LogFAQs > #979250409

Juhanor posted...

How effective were they as a combat unit? Your description reminds me of America's militia from my recent college readings--normal people with personal weapons and almost non-existent training.

I'll let the good doctor say it best:

The Athenian hoplite phalanx was a levy of eager amateurs. Its fighting ability rested on horizontal unit cohesion: it was wholly lacking in institutional organisation and training, but its members believed in their citys cause, and in combat they refused to let their friends and neighbours down. Their moral commitment gave their phalanx its strength. In a world of amateur armies, this was sometimes enough. Meanwhile, in a context of democratic and egalitarian ideology, tighter vertical unit cohesion and more extensive training were not welcome. The selfless bravery of the citizen hoplite was the military expression of the spirit of Athenian democracy, glorified as not merely sufficient, but ideal. This was the culture of combat Crowley analysed in peerless fashion.

The recommendations of authors like Xenophon seem to have gone mostly unheeded. Perhaps the methods they proposed reeked too strongly of Sparta. Perhaps, as they themselves seem to have realised, their authoritarian ideas were simply incompatible with the values of freeborn Athenians. Even they could not have guessed the consequence: the rulers of Macedon adopted all the improvements cited here, and their professional armies brought the freedom of the Greeks to an end.

The whole section is pretty damning on the Athenians.

In short, the Athenian hoplite militia lacked nearly all of the features that we associate with a military force worthy of the name. They had no combat training, no formation drill, no elaborated chain of command or small unit organisation, no unit traditions, no junior officer cadre, and no enforced disciplinary measures. They received no formal instruction in what they were expected to do, and their leaders were only nominally able to persuade or force them to do it. In these circumstances, the horizontal unit cohesion of the hoplites their commitment to their primary group, the values it stood for, and the goals it shared was absolutely essential. It was practically the only thing holding the Athenian phalanx together.

Essentially the Athenians lacked officer hierachy, they only had three officers the Lokhagoi, the taxiarkhoi and the strategoi, a culture that put emphasis on defying authority since the Athenians were pretty weary of any sort of authority and that includes military, lack of any sort of training. The chapter elaborates more on those points. I'm sure that the American militia at least had drill masters and was more organized, on top of that there was a regular professional army. IIRC the role of the American militia is romanticized in pop culture but in practice the American militia performed pretty poorly against the British army.