Hippeis, not Hippies

[Ghostmojo]

Hippeis may well have been the Greek term for cavalry but at Sparta the term had developed into something more specific

Undeniable. But I think you miss the point Stephanos and I have both been making. There are Hippeis or Equites or whatever the local derivation all over the place because only the elite of mediterranean society can afford to rear horses and arm them for war. Thus the hippo/horse reference denotes only the ability to afford one. Grenadiers spring from units of semi-suicidal men who took up the most dangerous tasks during sieges and were treated as elites because of it. Other units are raised specifically as guards whose prime focus lay with their royal patron.

No, I don't think so Paul. I don't even necessarily disagree with you or Stefanos in general. I just put a distinct emphasis on the role of this unit as perhaps being more specific. Even if it were not carved in stone (or written on papyrus) by the Spartans (sadly not leaving us notes to compare) or anybody else for that matter, that the Hippeis were a Royal Bodyguard - I think it is clear that they were one de facto. Think of three important conflicts when we hear of them - with the king - at Thermopylai 480 [size=85:7cb338bt]BC[/size]; at 1st Mantinea 418 [size=85:7cb338bt]BC[/size]; at Leuktra 371 [size=85:7cb338bt]BC[/size]. They are specifically surrounding and fighting with their king - with Leonidas I; with Agis II; with Kleombrotos I. The fact that a Spartan king was not unique (a spare at home) and that he was not autocratic and absolute like later monarchs who had such guards, doesn't mean he was ill-deserving of one. There is a clear paradox at work here which is difficult to resolve. A Spartan king could have his own troops criticise him - yelling at him from the ranks; or even have a sub-commander disobey him (Plataia (the Regent being much the same role)); and even be recalled and humiliated for any lack of performance - but still be honoured and revered as a direct descendant of the gods. My point about the Grenadiers is that the name survived (and still does) long after the specific role was dispensed with.

The Spartan Hippeis surely originated as the first type, from horse owners, then lost their horses, but retained their status as elites. The question is whether they would ever have seen themselves as the last.

I don't disagree with any of that, but ultimately it really doesn't matter. The 300 Knights were clearly originally (and perhaps continuously) from aristocratic backgrounds. The point is not so much they could afford horses or supply them or whatever - it is that their original role was lost but the name survived. They certainly saw themselves as an elite. Those not lucky enough to be selected either took the philosophical view that they were happy the city had 300 men better than themselves - or - they considered themselves at war with the hippagretai for overlooking them in favour of those who were selected.

Also, we must be careful with placing too much emphasis on the number 300. The one time we see 300 specifically tied to the King's life, or loss theireof, they are not the Hippeis. The 300 at the battle of champions may not have been either as you noted. And the number may not be so rare even outside of Greece, Gideon fought the Midionites with 300 elite men.

Well, as I say I have some views on the numbers myself, but we do hear of them at Leuktra (also with a dying king) as well as Thermopylai, and as for the latter I am not convinced that the fact that Leonidas replaced the younger men with older ones (who had sons) means this second group were not still the Hippeis. After all, some of these men who had perhaps produced progeny might still have been under 30. We know men without sons were replaced, but that does not mean every single one of the original 300 in August 480 [size=85:7cb338bt]BC[/size] was replaced by another man.

Kings often took very few men with them, and we are told as noted above that 100 was the number on one occaision. IN assuming the 300 hippeis performed this function are we obscuring a 100 man unit? Were I a Spartan king, with what I know of Spartan politics, my guard would be the members of my Phiditia and a core group most loyal to me, with a sprinkling of olympic winners now and then.

As I have said many times, I think the 300 were 100 x 3. The tripartite nature of Spartan numerology cannot be underestimated. The Gerousia had 30 permanent sitting members and I suspect these senators were drawn 10 from each Dorian sub-tribe. That would be 10 from the Dymanes - 10 from the Pamphyloi - and 8 plus the 2 kings from the Hylleis. The fact that the kings belonged to a royal phiditia rather than a regular homoioi one, does not mean that they necessarily chose their battle companions from that group, although they may well have been incorporated (politically) by the hippagretai in their selection process. It is therefore entirely conceivable that the 300 Hippeis were formed of three 100 man companies from each of those Dorian sub-tribes. There is a significance to the H, D & P sub-tribes/clans which I seem to be somewhat alone in recognising here. And also surely the highest honour that any soldier might anticipate, is to be picked to fight alongside and protect his king? I suppose finally, that the royal bodyguard might well have been composed of 300 Hippeis plus whomever else the king chose to have along that day. We hear of the Hippagretai as the selectors of the 300 - but these 3 individuals may well have doubled up as the 3 Polemarchs for the Hippeis - each one leading his own 100 men - the Ephors perhaps having specifically selected 1 hippagretes from each clan. They may well have been amongst his mess companions on campaign, alongside the Olympic victors et al.