George R.R. Martin’s Unsullied epitomize disciplined, ruthless warfare. And their battlefield presence is strikingly reminiscent of a perfect phalanx—a hallmark of Greek hoplite tactics. In this post, we compare these fictional warriors with the real-life Ottoman Janissaries in terms of upbringing. As well as the ancient Greek hoplites in terms of tactics and warrior ethos. Exploring their origins, training, battlefield formations, and social dynamics to reveal how each force, in its own brutal way, shaped the destinies of empires.
Origins and Recruitment: From Slave Soldiers to Citizen Warriors
Unsullied:
In world of Game of Thrones Essos is a dark continent (and that’s definitely saying something!). It is here in the cities of Slaver’s Bay where the Unsullied are bred from childhood for one purpose—to fight and die for their masters. Taken from their families and conditioned to suppress all individual emotion. Killing puppies and butchering helpless infants in front of their mothers as part of the training. All to ensure any emotion is eroded by the time they’re ready. These soldiers are molded into unyielding death machines expertly coordinated to be a scourge of absolute destruction without questions asked. Their transformation from human beings into disciplined instruments of war underscores the dark cost of their military efficiency.
Source: Trust me bro
Janissaries:
Historically, the Janissaries were formed under the Ottoman Empire through the devshirme system. A practice whereby Christian boys were forcibly recruited, converted to Islam, and trained as elite soldiers. Like the Unsullied, their origins lie in coercion and state control. However, as they matured, the Janissaries evolved into a formidable military and political force with a distinct identity.
Hoplites:
In contrast, Greek hoplites were free citizens who took up arms out of civic duty. Their service in the phalanx was driven by honor and a commitment to their city-state. Although their training was rigorous, it was integrated with their everyday lives rather than imposed as an alien identity.
Training and Tactics: Forging the Perfect Formation
The Unsullied and the Phalanx:
Martin’s Unsullied are depicted as a nearly mechanical force—soldiers who operate in tight, cohesive lockstep formations reminiscent of the ancient phalanx. In a phalanx, heavily armed warriors lock shields and thrust spears in unison, creating an impenetrable wall of death. The Unsullied mirror this ideal, their relentless discipline ensuring that their formation remains unbroken under even the fiercest assault.
The best showcasing of this resolve would be the Battle of Qohor. Where the Unsullied had been recruited to defend the city against the Dothraki horselords. They were at a 20.000 v 3000 disadvantage. Still, it did it not go well for the horse lords, resulting in a catastrophic loss on their end.
Janissaries’ Evolution:
The Janissaries, initially trained in archery and hand-to-hand combat, gradually adapted to new military technologies as the art of war evolved. Their rigorous training made them versatile on the battlefield, serving as shock troops and later incorporating firearms. Their robust showings on the battlefield and their ability to adapt id not go unnoticed. It helped the Ottoman Empire expand, even as internal corruption eventually eroded their initial effectiveness.
Hoplites’ Collective Might:
Greek hoplites relied on mutual trust and the solidarity of the citizen-soldier. Their strength in the phalanx came from each man’s commitment to the group. Every hoplite was both a warrior and a defender of the communal honor of his polis. Their success depended on synchronizing individual actions to create an almost impenetrable front. In other words, they were forced to put their trust in the next man’s shield if they were to survive. Great cohesion and solid bonds were forged as a cause of this.
Battlefield Tactics: Discipline Versus Identity
Unsullied:
On the battlefield, the Unsullied’s tactics are defined by their unwavering discipline and formation. Their combat style is almost a textbook phalanx formation. Each soldier working in perfect unison, making it extraordinarily difficult for enemies to break through thier lines. However, unlike Greek hoplites, whose fighting spirit was fueled by personal and civic honor, the Unsullied fight devoid of personal initiative. A product of their dehumanizing upbringing. They have about as much politically involvement as the arrow has with the target it is loosed upon.
A further disadvantage that the rigid fighting framework of the Unsullied brings is the unquestionable status quo. This is cause for them to be stagnant in all terms whether they be tactics, innovation, even warfare itself as it evolves (or is intended to evolve) as a concept over time. When talking physically, their rigid formations may be hell to the light (and even heavy) infantry they face, though they will always be susceptible to ranged attacks and heavy cavalry charges.
Janissaries:
In battle, the Janissaries were often deployed as the spearhead of the Ottoman military. They expertly leveraged both traditional melee and later gunpowder techniques. Their early use as disciplined infantry parallels the Unsullied’s rigid formations. But the Janissaries’ ability to integrate evolving tactics and weaponry provided them with a flexibility that the purely phalanx-oriented Unsullied do not display.
Over time, the Janissaries developed significant internal weaknesses. Their early reputation for discipline and elite combat skills eroded as they became increasingly politicized and complacent. As they gained privileges and political influence, factionalism and corruption began to creep in. This internal strife, coupled with a resistance to military innovation, eventually undermined their effectiveness on the battlefield. And made them less adaptable to new forms of warfare.
Hoplites:
The hoplite phalanx was a formidable tactic in its day—dense, interlocked, and powerful through unity. Each soldier’s personal valor was subordinated to the collective, much like the Unsullied. However, the hoplites’ motivation sprang from a shared cultural identity. And from pride in defending their homeland, contrasting sharply with the state-forged obedience of the Unsullied.
While the hoplite phalanx was a formidable formation under the right conditions, its rigid structure also proved to be its Achilles’ heel. The success of a phalanx depended on maintaining a tight, cohesive line on flat, open terrain. Any disruption or flanking could quickly turn the formation into a liability. Their heavy armor and fixed position made them less agile, leaving them vulnerable to more mobile opponents, cavalry charges, and ranged attacks that could break their unity and expose individual soldiers to devastating blows.
Social Dynamics and Long-Term Effectiveness
Unsullied:
The Unsullied’s strength is both their greatest asset and their most tragic flaw. Engineered to be the perfect soldiers, they lack personal ambition and identity. This dehumanization ensures flawless discipline on the battlefield but also strips away the individual spirit that can drive innovation or moral resistance, making them both terrifyingly efficient and heartbreakingly expendable.
Janissaries:
The Janissaries, though initially deprived of their past identities, gradually developed their own sense of camaraderie and power. Over time, they became influential political players within the Ottoman court. Even as their loyalty and effectiveness waned due to internal corruption and the very privileges they had earned.
Hoplites:
Greek hoplites, fighting as citizens rather than conscripts, embodied the values and honor of their communities. Their personal stake in the fight—defending their homes and families—provided a strong, intrinsic motivation that fortified their collective resolve and long-term commitment to their city-states.
Conclusion: The Brutal Price of Military Excellence
Each of these forces—the Unsullied, Janissaries, and hoplites—illustrates a distinct approach to creating elite warriors. The Unsullied, with their phalanx-like formations and ruthless conditioning, represent a chilling ideal of efficiency stripped of individuality. The Janissaries demonstrate how coercion and state control can forge a versatile, albeit eventually self-serving, military elite. Meanwhile, the hoplites remind us that the true strength of a military force often lies in the shared honor and identity of its soldiers. In comparing these warriors, we uncover not just differences in tactics and training, but a deeper commentary on the human cost of discipline. And the enduring impact of military tradition on society.
Sources and Further Reading:
- Finkel, Caroline. Osman’s Dream: The History of the Ottoman Empire
- Hanson, Victor Davis. The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece
- Madden, Thomas F. A History of the Janissaries
- Martin, George R.R. A Song of Ice and Fire series
On a more serious note, this analysis serves as a reminder that while military innovation can create near-mythical units, the harsh realities of recruitment, training, and social control remain as bloody and brutal today as they were in the annals of history. It might appear exciting or adventurous from a safe distance, and sure, it will have its moments. But ultimately there is scarce good or honorable that comes from any of it.
