63
Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, Vol. 5, No 2, pp. 63-74
Copyright © 2005 MAA
Printed in Greece. All rights reserved
WEAPONS AND WARFARE IN EARLY IRON AGE
THESSALY
IOANNIS GEORGANAS
Received: 4-11-2004
Accepted: 15-3-2005
The Canadian Institute in Greece
Dionysiou Aiginitou 7
GR 115 28 Athens, Greece
E-mail:info@aiathens.gr
ABSTRACT
The aim of this paper is to examine all the archaeological evidence regarding weapons in Early
Iron Age Thessaly. This involves the study of both offensive (swords, knives, spearheads,
arrowheads, and sling bullets) and defensive (shields) equipment. This analysis shall serve as the
basis for an attempt to throw some light on the nature of warfare in Thessaly during this crucial
period of Greek history.
KEYWORDS: Naue II swords, knives, spearheads, Protogeometric, Geometric
INTRODUCTION
Since the works of Snodgrass in the 1960s
(1964; 1967), very little has been written on
Early Iron Age (EIA) weapons and warfare.
With the exception of Kilian-Dirlmeier’s
(1993) fundamental study on swords, most of
the material is published as part of excavation
reports, which understandably do not go into
much detail. Recently, Irene Lemos (2002)
has successfully attempted to bring together
most of the weapons evidence from the
Aegean, but only for the Protogeometric
period. In addition, the lack of any
representational art and written sources still
inhibit us from establishing a clearer picture
for EIA warfare, in contrast with the ample
evidence from the Late Geometric period
onwards. In this paper, we are first going to
present all the archaeological record regarding
weapons in EIA Thessaly (fig.1). This shall be
followed by a discussion summarising the
evidence and putting it into a greater context.
I. GEORGANAS
64
Fig. 1: Map of Thessaly showing main sites discussed in text.
SWORDS
During the EIA the dominant type of
sword used was an iron cut-and-thrust
weapon widely known today as “Naue II”.
This form, which derived from the similar,
but bronze sword found in Late Bronze Age
Greece, is thought to have been introduced to
the Eastern Mediterranean from Central
Europe (Snodgrass 1964, 93; Catling and
Catling 1980, 253; Kilian-Dirlmeier, 1993,
94-105). Various scholars have offered
detailed classifications of the bronze examples
(e.g. Catling 1961; Sandars 1961), although
very little has been written for their iron
successors (Snodgrass 1964, 93-113; KilianDirlmeier 1993). Generally speaking, this
type of sword is flange-hilted with the blade
having parallel edges for the greater part of its
length before tapering to a sharp point. The
hilt usually takes the form of two or more
successive swellings alternating with
intervening “necks”. In some cases, there are
two “pommel-ears” projecting outwards, with
or without a spur between them. The
handgrip may have a swelling to prevent the
hand from slipping. At its base, the hilt
widens into the shoulder of the blade
(Snodgrass 1964, 93-94).
In Thessaly iron swords have been
recovered from the sites of Marmariani,
Homolion, Halos, Volos-Kapakli, Krannon,
Sarantaporo and Pythio. In addition to these
find spots, we might also include the tholos
tombs at Nea Anchialos and Agioi Theodoroi,
where the reports mention several iron
weapons but without giving any information
about them (A. Delt. 42, 255; A. Delt. 45,
204-205).
Tholos tomb VI at Marmariani yielded a
sword with a preserved length of 0.27 m and
width of ca. 0.036 m (Heurtley and Skeat
1930-31, 36, fig. 15.22). The end of the hilt
65
WEAPONS AND WARFARE IN EARLY IRON AGE THESSALY
and the end of the blade are missing. One rivet
is preserved at the end of the hilt with bronze
head. The impress of the wooden sidepieces is
still preserved in some places of the hilt. The
date of this sword is problematic as the tomb
was in use for some 150 years (Late
Protogeometric-Middle Geometric).
Chamber tomb I at Homolion contained a
specimen 0.672 m long, dated to the PG
period (A. Delt. 17, 175). A number of swords
comes from the Halos tumuli, although
adequate information is available only for the
11 pieces found at Tumulus A and for two
swords coming from Tumuli B and G. Nine
out of the 16 pyres of Tumulus A contained
one sword each, while Pyre XIV yielded two
examples (fig. 2). All the swords are
typologically similar, although four of them
have a slightly broader blade (Wace and
Thompson 1911-12, 26). The preserved
length of the blades ranges between 0.62 and
0.91 m (average 0.75 m), with that of the hilt
usually measuring 0.12 m. The hilts are of the
same type in all the examples and they are
made in one piece with the blade. Originally,
they seem to have been completed by hiltplates of wood, bone or ivory, inlaid and
attached by iron rivets (some of these still
survive in the pieces from Pyres V and VII). In
the broad-bladed examples, the blade has a
width of 0.05 m at the hilt and for some
distance below the edges runs almost parallel
but afterwards increases to a width of 0.06 m
(Wace and Thompson 1911-12, 26, fig.
15.1). To this group, we may also allocate the
example from Tumulus B (blade”s preserved
length 0.40 m, width 0.045-0.05 m) (Wace
and Thompson 1911-12, 19). In the narrowbladed pieces, the blade has again a width of
0.05 m at the hilt but afterwards decreases to
0.04 m. It increases again to 0.05 m before
tapering to a point. In section, the blade is
cusped rhomboid and the midrib is quite
prominent, in contrast with the broad bladed
swords where the midrib is very slight (Wace
Fig. 2: Swords from Halos Tumulus A
(after Kilian-Dirlmeier 1993, taf. 47).
and Thompson 1911-12, 28, fig. 15.3). To
this category seems to belong the sword from
Tumulus G (blade”s preserved length 0.68 m,
width 0.035-0.04 m) (Wace and Thompson
1911-12, 20).
Three pieces from Pyres IX, XIV and XV,
though described as knives by the excavators,
could be classified as hacking-swords (length
0.45-0.49 m, including the hilt) (Wace and
Thompson 1911-12, 14, 17-18, 26, fig. 15.67). All three of them have single-edged
blades, with a convex cutting edge and a very
66
slightly recurved back. Snodgrass, who
classifies them as Type II swords, points out
that “it is not clear that these are in fact
weapons of war…” (Snodgrass 1964, 100).
Parallels are known from Chauchitza, Vergina
and Crete, while a smaller specimen from the
PG Kerameikos Grave 28, seems to be the
likely ancestor for this type (Snodgrass 1964,
100; 1971, 274).
From the other three excavated tumuli,
several swords have also been reported but the
excavators do not provide us with a detailed
description, except that some of them are of
the Naue II type with “fish-tail”-shaped hilts
(Malakasioti 1997, 192-93).
For the tholos tombs at Volos-Kapakli the
reports only mention that numerous iron
swords were found among other weapons,
without giving any description of them
(Arvanitopoulos 1914, 141; Kilian-Dirlmeier
1993, 113). Finally, cist graves 37 and 40 at
Krannon yielded one sword each (A. Delt. 38,
206-207), while two stray finds are reported
from Sarantaporo (preserved length 0.45 m,
width 0.04 m) and Pythio (A. Delt. 42, 281).
With the exception of the three singleedged examples from Halos, all the Thessalian
swords fall into Snodgrass” Type I, with
parallels coming from mainland Greece,
Crete, Euboea, Samos, Rhodes, Cyprus and
the Near East (Snodgrass 1964, 93-98;
Catling and Catling 1980, 253-254).
KNIVES
Under this heading we include all
specimens measuring 0.355 m or less, loosely
following the classification proposed by
Gordon (1953, 67). A differentiation between
knives, daggers and dirks is not pursued for
two reasons: first, both daggers and dirks
imply weapons with two-edged blades that
mainly differ from swords in terms of size. As
we are going to see, almost all of the
Thessalian examples (for which we have
sufficient information) are single-edged.
I. GEORGANAS
Second, most of the material is either
unpublished or inadequately described,
making such a distinction unfeasible.
Of the 43 knives recovered in
Thessaly, only three are of bronze. The latter
were found in a Geometric grave at Dimini
(two examples) and in the PG tholos tomb 5
at Sesklo (Arvanitopoulos 1915, 155-156;
1911: 299). Bronze swords and knives are not
unknown in the EIA, as the evidence from
places like Vergina, Orchomenos, Samos and
Vrokastro indicates (Snodgrass 1964, 94, 9697, 103 with references). Iron knives come
from the sites of Homolion, Pharsala, Kastri
Agias, Krannon, Theotokou, Argyropouli,
Marmariani, Velestino-Chloe and Halos.
Sufficient information is, however, available
only for those coming from a tholos tomb at
Chloe, tholos tombs VI and I at Marmariani
and Tumulus A at Halos.
From the only published tholos tomb at
Chloe two knives are reported (BE 8778,
8776) (Arachoviti 1994, 133-134). BE 8778,
which was found complete, has a length of
0.242 m and greatest width of 0.031 m. Its
blade is triangular in section and at the hilt
there are traces of the wooden hilt-plates. BE
8776 is similar, although smaller, with a
preserved length of 0.103 m and greatest
width of 0.021 m. Traces of wood and cloth
are preserved at the hilt. Similar knives are
reported from Vergina (Andronikos 1969,
268-269, figs. 104.AAI and 105.TX).
Tholos VI at Marmariani contained a knife
with a present length of 0.14 m and greatest
width of ca. 0.02m. The handle and the tip of
the blade are missing. The single edge of the
blade is convex (Heurtley and Skeat 1930-31,
36, fig. 15.23). Fragments of three similar
knives have also been found. From tholos I
come the fragment of a curved knife with
wooden hilt (width ca. 0.015 m) and the tip
of a straight knife (Heurtley and Skeat 193031, 38).
Tumulus A at Halos has yielded 20 iron
WEAPONS AND WARFARE IN EARLY IRON AGE THESSALY
knives. All of them are typologically similar,
with their length ranging between 0.15 and
0.33 m. All are single-edged and were
fastened into handles of wood by tangs and
iron rivets. The edge of the blade is almost
straight, except for the curve near the tip. The
incurved profile that is observed in some of
them, is probably due to long use and
repeated sharpening (Wace and Thompson
1911-12, 26). Similar examples come from
Athens and Vergina (Andronikos 1969, 268,
fig. 104.Z5‚). The three smaller knives
(0.15 m long) were found in female pyres,
while the rest come from the men”s pyres.
For the other sites, the reports only
provide us with the number of specimens:
Homolion chamber tomb II (one singleedged), Homolion tholos tomb (a fragment)
(A. Delt. 17, 175-176), cist grave at Pharsala
(one) (A. Delt. 19, 261), peribolos at Kastri
Agias (one) (A. Delt. 34, 222), cist grave B at
Theotokou (one in fragments) (Wace and
Droop 1906-07, 326), a tholos tomb at
Argyropouli (one) (A. Delt. 51, 373),
Krannon cist graves 1 and 37 (two each) and
28, 61 (one each) (A. Delt. 38, 204, 206,
208).
SPEARHEADS
Iron spearheads have been found at
Homolion, Sesklo, Kastri Agias, Platykambos,
Marmariani, Velestino and Halos. It is very
possible that spearheads have also been found
in the tholos tombs of Nea Anchialos, Agioi
Theodoroi and Kapakli, where the reports
mention several iron weapons among the
offerings (A. Delt. 42, 255; A. Delt. 45, 204205; A. Delt. 48, 233). Chamber tomb III at
Homolion, a cist grave at Sesklo, the peribolos
at Kastri, a cist grave at Platykambos and
tholos VI at Marmariani have all yielded a
spearhead each (only a fragment from the last
three), while the settlement at Velestino and
the Halos tumuli provided us with several
examples (A. Delt. 17, 175; Syriopoulos
67
1984, 631; A. Delt. 34, 222; Theochari 196466, 46, fig. 11.1; Heurtley and Skeat 1930-31,
36). Sufficient information is available only
for the ten spearheads from Halos Tumulus A
and the four specimens found at the
settlement of Velestino.
All of the Halos specimens are socketed
and eight of them are almost identical in
shape and size (Wace and Thompson 191112, 26, fig. 15.5). The socket first tapers and
then widens into a flat, leaf-shaped blade, in
one continuous curve. There is no midrib
present. The best-preserved example, which
is 0.34 m long and 0.04 m wide, comes from
Pyre XV. This type, Snodgrass” Type Q, is rare
and the only known parallels are those from
Bassae and Delphi (Snodgrass 1964, 130). Of
the remaining two spearheads, one has a
slightly broader blade while the other is so
damaged that it cannot be classified. For
tumuli Alpha, Beta and Gamma, the
preliminary reports just mention the presence
of numerous Type J spearheads (Malakasioti
1997, 194). This type, which is similar to
Type E but with longer socket, narrower blade
and sloping instead of rounded “shoulders”,
has been characterized by Snodgrass as the
“long spear par excellence” (Snodgrass 1964,
123-126).
Rescue excavations at the settlement of
Velestino have brought to light four iron
spearheads (BE 445, 201, 2652, 481)
(Apostolopoulou-Kakavoyanni 1992, 318319). BE 445 (length 0.163 m, width 0.025
m, socket diameter 0.02 m) is leaf-shaped
with a very prominent midrib running across
its length. This specimen falls into Snodgrass”
Type D, with parallels coming from
Kerameikos, Nauplion, Delphi, Vitsa and
Cyprus (Snodgrass 1964, 120-121, fig. 7d).
BE 201 (length 0.145 m, width 0.018 m) is
also leaf-shaped with a pointed tip and a
midrib. It belongs to Type J (Snodgrass 1964,
124, fig. 7h). BE 2652 (length 0.165 m,
width 0.022 m) and BE 481 (preserved
I. GEORGANAS
68
length 0.092 m, width 0.026 m) fall into
Type P, having flat blades with no midribs
(Snodgrass 1964, 129-130).
ARROWHEADS
Only two graves have yielded arrowheads;
the published tholos tomb at Velestino-Chloe
and a cist grave in the sanctuary of Enodia at
Velestino. The former contained four iron
examples, with one of them complete (BE
8792). It has a length of 0.026 m, width of
0.014 m and it is 0.002 m thick. Traces of the
wooden shaft are still preserved (Arachoviti
1994, 134). This form, which falls into
Snodgrass” Type 2 (barbed and tanged
arrowhead without boss), has a long history
stretching back to the Late Helladic period
(Snodgrass 1964, 148). Parallels come from
Lefkandi, Kerameikos and Vergina (Catling
and Catling 1980, 256-257 with references;
Andronikos 1969, 272-273, fig.108). Finally,
cist grave 85-86 at the sanctuary of Enodia
contained six arrowheads, with one of them
still embedded in the spine of the deceased
(Béquignon 1937, 52).
SHIELD-BOSSES
Bronze shield bosses are reported from the
two major Thessalian sanctuaries; of Artemis
Enodia at Pherai and Athena Itonia at Philia.
However, only the finial of one specimen from
Philia has been published (Pilali-Papasteriou
and Papaeuthumiou-Papanthimou 1983, 57,
fig. 4). It is pyramid-shaped, with a disk at its
one end. Almost identical examples have been
found at Olympia (Jacobsthal 1956, 43, figs.
187-191).
Although the precise function of these
objects is still a matter of heated debate
(Snodgrass 1973; Catling 1996, 522-524),
their connection with shields is well proved,
especially by the finds in grave T.40 at
Kaloriziki in Cyprus (Catling 1996, 524 with
reference). Among the various offerings, three
bronze bosses (one large between two smaller
ones) with fragments of a bronze rim running
round them were found. This assemblage has
been restored as a broad shield with a Wshaped lower outline, not very different from
those depicted on the Warrior Vase from
Mycenae.
SLING BULLETS
Three sling bullets were found in
Marmariani Tholos V. The first, which is
made of stone, is 0.065 m long and its shape is
ovoid with pointed ends. The other two are
made of clay and are of the same shape as the
stone one (Heurtley and Skeat 1930-31, 38,
41, fig. 16.25).
WEAPONS AND WARFARE:
A DISCUSSION
The most striking innovation of the EIA in
terms of arms is the introduction and
subsequent widespread adoption of the iron
cut-and-thrust sword, although such
weapons, but in bronze, were not unknown in
the latest Mycenaean period (Snodgrass 1964,
190; Lorimer 1950, 263). As far as its place of
origin is concerned, various scholars have
come up with different theories, with the vast
majority now accepting a Central European
origin (for a review of the proposed theories,
see Snodgrass 1964, 204-212; KilianDirlmeier 1993, 94-105).
Regardless the origin, what is really
important is the profound effect that this type
of weapon had in EIA Greece. The iron “Naue
II” sword, with its robust blade and very
efficient flanged hilt, becomes the main - if not
the only - type of sword used, with examples
found all over the Greek world. Typologically,
it follows its late Mycenaean predecessor,
though the suggestion of a fully continuous
series is invalid, mainly due to the change in
material (Snodgrass 1964, 190-191. For a
different view, see Kilian-Dirlmeier 1993,
154, 170-171). Iron-working, as well as the
metal itself, seems to have been introduced to
WEAPONS AND WARFARE IN EARLY IRON AGE THESSALY
Greece from the Eastern Mediterranean, and
Cyprus in particular. This is clearly reflected
in the earliest iron sword from the mainland
(Kerameikos PG Grave 2), which shows more
affinities with bronze specimens from Cyprus
and the Levant, rather than with any
Mycenaean pieces (Snodgrass 1971, 217-231,
especially 229; Desborough 1972, 311, 315318). It should be noted, however, that after a
short period of time iron swords were again
being manufactured in a form close to the
Mycenaean bronze types. This form
dominated on the Greek mainland for some
300 years, well into the Archaic period
(Snodgrass 1964, 112). A notable instance of
the continuing use of the Naue II sword in
Thessaly is given by the several specimens
found in the tumuli at Agios Georgios, the
latest dated to the mid-6th century BC
(Tziafalias 1978, 180).
The sword evidence from Thessaly
harmonises with what is known from the
other regions of Greece, and especially Attica,
where sword burials are almost unknown in
the Submycenaean period and become more
common from the Late Protogeometric period
onwards. From the seven sites that produced
iron swords, none can be securely dated before
Late Protogeometric. In terms of typology, the
vast majority (17 out of 20) of the Thessalian
swords fall into Snodgrass” Type I, while only
three specimens fall into Type II. If we attempt
to apply Catling”s bronze-sword classification
to our iron specimens, we can see that those
from Marmariani and Halos could probably
fall into his Group II. However, as Snodgrass
has correctly pointed out, trying to apply such
a typology to iron swords is not an easy task,
as the severe corrosion observed in iron blades
denies us of any characteristics such as “blood
channels” and other ridges (Snodgrass 1964,
106).
In terms of use, there is no doubt that all
our Type I specimens were implements of war,
used for both cutting and thrusting. This can
69
be clearly seen after employing the criteria
proposed by Gordon (1953, 67-78).
According to his study, in order for a sword to
qualify as cut-and-thrust, it should be at least
0.508 m long, 0.0225 m wide and have a
prominent midrib.
Of all the published swords, namely those
from Halos, Homolion and Marmariani, only
the latter does not meet the length criterion
(0.27 m), although note its fragmentary
condition. The Halos specimens measure
between 0.62 and 0.91 m and that from
Homolion is 0.672 m long. On the question of
the width of the blade, all the examples meet
the criterion, having a width of at least 0.04 m.
As far as the presence of a midrib is
concerned, we have seen that from the Halos
specimens, those with a narrow blade had
more prominent midribs compared to the
broad-bladed ones. This is expected, as some
form of strengthening was necessary for
narrow blades. In addition, midribs took the
strain of blows with the flat of the sword,
which were very likely to occur with a cutand-thrust sword (Snodgrass 1964, 105). The
above criteria, of course, do not apply to the
three single-edged pieces from Halos, which
were obviously used only for hacking.
The limited distribution of iron swords
observed in Thessaly in combination with the
fact that almost all graves contained a single
sword, allows us to assume that swords were
highly prized. It is therefore very probable
that only very few warriors could afford such a
weapon and the majority would have to stick
with a less impressive knife and a spear. This
assumption seems to fit well with the model
proposed by Morris (1989, 502-519).
According to him, the circulation of iron
objects was heavily controlled by the élite,
making it at the same time the only
appropriate metal for grave goods in formal
burials. In this way, the leading families of
EIA Greece “could solidify their powers,
creating a ritual gap between themselves and
70
those excluded from iron and the formal
cemetery” (Morris 1989, 507). This must
have been particularly true for swords, as their
utilitarian aspect must have given the élite a
decisive military advantage. Therefore, it is
not a coincidence that all swords are
associated with rich burials in tholos tombs
and tumuli (with the exception of only two
examples coming from cist graves). The
importance of swords is also exhibited by the
cases of their ritual “killing” (e.g. Halos
Tumulus A, Pyre VII). Some scholars argue
that the practice of bending swords in a
circular or U-shape fashion when deposited in
graves, had a practical use only, namely to fit
into the small cremation graves (Snodgrass
1967, 37; Grinsell 1973, 111). Others,
however, emphasise the ritual aspect of that
action. According to them, swords were
thought to have a life of their own, which was
to be terminated when their owners died
(Desborough 1972, 312). In that way, the
sword”s spirit could follow the spirit of his
master on the other side, but also (and in a
more practical way) it could never be used by
another man (for the phenomenon of the
intentional destruction of grave goods in
general, see Grinsell 1961 and Aström 1987).
To return to the tight control of iron by the
élite, we must point out that it came to an end
during the last phase of the Protogeometric
period (Morris 1989, 508). This may have
some implications for our argument, as most
of the Thessalian evidence for weapons dates
to the Geometric and even to the Archaic
period. This problem could be tackled by
arguing that in Thessaly, like in some other
“peripheral” areas of Greece (e.g. Macedonia
and Epirus), the need to designate someone as
a “warrior” continued to exist until after Late
Geometric, in contrast to Attica where the
custom of depositing weapons ends in Middle
Geometric II/Late Geometric I (Bräuning
1995, 139).
Knives are more widespread than swords,
I. GEORGANAS
with 43 examples coming from 11 sites. From
the 23 graves that yielded knives, 12 of them
contained a single specimen, while the rest
two or more. At least in nine graves, knives
were found with weapons (either swords or
swords and spears). With the exception of the
three bronze knives, for which we have no
information at all, the iron examples seem to
be typologically similar. Their single-edged
convex blades and their relatively short
lengths (0.15-0.33 m) suggest a non-military
use, although in case of an emergency they
could have also been used as weapons. Instead
of that, they look ideal for general use such as
cutting food, cleaning game, whittling and
pruning. Such functions have been proposed
by Catling and Catling (1980, 257) for
similar knives from Lefkandi. On the one
hand, their presence in female burials (Halos
Tumulus A, Pyres III, X, XII) may support
such an assumption; these women could have
used the knives in a domestic context during
their lifetimes. On the other hand, their
occurrence in these burials may be indicative
of the high status of the deceased (socioeconomic, religious or both).
The 19 identified spearheads are distributed
in six sites, with the vast majority (10)
coming from Tumulus A at Halos. In all but
one grave (Halos Tumulus A, Pyre XIV), single
spearheads are found. This allows us to
assume that these spearheads belonged to
thrusting spears and not to javelins, as
warriors would normally not throw their
spear if they had only one. Their shape and
large size (ca. 0.34 m) are also indicative of
such a use. This pattern is also observed in
Vergina (Andronikos 1969, 270) but is in
complete contrast (at least for the Geometric
period) with the evidence from Attica, the
North-Eastern Peloponnese and Crete, where
warriors were equipped with both a thrusting
and a throwing spear (Snodgrass 1964, 136139). It is noteworthy, however, that at
Vergina spearheads are never found together
WEAPONS AND WARFARE IN EARLY IRON AGE THESSALY
with swords in any interment but only with
daggers (Andronikos 1969, 270-271).
Finally, at Vitsa in Epirus, the EIA cemetery
yielded 108 spearheads (nearly half in pairs)
and only 19 swords (Vokotopoulou 1986).
This means that both the warriors buried at
Vergina and Vitsa viewed spears as primary
weapons, unlike the occupants of the Halos
tumuli.
Typologically, with the exception of the
rare Type Q spearheads from Halos Tumulus
A, the Thessalian corpus is in accordance with
the evidence from the other areas of the Greek
world, showing a slight preference for the
large Type J spearheads. We should also note
that as at Lefkandi no bronze spearheads are
present in Thessaly, in contrast to Athens
where bronze specimens continued to be used
well into the Early Protogeometric period
(Catling and Catling 1980, 255-256).
The meagre number of arrowheads
observed in Thessaly, ten examples from two
graves, corresponds with the scanty evidence
from the rest of Greece (Snodgrass 1964, 141156). Although excavations at sites like
Lefkandi (Catling and Catling 1980, 256257) and the North Cemetery at Knossos
(Snodgrass 1996, 584-585) have provided us
with new material, both physical, and in the
case of Lefkandi representational also, it is
still safe to believe that archery played a
relatively minor role during the earlier phases
of the Iron Age. We should however keep in
mind, as Hector and Elizabeth Catling have
pointed out, that the rarity of arrowheads
during the EIA “may partly be the result of
almost exclusive reliance upon grave evidence,
where much of the BA material comes from
occupation sites” (Catling and Catling 1980,
257). It is only after ca. 750 BC that we have
more evidence for the role of archery in
warfare, as it can be seen on the numerous
representations of the bow in battle-scenes on
Late Geometric vases (Snodgrass 1971, 275).
The same also seems to apply for slings.
71
The lack of any physical evidence for
defensive armour must not be taken in its own
merit. As is well known, helmets, shields and
armours could all have been made of
perishable materials, like leather, which
would leave no traces in the archaeological
record. The bronze helmet from Tiryns, dated
to the middle of the 11th century, is so far
unique in the EIA Greek world, reinforcing
our theories about the use of perishable
materials (Hencken 1971, 23-26, fig. 8;
Desborough 1972, 306, pl. 11). Metal helmets
are to make again their appearance in the Late
Geometric period (e.g. the helmet from the
“Panoply Grave” at Argos), showing an
influence from Oriental types (Courbin 1957,
356-367, pl. IV; Snodgrass 1964, 194-195).
The evidence for shields in Thessaly is
mainly representational, in the form of the
Late Geometric and Archaic figurines (fig. 3).
Most of them carry a type which is widely
known today as “Dipylon”. This curious
shield is something less than a body-shield,
extremely wide at the top and bottom and
with the sides curving sharply inwards to a
narrow waist at the middle (Snodgrass 1967,
44, fig.16). Whether it can be considered as a
descendant of the Mycenaean figure-of-eight
shield or as an innovation of the EIA is still
under debate. Recent archaeological evidence
from Kynos in Lokris suggests that an
intermediate type of shield was used in Late
Helladic IIIC. More specifically, in two krater
fragments depicting sea-battles, warriors carry
“Dipylon”-like shields, although smaller than
the EIA ones (Dakoronia 1999, figs. 1, 3;
2002, 44, fig. 4). These representations seem
to reinforce the Mycenaean origin of this type
of shield.
The only area where this lack of evidence
could probably reflect the truth is that for
metal armour. The earliest known metal
example in the Greek world, after the Bronze
Age, is the Late Geometric bronze platecorslet found at Argos (Courbin 1957, 340-
72
Fig. 3: Warrior figurine from Karditsa
(ca. 700-650 BC) (Athens National Archaeological
Museum 12831).
356, pls. II-III). Although it is tempting to
compare this bell-shaped corslet with the
Mycenaean cuirass from Dendra, and consider
the latter as its remote ancestor, the big time
span between them and the lack of any
intervening pieces makes such a hypothesis
improbable. The more plausible explanation is
that this type of armour was introduced to
Greece from Central Europe, possibly through
I. GEORGANAS
Italy, where the corslets of the Urnfield
Culture offer precedents for both the bell
shape and the semicircular marking of the
breasts, common features of the later Greek
corslets (Coldstream 1977, 148).
It is now time to summarise the evidence
from weapons. For the early phases of the
Protogeometric period the evidence is scarce,
making any attempt at interpretation
extremely difficult. From Late Protogeometric
onwards, however, our data suggest that the
more privileged (e.g. the occupants of the
Halos tumuli and of some of the tholos tombs)
find themselves equipped with a very effective
cut-and-thrust sword, a thrusting spear and
one or more knives. The less powerful
individuals, on the other hand, seem to settle
with a spear and a knife. Although direct
evidence for any defensive armament is
lacking, we should expect some sort of
defensive equipment to be used, helmet and
shield at least, based on the evidence from the
bronze warrior figurines.
On the nature of warfare itself, including
the tactics employed, we can only speculate.
The mainly accepted theory today is that the
conflicts of the EIA were nothing more than
small-scale skirmishing between neighbouring
settlements (Snodgrass 1967, 189). The main
aim of these relatively disorganised operations
must have been plundering, although
annexation of land is also possible
(Thucydides 1.15.2). The popularity of
swords, knives and thrusting spears suggests
that a man-to-man, close-quarter combat was
the common method of fighting (Lemos
2002, 126). We can envisage small bands of
men armed with spears, knives and probably
non-metal shields led to battle by the leading
men of their communities, the latter armed
with both a sword and a spear. These relatively
heavy-armed warriors were possibly
accompanied by some archers and sling
throwers.
So EIA battles were indiscriminate affairs,
73
WEAPONS AND WARFARE IN EARLY IRON AGE THESSALY
partly of sword-and-spear fights and partly of
missile warfare with archery playing a
prominent role, especially from the Late
Geometric period onwards. It is during the
very end of Late Geometric that land warfare
starts to become more organised with the first
steps towards the hoplite phalanx. This Late
Geometric-Early Archaic proto-phalanx,
however, was not one encased in bronze like
its Classical antecedent, but a group of
variously armed warriors (Storch 1998, 7).
For Thessaly specifically, we should
expect cavalry to have played a major role in
warfare, based on the long tradition of horse
breeding in the area (Herodotos VII, 196).
Although archaeologically there is no
evidence to support this, later accounts for the
involvement of Thessalian cavalry in the
“Lelantine War” seem to strengthen this
assumption. The “Lelantine War”, fought
between the Euboean cities of Chalcis and
Eretria ca. 700 BC, is thought to be the first
historical large-scale conflict attested in the
Greek world. From Thucydides (1.15) we
learn that the people of Pharsalos, being allies
to the Chalcians, sent their cavalry for
assistance. In a decisive battle, the Thessalian
cavalry crushed that of Eretria, practically
offering the final victory to Chalcis.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
As this paper derives from my PhD thesis The Archaeology of Early Iron Age Thessaly (ca.
1100-700 BC) (The University of Nottingham, 2002), I should like to express my gratitude to my
supervisor Prof. William Cavanagh and to my examiners Prof. Nicolas Coldstream and Prof. Julian
Henderson, for their valuable comments. Of course, I assume full responsibility for any mistakes.
REFERENCES
Andronikos, M. (1969) Vergina I: The cemetery of Tumuli, Athens (in Greek).
Apostolopoulou-Kakavoyanni, O. (1992) Finds of Proto and early Geometric period from Ferrae. In: Acts of the
international Congress on Ancient Thessaly in memory of Demetres R. Theochares, Athens, 312319 (in Greek).
Arachoviti, P. (1994) Protogeometric tholos tomb in the area of Ferrae. In: Thessaly, Fifteen years of
Archaeological research 1975-1990. Results and perspectives, Athens, 125-138 (in Greek).
Arvanitopoulos, A. (1911) Excavations and research in Thessaly during 1911. In: PAE 1911, 280-356 (in Greek).
Arvanitopoulos, A. (1914) Tholos tomb in Kapacle, In: PAE 1914, 141 (in Greek).
Arvanitopoulos, A. (1915) Excavations and research in Thessaly. In: PAE 1915, 131-200 (in Greek).
Aström, P. (1987) Intentional Destruction of Grave Goods. In: Laffineur, R., (ed.), Thanatos. Les Coutoumes
funeraires en Egee a l'Age du Bronze. Actes du colloque de Liège (21-23 avril 1986). Aegaeum 1.
Liège, 213-218.
Béquignon, Y. (1937) Recherches archéologiques à Phères de Thessalie, Paris.
Bräuning, A. (1995) Untersuchungen zur Darstellung und Ausstattung des Kriegers im Grabbrauch
Griechenlands zwischen dem 10. und 8. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Internationale Archäologie, Band
15, Leidorf.
Catling, H. W. (1961) A New Bronze Sword from Cyprus. Antiquity 35, 115-122.
Catling, H. W. (1996) The Objects other than Pottery in the Subminoan Tombs. In: Coldstream and Catling,
Knossos North Cemetery: Early Greek Tombs, London, 517-537.
74
I. GEORGANAS
Catling, H. W. and Catling, E. (1980) Objects of Bronze, Iron and Lead. In: Popham, M. R., L. H. Sackett and P.
G. Themelis (eds.), Lefkandi I: The Iron Age Settlement. The Cemeteries, London, 231-264.
Coldstream, J. N. (1977) Geometric Greece, London.
Coldstream, J. N. and Catling, H. W. (eds.), (1996) Knossos North Cemetery: Early Greek Tombs, London.
Courbin, P. (1957) Une tombe géométrique d'Argos. In: BCH 81, 322-386.
Dakoronia, Ph. (1999) Representations of Sea-Battles on Mycenaean Sherds from Kynos. In: Tzalas, H. (ed.),
Tropis V. 5th International Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity. Nauplia 1993,
Athens, 119-128.
Dakoronia, Ph. (2002) Eastern Locris: Its history through monuments and archaeological research. In: Locris:
History and culture, Athens, 19-112 (in Greek).
Desborough, V. R. d' A. (1972) The Greek Dark Ages, London.
Gordon, D. H. (1953) Swords, Rapiers and Horse-riders. In: Antiquity 26, 67-78.
Grinsell, L. V. (1961) The Breaking of Objects as a Funerary Rite. In: Folklore 72, 475-491.
Hencken, H. (1971) The Earliest European Helmets: Bronze Age and Early Iron Age, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Heurtley, W. A. and Skeat, T. C. (1930-31) The Tholos Tombs of Marmariane. In: BSA 31, 1-55.
Jacobsthal, P. (1956) Greek Pins and Their Connexions with Europe and Asia, Oxford.
Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. (1993) Die Schwerter in Griechenland (außerhalb der Peloponnes), Bulgarien und
Albanien, Stuttgart.
Lemos, I. S. (2002) The Protogeometric Aegean. The Archaeology of the Late Eleventh and Tenth Centuries
BC, Oxford.
Lorimer, H. L. (1950) Homer and the Monuments, London.
Malakasioti, Z. (1997) Burial tymbs in the area of Voulokalyva-Platanos, Almyros: The case of D.
Despotopoulos property. In: Achaeofthiotica B. Acts of the 2nd Congress of Almyros Studies , 34 June 1995, Almyros, 189-196 (in Greek).
Morris, I. (1989) Circulation, Deposition and the Formation of the Greek Iron Age. Man (N.S.) 23, 502-519.
Pilali-Papasteriou, A. and Papaefthumiou-Papanthimou, K. (1983) New excavational research in the sanctuary
of Filia. In: Anthropologika 4, 49-68 (in Greek).
Sandars, N. K. (1961) The First Aegean Swords and Their Ancestry. In: AJA 65, 17-29.
Snodgrass, A. M. (1964) Early Greek Armour and Weapons, Edinburgh.
Snodgrass, A. M. (1967) Arms and Armour of the Greeks, London.
Snodgrass, A. M. (1971) The Dark Age of Greece, Edinburgh.
Snodgrass, A. M. (1973) Bronze “Phalara”-A Review. In: Hamburger Beiträge zur Archäeologie 3, 41-50.
Snodgrass, A. M. (1996) Iron. In Coldstream and Catling, Knossos North Cemetery: Early Greek Tombs,
London, 575-597.
Storch, R. H. (1998) The Archaic Greek “Phalanx”, 750-650 BC. In: AHB 12.1-2, 1-7.
Syriopoulos, K. (1984) Introduction to Ancient Greek History: The transitional years, Athens (in Greek).
Theochari, M. (1964-66) Protogeometrica of Thessaly. In: Thessalika 5, 37-53 (in Greek).
Tziafalias, A. (1978) Excavational research at Ag. Geogios, Larisa. In: AAA 11, 156-182 (in Greek).
Vokotopoulou, I. (1986) Vitsa: The cemeteries of a Molossian settlement, Athens (in Greek).
Wace, A. J. B. and Droop, J. P. (1906-07) Excavations at Theotokou, Thessaly. In: BSA 13, 308-327.
Wace, A. J. B. and Thompson, M. S. (1911-12) Excavations at Halos. In: BSA 18, 1-29.
WEAPONS AND WARFARE IN EARLY IRON AGE THESSALY
75