Xerxes was a man of power. The Great King of Persia, his empire encompassed the majority of the known world. On his invasion of Greece in the spring of 480BCE, he reportedly commanded a horde of over two million men. Even the Greek oracle at Delphi encouraged prudence in face of such an overwhelming force (7.140). Thus the question arises of why such an army failed to compel Greece into submission. I will explore this with focus on the key battles and the important factors, most notably the timing of the attack, the quality of his expeditionary force and Xerxes’ personal faults. Overall, Xerxes’ initial strategy was sound. Before he had even bridged and crossed the Hellespont , Xerxes had established a very good relationship with the Macedonian Empire and had received submissions from city-states down to Boeotia (7.132.1). Essential communications with Persia were secure and Xerxes’ army had a good base for the invasion of Greece proper. However, hindered by the army’s massive size, only slowly did the army advance south – it being midsummer by the time the army had reached Thermopylae (8.11) – with the fleet following down the coast. The size of the army was both an advantage and weakness for Xerxes in this respect. While the army reached Thermopylae intact, the fleet suffered at the hand of two storms, with Herodotus attributing them to God attempting to equalize the opposing forces . The disparity between the size of the Persian and the size of the Greek forces was huge – thus, the Greeks’ strategy relied on geography . Holding the narrows at Thermopylae and the concurrent straits of Artemisium meant that Xerxes’ numerical superiority was reduced. It was here, on land and sea, that Greece showcased the superiority of it... ... middle of paper ... ...asion was repelled. In conclusion, multiple factors led to the failure of Xerxes’ expedition into Greece. According to Herodotus, Xerxes failed due to his personal hubris, fear, and general ineptitude. He further believed that it was God’s decree. More pragmatic reasons would include strategy; the Persian’s plans were generally sound – the Greeks, with the genius of Themistocles, just did one better. Timing was also a factor – winter came on all too soon. Key to all of this was the war of morale – one which the Greeks decisively won. Luck, too, played its part, but it was relative incompetence of the Persian troops which was the crux of the matter. The failure of the infantry was the cause of the final disintegration of the campaign. Xerxes’ personal failures and errors of judgment were an accelerant towards this end. First and foremost, he was let down by his men.
There is no coincidence that the rise of Athenian Democracy goes chronologically hand in hand with the rise of the Athenian Navy. Following the defeat of the Persians by the Greeks, Athens’ naval successes allow it to surpass the previous naval power of Corinth; create the Delian league to fund and support this navy; and eventually ruffle enough feathers with their fellow Hellenic neighbours that they inspire the Peloponnesian war. Overall their naval reputation and intimidation comes from the skill of the men who maneuver and command the ships, and the tool they use to wield their power, the Athenian trireme. By looking at the design of the trireme, and the work and numbers put both into the ship and the men that drive it, hopefully both the wealth and skill of the Athenian navy can be appropriately highlighted. In the end, it is this immense power and resources that allow the Athenians to overstep their limits and caused such demoralizing defeats such as the expedition at Syracuse and the eventual loss of the Peloponnesian war, after which they prove unable to grow to the same undefeated sea power they were.
In early fifth century BC Greece, the Greeks consistently suffered from the threat of being conquered by the Persian Empire. Between the years 500-479 BC, the Greeks and the Persians fought two wars. Although the Persian power vastly surpassed the Greeks, the Greeks unexpectedly triumphed. In this Goliath versus David scenario, the Greeks as the underdog, defeated the Persians due to their heroic action, divine support, and Greek unity. The threat of the Persian Empire's expansion into Greece and the imminent possibility that they would lose their freedom and become subservient to the Persians, so horrified the Greeks that they united together and risked their lives in order to preserve the one thing they all shared in common, their "Greekness".
When the Persian fleet had arrived at Aphetae, Eurybides, the commander of the small amount of ships that Sparta had sent, wished to turn tail, and return home. Themistocles used bribe of thirty talents to keep him, and his ships at the front. (Herodotus, 1954) Themistocles, seeing the overwhelming navy of the Persians conducted a plan: When the fighting broke out, the highly-trained Greeks would allow themselves to become encircled. At the first blow of the signal horn, the triremes would form a ‘close circle – bows outward, sterns to the centre.’ From this position, they had no mobility; the only direction in which they could move was forward, and that is exactly what they did. On the second signal blast, these lighter and faster Greek triremes rammed the Persian ships, and with their bronze-sheathed battering rams on the bow of the ships, caused great damage to the enemy ships. (Herodotus, 1954) Another tactic that Themistocles used was his discussion to initiate the battle in the mid to late afternoon. One cannot fight at sea when dark, and he knew that; making sure that this was done minimised casualties for the Greeks and tired out the Persian men, who had been ready to begin fighting since the very early morning. Overall, this decision made sure the battle had a fast conclusion. When they got word of the massacre at Thermopylae, however, Themistocles called a retreat, as they were only holding the pass to prevent Xerxes using his navy to assist his men at Thermopylae, and at this moment in time, there were no men at Thermopylae that were worth protecting, anymore. (Last Stand of the 300,
whether ill or benign, on the military endeavors of the peoples in the age of the Ancient Greeks.
In the years that follow Persia grows its empire. Then king Darius decides to force the Ionians to settle their differences by sending his son-in-law Mardonius to suppress the tyrants and set up a democracy. Along with those objectives Mardonius also had another motive for his trip. King Darius instructed him to “subjugate as many Greek towns as he could” (p. 338). Herodotus shows a big difference between his beliefs and the beliefs of most modern day historians while describing Mardonius’ journey. Herodotus gives a report of a wreck in Athos and says that those who did not drown were eaten because “the sea in the neighbourhood of Athos is full of monsters” (p. 338). This is contrary to what I think a modern day historian would say happened in this ship wreck. According to Herodotus this wreck does not stop the Persians from subduing the Brygi,a Macedonian tribe that attacked the Persian fleets. This account exemplifies the brute strength of the Persian army because even after a loss they are able to overpower a tribe of people. The Persians are known for their organization so it was only right that they return back to Asia in order to regroup after losing so much during the shipwreck and battle with the Brygi. The Persians battle tactics appear to involve large fleets of ships. These fleets include
The three day Battle of Thermopylae took place in 480 B.C. in the present country of Greece. This was a battle between the invading army of the Persian Empire against the alliance of the city-states of the Greeks. The scene of the battle took place on a very narrow passage on the north side of the Kallidromos Mountain range that almost dropped immediately into a rough coastline into the Malian Gulf. The narrow passage was approximately three miles long from west to the east and close to 15 meters wide in some areas between the steep cliffs of the mountains and coastline. This was also a battle of epic proportions; the numbers that the Persian army had brought with them compared to the small but highly organized army of the Greeks were staggering. This site was selected by the Greeks because they lacked in numbers compared to the Persians and would be able to use the terrain to their advantage. This battle is also known today as the “Last Stand of the 300.”
The historical events are compelling on their own but Steven Pressfield creates a truly epic journey in his novel Gates of Fire. Pressfield weaves the tale of Xeones, an Akarnanian by birth, who is the lone Greek survivor of the Persian victory and the Emperor’s captive. Xeones’ boyhood home of Astakos was pillaged and burned by the traitorous city-state of Argos. Through a series of events Xeones finds his way to Sparta and becomes first the servant of Alexandros, a youth in the agoge, then battle squire to the boy’s mentor Dienekes. It is his duties as squire that bring him to Thermopylae. Throughout the novel Xeones unfolds the events of his life in a series of interviews with the Persian royal court recorded by Xerxes personal historian culminating in the last stand of the Three Hundred. It is this story telling technique that makes Gates of Fire is truly a masterpi...
The Battle of Thermopylae began in 480 BC and was a product of the Greeks attempt help defend the Ionians from the Persians. This irritated the Persian Emperor, Xerxes, because he thought of Greece as a small kingdom that had no place revolting against the Persian Empire. The Athenians sympathized with the Ionians because the Persians had also tried to invade Greece on multiple occasions. The Athenians provided feeble help to the Ionians and in retaliation the Persians struck at athens (23B). Xerxes was known to be irrational with his temper, and may have thought of his invasion as retaliation for the fact that his father, Darius the Great, was defeated at the Battle of Marathon against the Greeks. His temper was so great that at Hellas Point he had the water whipped because it would not obey him (E49). One of several Greek war leaders in the Battle of Thermopylae was Leonidas, the second born son of King Anaxandridas. It was not until his half brother was killed under controversial circumstances that Leonidas rose to power (G72). Apart from misconceptions spread by the popular film “300,” the three hundred Spartans did not go into battle alone, and were accompanied by over eight hundred allies. Nevertheless, the Persians still outnumbered the Greeks ten to one, which is why it is incredible that the Greeks were able to hold them for three days before eventually losing that specific battle. Despite losing the battle in terms of soldiers and defending greece, the battle of thermopylae was somewhat successful in that it was a demonstration of the courage of greek soldiers, impressive battle tactics,
The causes of the Peloponnesian War proved to be too great between the tension-filled stubborn Greek city-states of Athens and Sparta. As Thucydides says in Karl Walling’s article, “Never had so many human beings been exiled, or so much human blood been shed” (4). The three phases of the war, which again, are the Archidamian war, the Sicilian Expedition and the Decelean war, show the events that followed the causes of the war, while also showing the forthcoming detrimental effects that eventually consumed both Athens and eventually Sparta effectively reshaping Greece.
As such, it is possible that in writing his “version” of events Xenophon used The Persian Expedition as an apologia. Xenophon’s writing centers around himself and his greatness. His purpose could also have been simply to record the events and people of the expedition. As a military history, it could be seen to exemplify a Socratic philosophy while teaching the principles of leadership and government shown by an army. Both purposes are difficult to substantiate as Xenophon did not state his formal purpose for writing. However, one could argue that this book gave Philip of Macedon the belief that a small, disciplined Greek army could overtake a much larger Persian army generations after its
In Sparta, Xeones became a helot and he was given to a Spartan soldier named Dienekes. Xeones was trained to fight like a Spartan and later became Dienekes’s battle squire. When Xeones was about twenty, the Spartan king, Leonidas, announced that three hundred Spartan men would be sent on a suicide mission to Thermopylae to hold off the invading Persian army. Dienekes was chosen to go. On the first and second day of battle, many Persians were killed, but only a few Greeks. At the end of the second day, Xerxes found a secret path where part of his army could go through and completely surround the Greeks on the next day. Leonidas was informed of this and sent a group of Spartans, including Xeones and Dienekes, on an unsuccessful mission to kill Xerxes. On the third day, the Persians surrounded the Spartans and they all were killed.
Thucydides set out to narrate the events of what he believed would be a great war—one requiring great power amassed on both sides and great states to carry out. Greatness, for Thucydides, was measured most fundamentally in capital and military strength, but his history delves into almost every aspect of the war, including, quite prominently, its leaders. In Athens especially, leadership was vital to the war effort because the city’s leaders were chosen by its people and thus, both shaped Athens and reflected its character during their lifetimes. The leaders themselves, however, are vastly different in their abilities and their effects on the city. Thucydides featured both Pericles and Alcibiades prominently in his history, and each had a distinct place in the evolution of Athenian empire and the war it sparked between Athens and Sparta. Pericles ascended to power at the empire’s height and was, according to Thucydides, the city’s most capable politician, a man who understood fully the nature of his city and its political institutions and used his understanding to further its interests in tandem with his own. After Pericles, however, Thucydides notes a drastic decline in the quality of Athenian leaders, culminating in Alcibiades, the last major general to be described in The Peloponnesian War. While he is explicit in this conclusion, he is much more reticent regarding its cause. What changed in Athens to produce the decline in the quality of its leadership?
The Ionian revolt was put to an end at the Battle of Lade, with a Persian victory. After this Darius began a plan to conquer Greece after the support they sent the Ionian revolt. In 490BC Darius sent a fleet to conquer the Cyclades, and then attack Athens and Eretria. Quickly conquering the Eretria, the Persians burned th...
... them. He kept the Greeks composed compared to how much the Persian fleet was panicking and losing formation.
In the year approximately 500 B.C., the Greek civilization came upon a time of peace. Because of the tranquil times, the civilization’s society had more time to focus on writing, math, astronomy, and artistic fields, as well as trade and metallurgy. Out of all the city-states of Greece, two excelled over all the rest, Sparta and Athens. Even though they were the most advanced and strong civilizations, they were bitter enemies. While Athens focused mainly on the people’s democracy and citizen rights, Sparta were ferocious and enslaved its original inhabitants, making them unable to leave