RomanArmyTalk
"Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - Printable Version

+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Greek Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" (/showthread.php?tid=6264)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6


"Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - qcarr - 07-21-2006

Paul Cartledge has published a new book entitled Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World. It will be released in October and can be pre-ordered at Amazon ( http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/158567 ... 12?ie=UTF8 )

I've read nearly all of his books on Ancient Greek history and find him very thorough and informative. I'm looking forward to this one!

Quinton


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - Jona Lendering - 07-21-2006

Personally, I thought that his book on Alexander ought not to have been published because he was capable of ignoring the wealth of cuneiform sources that has been published during the last ten years. It's pretty simple, in my view: if you can not read ancient Greek, you must not write book about ancient Greece; and if you can not read cuneiform (and even ignore translations), you must not publish about the ancient Near East.

Fortunately, Thermopylae is safe and sound in Greece, and has a lot to do with Sparta, a subject that Cartledge knows a lot about. I wonder how he wants to demonstrate that Thermopylae changed the world; Herodotus' account, of course, did, but the battle was a simple mop-up. The legend is better than the real event (as always).


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - qcarr - 07-21-2006

I would be willing to bet that Cartledge's premise for how Thermopylae changed the world will, indeed, concentrate on the legend of Leonidas and the other defenders. East vs. West, sacrifice for the cause, etc. In the final chapter of his general audience work, The Spartans: The World of the Warrior-Heroes of Ancient Greece which is entitled, "The Legacy: Leonidas Lives!" he touches on this subject a bit.

I did not read his Alexander book - sounds like it's a bit disappointing.


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - lupus - 07-21-2006

Greatings friends...

OBVIOUSLY you're right! Indeed. Thermopylae's Battle, from military tactical point of view, was a disaster!
It could be a HUGE, SUPERB by all means battle, but it didn't!

2.000 Lacedaimonians - BEST infantry in these Times (300 Spartan SPECIAL FORCES' - the Royal bodyguard "Heppeis" + one of the two Kings + 700 auxiliary personel + 500 Mantinean Hoplites + 500 Tegean Hoplites) and 700 ELITE Thespian Hoplites... DIED to the last!!!

What MORE to add, to understand the HUGE of that disaster!

The only good of this battle, was the parallel naval Greek draw in the naval Battle of Artemisium, by Themistocles...

But!... It was a "Pyrrhic victory" for the Persians, because their HUGE casualties! The Greeks fought, like "poets", like Gods! And they EARNED their Myth!

OF COURSE, if we like to talk about THE MOST IMPORTANT battle (in ANY case), the battle that MARK history, that was... MARATHON's Battle!
The battle that STOPPED East to invade West!

If we like to talk about the MOST IMPORTANT NAVAL battle, it was SALAMINA's Battle!
A SECOND crash of Persian Empire, in different type of "battlefield"!

And, if we like to talk about the MOST VITAL & CRITICAL battle, it was the Battle of Platea!
The END of Persians' ambition!

That's my opinion - and I thing, many others...

Thermopylae's Battle was THE ULTIMATE SACRIFICE, which ALL sacrifices FASCINATING the people!
Also, specially the Americans, LOVING that incident, because it reminding them THEIR "Thermopylae", Alamo's battle...

Regards...


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - Eleatic Guest - 07-21-2006

Quote:If we like to talk about the MOST IMPORTANT NAVAL battle, it was SALAMINA's Battle!
A SECOND crash of Persian Empire, in different type of "battlefield"!

Ironically, Salamis was Greek vs. Greek.

The main Persian contingent constituted the Asian Minor Greeks, the Persians only fought as marines.


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - lupus - 07-22-2006

Quote:Ironically, Salamis was Greek vs. Greek.

The main Persian contingent constituted the Asian Minor Greeks, the Persians only fought as marines.

Well... ALMOST, you're right! Persians' ships were FULL of Ionian city-states sailors, Cypriots and Phynicians...


re - Johnny Shumate - 07-22-2006

I thank the Greeks for setting the stage of the things I enjoy in the "Western" world. Thermopylae was a defeat, so was the Alamo, but it showed how men who are citizens, and not subjects, can fight(yeah-I like the books by Victor Davis Hanson). Just look at Iran today, would you like to live there..?
Johnny


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - Jona Lendering - 07-22-2006

Quote:it showed how men who are citizens, and not subjects, can fight
This is the legend, of course. I like the legend, because I think that today, it needs to be stressed that failure can be honorable. Still, Herodotus' story remains a legend, a legend, and nothing but a legend. We don't know how many people were killed by the Spartans and we do not know why the Spartans did not leave the pass.

Like Hignett (Xerxes' Invasion of Greece), I think that when Hydarnes was moving down from the hill, Leonidas ordered a retreat, but that he was cut off before he, the Thespians, and the Thebans could make it to safety. What happened after the moment Leonidas' men were cut off, is just unknown, because there were no survivors. Herodotus' account of the final hour is a reconstruction, including the certainly invented detail that a fight was waged over the body of Leonidas, as if he were some sort of homeric hero. Hoplites didn't fight like that. What happened in that final hour remains the ultimate riddle.

I think the anti-Persian bias of Herodotus' account deserves some attention. Xerxes' men were at Trachis for a week, but still we have to believe that the Persian scouts (who had already found roads to circumvene Tempe) were incapable of discovering the paths through the mountains, and we are supposed to believe that a traitor was needed. (Herodotus himself mentions variant traditions.) As Herodotus presents the story, the Persians were poor warriors, Xerxes was effeminate (not controlling his emotions), the Spartans were unbeatable, so the fall of Thermopylae had to be the result of treason.

I think that we are closer to the historical facts if we assume that the Persians simply did what they had to do. There's no pass in the world that cannot be turned, and after a week, the Persian mounted scouts had discovered the detour.

However, Leonidas is like Gandhi: not the real man is important, but the legend. We like Gandhi as a symbol of peaceful resistance, and prefer to ignore his enthusiasm for the World Wars and his proposal to solve India's need for food by forcing the people to eat their excrements. Likewise, we prefer the legend of the courageous Leonidas, inspiring even in defeat, and we ignore that by putting only 1,000 Phocians on the Anopaea, he was defending the front door and leaving the rear door open.

The defeat at Thermopylae, as Julius Beloch pointed out in the nineteenth century, had the advantage that it liberated the Greeks from an incapable commander. That's the sad epitaph of the real Leonidas. Still, the legend, from Herodotus to Kavafis, remains a great and inspiring one.


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - lupus - 07-22-2006

Generally, ALL nations - and OF COURSE, the Greeks... enough! - are "twisting" much the facts...

There is an openning-sceen in a movie ("Braveheart"), when Roberd de Bruce (the Scothish King - and the story's relater) says:

"History is written by the heroes' executioners..."

This is a tiny change of the verb:

"History is written by the VISTORIOUS ones!"

So... every Ancient Greek Historic, was NOT THAT MUCH accurated! Every one of them, showing the Greeks as the "victorious-brave-few" and the defeated (Persians) as the "barbaric-pathetic-many"...
Which is OBVIOUSLY STUPID to think about THAT way and it's also INACCURATED!

(Another example, is the "Battle of Britain", 1940. The "very few" - British - actually, MANY allies fought bravelly with them - like Churchil said, defeated the "mighty ones", the Luftwaffe. He... forgot to mention, that by a SMALL but SERIOUS accident - a bombs loose of a German Heinkel over London - changed the Battle's fate! British took revenge of bombarding Berlin, Hitler gone mad - was he... always? - and he order Herman Goering - Luftwaffe's Chief - to... STOP attacking the airfields and RAF and start... bombarding London only!!!
That was a TRAGIC suffering for citizens, but gave HUGE help to RAF to REGROUP and fight back - and win... History can change by a... butterfly fly in China...)

Persians had a huge army - 70% INDEED was a pathetic folk of savages peasants/subjects... but they ALSO had SUPERB ELITE units, like the "Immortals" and the "Apple-Carriers"!

The problem - HUGE one! - with Persians, wasn't the army quality, was the LEADERS' quality! Persian generals, were like the Medival Ages' generals or Napoleon's Wars time: nobles... and compelely irrelevant with war!

Greek generals were... "dog-war"! Forged in the battle! NO comparing with the fat & lazy noble Persian satraps!

Generally, to study a history fact, you need to study ANY POSSIBLE resource, from ANY SIDE involved...

Regards...


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - conon394 - 07-22-2006

Jona Lendering

Quote: and if you can not read cuneiform (and even ignore translations), you must not publish about the ancient Near East.

That seems a tad harsh, not everyone is a polymath; perhaps just make sure you have a collaborator who can; and acknowledge and address or deal with the relevant scholarship?

Quote: The defeat at Thermopylae, as Julius Beloch pointed out in the nineteenth century, had the advantage that it liberated the Greeks from an incapable commander. That's the sad epitaph of the real Leonidas. Still, the legend, from Herodotus to Kavafis, remains a great and inspiring one.

I’m of two minds on that score. On the negative side Leonidas seems to me to have made his biggest blunder in choosing or allowing the Phocians to hold (what was likely) the most obvious route by which his position could be turned. Had he stiffened the Phocians with a Spartan commander and maybe a Tegean or Thespian contingent maybe things fall out differently.

On the other hand at least Leonidas seems to understood the broader requirement of fighting north of the Isthmus, his more experienced Spartan brethren may have managed the campaign at Thermopylae better, but they were all to busy fortifying the Isthmus and ignoring just how devastating the loss of Athens and her allies/dependencies Plataea, and Chalkis would be to the Greek war effort (and perhaps Aigina and Megara as well…).

Quote:I wonder how he wants to demonstrate that Thermopylae changed the world

Good point.

Just to be contrary has anyone ever published Artemisium the battle that changed the world or anything similar, instead of one more in an endless series of examinations of the death of 300 warrior cast oppressive oligarchs while ignoring the exertions of the 40,000 or 50,000 hoi polloi down the way on the boats in the name of Greek Freedom (sorry lupus...).


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - Aryaman2 - 07-22-2006

Ok, I take the field once more to defend the poor Persians
I will take on some common misconceptions, many of them already posted here
1) Persian numbers: We have discussed this subject many times before, it is one of my favourites I admit, I am writing a work on numbers in ancient and medieval sources. As Delbruck pinted out long time ago, by their own nature, an aristocratic, cavalry strong army, Persians would in all probability being actually regularly outnumbered by the Greeks.
2) Persian army: forget all that submissive servants vs free citizens crap. The Persian army was based on a three layers structure, the inner one formed by the Royal Household (kinsmen and Inmortals), then the Persian and Median noblemen with their retainers, finally the aristocracy of the conquered nations with their retainers. It was the fight of an aristocratic army against citizen militias, Delbruck compared it to the Burgundian wars of Charles the Bold against the Swiss.
3) Persian juggernaut: In fact the Persian empire was a very fragile structure, in which a tiny Iranian minority ruled very diverse territories, facing revolts in every corner, as well as nomadic invasions.
4) East vs West: In fact, many Greek cities suffered far worst tyrannies, the King of Kings rule was basically an indirect rule through local aristocracy, on whose loyalty the Empire very much depended.


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - Jona Lendering - 07-22-2006

I could not agree with you more, Aryaman2.

@Conon394: I opened another topic because in my reply, I started to digress.[/url]


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - hoplite14gr - 07-22-2006

Most of these has been duscussed in othet toplics already.
To summarize:
Xerxes did NOT have 5000000!
Herodotus did not accused the Persians as cowards.
Phocian hoplites were a minority in their continent and Asiatic missile troops did the difference!
Leonidas was in command of and "allied" army where other commanders could withdrow.

If you walk on Kallidromo you will see there are only 2 passes with the chance of onlý one available at the time. Leonidas can be accused for improperly guarding the alternate rootes.
In all the battles fought in the area the possition was always compromised from the Kallidromo pass.

Yes the legent palys agood part in the story but what I see here is the difficulty to stomach the fact that some ancients were trained or "indoctrinated", if you like, to stand. In our world we are taught usually the opossite and some modern people simply do not like the comparison and try to lessen what they fail to comperhent.

Kind regards


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - conon394 - 07-22-2006

Quote: Phocian hoplites were a minority in their continent and Asiatic missile troops did the difference!

Well you could reference the topic(s) in that case, but on what basis were the Phocians a minority in their contingent, and why should archery suddenly prove decisive when it failed to in general in every other engagement between Persian and Greek…


Re: "Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World" - lupus - 07-23-2006

So... we all agree, as I can see, that Thermopylae's Battle was a SUPERB proof of bravely fight, an example of heroic sacrifice... but not the battle that changed the world!

You didn't comment, though, about my thoughts of which were the IMPORTANT/VITAL battles, as I wrote...

Do you agree, do you not?

Regards.