Was the Spartan hoplite recognizable?

[RobertGargan]

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

[Patrick Waterson]

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.

[Patrick Waterson]

Forgot to mention: each Spartan hoplite carried a large letter Lambda on his shield.  This looks like an inverted 'V' (see here).

Though I expect you already knew that.

[RobertGargan]

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

[Tim]

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

[Duncan Head]

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

[Erpingham]

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?

[RobertGargan]

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

[Patrick Waterson]

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.

[Duncan Head]

More specifically Spartan, Xenophon also says (Agesilaus II.7) that the Spartan king:

brought 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:

In 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.

[Duncan Head]

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"  .)

[Dave Knight]

Were good red dies available?

[Patrick Waterson]

Probably not (most dies were made from iron or steel for durability), but the characteristic red dye was madder.  One can achieve several shades of red and orange with this.

[Duncan Head]

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

[Erpingham]

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.