Ambush: Surprise Attack in Ancient Greek Warfare

by Rose Mary Sheldon

There are two images of warfare that dominate Greek history. The better known is that of Achilles, the Homeric hero skilled in face-to-face combat to the death. He is a warrior who is outraged by deception on the battlefield. The alternative model, equally Greek and also taken from Homeric epic, is Odysseus, ‘the man of twists and turns’ of The Odyssey. To him, winning by stealth, surprise or deceit was acceptable.

Greek warfare actually consists of many varieties of fighting. It is common for popular writers to assume that the hoplite phalanx was the only mode of warfare used by the Greeks. The fact is, however, that the use of spies, intelligence gathering, ambush, and surprise attacks at dawn or at night were also a part of Greek warfare, and while not the supreme method of defeating an enemy, such tactics always found their place in warfare when the opportunity or the correct terrain or opportunity presented itself.

Ambush will dispel both the modern and ancient prejudices against irregular warfare and provides a fresh look at the tactics of the ancient Greeks.

Genres: History, Military History

322 pages, Hardcover

First published May 1, 2012

Reviews

[Anibal · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ambush was present throughout all history of Greek warfare. That is the point that the highly intelligent and great scholar Rose Mary Sheldon wants to prove. And she nails it, that’s for sure. Travelling through time since the Iliad until the Hellenistic period, the authoress manages to dig an overwhelming amount of literary evidence regarding the uses of ambushes, trickery, night raids, intelligence gathering, secret operations and betrayals with 5th columns.

If this was the first time this issue was brought to notice, Colonel Sheldon would receive accolades and cheers. Unfortunately this issue was already debated, although there are still many historians which simply dismiss this kind of operations in classical Greek warfare concentrating on the clash of phalanxes. For that reason I believe that this book is still needed.

This work has many excellent merits, the amount of research was immense and well done, the sheer amount of examples that Sheldon produces for each situation will dissipate most doubts regarding the fact that ancient Greek generals were efficient, trying to use their resources in the most effective way…and they wouldn’t miss the opportunity for a good ambush. She also proves that those kind of operations were frequent (not rarities) and that military leaders needed to be careful with reconnaissance and be imaginative (the most telling example was a simulation of an ambush using the fastest men so that the main army could retreat safely; that delayed the pursuing army and the “ambushers” returned to their army after the successful operation).

Another subject studied by the authoress was the way Greeks saw victory by trickery vs victory by strength. The Odysseus vs Achilles way of battle. Colonel Rose Sheldon reminds that Odysseus wasn’t only an ambusher, he was also a mighty spear fighter. She makes a case on oriental prejudice and that the use of ranged weapons was considered cowardly due mainly to social factors. That our own prejudices against ambushes and trickery are misplaced and easterners weren’t more prone to the use of those tactics then Greeks.

That is obviously a complex issue, because contrary to the authoress supposition, our present culture doesn’t descend solely from the Greek. Celtic and Germanic societies also had that same “prejudice” against ranged weapons (although obviously they also used them extensively). The single fight and the beheading of the foe was the most momentous event of the champion. And it’s almost impossible to prove that this trend was imported or exported by Greeks. The Italians (not only Romans), even before Magna Grecia had a spear fighter and duel mentality also. So probably the question of the highest valor being considered on face to face battle isn’t just a modern prejudice but a very ancient cultural and geographical issue. That doesn’t mean that all those cultures would miss a fine opportunity to unleash an ambush and defeat their foes that way…but nothing was greater for a Celtic warrior than a duel in front of his army, for example.

So, the authoress opposes “The Western Way of War” by Hanson, and occasionally “Soldiers and Ghosts” by Lendon. Both those books and the presently reviewed are excellent and remarkable works of investigation and analyses and I would advise any reader to consult them all.

There is also interesting information regarding the evolution of light troops, including the rise of the peltast, the Iphikratean Reforms, the ascension of the professional specialist and mercenary soldier, etc.

As spots to be improved in next editions I would recommend more useful maps with movement troops and places of the operations; when possible even probable troop positions. The correction of some small mistakes and introducing some of the examples in the correct place (just as an example, the attack of Heridippas against the Mysians of Pharnabazus should obviously been included in the section “The Fourth Century” since the attack took place in 395 BC (which by the way, that section should be a chapter in itself and not a sub-section within the chapter “Chapter 5 - Surprise Attacks – Fifth Century”).

The bibliography is a treasure in itself; and the immense notes are useful indeed for further investigation. All in all a very interesting book which raises questions old but always contemporary.

[Seth Rutter · Rating 2 out of 5]

This reads more as a list of instances of the subject matter rather than examples with any detail. The flow of reading is choppy and feels disorganized. Often times a section will contain numerous instances of "proof" jammed together and spanning entire centuries. I really wanted to like this book, because I am in agreement with the author that "unconventional" tactics do not receive their due in accounts of earlier warfare, but I feel this work was poorly realized.