Both the Etruscans and the Romans had hoplite armies during classical antiquity, and probably other Italian city states employed hoplites to a greater or lesser extent. The later Greek writers referred to Roman legionaries as hoplites, to give an example.Īs for the question, the answer is yes. The term "hoplite" did not actually have a social meaning, it was simply used as a generic term for "heavy infantry". Perhaps in some context hoplon could refer to the shield, but this was not generally the case. The term for the shield was aspis, or at least this is the terminology that all the ancient writers I've read used. I think it's fairly accurate to call early Roman soldiers hoplites, due to living in a society very similar to the Greeks, but you'd call their social classes as they are, Hastati, Triarii and so on.Īctually, "hoplite" comes from hopla, which can be translated as "arms", more or less, as in hoplite=armed man. I was under the impression Carthaginians had men with shields and spears, who fought like Greek Hoplites, but due to living in a different society, they were not a social class of hoplites. The fact that Hoplite has a social and a military term confuses the issue. Or even just a solid wall of shields, but it has implications that you should consider. Phalanx does work as a generic term for pikemen or shield and spear. Kind-of right, but it conjures up the wrong imagery. Calling medieval Sergeants armed with spears Hoplites though, is like calling swordsmen Legionaries or Hastati. Hoplite comes from the generic term for a shield "hoplon." But their specific shield was called an Aspis. Hoplite is a specific term for the social class in Greece and the class fought as Hoplites, the military term.
Calling non-Greeks hoplites is slightly wrong though. Using a shield and spear together is not something anyone had a monopoly on.
0 kommentar(er)
