The horror of ancient warfare

[Conan]

I love ancient warfare. The history, tactics, the campaigns its so ancient, distant, its almost like fantasy. The battles such as Thermopylae, are noble, glorious, maybe even romantic.

Are there any sources that paint the darker side of ancient warfare? The detail of the heat of battle? The unimaginable violence.

What it was like to stand in the front line holding your shield tight and bracing for the impact of the charging Celtic enemy. To be at the front of the legion, your shield arm is almost numb, your so exhausted every thrust/ slash of your gladius is agony.

What it must have been like to thrust your spear into the face of your opposing enemy, step over him and allow the men in the ranks behind you to finish him of, making sure he doesn't get back up.

To have to hack through a mans desperately raised hands and forearms to deliver the killer head blow.

To stand in the baking sun after a grueling, grinding battle, you so exhausted your nearly sick, dehydrated, light headed, covered in blood only to raise your aching head to see fresh enemy troops formed up and heading to your position.

Is there any sources that identify the psychological impact that battle/war must have had on some soldiers?

[desert]

Don't forget the smell of feces. Lots and lots of feces.

TBH, that's the one thing I hate about ancient warfare. All the dead men with feces in their underwear and around their abdominal wounds. Smells really bad.

[johnhughthom]

I always think that loading screen of the Ptolemy guys finishing off the Seleukid guys really brings home the brutality that must have been ancient warfare.

[Conan]

I always think that loading screen of the Ptolemy guys finishing off the Seleukid guys really brings home the brutality that must have been ancient warfare.

Same here....

I think its a gripping piece of artwork. I'd love to see another showing a similar scene.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Same here....

I think its a gripping piece of artwork. I'd love to see another showing a similar scene.

On the other hand, bloody people we are. So much for people who would probably shit in their pants upon seeing a decapitation... But hey, at least I hated 300.

[gamegeek2]

Yeah, I never watched the movie - total insult to what actually happened, and it seriously misinformed people - I had to give some talks to my friends about the crap that 300 threw at our minds.

I also watched the History Channel documentary on Thermopylae, which is possibly the most historically accurate documentary on an ancient battle ever. See here - an amazing work that can appeal to both history buffs and "normal" people.

[Fixiwee]

I always think that loading screen of the Ptolemy guys finishing off the Seleukid guys really brings home the brutality that must have been ancient warfare.

But have you noticed the guy in the back giving the other dude a massage? Take a close look, they are having a good time.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Roman soldiers, and pretty much anyone capable of holding a tight and disciplined formation rotated often, so whenever they could the front ranks would give room to the fresher men in the rear ones and so on.

Celtic warfare was very much reliant on charges. First a devastating attack swept on the enemy lines with the intent of quickly breaking a foe, and if that didn't happen maybe some prolongued fighting would ensue but there was a good chance that the least disciplined among the Celtic host would cause a chain rout. So the sight of fresh troops while you're exhausted and bloody is perhaps exaggerated and only happened when the enemy vastly outnumbered you.

Yet there was a lot of room for other kinds of brutality, and the familiar stench of death. Maggot therapy was actually used due to the fact that American Civil War veterans would lie wounded on the field for days, causing maggots that eventually came or appeared to eat their necrosis and ironically heal them if they survived; in fact being hurt and not being able to walk was practically a death sentence due to disease and the likes.

[Gleemonex]

I think in the past people may have been slighty more desensitised,if thats how its spelt, to the violence Life was harsh and maybe it was just accepted.

It would be more accurate, from an anthropological perspective, to say that we in the more industrialised nations have been sensitised to violence. Notice how brutally violent children (mostly boys, but girls also) try to be in their awkward, chubby little bodies. They have to be taught non-violence and co-operation, yet smacking someone and taking their stuff is totally natural.

There were no lovely little (actully crap) Disney films to give to your children to make them learn how it all ends happliy ever after.

Too true. One need simply look at the original Brothers Grimm tales for that.

I don't understand the hatred toward 300, at least people know what the Battle of Thermopylae (my browser spell check doesn't even recognize the word) is. Any attempt to find out more about it, will quickly reveal any glaring inaccuracies the movie has.

If the ephors scene doesn't smack someone with the clue-by-four, nothing will.

With the near-universal glorification of soldiery (if not warfare) in ancient times, I doubt you'd find many willing or able to speak negatively of it. Even the famous multiculturalist Megas Alexandros seemed to have no issues with battle itself.

-Glee

[antisocialmunky]

Don't forget the smell of feces. Lots and lots of feces.

That can be said about history in general because until very recently, you have animals pooping in the street, people pooping in the street, and people pooping else where and dumping it in the street.

[Shylence]

I think in the past people may have been slighty more desensitised,if thats how its spelt, to the violence Life was harsh and maybe it was just accepted.

There were no lovely little (actully crap) Disney films to give to your children to make them learn how it all ends happliy ever after.

[Tiberius Claudius Marcellus]

Is there any sources that identify the psychological impact that battle/war must have had on some soldiers?

Take this as you will; but in the Old Testament of the Bible when Joshua and Moses were leading the Israelites into Canaan from Egypt, I believe it was decreed that all warriors had to stay outside the camp for 7 days as they were "ritually impure." I've read that modern sociologists believe this was more as a way to ensure that the men got most of their emotions/rage back in check before they returned amongst the unarmed populace.


As a USMC M1A1 tank crewman and veteran of the 2nd Battle of Fallujah (Nov 2004) I'll tell you that killing a person is entirely life-altering (unless, presumably you're a psychopath).

Seeing someone die is a change in itself. Imagine, if you can, a person - a mother/brother/father/son/sister/uncle/aunt/cousin/child (all of the above?) to someone else being alive, walking, talking, breathing, laughing, crying one instant, and then BAM a lifeless rag doll falling/tumbling whichever way gravity/inertia take them. It's unsettling in the least, and not even comparable to seeing an animal die.

Now, imagine being the cause of that. Imagine that no matter what this person was doing to you or to others, he did have some good, redeemable virtues to him. He did take care of his family and friends. He was once a little tiny baby that made his parents hearts swell with joy at every coo and gurgle. He made some woman's heart flutter. He helped an old woman cross the street. That person, whatever combination of good/evil he was, is irreplaceably gone now and there's nothing you or anyone can do to take it back.

I've seen people turn into the proverbial pink mist. I've seen an RPG go through a man's chest and leave a hole and like in the cartoons where he looked down and all his guts fell out, still alive as he hit the ground. I've looked into the eyes of a teenager who ran weapons in a vehicle past our blockade as I shot him in the throat (only because the round dropped over distance.)

I would have to say that fighting in hand to hand combat would be the most frightening experience ever. I was lucky to be surrounded by 72 tons of depleted uranium and steel, and part of the greatest fighting force in history. True, as humans we have adrenaline, some have cultural expectations/acceptance of violence, and there is such a thing as going into a blood rage/seeing red/blacking out to the point where your body simply acts to survive without your mind comprehending what's going on; but still, you'd have to be pretty bad ass to go on doing this for years and years. Even though you dehumanize your enemy and it does get easier after the first one (hell, sometimes its like fish in a barrel and you and your buddies laugh your asses off as you see the enemy getting blown to pieces or gunned down like ducks in a carnival game) I'm sure there was a ton of moral justification going on in the hearts/minds of ancient warriors.

Think about it and theorize all you want, I admit I still love playing this game and can imagine being in place in the battles; but it's a lot different in real life.

[Cyclops]

Great that gamers recognise the horror of war. I am horrified by the "war iz kewl" nonsense you see. That Sherman was right.

...I'll tell you that killing a person is entirely life-altering (unless, presumably you're a psychopath)...

Think about it and theorize all you want, I admit I still love playing this game and can imagine being in place in the battles; but it's a lot different in real life.

Great points you make, which cannot be stressed enough. I have a number of service and police friends and they tell me the story is the same over and again.

I'm sure there was a ton of moral justification going on in the hearts/minds of ancient warriors.

There's a lot of moral justification going on in the Bible and everywhere else. It takes a clear head to see above all the crap.

I guess the way you nerve guys up to face death is tell them they're heroes and treat them like kings when they get home. I'm 100% civilian but recently had surgery in a veteran's hospital (they have spare capacity so they accept overflow from the public system) and the facilites and staff were excellent.

I believe the English look after their vets reasonably well too: I visited Chelsea and spent some time with a physio attached to the "Artists Rifles" when I was in London. They had stories about Paddy Maine who won a truckload of DSO's: not a very happy person poor fella, but a real soldier.

[duncan.gill]

Having done a fair bit of psychology I think that war in the ancient world would have been “easier” than modern combat for a number of reasons:

1. society was a lot more violent – we do not have public executions any more whereas they would have grown up in a society where seeing someone tortured/executed may not have been such a huge deal. This would make seeing a similar thing on the battlefield as less of a shock.
2. the societies tended to glamorise war a lot more and so Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) may have looked different (this is a psychological condition that occurs after people experience a traumatic event – it involves a number of symptoms including flash backs etchttp://www.behavenet.com/capsules/disorders/ptsd.htm). I read somewhere that even in the American Civil War these flashbacks of experiences were described as “war nostalgia” (which kind of has connotations of remembering good experiences). I find it interesting that the first time (AFAIK) that combat fatigue/PTSD became a major issue was around WW1.
3. In antiquity then the actual battles were much shorter and so they weren’t exposed to long periods of stress (e.g. battles that go on for weeks) except in the case of sieges.
4. I suspect that nowadays some people have a greater regard for human rights/suffering etc and so it is psychologically more problematic to inflict suffering on another human (and therefore has the potential to be traumatising).
5. It may have been less likely that you would survive from a wound back then (so if you were injured then you would die rather than going on to develop PTSD).
6. back then I think that they would have had a bit more us vs them mentality (viewing the enemy as subhuman barbarians dehumanises them and so stops you feeling sorry for them).
7. Soldiers were probably not required to think beyond the fight (i.e. nowadays there are more “rules” to warfare which means that soldiers are required to think about the enemy as humans).

[Megas Methuselah]

Nice post, duncan.gill! My great-grand-uncles weren't the same when they came back from the wars...

Anyways, I'd like to add that I once read somewhere of how the first PTSD of some sort was recorded in ancient Greece. Is that true?

[Watchman]

I find it interesting that the first time (AFAIK) that combat fatigue/PTSD became a major issue was around WW1.
3. In antiquity then the actual battles were much shorter and so they weren’t exposed to long periods of stress (e.g. battles that go on for weeks) except in the case of sieges.

I would figure #3 is the main reason for the previous; WW1 was the first of the truly modern wars that just went on and on and on, exposing the soldiers to an endless barrage of fear and stress.

Well, the effects of essentially modern weaponry being for the first time unleashed in full on human beings at a large scale cannot really have helped...

[antisocialmunky]

Well, for the first large scale truly mondern war, I would nominate the end of the American Civil War. It basically transitions from classic Napoleonic warfare to static trench systems, tunnelling, and massive artillery barrages that are seen in WWI. The only thing you didn't have were machine guns everywhere.

[Kingsilver]

for a realistic, though fictional, portrayal of ancient warfare, i recomend you check out the 'tides of war', by steven pressfield. it describes some very intense scenes of hoplite warfare. a must read for any EB fan.

[geala]

A book which deals a bit with the ferocity of an ancient war is "A War like no other" by Hanson about the Peloponesian War between Athens and Sparta and allies.

Reading ancient sources one gets an impression of the inhumanity and cruelty of thinking of some old societies. For example in the Bible (e.g. Samuel) or in "De bello Gallico" from Caesar you find pretty examples for genocide, calmly reported with no sign of bad conscience. Genocide is of course not at all out of mode, but in modern times mostly tried to be concealed. A big progress in morality.

Ancient battle descriptions are often a bit "low intensive", f.e. Xenophon. Thoukidides is a bit tougher but not as gory one might expect. The "Ilias" contains a lot about weapon against body and gives a vivid image of the merciless slaughter of bronze age battles. The book of Barry Strauss (don't know the English title, The Trojan War?) is a good research how the war could have been fought and how the fighters felt.

If you would like to know something about weapons and wounds, ancient and medieval findings could offer at least some impressions. Think about the bone findings at Maiden Castle with skulls that bore several marks of sword slashes against presumably already wounded and fallen victims. Same with the Wisby findings of the battle of 1361 or that of Towton 1461, where mass graves were detected.

That some cultural differences existed in the conception and adaption to the kind of war and its results you can see from the allegedly appalled reactions of the Greeks when they faced the sword wounds of their warriors hacked and stabbed to death in fights with the Romans. Such wounds seamed to be not the norm in Greek warfare before (because of the manner and technique of fighting).

[Uticensis]

Are there any sources that paint the darker side of ancient warfare? The detail of the heat of battle? The unimaginable violence.

There are not many. Archilochus comes to mind. He didn't really write about the darker side of war, but his poetry sometimes mocked the supposed heroism of falling in battle (he was kicked out of Sparta for writing such poetry).

Also, as time went on in the ancient world, violence and gore seemed to be stressed more. An interesting example is the Column of Marcus Aurelius. Unlike Trajan's, which had the Roman soldiers acting heroic, building fortresses and bridges and easily defeating the barbarians, Marcus Aurelius' shows prisoners and civilians getting executed, women and children being enslaved, heads getting chopped off, even Roman soldiers losing (yet luckily getting saved by a storm). I would say around this time, with the Golden Age of Rome waning and the barbarians closing in, warfare was seen and depicted in a much grittier and violent way.

[belliger]

you should have a look at the books from

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Victor Davis Hanson

. the best ones.
especially 'the art of warfare in the western world'. despite its title it depicts - perfectly - the typical battle in the greek warfare, and moreovr its cultural consequences.
but also his book 'carnegie and culture' is absolutely a MASTERPIECE. you should see my copy: i read and re-read it so many times that it looks like weird.
another veeery good author is J

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

ohn Keegan

. it writes more about the WWI and its psychological impact over the combatants, but writes also, in an unarrivable way, about ancient and medieval warfare, exactly about the matters you are looking for.
and - of course -, if you don't have done it yet, the novel by

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Steven Pressfield

. his 'gates of fire' (about the thermopylae) is absolutely unbelievable.

bye

[Subedei]

Paul Keegan has a very good account of ancient warfae in his book "The History of Warfare". Can´t find a quote, yet I remember on Phalanx warfare smth. like "one of the most horryfying experiences one can make".

[Gleemonex]

and - of course -, if you don't have done it yet, the novel by

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Steven Pressfield

. his 'gates of fire' (about the thermopylae) is absolutely unbelievable.

bye

Good post and good suggestions (overall). But I have to take issue with "Gates of Fire" by Steven Pressfield.

I was so excited when I heard about this book -- I find the premise extremely enticing. But when I read the sample on his site, I could have sworn he had stolen the cast of Full Metal Jacket and dropped them into Ancient Greece. All the "chow" and "hooah" and bitching and moaning were straight out of Vietnam Flicks 101. Even as a modern Canadian I found it jarring and tacky. Imagine trying to put it in the perspective of an Ancient Greek.

If someone ever translates it from "1960s Marine" into "English" (or any other actual language), let me know.

-Glee

[Dutchhoplite]

His book on Alexander's campaign in Afghanistan suffers from the same with the Macedonians calling themselves "Maks".

And i want to mention the last book of the "Gallic wars". Aulus Hirtius added an eighth book to Caesars work and he's unable or unwilling to hide the atrocities and less than glorious actions during the last phase of this war.

[mirmorix]

Also the books from Valerio Massimo Manfredi are very interesting. I have trilogy about Alex the Great and Tyrant /i dont know if its true name of this book in english/ - its about life od Dionysius I. who fight for whole life against Qarthadast in Sicily.

[Dutchhoplite]

Dionysius I of Syracuse ;)