Introduction

This chapter surveys warfare amongst the poleis (city-states) of mainland Greece from about 500 to 340. It begins on land, with examination of troop types and equipment, training and tactics, logistics and medical care, the role of slaves and non-combatants, and religion. There follow discussions of sieges and fortifications, as well as navies and sea power. Lastly, it outlines the transition from the Classical period to the Hellenistic, and suggests some profitable future paths for Greek warfare studies. Although it concentrates on the practical aspects of war-making, the survey also indicates the most significant connections between warfare and developments in other aspects of Greek civilization. Classical warfare was as much a political, social, and cultural phenomenon as a purely military one, and readers are encouraged to consult this chapter in conjunction with the relevant other chapters of this Companion. It also bears remembering that significant regional variations in military practices and ideology existed throughout the period, and while space constraints make it necessary here to emphasize features common to the polis world, it would be more accurate to speak of Greek ‘‘ways’’ rather than a ‘‘way’’ of war.

Armed conflict was an ever-present feature of ancient life, so it is no surprise that evidence for how the Greeks fought their wars appears throughout Classical literature. For descriptions of military organization and tactics, as well as for narratives of battles and campaigns, our major sources are the contemporary historians Herodotos, Thucydides, and Xenophon. Of these three, Xenophon (c. 427-355), a professional soldier with several decades of wide-ranging military experience, deserves particular attention not only for his historical writings, the Hellenika and Anabasis, but also for his technical treatises on horsemanship, cavalry, and hunting. The Anabasis is also noteworthy for the way in which it foregrounds the experiences of common soldiers, presaging the modern war memoir. A different approach appears in the fourth-century writer Aineias Taktikos, whose handbook on city defense and sieges comes in the form of a staccato series of general guidelines, backed up by historical examples. Other Classical authors, amongst them the comic playwright Aristophanes, provide passing references that help in recovering the details of equipment and logistics. Finally, inscriptions on stone and metal are important sources, especially for Athens, where a number of lengthy texts furnish valuable information on Athenian naval administration and on the commemoration of Athens’ war dead. All this textual evidence demands careful analysis, for it sometimes tells us more about how the Greeks preferred to depict military matters than about how they actually were (van Wees 1995: 153-78).

Archaeological evidence is equally valuable in reconstructing Classical warfare, but here too there are challenges of interpretation. Depictions of warfare in sculpture and on painted pottery may seem straightforward enough at first glance, but as with literary authors, sculptors and potters were often more concerned with presenting an ideal vision of warfare than with historical accuracy. To give just one example, the many nude or nearly-nude warriors who appear on painted pottery reveal more about the Classical aesthetic of heroism and physical perfection than they do about how real soldiers dressed for combat. Excavated finds of armor and weapons, especially from graves and from the panhellenic sanctuary of Olympia, allow us to see how the Greeks girded themselves for battle, but there is precious little archaeological evidence for many of the more mundane aspects of military equipment, such as footwear and knapsacks. Some important items of Greek equipment, including wooden shields and leather corselets, are virtually absent from the archaeological record, and must be reconstructed using a combination of scattered literary references, surviving metal fittings, and practical calculations.