-525 which already has the familiar "upright" lambda. So if the Spartans
were using the lambda early on, it would probably be the form that we are used to.
Excellent point, Duncan: this looks to me like good evidence.
Thanks, Duncan.
Quote from: RobertGargan on Sep 04, 2016, 01:27 PM
Was the later Spartan hoplite (Peloponnesian wars onwards) distinguishable from other hoplites? I want to paint a 28mm Spartan army but I am filled with doubt as to whether they wore a crimson tunic, body armour, a pilos-style helmet or their shields even displayed the legendary lambda? The latest Osprey book, Pylos and Sphacteria, written by William Shepherd, depicts the majority of hoplites wearing the crimson exomis tunic and no body armour. I cannot find any evidence depicting a later hoplite from Lakedaimon – or identified as such. Although I could work on the premise it is a matter of opinion as "no-one knows" I am interested in historical accuracy and would welcome advice from members of the forum.
Robert Gargan
Debatable.
I'm of the opinion they certainly were later on. (but when and how much is a debate in itself)
There was mention of the lambda entering rotation (but this is post the popular Persian Wars era)
We tend to assume they favored red as we know they purposely went for more uniformity than the other Greek City states. So the army should have a more uniform look HOWEVER that too is somewhat debatable as the 'uniform' look is rather vague. The crimson cloak they got 'may' have been donned but it is unlikely.
Somewhere halfway their conflict with Athens they seem to have opted for a less armored kit to allow mobility. For a while during this period you could definitely depict them as different but I've read theories that indicated others followed suit.
And other theories which I find believable that not everyone ran around low armoured on the Spartan side.
To boot post Persian Wars I feel you can get away giving some of your miniatures the more classic armor due to the fact Sparta was not wealthy in a traditional sense and the conservatism of the Spartans.
With my Spartans I just went with classic look, red and something practical for wargaming purposes.
I opted for armor because I feel for most of their existence they seem to have been decently even heavily armored.
I went for red as it is the color most associated with them and may be indeed integral to the supposedly (but relative) more uniform look they had.
The easiest period to have 'right' is probably pre and during Persian Wars.
The Spartans seem to have been quite indistinguishable from normal hoplites.
Other Greeks identified them easily enough and they seem to not yet have felt the need to 'cultivate' their reputation as a weapon of war in itself.
So if you opt for that period, go for a classic early hoplite with a touch of red as the unifying color and a variety of shield designs.
I would opt for beards and long hair though. Which already seems to have been a very Spartan thing.
But I think you can get away with a lot depending on the period you go for.
Regretfully our sources on Sparta tend to be contradictory, one sided and open for interpretation.
Probably not much help, but I just mean to say... go for the theory you like visually most. Anyone beating you on the head over it when playing you is a horrible person.