How did the hoplite phalanx change greek society?

Answer 1

Hoplite tactics modified Greek political norms primarily due to their equipment requirement. The Greek hoplite was well armored, and bronze chestpieces, helmets, and greaves not to mention weaponry and shield were only attainable by those of a certain wealth. This concentrated military power in the hands of an elite, giving many what they would feel should be more say in how the government operates. With leading citizens as critical components to Grecian armies, it becomes easier to see how "Deomcratic" trends emerged. Let us not forget that in many Greek cities the ratio of Citizens to Slaves was quite unfavorable to the Citizens. Hoplite warfare, by requiring expensive arms excluded the underclasses and allowed the social elite to monpolize force. Addendum: We should not overemphasise the elite division of population. The normal hoplite was a small farmer (peasant in later terminology). Indirect sources indicate that they probably had property of perhaps 2,000 drachma, which at a 10 percent return amounts to 200 dr annual income (in produce). At the prices which we have record for for wheat, there would barely be enough to feed a family of five with a slave, and maintain a ploughing ox (Socrates who was an hoplite admitted to property of 300 dr, though that was during general impoverishment during the Peloponnese War). So the average hoplite lived an economically uncertain life, which could in our terms be described as a life of grinding poverty. And Athenian farms were mostly too infertile to raise wheat, so they had to live on inferior grains. As for the cost of arms, most obviously were passed from father to son, and other sons equipped from battlefield spoils (which is why the emphasis in the literature on stripping the dead, and fighting over ownership of the armour). So the 'elite' class was in fact the mostly the ordinary farmer, and the reason he was prepared to fight was to protect his farm. The bottom third of the citizenry was the unpropertied class. However they had the opportunity to earn subsistence rowing in the navy (in Athens anyway). So power was basically in the hands of two thirds of the population - the hoplites. The Greek word oligarchy means rule of the few, but it didn't really have to be a few. A narrow oligarchy might have a small number of richer men dominant, but aristocracies were generally overthrown and replaced by tyrannies - a popular man prepared to give a fair deal to the broad base of people, but who had to keep a bodyguard to avoid the aristocrats seizing power again. Democracies progressively replaced the tyrants when the mass of small farmers gained the confidence to take over governance of the city-state. A measure of who was in the elite can be gauged not by the hoplite class but by the cavalry. In these poor farming countries, few could afford to keep a horse. Athens' cavalry amounted to about 50, as opposed to a hoplite strength of something over 30,000 in the late 5th Century BCE.

Answer 2

The Hoplites were average citizens that were capable of purchasing standard armor to become soldiers in Ancient Greece. Their tactics included formations such as the phalanx, which ended up giving Sparta a successful standing army. Hoplite tactics are often thought to correspond with the existence of the city-state structure of Greece, making the issue of defense a central political norm. These small armies were pitted against external threats like the Persians under the direction of several generals, the most famous being Epaminondas, or to solve internal disputes among rival city-states to maintain order.