Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thermopylae
#1
Was the Spartan stand, bravery in the face of danger or useless sacrifice? <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#2
I don't think it was useless. I'd say was analogous to the Alamo in terms of infusing the Greeks with the will to fight and win. <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#3
I'm not sure, but I think the delaying action provided a few extra days of preparation further south and demonstrated the weaknesses of the Persian military. <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#4
What did Thermopilae demonstrate?<br>
<br>
IMHO it demonstrated superiority of Greek armor over Persian missiles.<br>
<br>
If the Persians had had good missile troops they could have wounded all Spartans during several hours. And by the end of the day the Spartan band would have been unfit for action.<br>
<br>
Then it demonstrated once again that in a battle ‘line against line’ with protected flanks hoplite phalanx was invincible. Persians had nothing to deal with heavily armoured Greek guys in a tight formation.<br>
<br>
And of course, superiority of Spartan spirit displayed.<br>
<br>
If I were in Persian king’s shoes I would think twice to continue that operation.<br>
<p></p><i></i>
Reply
#5
Essentially it was a futile attempt to stop the persians as the real battle was fought at Salamis. But one must remember the Spartan Code " With you shield or on it " The Spartans led by Leonidas were never going back down, ps it was also a delaying tactic in order for the other greek forces to get back and fortify the greek cities. <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#6
I think another thing that Leonidas accomplished was putting the fear of hoplites into the Persian horde. The Persians that marched south after the battle had watched for three days as a relative handful of Greek heavy infantry inflicted 20,000(?) casualties on the Persians, including their crack troops, the Immortals. <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#7
Everyone,<br>
<br>
Well, what was the true purpose of the Thermopylae-Artemesium line? Was it really just a holding action or a determined defense?<br>
<br>
I believe that toward the end of Thermopylae, once it was realized that it was proven to be indefensible, that the true purpose transitioned from a determined defense into a fighting withdrawal.<br>
<br>
I believe there was signifant motivation - particularly among the Locrians, Phocians, Athenians, and to a lesser extent, the Spartans and a minority of Thebans - to prevent the Persians from seizing the open fields of Boeotia and Athens.<br>
<br>
According to Hanson (Wars of the Ancient Greeks, 96), Leonidas marched north toward Thermopylae, confident with the knowledge that he would eventually be reinforced. Hanson wrote, "If the Persian fleet could be stalled and the massive army bottled up, all the city states to the south might yet rally northward, join Leonidas, and so thwart the advance without much harm to the rich interior of central and southern Greece."<br>
<br>
According to Herodotus (Histories, vii.203), when the Greeks at Thermopylae sought aid from the Locrians and Phocians, Leonidas stated, "They were themselves but the vanguard of the host, which might everyday be expected to follow them."<br>
<br>
Accoriding to Green (The Greco-Persian Wars, 112), although he does not seem convined that Thermopylae was intended to be a determined defense, nevertheless wrote, "The Spartans always intended to send reinforcements, and when Leonidas assured various prospective allies that help was on the way he meant what he said."<br>
<br>
It seems to me that Leonidas intended to hold the line at Thermopylae, holding off the Persians until the Spartan religious festival (Carneia) and Olympic games ended (Histories, 7.206), thus allowing more Greeks and Spartans to rally and reinforce Thermopylae.<br>
<br>
Indeed, the 7,000 or so hoplites of Leonidas' advance force were in firm control of the pass, demonstrated by the fact that several attempts to penetrate Thermopylae, by Xerxes' best troops - Medes and Immortals - proved unsuccessful. In fact, it wasn't until Ephialties betrayed the Greeks, by guiding the Persians up a goat trail, thus flanking the Spartans, that Leonidas modified the purpose of Thermopylae.<br>
<br>
I am convinced that Thermopylae was originally intended to be a determined defense. Unfortunately, the line was realized to be indefensible solely via Ephialties's betrayal. The betrayal bascially ended the possibility of additional Greeks from rallying northward, or completing their religious and Olympic festivals, in time to reinforce Leonidas.<br>
<br>
Any comments? <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub152.ezboard.com/bgreekarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=wade1066>Wade1066</A> at: 11/21/03 2:20<br></i>
Reply
#8
Quote:</em></strong><hr>Well, what was the true purpose of the Thermopylae-Artemisium line? Was it really just a holding action or a determined defense?<hr><br>
I think it was a determined defense. They were holding quite well until they got word they'd been flanked. To the Greeks of that time 7,000 hoplites was a fairly large army. After all, the Athenians and Plataeans had defeated the Persians at Marathon with just 10,000 troops ten years earlier.<br>
Quote:</em></strong><hr>I believe there was signifant motivation - particularly among the Locrians, Phocians, Athenians, and to a lesser extent, the Spartans and a minority of Thebans - to prevent the Persians from seizing the open fields of Boeotia and Athens.<hr><br>
Very true. As soon as the pass fell, the Thebans "medized". There was a significant Theban force at Plataea - on the Persian side. I would agree with you and Hanson on this.<br>
<br>
It was critical that the Greek fleet hold at Artemisium to prevent the Persian fleet from flanking the land position. In addition to the casualties and damage to morale that the hoplites inflicted, the Persians suffered a significant loss of ships during the 3 day battle due to a storm.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>
Reply
#9
Although this doesn't relate exactly to your discussion -we have just released a game called Gates of Troy which includes a scenario based on Thermopylae and lets you fight it out on a one for one scale with 300 Spartans, 700 Thespians, and 400 Thebans, against a never ending horde of Persians. Its a great deal of fun, but then I would say that<br>
<br>
You also get Leonidas & Demophilus on the battlefield to boost the morale of the troops!<br>
<br>
For more info - www.slitherine.co.uk/spar...nIndex.htm<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>
Reply
#10
Thanks for remembering us Thespians.<br>
Paul <p></p><i></i>
Reply
#11
The place is simply cursed I tell you!<br>
If you defend successfully. fate will always see that you will be outflanked and destroyed.<br>
Check this:<br>
<br>
480 BC<br>
Leonidas defended succesfully untill betrayed.<br>
<br>
279 BC<br>
The Greek coalition resited the Celts until they forced the Phoceans (again!) to abandon the that altenate pass by raiding their villages<br>
<br>
191 BC<br>
Antiochos defended succesfully against the Romans.<br>
The Phoceans fell asleep on their posts, the Romans masacred them and opend the flank root again!<br>
<br>
1204 AD<br>
Leon Sgouros held the pass against the 4th crusade Franks untill an Italian light horshman found the flank root again!!!<br>
<br>
1463 AD<br>
Ottoman soultan Mehmet the second ordered a group of basibozooks to adavnce parallel to his army using the fateful pass on his campaign in Peloponnisos. The guy definitly studied history!<br>
<br>
1941 AD<br>
The British Expeditionary force try to cover the road to Athens and block the panzers there. Strugglers from the 9th Greek division holding the place were decimated by the Luftwaffe the Gebirsjager stormed the pass. Most of BEFs hevy staff had tobe abandoned there!<br>
<br>
It is cursed I tell you!<br>
<p></p><i></i>
Reply
#12
The fighting on the last day was hardly a useless sacrifice. The Spartans, Thespians, etc. were covering the retreat of the remaining 6,000 hoplites, who did live to fight another day. Covering a retreating force, particularly against an enemy with superior cavalry, meant buying time. Which is exactly what they did.
Felix Wang
Reply
#13
I agree with the postes above that it was meant to be a determined defense.

About the last stand of the Spartans:

The weak defense on the 2nd pass was a tactical mistake made by Leonidas. The traitor story is a bit exaggerated, it wouldn't have been too hard for the Perisans to find a guide sooner or later. I personally think Welwei's explantion in "Sparta" is quite reasonable:

After getting the message that a strong Persian force is moving behind his own defensive position Leonidas ordered the Greeks to retreat to prevent encirclement. The only sufficient force to cover the retreat were the Spartans as they were more or less the only professionals around.

The persians attacked the pass again to bind the Greek forces while the Immortals were moving around, in order to give them the time to complete the encircling move.

Because of this the Spartans were not able to retreat themselves before the Immortals arrived behind them and in this situation could only fight to death or surrender.
RESTITVTOR LIBERTATIS ET ROMANAE RELIGIONIS

DEDITICIVS MINERVAE ET MVSARVM

[Micha F.]
Reply
#14
I think it was a combination of things.

Leonidas was well aware of the Delphic prophecy concerning his own fate.

However, he was also, one assumes a pragmatic general and realised the successful retreat of the majority of Greek troops in the pass (to fight another day) was best assured by a rearguard action.

It was also perhaps a great way of letting rip in an absolute no-holds barred final battle with the invader. The Spartans did what they did best and in sacrificing 300 of their best (and their brave allies) they incurred serious numerical losses on Xerxes' horde. The latter may well have marched forward with some considerable foreboding based upon that experience. Plataia was to prove to them what they were really up against.
[size=75:2kpklzm3]Ghostmojo / Howard Johnston[/size]

[Image: A-TTLGAvatar-1-1.jpg]

[size=75:2kpklzm3]Xerxes - "What did the guy in the pass say?" ... Scout - "Μολὼν λαβέ my Lord - and he meant it!!!"[/size]
Reply


Forum Jump: