Did the Greeks ever adopt foreign equipment ..

[Ghostmojo]

What is your evidence that Greeks invented the tube-and-yoke? Very early on we see it from Fars to Gaul, from Scythia to Cyrene.

All areas that the Greeks either colonised or visited - not that I am agreeing or disagreeing with your point BTW :-)

[Darth_Roach]

Greeks colonized Fars before 480BC? Or Gaul, for that matter? And no, Massalia was just a coty on the coast, Celts inhabited massive territories.

[Ghostmojo]

Greeks colonized Fars before 480BC? Or Gaul, for that matter? And no, Massalia was just a coty on the coast, Celts inhabited massive territories.

Jeez - you need to get a team of international lawyers to vet anything you say on this forum, before somebody jumps on you! :lol:

I think I said colonised or visited - and I don't remember giving any dates.

I merely postulate that they got almost everywhere, and must have met and traded with just about everybody too. From the far reaches of the Black Sea to ancient Cornish tin miners. And that probably included navigating decent waterways taking them inland for considerable distances too.

In doing so they would have acquired all sorts of things, military and otherwise.

[Darth_Roach]

So you suppose the natives would suddenly adopt Greek equipment en masse from isolated trade missions?

[Ghostmojo]

So you suppose the natives would suddenly adopt Greek equipment en masse from isolated trade missions?

You know what you can do with that statement ...

[Darth_Roach]

And what would that be?

[hoplite14gr]

Can you prove beyond reasonable doubt that heavily armed hoplite marine from cargo vessel guard who took part in an engagement that was witnessed by locals did not make an impression? The options range from a brawl to assisting the locals against their enemies or fending off pirates. Choose your pick.

Can you also prove beyond reasonable that the locals had already known composite armor?
So far chances favor the Greeks unless some archaeological item proves beyond doubt that some invention was theirs truly or someone else's.

Certainly the Greeks did not invent everything but from the items that you mentioned who can tell conclusively that they didn't and who can tell us conclusively that they did not adopt foreign customs. If you survive a couple of generations in foreign soil you probably have adapted to some degree to local customs and products wherever you go.

Kind regards

[Darth_Roach]

So Greeks invented a lot, and didn't adopt much because "they were keeping to their tradition", but everyone else copied them?

I'd really like to know at which point the Celts became so wholly immersed in Greek weaponry that their primary armor was a Greek type. Or the Persians, who used that armor from their earliest days.

[hoplite14gr]

You seem focused too much on the archaic classical period.

Do you you have evidence that the Luristan (Iran Bronze Age)culture had composite armor when we have art evidence and the Thebes arsenal to prove that composite (linen armor)was known to Greeks from the Bronze Age?

I could that use that: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ancientgree...133632890/
to start claiming that the Greeks invented the plate armor and opened the way to the western knight, but what is the evidence to this? A logical theory yes but a questionable scientific fact.

Your original question about Greeks being influenced by others has been answered positively. The thureos shield example is the most conclusive.

Were the Greeks open to new customs? Yes but very very slowly.

Did they influence others? Yes even centuries after. i.e The Italian medieval iron smiths who developed the barbuta helm http://www.deltin.it/barbuta.jpg
could have seen the corinthians in the Papal collection.

Kind regards

[Darth_Roach]

But what exactly makes you think that everyone else was MORE open to ideas?

[Theodosius the Great]

My guess would be that Old Greece was relatively isolated being on the periphery of the civilized world. Even isolationist Egypt had more regular contact with the great Near East civilizations. Wars with the Hittites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Medes and Persians would foster a greater degree of crosspollination.

And the Greeks were not merely traditional but notoriously chauvinistic.

~Theo

[Ghostmojo]

I'm not so sure about that. It is a very wide subject really.

The Greek alphabet was certainly related to those of the near east, as were much of their proto-religious ideas. They also drew from Egypt which had been the preeminent power in earlier times, and the Greeks came into contact with them often, and not just because of their colony in Kyrene. Herodotos was clear on the religious connections with Egypt.

Again, I'm not sure you could consider it being on the periphery of the civilised world, bearing in mind it was fairly central in the Mediterranean; sat between the expanding powers of Carthage and Persia - and earlier it had been the seat of both Mykenaian (Mycenaean) and Minoan cultures which were in themselves quite widespread in terms of trade and cultural influence.

I think you can detect some slight influence of Assyrian equipment and armour, helmets etc. in very early archaic and Helladic gear, possibly via Phrygia, Anatolia and the Greeks of Kypros.

[Darth_Roach]

But Greece didn't magically appear in 540's BC so it could sit between Persia and Carthage.

Anyways, that is rather beside the point - the point is I don't see why we nearly assume that foreigners using gear similar to the Greeks' means they copied them.

[Theodosius the Great]

I'm not so sure about that.

Neither am I. It's just my guess mile:

The Greek alphabet was certainly related to those of the near east, as were much of their proto-religious ideas. They also drew from Egypt which had been the preeminent power in earlier times, and the Greeks came into contact with them often, and not just because of their colony in Kyrene. Herodotos was clear on the religious connections with Egypt.

True. But why would any of this stimulate adoption of foreign military equipment? Nothing does that better than direct, open warfare.

Again, I'm not sure you could consider it being on the periphery of the civilised world, bearing in mind it was fairly central in the Mediterranean; sat between the expanding powers of Carthage and Persia

Again, I said Old Greece (i.e. excluding overseas colonies). And it's difficult to discuss this when no time parameters have been established. For example, most of Asia Minor once made up the Hittite Empire long before Persia appeared on the scene.

So, yes, Old Greece was on the periphery of the civilised world with barbarians to the north and west. With the exception of Cadiz, Spain which is the oldest inhabited city in western Europe to this day. But that's thousands of miles away from mainland Greece as was Carthage of course. I would say Carthage was on the southwest periphery while Old Greece was on the northwest with the Mediterranean separating them from eachother.

I think you can detect some slight influence of Assyrian equipment and armour, helmets etc. in very early archaic and Helladic gear, possibly via Phrygia, Anatolia and the Greeks of Kypros.

Oh, definately. The ubiquitus disc plate armor can be traced from Assyria to Spain.

But Greece didn't magically appear in 540's BC so it could sit between Persia and Carthage.

Who said or implied that? We're just talking about degrees of adoption.

Anyways, that is rather beside the point

OK, but it was a possible explanation to your last question. mile:

- the point is I don't see why we nearly assume that foreigners using gear similar to the Greeks' means they copied them.

It's likely, IMO, some civilizations invented similar weapons independantly. It might help if you give a specific example. What piece of equipment are you disputing is of Greek origin that's found outside of Greece? Is there one that particularly stands out?

Would anyone like to entertain the old theory that the Sea Peoples were Greeks?

~Theo

[Dan D'Silva]

Yes, I find that very entertaining. Certainly Homer's Achaians sound not unlike Sea People. I'd love to think the Heroic Age myths reflect something of what was going on at that time. But (not being a linguist myself) the linguistic evidences sound... tantalising, and not much more.

Or, to put it another way: I know the Greeks had a lot of weapons and armour that resemble (or can be said to resemble) those of the Peleset at Medinet Habu. So they look right for the part. But can anybody show good reason to think the Peleset spoke Greek or that their "Greek" gear wasn't shared by others in the eastern Mediterranean?