Preparing and organising for war in Classical Greece: seeking the diversity of city-state practice

项目摘要（请不要超过4000个字符，包括空格）：我的研究使用了特定于上下文的方法来确定古希腊城邦（城邦）之间军事传统的差异程度。这项研究将使用文学，金石学和考古学数据的组合来挑战传统观念，即古希腊战争是统一的，其特点是其主角的相对“业余”-重装步兵（重型武器）民兵及其领导人。通过询问各个社会，我的研究将产生一个更准确的观点，每个城邦之间的关系，其战争模式和军事传统。我的研究受到了最近关于古希腊城邦的研究的启发，该研究考察了每个城邦的具体特征，根据其自身的优点对待它，并避免了曾经存在过典型城邦的假设。在Gehrke（1986）和其他研究的影响下，学者们探索了传统的“雅典对斯巴达”两极之外的其他社会组织形式（例如Brock-Hodkinson 2000），这种方法在Hansen-Nielsen Inventory（2004）中达到顶峰。然而，这种方法在古典战争领域的影响有限，我们仍然主要面对重装步兵的统治地位（Hanson 1999），城邦民兵的“业余”性质（Konijnendijk 2017）和所谓的斯巴达的“专业”系统。考虑到希腊军事硬件的物质遗迹，以及艺术和服装中的军事价值观，将加强我以政治为中心的方法。对古典战争的研究表明，城邦（城邦）民兵在他们的军事传统中是典型的和明显的“业余”的（罗林斯2008）。这种均变论的方法忽略了不同社会的社会、政治和制度特征，以及每个社会所受到的地形和地理限制。从我的研究中已经很清楚，这些特征变化很大。例如，阿卡迪亚的曼尼托邦社会的组织不同于底比斯和雅典（汉森，2002）;然而，几乎没有研究这些差异如何在军事传统方面发挥作用。我的主要研究问题是：1。公民们是如何为个人和社区平台上的战争做好准备的？2.我们能在两极之间发现什么样的变化，它们是如何随时间变化的？3.不同的军事传统是如何发展起来的，它们对什么样的刺激（如地形、政治、社会）作出反应？我的研究集中在古典时期（公元前5 - 4世纪），在希腊化时期的皇家军队崛起之前。案例研究将来自希腊世界的各个地区，特别是阿卡迪亚（传统上是雇佣军的来源），皮奥夏（特别是霸权的底比斯），西西里（其“暴君”雇用雇佣军）和马其顿（学者们认为菲利普二世使军队专业化）。这些将提供一个更准确的观点，不同的社会如何准备战争，转移我们的目光从传统的重点放在雅典和斯巴达。我的研究对冲突的现代概念有影响。例如，它建议被称为“业余”的现代叛乱分子（如ISIS）如何调整其战士的准备，以有效地面对“专业”的现代军队。

Project Summary (Please do not exceed 4000 characters, including spaces):My research uses a context-specific approach to identify the extent to which military traditions varied between ancient Greek poleis (city-states). The study will use a combination of literary, epigraphic, and archaeological data to challenge traditional perceptions that ancient Greek warfare was uniform and characterised by the relative 'amateurism' of its protagonists - the hoplite (heavy-armed) militia and its leaders. By interrogating individual societies, my research will generate a more accurate view of the relationship between each polis, its mode of warfare and its military tradition. My research is inspired by the most recent work on the ancient Greek polis, which examines the specific character of each polis, treats it on its own merits and avoids the assumption that there was ever a typical polis. Under the influence of Gehrke (1986) and other studies, scholars have explored alternative forms of social organisation beyond the traditional 'Athens v. Sparta' polarity (e.g. Brock-Hodkinson 2000), an approach culminating in the Hansen-Nielsen Inventory (2004). Yet this methodology has had limited impact in the area of Classical warfare, where we are still mainly confronted by a generalised picture of the dominance of the hoplite (Hanson 1999), the 'amateur' nature of polis militias (Konijnendijk 2017) and the so-called 'professional' system of Sparta. A consideration of material remains of Greek military hardware, and the representation of military values in art and coinage, will strengthen my polis-centred approach. Studies of classical warfare have claimed that polis (city-state) militias were archetypal and distinctly 'amateur' in their military traditions (Rawlings 2008). This uniformitarian approach ignores the different social, political, and institutional characters of societies, and the topographical and geographical constraints to which each was subject. It is already clear from my research that these features varied strongly. For instance, the society of Mantinea in Arcadia was organised otherwise than in Thebes and Athens (Hansen 2002); yet there has been little research into how these differences played out in terms of military tradition. My key research questions are: 1. How were citizens prepared for warfare on individual and communal platforms? 2. What variations can we detect between poleis, and how did they vary over time? 3. How did different military traditions develop and what stimuli (e.g. topographical, political, social) were they responding to? My study centres on the Classical period (5th-4th centuries BC), before the rise of the royal armies of the Hellenistic period. Case studies will be drawn from regions across the Greek world, notably Arcadia (traditionally a source of mercenaries), Boeotia (especially hegemonic Thebes), Sicily (whose 'tyrants' employed mercenaries), and Macedonia (where scholars credit Philip II with professionalising the army). These will offer a more accurate view of how different societies prepared for warfare, shifting our gaze away from the traditional focus on Athens and Sparta. My research has implications for modern concepts of conflict. It suggests how, for example, modern insurgencies labelled 'amateur' (such as ISIS) adapt the preparation of their fighters to face 'professional' modern armies effectively.