DE BELLIS BOOKSTORE

Sections

Last Updated: March 27, 2000

Contact: Chris Brantley, brant@erols.com.

Special Feature -- Book Reviews

John Warry's Warfare
in the Classical World
(Part I)

Reviewed by Paul Rice

Warfare in the Classical World : An Illustrated Encyclopedia of Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in the Ancient Civilisations of Greece and Rome, by John Warry. I couldn't find a hardbound anywhere, so bought paperback through Barnes and Noble on web. $15.99, but with unrealistic shipping charges, taxes, etc pushed it over $20.

This will be a good reference for DBA Greeks, Macedonians, Romans, and to a lesser extent their enemies. Only problem is although the publishing date is 1995, the book is actually from 1980. 1995 is just the softcopy. BTW, DBA's Phil Barker is listed in the Acknowledgments. In addition, Warry gives two pages on pronunciation, including "hoplites" is Greek singular, and three syllables! The plural is "hoplitai," also three syllables.

Chapter I: Homeric and Myceneaen Warfare

The first chapter is on the Mycenean age, and covers the Trojan War. I think the "Mycenaean and Minoan" (DBA #10) are the culturally and chronologically accurate choice for both armies, although the Trojans might have a Hittite influence. According to Warry, only the wealthy Greeks had chariots, they were the exception, not the rule.

There is no mention of organized Pike. Indeed, even though a few heroes have spears with ridiculous cubits (probably got longer every time the story was told) which would measure as pike, I'm not sure I would even qualify the long spears they carry as Spear, because they fight in unorganized, individual combat (this is a weakness in DBA). This sounds like Aux or WB.

Bow are mentioned many times, even massed archers, and I would give the Greeks about 2, Trojans 1? The implication is chariots were more common on the Trojan side. They were all 2 horse, light chariots prone to breakage, and light enough for one hero to lift (sans horses we must presume). Specifically mentions that no one fights on horseback.

Blades were notoriously likely to break, and hence generally not preferred.

I'd call it:

• Greeks: 3 LCh, 1 WB (Myrmidons), 5 Aux or 2 Spear and 3 Aux, 1 Psi, 2 Bow or Ps

• Trojans: 4 LCh, 1 LCh or Bd or Spear, 5 Aux or 1 Spear and 4 Aux, 1 Ps, 1 Bow

Could be a fun battle.

Chapter II -- The Persian Wars

Warry's primary source is Herodotus, and there are a few others. The story follows Herodotus and Greece and Rome at War (GRW, by Peter Connolly) quite well. He gives a detailed description of Marathon, far better than GRW. The every-page timeline is a wonderful synopsis of Herodotus, with dates. By GRW standards, he skims over Thermopylae and Artemisium, but he covers Plataea and Mycale in more detail. The book addresses Salamis and ancient naval tactics at length.

Warry gives hoplite open files at 6 to 8 foot frontage, and closed files at 3 (to 4?) feet. He gives spear length as 6.5 to 10 feet. He also describes the Persian army, but doesn't give any kind of force ratios from which one could confirm DBA OOB (#28a). If I had just read Warry and neither Herodotus nor Connolly, my gut feel would be about 3 Cav, 2 Sp, 3 bow, 3 aux, 1 psi, but I can't say that is without looking at the DBA list. (The Sp vs. Aux determination hints to my overall problem with the simplicity of the DBA troop types.) Bear in mind that Persian army would be *much* larger than opposing Greek armies.

I've always assumed the distance from Marathon to Athens was 26 miles 475 yards. His interpretation is that the modern marathon celebrates the Herculean (perhaps I should write Athenian) charge of the Athenians in full armor into the Persians, followed by the forced march back to Athens. Others have interpreted that we commemorate the messenger who ran from Athens to Sparta and back, and died after doing so. Looking at a map, Marathon is about 25 miles from Athens, and Sparta is over 100 miles away, which makes me really doubt the story of the messenger. He gives the distances as 20 and 152 miles.

Either way, it's an excellent 16 page summary of the Persian Wars.

Chapter III -- The Peloponessian War

Warry's sources are primarily Thucydides and Xenophon, and some lessers. With this chapter he starts a new practice which continues through future chapters, which is that the second section of each chapter is devoted to the political background. He covers the Peloponessian War well, and discusses the overall strategies/ policies. Warry documents the Spartan and Athenian armies, and rightly downplays the horse arms. He writes about the campaign in Sicily, but not as well as GRW. BTW, by GRW (Connolly) standards the Syracusan DBA army would probably be 4 Cav, 4 Spear, 2 Art, 1 Aux, and 1 Psi. The Cav and arty are the instrumental and decisive arms.

The Spartans use some interesting tactics and tricks. Lysander is heavily featured as a Spartan general and admiral of distinction.

An interesting note is that at the battle of Sphacteria (where 292 Spartans actually *surrendered*, whoever heard of such a thing?) the Athenians deployed their 5000 to 7000 rowers in a mass behind (and later between) their main combat units as a sort of "third line" and show of strength. I guess they would be "hordes" by DBM standards, or aux by DBA. I can only imagine they wore no armor, and were armed with whatever they could find.

For hoplite phalanxes, Warry gives 2 meters spacing for open files, 1 for closed files (frontage). (I interpret it as left shoulder to left shoulder.)

This is the first chapter which stresses the importance of light troops, previously only mentioned in passing. About two pages are dedicated to peltasts, which by DBA standards would be psiloi with a strength of 3-2, and hence have all the advantages of both psi and aux. The author is obviously a fan of light troops, as in subsequent chapters he brings them more to the forefront.

One section is dedicated to "atrocities" (by our standards) for those readers who are not familiar with the barbarism of all war, and particularly of the ancients.

Ever heard of a thumb ring? It is referenced a few times as a draw technique for archers. I have difficulty visualizing it. Warry suggests that Greek archers used neither thumb rings nor the usual draw of two fingers on the bow string, but rather pulled the rear of the shaft between thumb and forefinger, which might help explain why one rarely hears of the use of Greek archers.

Javeliners attached a small loop to the javelin, and inserted their first two fingers, thus making an expendable quasi atlatl/ throwing stick/ missile launcher.

From The Book of Lists 2, 1979, Rebecca West's 3rd (of 5) events in history she would most like to have seen: "THE JAILS IN THE QUARTERS AT SYRACUSE IN SICILY WHEN THE GREEK PRISONERS OF [THE PELOPONESSIAN] WAR WERE TOLD THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GO HOME IF THEY COULD RECITE 10 LINES OUT OF A REALLY GOOD GREEK PLAY (413 B.C.) This is a tableau expressing real civilization. Think of the experience of repeating good poetry and getting your liberty simultaneously." I read this about 17 years ago, and have never seen a reference since. It's amazing I can still recall it, and found it! Ever heard of it? I skimmed "The Peloponnesian War," by Thucydides but didn't find a reference.

Chapter IV -- The Decline of Sparta and Ascendancy of Thebes

Connolly really skimmed over Thebes. Warry's primary source is Xenophon, along with a few other lesser knowns. Xenophon's Ten Thousand receive an entire section, and are heavily referenced in other sections. Sparta's Agesilaus is also spotlighted.

Warry continues his treatise on light troops, showing six examples, including the battle of Lechaeum and Xenophon's retreat, and giving them an entire section. Cavalry finally starts to take on a worthy role. We see the first reference to scythed chariots, and they are ineffectual. Most subsequent references in the book are to scythe-wheeled or scythed-axis chariots, sounding like Ben Hur style.

The battles of Leuctra and Mantinea are described in detail, and the Theban tactic is to mass spearmen very deep (50) on one side (left), and break through the enemy's thin line. While this is basic military strategy, it sort of countermines how I thought of ancient battles, where the first x rows contributed to the overall combat effectiveness of the unit, and the rear rows were just there to fill gaps and exploit holes. One has to wonder how much the phalanx battles were not spear vs. spear, but rather shield vs. shield, and the whole objective was to push with momentum. (In the game Melee, this is called a shield rush.) Otherwise, how could any but the first 4 or 5 rows add any additional combat power? Why would anybody set up 8 deep, much less 16 deep, much less 50 deep?

It seems like battles were largely a matter of pushing. Think of those poor guys on the front line, with 50 men pushing from the rear, and 8 to 12 from the front pushing in the opposite direction. It would be all you could do to keep on your feet and not get trampled underfoot. It's doubtful you'd do much finesse work with your sword or spear, and you'd be squished pretty flat. I'm not sure how DBA or any game could adequately mimic this, unless you continued to get diminishing bonuses for stacking units behind each other. We also see the first full descriptions of "engines" (siege devices).

As an interesting side note, due to the geography of Greece, it seems that subsequent generations of soldiers fought in the same places. Hence we see multiple battles at Chaeronea, Cynocephalae, Thermopylae, etc. One is reminded of Manassas, the Wilderness, Fredericksburg, Harper's Ferry.

Over the course of the 4th century, peltasts became progressively heavier armed, and hoplites lighter armed, and the author leaves the impression they would have eventually met in the middle somewhere, had it not been for the arrival of the Macedonians and their new way of fighting with sarissae and charging heavy cav.

There is a power vacuum, and Phillip arrives on the scene, expanding his empire. Phillip invades Greece and wins the battle of Chaeronea due in part to his son the boy wonder. The chapter ends with the death of Phillip. I wonder what happens next?

Chapter V -- Alexander the Great

The book spends an entire chapter on some obscure Macedonian leader named Al III. I never heard of the guy, but he must not have accomplished much because he died before his 33rd birthday ;-)

Author Warry is clearly a fan of the original wiz kid, and Alexander's battles get more detailed treatment than any other general in the book. Granicus, Issus, Gaugamela, Tyre, and Hydaspes are described thoroughly. He lists numerous sources.

According to Warry, the syntagma was capable of forming various complex formations, including crescents and wedges. He gives open order as 6 ft frontage and depth per man, closed order as 3 ft frontage and depth per man, and locked shields as 18 inches frontage and depth per man. That last is a little hard to accept -- I can fit inside an 18" square, but I doubt I could with shield and armor, and certainly not while moving. Doubtful big guys bustling with armor could do that while moving and fighting.

Sarissas are 15 feet long. Alexander's troops were well disciplined and drilled.

Almost two whole pages are devoted to artillery of the time. Cavalry come into their own, and Warry gives the frontage as 4 feet and the depth as 11 feet (presumably nose to nose). There are more references to ineffectual scythed chariots.

The force disposition is listed for the battles of Granicus, Issus, Gaugamela, and Hydaspes (handy for wargamers). Of course, this doesn't mean one should necessarily use these numbers independent of other sources, such as Connolly or Osprey books.

Warry doesn't give credit to what I feel was one of the main reasons for Alexander's great success. Socrates, one of the greatest philosophers who ever lived, had many students, but his star pupil was undoubtedly Plato, who still influences political and philosophical thought. Plato had many students, but his star pupil was certainly Aristotle, one of the most influential men in the history of western thought. Phillip chose Aristotle to tutor his son, Alexander. And the rest is history.

The chapter ends with Alexander's sudden death. A few days ago while driving home I was singing along with the radio, "Roxaaaaaaaaaaaaane, Roxaaaaaaaaaaaaane, Roxaaaaaaaaaaaaane....," thinking of how history might have been different.

| Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV |

De Bellis Bookstore | Rice Reviews | DBA Resource Page | Fanaticus