ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
THE GREEK WORLD
Content Focus
Through an investigation of the archaeological and written sources for the Greek world 500–440 BC,
students examine the nature of power and authority, significant developments that shaped the historical
period and relevant historiographical issues. The Historical concepts and skills content is to be integrated
as appropriate.
Content
Students investigate:
Survey
●
the chronological and geographical context of ancient Greece in the Mediterranean and the Near
East, key powers in the region and the nature of contact with other societies
Focus of study
●
Persian Wars, including:
- origins: Persian imperialism, Ionian Revolt
- invasion of 490 BC: Battle of Marathon, role of Miltiades
- inter-war period: preparation and developments in Persia and Greece
- invasion of 480–479 BC: Battles of Thermopylae and Artemisium,
Salamis, Plataea and Mycale
- role and contribution of Themistocles, Leonidas, Pausanias, Eurybiades
- reasons for Greek victory and Persian defeat
●
Development of Athens and the Athenian Empire, including:
- Delian League: origins, aims, organisation and activities to the Battle of
the Eurymedon River, role and contribution of Cimon and Aristides the
Just
- transformation of the Delian League into the Athenian Empire
- nature of Athenian imperialism, changing relations with allies
- key democratic developments: influence of the thetes, ostracism,
citizenship law
●
Athens and Sparta, including:
- impact of Persian Wars
- nature, composition and activities of the Peloponnesian League: Spartan
responses to Athenian imperialism
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
SOURCES ON THE PERIOD
Major written/archaeological sources for the Persian Wars are all Greek –– must be
treated with caution
Persians left virtually no record of these events
HERODOTUS
- ‘The Histories’ –– primary source for Persian Wars
- Work written within a generation of the end of the wars
- Used contemporary records ie surviving participants and eye witnesses
- Reliable narrative, though limited through tendency to exaggerate
- Significantly from a Greek, particularly Athenian perspective
AESCHYLUS (PLAYWRIGHT)
- ‘Persae’ (The Persians) — first performed in 472, 8 years after Battle of Salamis
- Aeschylus’ was either an eyewitness or participant to the ‘Historical Tragedy’
- Streamlined details of battle for dramatic purposes
- Provided lessons on morality; depicted opposing forces as prideful
- Deliberately omitted information to fit narrative, hence the inaccuracies
THUCYDIDES
- ‘History of the Peloponnesian War’ composed towards end of 5th century
- Benefit of hindsight in present perspectives.
- Themed as Athenian imperialism, only choosing events that represented such
PLUTARCH (BIOGRAPHER)
- ‘Lives of Greek and Romans’ written 1st century AD, hundreds of years later
- Focused on common moral virtues of famous Greeks and Romans
- Though people and events written in his biographies were much later, understood he
had access to original manuscripts
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOURCES
- Battle sites of Persian Wars and any other finds
- Buildings and monuments
- Statuary and sculptured reliefs
- 5th century vase paintings detail weapons and armour
SURVEY
Persian Wars (490-479 BC) — Battles between Persia and Greece.
- 1st Persian Invasion (490 BC) at the Battle of Marathon —> Greek Victory
- 2nd Persian Invasion (480-479 BC) at Battle of Thermopylae saw early success
- “
“
“
defeated in battle at Salamis and final battles of Plataea and Mycale
ANCIENT GREECE
- 6th century BC, Greece made up of mainland, Aegean Sea islands, coastline Ionian
cities in Asia Minor and around Black Sea
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Greeks not park of politically unified state
Divided into city states, Athens and Sparta most powerful
States held agency in religion, politics, culture and economy
Had determination to be free and independent, causing strife
SPARTA ⇾
- Militaristic way of life, citizens full time soldiers
- Large population, of particularly helots, which held tension for revolts
- Oligarchy with Spartians holding power
- Suspicious of democracy and foreign expansion, allying with Peloponnese
ATHENS ⇾
- Athens introduced democracy in 6th century, though held undemocratic features
- Athens held more open society than Sparta; prosperous economy and culture
- Foreigners encouraged to participate in Athenian society
- Benefitted from ideas of Greeks in Asia Minor and Hellas outwards
PERSIAN WARS
ORIGINS: PERSIAN IMPERIALISM
Origins of conflict within Persian Imperialism involved Persian emergence and expansion
during the 6th century BC.
- Persian King, Cyrus the Great, founder of Achaemenid Dynasty; born in 585 BC;
became King in 559 BC.
- Cyrus led many military campaigns and tolerated non-Persian culture.
- The Persian empire dominated after Assyrian collapse; Cyrus allied with Babylon.
Cyrus the Great: “King of the Medes and Persians, King of Kings.”
- Empire established once Cyrus conquered Ecbatana, Median Capital, 550 BC
- Rapid expansion between Cyrus’ accession and Ionian Revolt
- Kingdom of Media fell to Cyrus, Kingdom of Lydia in Asia minor (ruled by King
Croesus) fell next
- Croesus began hostilities in 547 BC ⇾ crossed Halys River; formed boundary between
Lydian-Persian territory
- Croesus sought advice from Delphic Oracle, responded “If you cross the Halys you
will destroy an empire”
- Cyrus’ army and Ionian Greek invitees revolted against Croesus, who withdrew to
fortress of Sardis
- Cyrus attacked again in 546 BC with ‘secret weapon’ camels; Lydian cavalry withdrew
- Sardis and the Lydian kingdom conquered; all territories, including Ionia, became
Persian
PERSIAN CONQUEST OF IONIA
Ionia ⇾ last frontier between Persia and mainland Greece; Ionians held strong ties with
Greeks.
- 8th-9th century BC ⇾ mainland Greeks settled on coastal region of Asia Minor and
islands off of the coast, Greek cities became Ionian cities
- “Ionian Cities”: Miletus, Mycale, Ephesus, Chios, Samos, Naxos, Cos
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Ionian cities became rich in trade and fleets, where mainland Greeks “Ionian Greeks”
and Athenians maintained kinship
- Ionian Greek cities ruled by Greek Tyrants (men who exercised absolute power)
Tyrant (AH): leading man, member of city’s elite.
- Cyrus sent troops to seize Ionian cities; met with both compliance and fleeing
- Greeks sold into slavery or forced to serve Persia as mercenaries in military
- City fleets became part of Persian navy, tyrants becoming rulers of cities
- Ionian Greeks obliged to obey Persia, pay tax, and provide military with men & ships
- Persian control of Ionia conducted through local Persian governor, the Satrap
Satrap: supervised local tyrants, HQ at Sardis — main Ionian city
- By 500 BC, Persian Empire covered a large part of Asia (up to modern day India and
the Aral Sea), Egypt and Libya in Africa, and Thrace and Macedonia in Europe
- Included approx. 50 million people of different nationalities; only about half a million
were Persians
CONQUEST OF THRACE IN SCYTHIAN EXPEDITION
Darius I’s policy ⇾ further expansion. In 513 BC, embarked on a campaign into Thrace,
across the Danube and into Scythia.
- Darius used Ionian Greeks as they were already subjugated
Herodotus: 600 ships supplied by Ionians
- Ionian troops to build bridges of boats across Hellespont & Danube River for safe
crossing by Persian army
- Thrace was soon conquered, though Scythian tribes held stronger defence
- Persians retreated, and Scythians continued to see Persian danger
Herodotus: “The Persian King, having overrun the whole of the other continent… brought
Thrace into subjection... with the intention of making himself master of all of Europe... the
Persians will never be content to leave you unmolested.”
ORIGINS: THE IONIAN REVOLT
Between 499 and 493 the Ionian Greeks along the coast of Asia Minor revolted against
Persians, igniting Darius’ decision to invade Greece in 490 BC.
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Possible that Darius imperial ambitions would have led him to invade Greece, the Ionian
revolt a catalyst
UNDERLYING CAUSES OF IONIAN REVOLT
Once Greek cities of Asia Minor became subject to Persia from 545, there was widespread
discontent.
Herodotus: details that Ionians have been long contemplating a revolt but lacked
leadership and unity.
1. Greeks lost agency in their lifestyle that was highly significant to them
2. Subject to an oriental ‘barbarian’ king that demanded heavy tribute that was not
redistributed to the community.
3. Persian local govt. functioned through Greek, pro-Persian tyrants that were puppets
of the king. Position held through satrap’s support and responsibility. Tyranny was a
common structure through Cyrus, though the following generation saw most states
remove and disconnect from tyrants. For this to succeed, Ionian Greeks had to rebel to
the Persian King.
💀🌞💩
DIRECT CAUSE
- Histiaeus, tyrant of Miletus, commanded under Darius, and was detained at Persian
Capital ‘Susa’ as an indefinite forced guest following suspect of ambitions
- Son in law, Aristagoras was to rule Miletus
- Aristagoras was approached by a delegation of wealthy oligarchs from Naxos, who
were expelled through an uprising by the Democratic Party with desire to regain their
position.
- Aristogras concealed that he saw an opportunity to rule Naxos
- Aristrogras proposed to Sardis’ satrap, Artaphernes, half brother of Darius, that
returning the exiles would allow Persia to control Naxos and further expand Persia
- The plan was approved by Darius
- The plan misfired as Naxians were warned and prepared for siege, ultimately called off
after 4 months of costs and inactivity
- Aristogras feared Artaphernes’ reaction to his failure
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
Herodotus: “These various causes of alarm were already making Aristagoras
contemplate rebellion.”
- Histiaeus sent a message to Aristogras (tattooed head man) ‘urging him to do
precisely what he was thinking of, namely, to revolt.’
ARISTAGORAS’ ATTEMPTS TO GAIN SUPPORT
Aristagoras renounced his own tyranny and urged Greek leaders to do the same, where
those who resisted were forcibly removed or put under attack.
- Aristagoras needed help from mainland Greek states, particularly Sparta and Athens
- Spartans declined upon realising the distance of Susa from the sea as they realised
they would have to take their army too far from Sparta
- Athens and Eretria agreed, Athens contributing 20 warships, Eretria 5
- Tension remained between Athens and Persia, partially due to ex-tyrant Hippias at
the court of Artaphernes
Herodotus: was moving heaven and earth “to procure the subjection of Athens to himself
and Darius.”
- Aristagoras pointed out the close link between Athens and Ionia
…: “Miletus had been founded by Athenian settlers so it was only natural that the
Athenians, powerful as they were, would help her in need.”
- Eretians helped as during a war with Chalcis they'd been helped by Miletus
Herodotus: “The sailing of this fleet was the beginning of trouble not only for Greece but
for other peoples.”
- Athenians and Eretians landed at Ephesus, joined by Ionians, marched inland
- Took Sardis and lit fire to several thatched houses, destroyed temple of goddess
Cybele
- Withdrew to coast but forcibly battled near Ephesus, mainland Greeks sailed home
- Darius desired revenge for the burnt town and temples, prayed:
Darius: “Grant 0 god, that I may punish the Athenians.” Then, commanded servant to
repeat the words “Master, remember the Athenians” three times whenever he sat down to
dinner”
RESULTS AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE
The revolt fell apart as the Persian Empire had better resources, unity and discipline.
Herodotus: details the failure to work together; withdrawal of the Samians encouraged
others “to become faint hearted.”
- Histiaeus sent to Ionia to end rebellion, Artaphernes accused him of initiating it and had
him killed
- Aristagoras deserted the revolt, and was killed in Thrace
- Miletus totally destroyed and ceased to be a force in history
- Artaphernes made oath with Ionians to arbitrate conflict over raiding; surveyed a fair land
tax
- Next year Darius sent Mardonius to set up democracies, though Greeks still under
Persian control
- Escape of Miltiades as Phoenician fleet, and return to Athens was vital for future
Greek defence
- Ionian revolt was the first Persian Greek struggle of many
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
INVASION OF 490 BC: THE BATTLE OF MARATHON
EXPEDITION OF MARDONIUS, 492 BC
- Darius sought to reestablish his control in Thrace and Persian control in Macedonia,
appointing his son Mardonius to do so
- Mardonius acted with instructions to subjugate as many towns as he could along the
way
- Significant setback: fleet wrecked in storm on coast of Mt Athos
- Followed by attack on army by Thracian tribe
- Invasion of Greece was aborted, with preparations for another trial
DARIUS’ PREPARATIONS FOR THE 1ST PERSIAN INVASION
- Darius sent envoys demanding earth and water as tokens of surrender
- Earth and water: indicative of demise or surrender
- Aegina; traditional enemy; provided these along with many island cities
Herodotus: Athen and Sparta reacted to the demands for submission in a serious breach
of the diplomatic protocol of the times and a defiant gesture to Persia.
● In Athens, Darius’ heralds were “Thrown into a pit like criminals”
● At Sparta, “They were pushed into a well and told that if they wanted earth and
water from the king, to get it from there,”
- Darius had Asiatic coast towns provide vessels to carry the 2000 cavalry
- Appointed 2 new generals, Datis and Artaphernes
- Datis ⇾ prominent Median general
- Artaphernes ⇾ Datis’ nephew, second in command
- Hippias would accompany them
- New strategy involved sailing directly across the Aegean via Samos an Naxos
- Upon arrival Persians took Carystus on southern tip of Euboea
- As they would not offer hostages and support, Persians besieged them, before full
surrender was offered
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Persians then moved towards Eretria, Athenans couldn’t help in time, Eritrea taken
after 6 day hold out
Herodotus: Persians: Entered the city, plundered and set fire to the temples in retribution
for those burned at Sardis, reduced the people to slavery and taken to Susa, according to
Darius’ commands.
- Landed at Marathon; 42km north of Athens; upon Hippias’ advice following his father,
who 50 years prior had landed at Marathon to seize Athens
- Hippias details that landing at Marathon would surprise the Athenians, unprepared for
the conquest
- Persian fleet; 200 boats moored into “Dog’s Tail Promontory”; horses could graze,
water source for men and horses
- Members of Peloponnese League hesitated to help Athens
- Upon Persian advance, Athenian runner, Pheidippides, ran 225km in 36h to seek help
from Sparta
- Spartans could not assist, as they were celebrating religious festival Karneia
- Athens was able to seek support from ally, Boetian city of Plataea
- Confrontation alternatives included
1. Defence: Stay in Athens and defend city walls
2. Offence: March out and meet the enemy
- Miltiades, one of 10 decisive generals , urged for latter, his view would prevail
- Arrived at Marathon on 3-4 of September, setting up camp
THE OPPONENTS
Greeks led by either Athenian Polemarch Callimachus or Miltiades, having valuable
knowledge of Persian strategy and tactics.
- Arimnestos, one of the 10 generals, commanded 1000 Plataeans, Athenians fielded
some 10,000 hoplites, total force estimated at 11,000
- Persian force = Greek x 3; infantry estimated at 25,000 and cavalry approx. 5000
- Persian army came from various states, Persians and Sakai best fighting units
BATTLE TACTICS
The 2 opposing armies essentially represented the 2 approaches to Classical warfare - the
Persians favoured long-range assault using archers followed up with a cavalry charge, whilst
Greeks favoured heavily armoured hoplites, arranged in a densely packed phalanx
formation.
GREEK TACTICS
- Greek: involved heavily armed infantrymen marching in ranks 8 man deep
- Each hoplite carried hoplon (heavy round bronze shield that overlapped each-other)
- Fought at close quarters using long spears and short swords
Aeschylus: in play ‘The Persians’ portrayed the Persian wars as the bow (Persia) against
the spear (Greece).
Modern Historian, Alan Lloyd: “...Athenian hoplite supplied his panoply at his own
expense...wore a corselet (breastplate) plated with gleaming bronze..., laced up at the
front, ...supplemented with protective shoulder flaps... a short skirt of tough leather
thongs, joined to the corslet with a heavy belt, protected hips, abdomen and upper
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
thighs... padded bronze greaves (shin guards) on the lower part stretched from knee to
ankle... a splendid bronze helmet...Most helmets were peaked at the front, maybe with a
nose guard, and tailed off in a swooping neck piece...its crowning glory was the crest
which rose majestically from the brow.
... wore a short sword at his left side... an ash wood lance tipped with Iron. A bronze
shield ..., sometimes round, sometimes oval, ornamented with animal or mythological
devices, and often coloured tassels. Not everyone could afford such costly trappings.
One citizen might possess part of the armour, another no more than a sword and spear.
These more than vulnerable individuals would fill the rear ranks In an engagement, or
maybe stand apart and sling missiles at the enemy.”
PERSIAN TACTICS
- Persian: lightweight, often rectangular, spara (wickerwork shield), kopis (curved sword)
or long dagger, short spear, composite bow
- Shielded formed barrier, archers fired from behind
- Couple 1000 strong units (hazarbam) of spear bearers (aristabara); lighter armour,
often a tunic with bronze scales or a leather cuirass, patterned trousers, boots, soft hood
Herodotus: Persian infantry wore “the tiara, or soft felt cap, embroidered tunic with
sleeves, a coat of mail looking like scales of a fish, and trousers: for arms they carried
light wicker shields, quivers slung below them, short spears, powerful bows with cane
arrows, and daggers swinging from belts beside the right thigh.”
- Persian cavalry armed as foot soldiers; bow, + 2 javelins
- Cavalry operated on flanks of main battle
- Persian tactic of rapid fire arrows would look impressive, but the light arrows were
often ineffective on Hoplite armour
- Greek hoplites would have close quarter advantage, but Persian fielded superior
numbers
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
K. Kontorlis: “[The Persians] had perfected the bow, ..., both in its range and in the
effectiveness of the arrows. The uppermost limit to their firing range was 400-500 metres,
while their most effective range was up to 200 metres. When the enemy came within
range, the Persians would fire thousands of arrows [for example, 48 000 men could fire
200 000 arrows in one second, according to the calculations of M.Boucher] ... Then they
would order their cavalry forward to complete the victory.”
THE FIRST PERSIAN INVASION OF GREECE: MARATHON 490 BC
There was an initial 5 day, peaceful stalemate between the Athenian and Persian Armies,
the Athenians slowly closing in.
- Greek base on mountain slopes, with the ability to see Persian camp by the river
banks
- Greek site was well watered and protected by scattered trees, providing an
inconvenience for Persian cavalry
- 10,000 Athenians and 1000 Plataean troops were awaiting Sparta who was to arrive
after the full moon; likely not for another 6 days
- Persians waited alongside, with confidence in their cavalry, in touch with Hippias’
friends in Athens, who promised betrayal
- Persians would begin to worry for Spartan arrival
THE BATTLE OF MARATHON
- Persians decided to split their force — bulk of cavalry would sail to Athens under
Datis, army remaining with Artaphernes
- Persian split forced Athenians to remain at Marathon, Athens attacked by Persians
- Ionians under Persian command warned Athenians that “the cavalry is away”
Herodotus: The 10 Athenian commanders (strategoi) were divided in how to proceed.
- The 10 took operational command in single day rotations
- 5 generals wished to wait for reinforcements with fear of low numbers
- The other 5 (led by Miltiades) were for going into battle with fear of Athenian enemies
- Miltiades convinced Callimachus to fight under words;
…: “it is now in your hands Callimachus either to enslave Athens or make her free”.
- Unreliable historical records have offered speculation of accuracy
Herodotus: Details that the generals had offered sole leadership to Miltiades who
suggested the use of unconventional tactics that contrasted Persian tactics he was
familiar with.
- Miltiades knew of Greek fear, additionally that of being attacked on the flanks, phalanx
being vulnerable
- To survive Persian bowmen, they centred battle lines in the bay whilst Persians
embarked half of their ships
The unconventional tactics involved:
1. Lengthening the army lines by forming a front 8 man deep to match the Persians,
their centre thinned to 4 men deep
Herodotus: “ One result of the disposition of the Athenian troops before the battle was
the weakening of the centre by the effort to extend the line sufficiently to cover the whole
Persian front; The two wings were strong, but the line in the centre was only a few ranks
deep.”
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Plataeans on right flank, Athenians in centre-left
Best Persian and Sakai troops in centre, perhaps 10 man deep
Miltiades recognised this, the tactic allowing Greek lengths to envelop Persians
The formation would comparatively leave the Greek behind exposed if Persians passed
through
- 2 lines of men, invaders and defenders, stretched 1.5km long, now standing 1.5km
apart
2. “Suicidal Madness” according to Persians, the Greeks ran the final 200-400m to
avoid Persian archers’ arrows
Herodotus: “they were the first Greeks, so far as I know, to charge at a run.”
- Persians still managed to push Greek centre back, though right-left Greek flanks broke
Persian lines to a confused melee
-
Persians retreated back to their ships, though confronted with a marshy area that gave
Greek wings ability to close in the centre
- Greeks attacked Persian centre, pursued fleeing Persian flanks, Callimachus killed
around Persian ships
- Greeks captured 7 ships, the remaining fleets escaping
Herodotus: “The Athenians… fought in a way not to be forgotten.”
-
Persian cavalry mysteriously absent, theories telling of either Datis’ being unable to
use them, sending them to Athens , or their absence intended to tempt Greeks into
battle
THE PERSIAN WITHDRAWAL
Greeks won a great victory, with 6400 Persians dead, for 192 Greeks, though the second
figure is likely exaggerated.
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Datis and fleets further sailed to Phaleron Bay as to attack Athens before Greek
return
Greeks perhaps alerted by a traitor's shield signal from Mt. Pentelikos
Arriving the same night, Datis decided to instead sail east for home
At this point, 2000 Spartans arrived, and upon results would inspect and count the
dead, before returning home impressed
RESULTS AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BATTLE OF MARATHON
Several key, short term results would make Marathon one of the great battles of history.
- Moral victory for Athens was valued more than military victory
- Believed that gods were alongside them throughout this
Victor Ehrenberg: Comments that Athenian victory seemed like a miracle and there must
have been some divine assistance in events.
- Some saw this as a victory for democracy with more democratic changes in Athens
in 487BC
- With new Athenian reputation, Miltiades briefly became Athens’ leader
- The 192 dead were cremated and their ashes buried under a 12m mound with
inscribed slabs for commemoration, Mound of Marathon becoming a worship site
- Memory lived on in the Athenian Agora, seen in the Stoa Poikile, showing battle
scenes
- Persian relations dominated the structures of Greek states and their thinking
- By examination of the battlefield the Spartans learnt how to defeat Persians
- Darius determined on revenge, future invasion returns to Mardonius aborted
campaign in 492, a combined military and naval advance
INVASION OF 490 BC: ROLE OF MILTIADES
Miltiades recognised as most able strategoi, this supported by Callimachus’ willingness
to accept his advice.
- Miltiades pressed to attack Persians, having commanded the central body of the
Athenian forces at Marathon
Munro: Highlights the enormous debt the Athenians owed to Miltiades, who would soon
be treated badly by the citizens he saved. ... a master of timing, waiting for the right time
to act.
…: “driven to attenuate his centre, he snatched victory out of its defeat. Marathon was a
triumph of the intelligent use of tactics, discipline and armament…”
THE FATE OF MILTIADES
After the defeat of the Persians, Miltiades incited the Athenian’s retaliation, and convinced
them to entrust him with 70 ships, without knowing their purpose.
- Besieged the island of Paros for a month, to gratify a private quarrel, though
unsuccessful
- Would receive a leg wound, ultimately return to Athens and be impeached for deceit
- Due to gangrenous wound, brought to court on a couch, his brother conducting his
defence
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Was condemned, sentence reduced from death to a fine of fifty talents, the
equipment cost
Unable to pay, he was sent to prison, and would die of his wound
Fine paid by Cimon
THE INTERWAR PERIOD 490-480BC: PREPARATIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS IN PERSIA
4 years passed, Darius then faced a major revolt in Egypt in 486 BC. Egyptian affairs
became complicated when Darius died in 485BC, 63 years old.
Herodotus: “...Death, however, cut him off before his preparations were complete... and
so (Darius) was robbed of his chance to punish either Egypt or the Athenians”.
- Resolved to continue these plans was Atossa’s son, Xerxes, 33 years old
- Egyptian Revolt put down in 484 BC, punished with destruction of temples
- Xerxes’ brother Ariamenes, satrap of Bactria, was threatening revolt
- 482BC Xerxes faced revolt in Babylonia, harshly crushed, Babylonia incorporated
into the satrapy of Assyria
- Xerxes ready in 481 BC, though faced divisions over the issue at court in Susa
Herodotus: Xerxes torn between advice of “youthful, reckless” Mardonius (cousin and
brother in law), and “wiser, more tempered” Atrabanus (his uncle).
- Xerxes unconvinced by Atrabanus and in anger rejected and left him at court in Susa,
instead of taking him to Greece
MARDONIUS
- Greeks are weak in resources and manpower
- “ fight on open ground which suits Persia with its greatest forces
- “ were too scared to fight me when I marched to Macedonia
Herodotus: “...(should the Greeks) be so foolish as to do battle with us, they will learn
that we are the best soldiers in the world”
ARTABANUS
- We have to bridge the hellespont and this makes Persia vulnerable
- If the bridge was destroyed & the fleet defeated, the army would be stranded in Europe
- God does not like arrogance in man and invading Greece would be evidence of such
arrogance
Herodotus: “...I urge you, therefore, to abandon this plan…”
PERSIAN PREPARATIONS FOR WAR
The Persian invasion of 480 BC was far bigger than that attempted in 490 BC, vitally due to
Xerxes’ strategy of a combined land and sea attack.
- Close contact of navy with army was necessary to provide supplies, protection and
communication; a feature of Persian policy throughout the Greek campaign
Herodotus: details Xerxes’ logistical preparations for the Greek campaign, including:
➔ 481BC Xerxes sent envoys throughout Greece, except Athens and Sparta,
demanding earth and water; many vulnerable northern and central states
complied. HDT: “This… was due to his confident belief that the Greeks who
have previously refused to comply with the demand of Darius would now
be frightened into complying with his own.”
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
➔ A bridge of boats; HDT: 664 ships; was constructed across the hellespont
(Dardanelles) in order for the army to cross Asia into Europe. “Galleys and
triremes were lashed together to support the bridge. They were moored
slantwise to the Black sea and at right angles to the Hellespont.”
➔ Workmen dug a fleet passage canal through Mt Athos Peninsula for 3
years. Darius had previously failed when Persian forces wrecked in a storm at
peninsula, Xerxes learnt from this. “It was mere ostentation that made Xerxes
have the canal dug -- he wanted to show his power and leave something to
be remembered by.”
➔ Storage posts/dumps were set up on coasts of Thrace and Macedonia to
supply the army with grain and salted meat. “And provision dumps were
being formed for the troops lest either men or animals should go hungry on
the march to Greece.”
➔ Bridge constructed across River Strymon in Thrace for the army to cross.
- Herodotus’ calculations of Perian forces = 1.7 million are highly unlikely, most
historians accepting an army recruit being at most 300, 000 with 800 navy vessels
- Unlike Darius, Xerxes lead forces himself
- Persians & Medes referred to as ‘immortals’ as their numbers always maintained
10,000, of only well trained, professional soldiers
Ernie Bradford: “Xerxes and his staff were anything other than magnificent planners on a
scale undreamed of at that period in history… it is one of the most remarkable aspects of
the Persians.”
Persians invaded Greece…
- As punishment to Athenians for Ionian revolt, for defeat at Marathon, to avenge
father’s humiliation and restore honour of Achaemenid Dynasty
- Extend Persian empire by adding Greece
- Gain personal glory as did his predecessors
- For Mardonius’ ambitions
- Economics -- to prevent Greek influence in his western possessions (Thrace +
Macedonia) where gold and timber was
- Hubris -- Herodotus and Aeschylus argue that Xerxes arrogance and desire for glory wa
driving factor
THE INTERWAR PERIOD 490-480BC: PREPARATIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS IN GREECE
Renewed war with Persia was not a focus for Athens, instead consumed with political rivalry
during the interwar period, Athens became involved in a trade war with commercial enemies
on the nearby island of Aegina.
THEMISTOCLES’ NAVAL POLICY
Themistocles was considered one of the most brilliant and innovative leaders of Athens
during the 5th century.
Thucydides: “Themistocles was a man who showed an unmistakable natural genius…
quite exceptional… beyond all others deserves our admiration.”
- Earliest record of his rise to power was election in 493 BC to the anchorship
- No political backing, achieved position in the state as an indication of ability
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
As Archon he proposed improvements to Athens’ harbour and began fortifying bays of
Piraeus, 5 miles from Athens, instead of Phalerum’s unprotected beaches
Bradley: “It was his ambition to unite the whole city to the sea.”
- Project halted by first Persian invasion; later completed during interwar period
- Themistocles was one of the 10 generals at marathon, at this point having realised
danger from Persia was not final
- Themistocles believed the only way to defeat Persia was to cut off supply lines by
defeating them at sea
- Themistocles knew Athenian navy had to be strengthened, as no army could compete
with Sparta
- Led from 493 BC, increasing popularity; benefiting from the ostracism of his opponents
- Needed more warships, opposed by Aristides who saw fleet rower classes would rise
in status
- Tradition sees Themistocles as radical; opposed by good, just and conservative
Aristides
- Faced e/o in assembly over what to do with surplus silver from mines at Laurium
- Themistocles persuaded them to use the money to build 100 new triremes
Herodotus: “the outbreak of this war [with Aegina] at that moment saved Greece by
forcing Athens to become a maritime power.”
- Themistocles persuaded people to ostracise Aristides and then built the ships
- Athens’ navy manned by thousands of peasants and agricultural labourers who
Themistocles made efficient rowers
GREEK PREPARATIONS FOR INVASION
-> Meeting at the Greek Congress at the Isthmus 481 BC
- Greeks did not take major preparations, Athenians did
- Greeks aware of Xerxes’ plans via spies, though too preoccupied with domestic affairs
Bradford: “It was not possible that they [the Persian’s plans] could have been kept a
secret, for they involved an immense task force,...”
- Not until 481 BC that Greeks became concerned, 31 city states, absent northern
states, to meet at Corinth to decide how to defend Greece
- Meeting referred to as the Greek Congress, unusual for so many to unite
- During the Congress, Hellenic League set up and run by Sparta
- Medised Greek states would be taxed and the tax redistributed for god Delphi
- Greek unity shown as internal conflicts put aside, where 2 largest navies, Athens and
Aegina, would fight together against Persia
- Spies sent to Asia to estimate Xerxes’ strength, sent delegations to other Greek states ie
Crete, Argos, and sought advice from Delphic Oracle
- Delegates to the Greek Congress made decisions that concerned leadership
- At this time military strength > naval strength, so Sparta given leadership
- Athens expected leadership, seeming unfair with most naval ships
- Themitocles convinced others to accept for time being as he knew the
Pelopponesians wouldn't accept an Athenian leader
CONSULTATION OF THE DELPHIC ORACLE 480-481BC
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
It was practice to seek approval of the gods before any major undertaking, where the Delphic
Oracle would provide an answer in the form of a prophecy delivered by the priestess of the
god, Pythia.
- Herodotus recounts the oracles’ predictions:
“Hear your fate, O dwellers in Sparta of the wide spaces: Either your famed great town
must be sacked by the Perseus' sons, Or, if that be not, the whole land of Lacedaemon
(Sparta) Shall mourn the death of a king of the house of Heracles ...and will not be
checked until one of these two he (Persia) has consumed.”
“Why sit there doomed ones? Fly to the world's end, leaving Home and the heights
your city circles like a wheel. The head shall not remain in its place, nor the body, Nor
the feat beneath, nor the bands, nor the parts between; But all is ruined, for fire and the
headlong God of War speeding in a Sythian chariot shall bring you low. Many a tower
shall he destroy, not yours alone, And give to pitiless fire many shrines of gods. Which
even now stand sweating, with fear quivering, while over the roof-tops black blood
runs streaming in prophecy of woe what needs must come. But rise, haste from the
sanctuary and bow your heads in grief.”
-
Oracle’s response was pessimistic and advised Athenians to abandon all
resistance to Persia, with theories of the priest knowing Perians held a large force
Athenians requested a second reading:
”Now wholly can Athena win the heart of Olympian Zeus though she prays him with
many prayers and all her subtlety; Though all else shall be taken within the bounds
of the acropolis yet Zeus, the all-seeing, grants to Athena's prayer. That the wooden
wall only shall not fall, but help you and your children. But await not the host of
horse and foot coming from Asia, nor be still, but turn your back and withdraw from
the foe. Truly a day will come when you will meet him face to face. Divine Salamis,
you will bring death to women's sons.”
-
Oracle then advised to look to their wooden walls
Older people believed the wooden walls referred to the fence surrounding the
Acropolis, where only that would survive destruction
- Professional interpreters believed the wooden walls referred to the wooden ships
Athens was building
- They recommended Athenians abandon Attica and build a new city abroad
- Themistocles also saw wooden walls as wooden navy vessels, argued Athenians
take to their ships and stand against Persians at island of Salamis
- Oracle used words Devine Salamis which meant Greek succes
- Themistocles convinced people to fight at sea after assembly debate
Herodotus: Details that 200 ships were built, 100 of them after ↑; agreed “to meet the
Persians, with their entire manpower on board their ships in obedience to God and in
company of any other Greeks who were willing to join them.”
SECOND MEETING OF THE HELLENIC LEAGUE: 480BC
It was obvious to Themistocles that the Persians could not be beaten in a pitched battle on
land due to the number of their men and the inferiority of the Greek cavalry and archers.
- Greek strategy depended on terrain offered
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Believed best strategy was to choose mountainous areas to make military stand, Mt
passes restricting Persian numbers
Could be threatened if Persians found safe anchorage on the coastline
Spring of 480 BC delegates at Congress met after receiving a message from group
in Thessaly, requesting help from Congress to hold out on Persians
Without support, Thessaly would surrender, so Congress sent 10,000 infantry
Upon reaching Tempe, it was discovered that there were several routes through the
mountains that the Greeks could not all defend
The mountain people could not be relied on to defend Greece
As Southern Greeks withdrew, Thessalians would turn to Persian side
Greeks had to relocate, Themistocles joining a strategy debate in Corinth
Peloponnesian Greeks wanted to move south to Isthmus, which would leave
Athens and the rest of Greece undefended
Further, the Karneian festival was approaching and it was an Olympian year,
Spartans not in favour of campaigning
Themistocles deserves great credit for convincing Congress members to make military
stand in central Greece where Persian cavalry was disadvantaged
Thermopylae’s main route south went through narrow pass between mountains and
sea
Themistocles view that Greek navy would eventually decide outcome of conflict
Themistocles decided the ideal battleground for Greek fleets and Persian navy is in
Straits of Artemisium, only several hours from Thermopylae, with close communication
Restricted waterways = Persian fleet difficulty maneuvering and Greeks had abundant
drinking water
INVASION OF 480-479BC: BATTLE OF THERMOPYLAE
Battles of Thermopylae and Artemisium are usually regarded as a joint action, with
intentions that the Greek navy at Artemisium would support land forces by preventing the
Persian navy landing behind Greek positions at Thermopylae.
- Further intentions to delay Persian naval attack on Southern Greece
- Spartan force of 300 led by King Leonidas and supported by 7000 local Greeks
- Leonidas had overall command of Greek army and handpicked 300 Spartans
- Chosen Spartans were all middle-aged men with children to leave behind as heirs
- Leonidas convinced his final duty was death
- Spartans sent ahead and found pass unoccupied, 15m wide and narrower sometimes
- Hot springs there gave pass the name “the Hot Gates” an alter to Heracles and
remains of a fallen wall with gates, Greeks rushing to rebuild it
- Persian scout to survey Greek camp, found them naked and exercising, the rest
combing hair, common Spartan practice before risking life, but unexpected vanity
Herodotus: Spartan Dieneces was told that when the Persian archers let loose a volley,
their arrows would hide the sun. To Dieneces that was just as well. For if the Persians
hide the sun, he said, we shall fight in the shade.
- Four days Xerxes waited for Greeks to make their good escape
- By 5th day, August 17, 480BC, king lost patience and sent first wave of troops
DAY 1
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Xerxes sent forward Medes and Cissians to take Greeks alive, though repulsed with
heavy casualties
Herodotus: “They made it plain enough to anyone, and not least to the king himself, that
he had in his army many men, indeed, but few soldiers.”
- Xerxes then sent in immortals, no more success than Medes
- Thermopylae, narrow mountain pass, was not Xerxes anticipation to pass through,
Greeks having tactical advantage
- Battlefield nullified Persian numbers, preventing them fighting the way they’re trained
Herodotus: Persian boys only taught 3 things: to ride, to tell the truth and to use the bow.
- No place for cavalry or to volley arrows
- Greeks positioned themselves behind rebuilt wall, where Persians not prepared or
equipped for such close fighting
- Spartan warriors would battle Persians, feign retreat and draw Persians into trap
Herodotus: “Xerxes was watching the battle from where he sat; and it is said that in the
course of the attacks three times, in terror for his army, he leapt to his feet.”
DAY 2
Second day followed the same course as the first.
Herodotus: “...Next day the fighting began again, but with no better success for the
Persians,... Greeks never slackened… Persians… once more withdrew.”
- Greeks learned the site possessed a hidden weakness, track through the mountains
could be used to surround gate defenders
- Leonidas dispatched Phocian contingent to guard the path
- Traitor Ephialtes betrayed secret of mountain pass to Xerxes, motivated by greed
- King sent Persian troops to mountain pass during the night, surprised luckless
Phocians
- Persians then rained down arrows as Phocians gathered arms and attempted to
chase higher ground
- Persians aimed for the Thermopylae pass
- Lookouts ran to warm Leonidas, leading to decision to split Greek force, with the
whole force ultimately not annihilated
- Leonidas, Spartans and loyal Thespians to stay at Thermopylae, those who fled
given the chance to fight another day
- 400 Thebans taken hostage for Pesian sympathy
DAY 3
On August 19, Greeks to inflict as much damage as possible to Persians. They would
battle the massive Persian army on open ground.
- Fought without Thebans, who had surrendered to Persians
- Xerxes ordered his men to kill, had to lash them to drive them forward
- Many Persians trampled to death by their own, others drowned in sea
Herodotus: No one could count the dead.
- Greeks fought with long spears, swords, etc
- Leonidas fulfilled prophecy and died, before 4 times Greeks drove Persians away
from his body, but Persians ultimately dragged it away
- Second Persian force then arrived through Mt pass, surrounding Greeks
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
- Greeks withdrew to wall and formed single compact body
Herodotus: They resisted to the last, with their swords, if they had them, and if not, with
their hands and teeth, until the Persians, coming on from the front over the ruins of the
wall and cloning in from behind, “finally overwhelmed them with missile weapons.”
- Battle of Thermopylae was over, Leonidas and 300 Spartans all dead, with the 700
Thespians
- Persian dead said to umber at 20,000 where Xerxes secretly buried all but 1000 for
his army to see
- Spartans have ceremony for death of a King, riders spread news, women beat cauldrons
- Leonidas denied proper burial, Xerxes ordered his head cut off and fixed on stake,
ordered rest of Greek dead burned to remind veterans that Spartans are mortal
- Athens was soon sacked and Thermopylae was not a total failure
- Impacted Persian morale and Greek influence was indisputable
Herodotus: “Four thousand men from Pelops’ land/against three million once did stand”
Another celebrated Leonidas and the 300; “Go tell the Spartans, stranger passing by/that
here, obeying their commands, we lie.”
- Battle’s value not in land gained/lost, but in inspiration
RESULTS OF THERMOPYLAE
Persian losses were far greater than the Greeks, where Greeks lost approximately 4000,
with many helots, where Persians lost 20,000, though this is likely exaggerated.
- The loss of Thermopylae forced submission for most of central Greece
- The absence of Sparta is a contributing reason for the loss
- Despite the loss, Leonidas and forces deserved place among military heroes
- Rear-guard action prevented Persians taking the retreating forces
- Leonidas died according to Spartan law, courage and sacrifice was an inspiration
INVASION OF 480-479BC: BATTLE OF ARTEMISIUM
Inconclusive naval battle took place in the waters of Cape Artemisium to the north of
Euboea at the same time as Thermopylae.
TRIREMES
A warship used by both Greek and Persian navies.
- 3 banks of oars, one above the other
- Manned by about 200 men -> 170 rowers, 14 marines (inclusive of 4 archers), 15
deckhands, the captain & a flautist who piped time for rowers
- 37 metres long, 3.5 metres wide
- Persian ships from Phoenicia, Egypt and Ionia
- Some Persian ships built with higher stearns and decks, therefore both faster yet
harder to manoeuvre
- Persian tactic to maintain close formation and row alongside enemy ships to crash
sides and rain arrows
- Greek tactic relied on ramming with forward keel of each trireme equipped with
bronze plated ram, where open formation allowed them to manoeuvre
NAVAL ENGAGEMENT AT ARTEMISIUM
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
HDT: Persian fleet had 1200 ships that sailed from Therma to support the army at
Thermopylae.
- Storm destroyed up to 200 Persian ships with wreckage spreading 80km
- Greeks were intimidated, Themistocles bribed Spartan admiral in charge of Navy,
Eurybiades, to stay at Artemisium
- Greek navy of 271 triremes were able to avoid dangers of storm in Euripus channel
- Persian fleet took position at Aphetae, Greeks off Artemisium
- Persians hoped to encircle Greeks with 200 ships that were destroyed in another
summer storm
3 battles were fought over the following days:
1. Greeks rowed out to meet Persian fleet, 700 Persian ships to fight
HDT: Commanders and crews surprised by audacious Greek attack at late day, but more
surprised that Greeks attacked at all.
- Persian wanted to capture Greek triremes intact, Xerxes promised a bounty for
every ship taken, money more motivating than glory
- Greeks used Kyklos defence -> smaller force formed circle with rams
pointing outwards, preventing enemy ships disrupting their formation
- Upon signal Greeks charged Persians head on and stopped any maneuverability
HDT: Persians lost 30 ships
2. During night, storm damage to Persians encouraged Greeks to raid part of the
Persian fleet engaged in ship repair
3. In final encounter, Persians sailed towards Artemisium
- Persians formed an offensive semicircle, in which Greeks attacked head on
- Both sustained casualties, Persians withdrew
- No clear win, Greek navy then hears of loss at Thermopylae
- Persians seek to take Boeotia and advance through Attica to the gate of Athens
- Themistocles to evacuate his city
RESULTS OF ARTEMISIUM
- Despite indecisive results, Greek morale was high and Athenians given prize for
valour
- Persians, in no rush, moved slowly along the coast whilst sacking coastal villages
- Persians arrived at Phalerum (Athens harbour) at same time army entered Attica
- Central Greece lay wide open after 3 days of battle, Boeotia submitted and cities
burnt
- Difficulties of the battle seen in weather, Greek raids, and restricted fighting in
straits
- Meant Persians would not be able to divide fleet and make raids against
Peloponnese as diversions
- Could not afford risk of defeat and loss of the campaign, forced to concentrate at 1 point
THE DECREE OF THEMISTOCLES
In 1960 a farmer at Troezen in Attica discovered an inscribed marble stela now known as
the Decree of Themistocles (or Troezen Inscription).
- Found to be a decree issued by Themistocles during the Persian Wars
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Contained evidence about the strategy for Greek defence before the battles of
Thermopylae and Artemisium
Authenticity and reliability of the decree questioned when as the decree had been
carved in the early 3rd century BC, 200 years after the events it describes
Gods.
Resolved by the Boule and the People.
Themistocles, son of Neocles of Phrearrhioi, made the motion.
The city shall be entrusted to Athena, Athens' proteress, and to the other gods, all of them, for protection and
defense against the Barbarian on behalf of the country.
The Athenians in their entirety and the aliens who live in Athens shall place their children and their women in
Troezen, [to be entrusted to Theseus ?] the founder of the land. The elderly and movable property shall for safety
be deposited at Salamis. The treasurers and the priestesses are to remain on the Acropolis and guard the
possessions of the gods.
The rest of the Athenians in their entirety and those aliens who have reached young manhood shall embark on the
readied two hundred ships and they shall repulse the Barbarian for the sake of liberty, both their own and that of
the other Greeks, in common with the Lacedaemonians, Corinthians, Aeginetans and the others who wish to have
a share in the danger.
Appointments will also be made of captains, two hundred in number, one for each ship, by the generals, beginning
tomorrow, from those who are owners of both land and home in Athens and who have children who are legitimate.
They shall not be more than fifty years old and the lot shall determine each man's ship. The generals shall also
enlist marines, ten for each ship, from men over twenty years of age up to thirty, and archers, four in number. They
shall also by lot appoint the specialist officers for each ship when they appoint the captains by lot. A list shall be
made also of the rowers, ship by ship, by the generals, on notice boards, with the Athenians to be selected from
the lexiarchic registers, the aliens from the list of names registered with the polemarch. They shall write them up,
assigning them by divisions, up to two hundred divisions, each of up to one hundred rowers, and they shall append
to each division the name of the warship and the captain and the specialist officers, so that they may know on what
warship each division shall embark.
When assignment of all the divisions has been made and they have been allotted to the warships, all the two
hundred shall be manned by order of the Boule and the generals, after they have sacrificed to appease Zeus the
All-powerful and Athena and Victory and Poseidon the Securer. When they have completed the manning of the
ships, with one hundred they shall bring assistance to the Artemisium in Euboea, while the other hundred shall, all
around Salamis and the rest of Attica, lie at anchor and guard the country.
To ensure that in a spirit of concord all Athenians will ward off the Barbarian, those banished for the ten year span
shall leave for Salamis and they are to remain there until the people decide about them. Those who have been
deprived of citizen rights are to have their rights restored.
-
Decree contradicts records by HDT
HDT suggests evacuation of Athens after battles of Theropylae and Artemisium
was panic stricken to news of Greek defeat
- Decree suggests that evacuation was planned in expectation of Greek defeat
Herodotus: Suggests combined land sea attack was to be made with Peloponnese army
defending northern Greek states. Details that defeat was unexpected, Athens and
Northern Greeks betrayed by Peloponnese who didn’t send expected troops. Athenians
hence were forced to evacuate. Written 50 years later, Spartans were painted negatively
by HDT as Athens and Sparta were at war.
Decree of Themistocles: Suggest that Athenians agreed to abandon their city and to fight
the Isthmus before the events of Thermopylae and Artemisium. Implies that the battles
were to delay the numbers of the enemy and to give Athenians time to evacuate. If only
the Isthmus was to be defended, it would be explained why Spartans weren't present at
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
Thermopylae. Decree suggests that Athens and Sparta had formulated a unified,
well-planned strategy against the Persians.
INVASION OF 480-479BC: BATTLE OF SALAMIS
Salamis marked the beginning of the end for the Persian dream to dominate the Greek world,
labelled as one of the most decisive military engagements of all time.
- Ships that returned from Artemisium lay off the island of Salamis, still under Eurybiades
command
- 381 ships, half Athenian, the rest Peloponnese states such as Corinth and Megara
- Persian fleet had estimated 500 ships
HDT: Council of war held with Eurybiades calling for suggestions for where the fleet
should engage with Persians. Most agreed to defend Peloponnese and fight at Isthmus at
Corinth as the land army built a defence wall. While meeting held it was heard that the
Persians “had entered Attica and that the whole country was ablaze”
- Acropolis soon taken, city set on fire, Xerxes exacting revenge for burning of temple of
Sardis in Ionian Revolt
- Salamis chosen to engage Persians and protect Athenian refugees
- Passage of mainland is 1.6km wide, 4.8km long, which would neutralise Persian
numerical superiority
- Themistocles gave a speech to convince Greeks to fight and stay at Salamis
…: “Now for my plan: it will bring, if you adopt it, the following advantages; … Fighting in
confined space favours us but open sea favours the enemy. Secondly, Salamis… will be
preserved… If we beat them at sea, as I expect we shall, they will not advance to attack
you on the Isthmus,”
- Also threatened to remove the Athenian fleet and sail to Italy and reestablish Athens
PERSIAN CONFERENCE OF NAVAL COMMANDERS
Xerxes did not have to fight at Salamis, and could have bypassed the island. Motives for
battle expected to be removal of the Greek fleet.
- Likely a response to pressure from the approaching winter
- Persians anchored off Athens well outside Straits of Salamis
- Xerxes could not afford to divide fleet with low numbers after storms
- Xerxes held conference with naval commanders to get viewpoints on forcing a sea
battle
- They spoke in favour of Xerxes desire for battle in fear
- Xerxes took position on cliff to watch over battles events
- Xerxes hoped for Greeks to quarrel and betray each other
THEMISTOCLES TRICK
Themistocles is praised for luring Xerxes into Salamis, though the event is debated.
- Themistocles sent slave Sicinnus to deliver a message to Xerxes
Aeschylus: Message sent to Persian court to address Xerxes mother Atossa in play ‘The
Persians’, “That, come the darkness of the murky night, the Greeks would stay no longer,
but would board their ships in haste and go,”
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
HDT: “...the Greeks are afraid and fighting amongst themselves and are planning to slip
away. Only prevent them from slipping through your fingers and you have at this moment
an opportunity of unparalleled success.”
THE BATTLE
The details of the battle are sketchy and often contradictory.
- Xerxes divided his fleet to catch Greek triremes as they left in the Strait
- Egyptian squadron of triremes on west end would take no part in battle
- Phoenicians and Ionians blocked the channels around the small island of Psyttaleia
at east and south
- Persians waited all night, Xerxes waiting on slope of Mount Aegaleus
- Corinthian squadron of 50 ships hurry northwest as bait
- Ships had their sails up as a trick, where battle calls for them to be left on shore
- The Persian ambush seemed as though it would work perfectly, therefore Xerxes sent
in numerous squadrons into the narrow channel
- Persians trapped as fleeing ships turned to face them and redeploy into 3 lines
- Persians bunched too tightly to move, then left flank hit by squadrons from Aegina and
Megara
Aeschylus: “Our ships were jammed in hundreds; none could help another.”
- Athenians were aware they could depend on the rising swell in the morning that duly
appeared at 9AM
- Greek centre of gravity was lower and helped them in conditions of the waters
- Persian ships leaned and slewed, showing sides to Greek rams
- Phoenician admiral Ariabignes killed early on, no second in command, Xerxes
couldn’t convey orders from a distance
- Phoenicians on right wing broke and fled, Athenians exploited that gap
- Phoenician commanders beheaded
- Ionian Greeks were the last standing, but would too break and flee
- Queen Artemisia of Halicarnassus rammed a ship on her own side to make the Greek
pursuer think she was an ally, her trick worked and she fled to safety
- Xerxes thought she brought down a Greek ship
HDT: Xerxes detailed “My men have turned into women, my women into men.”
SIGNIFICANCE OF SALAMIS
- Casualties high for Persians, lost many high ranking officers
- Greek marines under Aristides landed on island of Pan where 400 Persian infantry
massacred them
- Turning point in PW, at least 200 Persian ships sunk, many more captured
- Persian land sea attacks now impossible with destroyed navy
- Loyalty of Ionian Greeks weakened without naval control, they would successfully revolt
in 479 BC
- Persians established HQ at island of Samos, army left without supply line
XERXES LEAVES GREECE
Xerxes faced with the decision to mount another attack with another strategy, withdraw for the
winder, or withdraw all together
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
HDT: Xerxes chose to leave Greece, but was a result of 2 significant meetings
“Mardonius...to renew the struggle in order either to bring Greece into subjection or,
failing that, to die…’I will make it my duty, with 300,000 picked troops, to deliver Greece
to you in chains’.”
- Xerxes listened to Mardonius’ proposal, King asked Queen Artemisia
HDT: Queen Artemisia says “I think you should yourself quit this country and leave
Mardonius behind with the force he asks for,”
- Xerxes then leaves for Persia, leaving Mardonius behind with 300,000 troops
- Athens had been punished, fulfilling Darius’ wish
- Mardonius attempted diplomacy and bribery to break Greek alliance
- Athenians refused Persian offer, Mardonius hence marched against Athens
- Athens evacuated once again and Spartans sent a force to help under Pausanius
INVASION OF 480-479BC: BATTLE OF PLATAEA
The battle was recorded by Herodotus.
1ST PHASE
- Plataea chosen because it was good for cavalry and close to Thebes
- Perians built 900 acre stockade along river as backup protection
- Mardonius camped men along Asopus River facing Greek Mt pass entry
- Greeks came from Cithaeron ranges on opposite side of river’
- Spartans on the right wing, Athenians on left, Peloponnese and Megarians in
centre
- Mardonius repeatedly sent cavalry under Masistius leadership to harass Greeks
- Masistius was killed, cavalry retreated without his body, Greeks then paraded his body
on a cart
2ND PHASE
- Pausanias moved troops to Asopus Ridge, giving Greeks room to function
- Mardonius continued sending cavalry, stopping Greeks getting water from the river
- Greeks relied on water from Gargaphia Spring
- Persians intercepted Greeks bringing supplies, slaughtered 500 animals
- On 12th day, mounted archer fouled the spring = no water
- Still no infantry involvement
3RD PHASE
- Pausanias and Greeks moved at night and the 3 divisions separated
- Mardonius thought they were escaping so he sent cavalry and infantry across the
river
- Spartans dominantly impacted
- Pausanias attempted to get help from Athenians, but they were overtaken by Thebans
and Thessalians
- Megarians and non Peloponnese went to help Athens
- Peloponnese led by Corinth attempted to close gap between them and Spartans
- Spartans waited in battle formation for Pausanias who later ordered they charge in
- Mardonius and his personal guard were killed, Persian troops fled to fort with no
leader
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
- Artabazos, other Persian Commander ha always disagreed with Mardonius
- Artabazos then took the 400,000 men and fled to Persia
- At the fort Athenians and other Greeks would soon breach the fence
HDT: Persians “no longer kept together as an organised force;... half dead with fright”
- Greeks took no prisoners, slaughtered fugitives
- Except those who escaped with Artabazos, only 3000 Persians survived
- 10 days later, Greeks besieged Thebes and put leaders to death at the Isthmus for
medising
SIGNIFICANCE OF PLATAEA
Plataea put an end to the invasion of mainland Greece.
- Struggle continued in northern Aegean and east, Greeks took offensive
- Showed Greeks working together, where 100,000 men of 25 Greek states defended
Hellas for 3 weeks
- Encouraged Ionian Greeks to revolt from Persia
INVASION OF 480-479BC: BATTLE OF MYCALE
- Ionian refugees informed Spartan admiral from the Greek fleet, Leotychidas, that
Persia could be defeated easily
- Greeks sailed to Samas, Persians retreated and built another stockade
- Leotychidas proclaimed freedom for Ionian Greeks so Persian army would mutiny and
change sides
- Greeks landed further down coast, Athenians on beach, Spartans on hills
- Persians faced Athenians with wall of shields, line broke and Persians retreat to
stockade
- Greeks broke palisade and Spartans arrived to fight
- Ionians guarding hill passes changed sides and s;aughtered Persians
HDT: When most of the enemy was cut to pieces, either in battle or during rout, Greeks
burnt Persian ships and the fort.
RESULTS OF MYCALE
- Greeks retired to Samas to decide future of Ionia
- Peloponnesian naval commanders suggested Ionians settle in medised cities
- Typical of Peloponnesians who didn’t want permanent troops in Aegean area
- Athenians objected for both impracticality and Ionians were originally Athenian colonists
- Agreed to enrol Ionians in Hellenic League
- Greek fleet with Ionians sailed to Hellespont to destroy Xerxes’ bridges but they were
already gone
- Peloponesians sailed home, Xanthippus took Athenians to collect bridge ropes as
an offering
- Athenians attacked Sestos, Xanthippus refusing to leave until Persians all killed,
captruede, ransomed
SIGNIFICANCE OF MYCALE
- Ended Persian threat to Greek mainland and freed Greeks of Ionia
- Greeks and Persians continued to be at war with each other until 448BC
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Ushered new phase of Greek history - based on supremacy of Athens
THE ROLE AND CONTRIBUTION OF THEMISTOCLES
Themistocles was a significant political power of the Greek world.
Persuaded Athens to pursue naval power; as archon worked on harbour at Piraeus
- Convinced Athenians to spend the silver found at Laurium on ships not gifts for people
- Incidental in creation and maintenance of Hellenic League, brought together 31
Greek states to fight Persians
- Themistocles convinced Athenians and wider Greeks that Delphic Oracle’s message
referred to wooden walls of Athenian ships
- Partly convinced Athens to evacuate, crucial if Troezen Inscription is to be accepted
- Promoted land and sea strategy of 480 BC and was a focal in battle of Artemisium
- Helped decide to fight Salamis instead of fortified Isthmus; led to debate, chided the
Corinthians, made threats to desert Greece and finally convinced Eurybiades of his
argument
- Themistocles secret message to Xerxes made Salamis possible
- Was a tactical master and would bring victory with such
HDT: “Themistocles was regarded everywhere as by far the wisest man of all the Greeks;
and the whole country rang with his fame.”
- Votes for prize of valour had all leading generals place their name first, but
Themistocles second; he would not win upon jealousy from rivals
- Spartans presented him with a chariot on departure from Sparta, was escorted to
Tegean border by elite 300 knights
HDT: Spartans held high regard for Themistocles
Thucydides: “[Themistocles] showed an unmistakable natural genius; he was quite
exceptional, and beyond all others deserves our admiration.” He was a man who by
virtue of his intellect, could consider complex matters and reach a conclusion quickly.
- His POV was invariably more reliable, he could see the good and bad in future actions
…: “...this man was supreme at doing precisely the right thing at precisely the right
moment.”
Plutarch: Themistocles knew everyone by name and was considered an honest
arbitrator in legal cases.
- When Xerxes sent Athens envoys, Themistocles dealt with them to avoid medism
Plutarch: On the defeat of the Persians “But the greatest of all his achievements
was to put an end to all the fighting within Greece…”
Ehrenberg: It was Themistocles naval policy that determined the course of the century.
He had great foresight, intellectual power and diplomatic skill. Though, he was flawed.
Bury: “greatest statesman of this critical period.”
- Naval development marks his greatness
Bury: Themistocles realised the potential of Athens with the energy and perseverance to
see his vision through. “It may be said that he contributed more than any other single
man to the making of Athens into a great state.”
- His career would end in disgrace, hounded into exile by the Athernians in 472 BC
REBUILDING OF ATHENS CITY WALLS
- Athens rebuilt city and walls after Persians retreat from Greece in 479 BC
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Spartans sent envoy to suggest Athens refrain from fortifying city
Themistocles went to discuss the issue with Spartans, told Athenians to rebuild city
walls
Ordered completion of walls around Piraeus, delayed by war
Themistocles avoided discussing the issues, Spartans suspicious when reports from
visitors suggested Athenians were rebuilding the wall at fast pace
Themistocles suggested Spartans sent observers to ease suspicions
He also sent the Athenians a message to hold the Spartans hostage until walls
high up
ALIENATION AND OSTRACISM
- Themistocles had political enemies, jealous of his rise to power and Athenians
offended by his vanity
- He built temple to Artemis near his home, called goddess Artemis ‘Aristoboule’
meaning ‘Artemis Wisest in Counsel’
- Meant Themistocles believed he gave the best advice in PWs
- Opponents lobbied for him to be ostracised
- Banished from Athens for 10 years in 472 BC
- He had been successful in convincing people to ostracise his opponents in late
480s
ANTI-SPARTAN ACTIVITIES
- Spent first 5 years of exile in Argos, Sparta’s traditional enemy
- Then spread anti-Spartan propaganda, possibly plotting against Spartan government
- After Pausanius’ death, Spartans claimed to have documentation of Themistocles
involvement in treasonable negotiation with the Persians
- The claim suited Spartans and Athenian rivals enough to have him punished
- He attempted to defend himself in writing against accusations, though unsuccessful
- Was forced to flee, first to Corcyra, then to Epirus and Asia Minor
- Was treated with respect by the Persians and lived to 65 as ruler of Magnesia, given
by the Persians
THE ROLE AND CONTRIBUTION OF LEONIDAS
King Leonidas' name sounded through the ages, an inspiration for Greece.
- Led the Peloponnesian forces north in 480 BC, with the 300
- Prompt action prevented many Greek states medising
- Realised the pass at Tempe was indefensible and moves to Thermopylae
- The stand against Persians at Thermopylae bought time for Greeks to organise
- Inspired Greeks to fight in PW
HDT: “...Leonidas fell fighting bravely, together with many other famous Spartans…”
- Modern view casts doubts on military acumen
A R Burn: “He stayed, with his own regiment, so that others might live to fight another
day…” suggests Leonidas erred in judgement not placing more troops on hill route.
“Leonidas had not, perhaps, shown the highest qualities of general ship…”
THE ROLE AND CONTRIBUTION OF EURYBIADES
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
Eurybiades was the Spartan general placed in charge of the Greek fleet at Artemisium.
HDT: Athenians should have commanded the fleet, but “they waived their claim in the
interest of national survival.”
- Not keen to fight Artemisium
- Euboeans gave Themistocles 30 talents to make the fleet stay, until they could evacuate
- Themistocles passed a sixth of the bribe to Eurybiades
HDT: This amount was “enough to secure Eurybiades’ consent.”
- At Salamis, he sought advice from captains on where to fight
- Eurybiades was convinced by Themistocles to fight Salamis
HDT: “At these words of Themistocles, Eurybiades changed his determination… feared
that if he withdrew… Athenians would sail away… without the Athenians, the rest of the
ships could be no match for the fleet of the enemy.”
- Eurybiades was awarded the prize of courage, the wreath of olive
- Same was given to Themistocles at Sparta
THE ROLE AND CONTRIBUTION OF PAUSANIAS
After the defeat of Persia, Pausanias’ reputation suffered due to his arrogance, highhandedness
and wear of Persian dress.
- Significant for contribution and role at Plataea
HDT: “Pausanias… win a victory exceeding in glory all those to which our knowledge
extends.”
- His conduct in facing Mardonius at Plataea was significant
- Persians still occupied northern Greece after Salamis, the Greek alliance was still fragile,
where Persian victory would have changed history
- Faced many problems in battle
- Commanded force of 100,000 men from 24 states that were independent and jealous
- Maintaining unity of the Greek army was a significant achievement
- Faced logistical problems in supplying troops with food and drinkable water
- Had to fight a location that advantaged Persians
- Threatened by Persian cavalry
Fine, The Ancient Greeks p.20: “When one tries to envisage the difficulties Pausanius
faced in holding together for weeks an army consisting of over 100,000 men from some
twenty-four cities, plagued by dissension, insubordination … one can only applaud
Herodotus’ judgement… when he writes that at Plataea, ‘the finest victory In all history
known to man was by Pausanius.’”
-
REASONS FOR GREEK VICTORY AND PERSIAN DEFEAT
Pausanias’ skillful leadership at Plataea
Themistocles policy of developing Athenian naval strategy
Xerxes’ overconfidence
Greek unity
Superior Greek army and equipment
Weather
Geography of Greece
Morale
The example of Leonidas
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Themistocles’ stubbornness at Salamis
Inconclusive nature of the battle at Artemisium
Spartan leadership
Athens’ willingness to comply with spartan command of the navy
Impact of delaying Persian forces at Thermopylae
Decision to fight at Salamis
Mardonius’ recklessness in persuading Xerxes to invade Greece
Short Greek supply lines
The persian need to supply a massive force in foreign territory
Gods on the Greek side
Greek military tactics
Persian failure to make effective use of calvary
Superiority of Greek triremesGreek decision to avoid reckless, early confrontation
DEVELOPMENT OF ATHENS AND THE ATHENIAN EMPIRE
DELIAN LEAGUE: ORIGINS, AIMS, ORGANISATION AND ACTIVITIES OF THE LEAGUE
After success in the PW, Greeks were concerned for the revival of Persian power in Asia
Minor and the Aegean. In 478, a league of sea states led by Athens replaced the Hellenic
League led by Sparta. Modern terms refer to this as the Delian League or the Confederacy of
Delos. The 5th century referred to this as “The Athenians and their Allies”.
ORIGINS
Athens was accepted as leader for the following reasons:
- Pausanias was sent in an allied fleet in 478 to free the Greek states under Persian
control
Plutarch: his “officiousness and absurd pretensions” upset the Greeks of Asia Minor
where he scattered “insults far and wide”.
- Greeks respected Pausanias for Plataea, but his arrogance and ambition in
the following years upset Spartans and offended Greeks
- Pausanias communicated with Persian King and adopted Persian dress &
behaviour
- Ionians suggested to Athenians that they take leadership
- Spartan govt recalled Pausanias and replaced him with commanding officer
Dorcis, who was too rejected
- Sparta was reluctant to continue war with Persia in the east
- Sparta desired to return to its isolationist policy and control the helot
population
- No protest when Athens took over a league of sea states
- As a military power, its rigid system made Sparta unsuitable to lead Greeks
- Athens had a large and experienced navy with high regard after Salamis
- Athenians had a common racial descent with Ionians, with Spartans of Dorian descent
- Ionians wanted Athenian, Aristides, to organise the league
- He had proven himself as general at Marathon, Salamis and Plataea
Plutarch: Aristides was known as “a sturdy champion of justice”, a steadfast character”,
and not one motivated by greed or trickery.
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
AIMS
Thucydides: Aims of the league were to compensate the Greeks “for their losses by
ravaging the territory of the king of Persia”.
- Aims of aggressive, offensive war may have initially attracted states
- Intended to liberate the states of Asia Minor still under Persian control
- Held economic motives for Athens, such as safeguarding trade and gaining resources
ORGANISATION
Adequate funds were needed to sustain the league.
Plutarch: As allies wanted each city fairly assessed, they appointed Aristides “to survey
the various territories and their revenues, and to fix their contributions according to each
member’s worth and ability to pay.”
- Assessment of the contribution amounted to 460 talents (1 talent = 6000 drachmas)
- A skilled worker in Athens would earn about 1 drachma a day
Plutarch: Aristides “drew up assessments with scrupulous integrity and justice, but also
in such a way that all the states felt they had been appropriately and satisfactorily dealt
with”.
- Contributions took the form of money payment (phoros) and ships
- Athens contributed the largest amount of ships and men
- Money payment was collected and supervised by 10 Athenian officials called
hellenotamiae (stewards of the Greeks)
- Payment went straight into the Leagues treasury at Delos
- Those who contributed ships retained control of them but were expected to serve
the League fleet for a portion of the year
- Included large Aegean islands of Chios, Lesbos, Samos, Naxos and Thasos
- Delos chosen as the League’s HQ, site of treasury and meetings of allies
- Delos was centre of Ionian culture and religion based on the cult of Apollo
- Delos midway between Athens and the coast of Asia Minor, good harbour and
politically neutral
- Allies were initially independent states with particular govt forms
- Unknown if all states had equal influence in the League, likely Athens had most
- Athens could likely control vote by its patronage and intimidation of small states
- Athenian officials carried out policy and strategy
- Cimon the Athenian was commander of the Leagues fleet and forces
- Allies took an “Oath of Allegiance” organised by Aristides that implied a common
foreign policy
- To confirm loyalty they were to throw lumps of iron into the sea, suggesting
permanency until the Persians were no longer a threat
- Secession would have been seen as rebellion, other members justified in forcing them
back
- There was no written constitution for the League
Thucydides: Suggests that Athens had a hidden agenda when first organising the Delian
League, with a real reason to bring its allies under control.
- Whether Thucydides was right there was always potential for Athens to change the
league into an empire.
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
ACTIVITIES
The League was fully occupied in its first 10 years, carrying out major aims of continuing the
liberation of Ionia and ejecting the Persians from their bases in the Aegean and elsewhere.
- The nature and purpose of their activities went under significant change
- Cimon, son of Miltiades, was chosen to lead the League forces as under Pausanias in
Asia Minor in 478 had gained a reputation dealing with Ionians sympathetically
Plutarch: Cimon’s own soldiers “were a byword for their discipline” and he had “skill in
handling men”.
DELIAN LEAGUE: BATTLE OF EURYMEDON RIVER [TIMELINE]
477BC ⇾ CAPTURE OF BYZANTIUM AND SESTOS
- Cimon led expeditionary force to recapture the cities after disgrace and recall of
Pausanias
476BC ⇾ CAPTURE OF EION
- Persians expelled from base in Thrace
- Advantaged Athens and League in access to mineral, timber and trade opportunity
474BC ⇾ CAPTURE OF SKYRUS
- Cimon and League expelled pirates and colonised it
- Freed Aegean from piracy, ensuring free flow of trade and provided a corn route from
Hellespont to Athens
- Capture signalled flexibility in League aims as Athens established a cleruchy
- Cleruchy to rid excess population and act as watchdog
- This was the first questionable activity of the League
- Cimon returned bones of King Theseus to Athens, who was buried in Skyrus
Plutarch: “this affair did more than any other achievement of Cimon’’s to endear him to
the people.”
472BC ⇾ CARYSTUS FORCED TO JOIN THE DELIAN LEAGUE
- Showcased imperial ambition with a campaign against fellow Greeks
- Was not in original character of the League
- Carystus had not joined but benefited from their activities
- Athens benefited from the forced join as Euboea was important to Hellespont corn route
469BC ⇾ REVOLT OF NAXOS
- Clear turning point in League activities was against a member state
Thucydides: "Naxos left the League and the Athenians made war on the place. After a
siege Naxos was forced back to allegiance. This was the first case when the original
constitution of the League was process broken and an allied city lost its independence,
and the r was continued in the cases of the other allies as various circumstances arose.
The chief reasons for these revolts were failures to produce the right amount of tribute or
the right numbers of ships, and sometimes a refusal to produce any ships at all. For the
Athenians insisted on obligations being exactly met, and made themselves unpopular by
bringing the severest pressure to bear on allies who were not used to making sacrifices
and did not want to make them. In other ways, too, the Athenians as rulers were no
longer as popular as they used to be.”
- Naxos lost independence, forced to pay tribute rather than ships
- Created third type of League member (tribute-paying subjects)
- First example of what would be a recurring pattern
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
468BC ⇾ BATTLE OF EURYMEDON RIVER
- Cimon and League forces won major victory over Persians
- 468 Xerxes assembled military & naval force at mouth of river in Pamphylia in
southern Asia Minor ‘waiting for 80 Phoenician ships to arrive from Cyprus’
- Cimon sailed south and surprised Phoenician fleet, destroyed ships and crews
- Xerxes accepted terms of a peace, to stay a days sail from the coast of Asia Minor
- Removed threat of Persia from Aegean thus accomplishing goal of the League
- Allies then payed tribute in money over ships
- Athens became harsh and punished allies who defaulted on payment or revolted
Thucydides: “consequently the Athenian fleet grew strong with the money which the
allies themselves contributed, while whenever the allies revolted, they were ill-prepared
and inexperienced for war”
DELIAN LEAGUE: THE ROLE AND CONTRIBUTION OF CIMON
CIMON’S LATER CONTRIBUTIONS
Cimon was ostracised in 461BC.
- Sparta earthquake sparked helot revolt, Spartans desperately seek military assistance
from Athens
- Presence of Athenians alarmed Spartan authorities, as “dangerous
revolutionaries”
- Athenians ordered home, publicly humiliated
- Destroyed Cimon’s career and was hence ostracised for 10 years
Plutarch: “They returned home in a fury and proceeded to take public revenge upon the
friends of Sparta in general and Cimon in particular. They seized upon some trifling
pretext to ostracise him…”
- Cimon eventually recalled from exile, confusion about when
- Cimon aids in restoring peace for Athens & Sparta in Five Year Truce
- Cimon next heard of in 450 BC with expedition against the Persians
- Suggests he did not return to Athens until 451BC, after 10 years
- Cimon sailed with Cyprus with 200 ships to quell a revolt
- There he sent 60 ships to Egypt to aid their fight against Persians
- Cimon used the remaining ships to gain control of Cyprus
- Defeated Persian fleet, Cimon then laid siege to city of Citium on SW corner of Cyprus
- Cimon then died of either a sickness or wound
DELIAN LEAGUE: THE ROLE AND CONTRIBUTION OF ARISTIDES THE JUST
Plutarch: Aristides (and Pausanias) were instrumental in giving Athens the opportunity to
be the leader of the new Delian League.
- Leading Athenian politician and a contemporary of Themistocles
- Was considered an honourable politician and titled- the Just
- Fought at Marathon and was ostracised in 482, returned to fight at Salamis and as
Athenian commander at Plataea
- Most significant in organisation of Delian League and assessing tribute members were to
pay
Plutarch: After Mycale, Aristides treated the allies with “tact and diplomacy” and the
overbearing conduct of Pausanias “served to endear the Greeks even more.”
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Aristides treatment of the allies was crucial in getting the leadership of the Delian
League for Athens
Plutarch: “rally round him the allies who had long wished to be quit of Sparta.” “Chios,
Samos and Lesbos approached Aristides and pressed him to accept the supreme
command.” - Aristides was appointed to survey the members and “fix contributions
according to each member’s worth and ability to pay.”
- Aristides imposed tax of 400 talents and the treasury was kept at Delos
Plutarch: Aristides assessed the tribute with “scrupulous integrity and justice” and all
“states felt they had satisfactorily been dealt with”
Thucydides: The Hellenic treasures were appointed by Athens to collect the tribute.
Themistocles sneered at him and called Aristides “not a man but money in a box!”
- Aristides introduced an Oath that the members of the Delian League swore to have
“the same enemies and friends as the Athenians”
- To confirm the oath, iron bars were thrown to sea
BENEFITS OF MEMBERSHIP WITHIN DELIAN LEAGUE
FOR ALLIES⇾
- Trade: Protected trading interests. Capture of Skyrus and expulsion of its pirates is
evidence for this. The Piraeus became the port of the empire with facilities for unloading
ships and storing grain.
- Protection: Fleet of League protected members against renewed Persian threat.
- Government: Athens encouraged democracy, allies had access to Athenian law courts.
- Spoils: At the beginning of the League allies received booty from attacks on Persian
territory e.g. the sale of slaves
FOR ATHENS⇾
- Power: Athens had control of a large and powerful alliance of wealthy states.
Sometimes used to benefit Athens rather than the League e.g. the long siege and
destruction of Thasos in 465-463BC.
- Wealth: In 478 BC, Athens received 1/16th of total tribute as repayment for organising
the League and half the booty collected from Persians. Sale of slaves brought additional
revenue.
- Trade: Piraeus became the main Aegean port. After 449BC, tribute was used to fund
building of docks, storehouses and harbour facilities.
- Employment: Naval initiatives stimulated employment for rowers, shipbuilders, dock
workers and builders.
- Cleruchies (colonies): When a state revolted against the League, Athens often settled
citizens there to look after its interests.
TRANSFORMATION OF THE DELIAN LEAGUE INTO THE ATHENIAN EMPIRE
By 467BC, the Delian League seemed to have achieved the aims for which it was formed.
- The threat of Persian attack had been neutralised
- Xerxes forced to sign an agreement in 467BC where Persian forces couldn’t be a
days march from Greece
- Cimon’s victory at the Eurymedon River and the attack on Cyprus brought security to
Greek states of Aegean and Asia Minor
- Booty from Persian defeat passed to Greek allies, some to strengthen Athens’ fleet
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
-
-
League was no longer needed
Athens dispelled that in 465 BC when Thasos attempted to secede from the League
- Thasos and Athens fought over gold mining and trade
- Thasos succeeded from the League when Athens claimed a share of their
gold mines
- Athens didn’t let members leave even 5 years after Eurymedon River
- Was first time Athens used League resources in a private quarrel
- Thasos asked Sparta for help, they agreed but were interrupted by an
earthquake that caused the helots to revolt
- Athens besieged Thasos and took the island after 2 years
- Athens took Thasos’ navy, demolished their walls and took their possessions
- Reveals Athens’ imperial ambitions
In 459 BC, Delian League helped Egyptians revolt against Persia
Persians would regain control of Egypt
Persian fleet was active in Aegean waters; gave Athens an excuse to move treasury
from Delos to Athens
A step to Athens becoming an empire, using funds to rebuild and beautify Athens
All League meetings now suspended
- Persian threat at end when the Peace of Callias was signed with Persia
- Cimon returned from exile to lead the League in 451 BC
- Likely in 449/448BC Athens, fighting Sparta, used the opportunity to make
peace with Persia
- Persia agreed to not send warships into the Aegean Sea and the Asiatic Greeks
were to be independent
- Peace signed with Persia but Athens insists on keeping League
Island of Euboea revolted while Athens and Sparta fought
Euboea was reclaimed by Athens a year later
The Chalsis Decree was issued by Athens after the revolt of Euboea
I will not revolt against the Athenian people by any device, either in word or in deed.
I will pay tribute to the Athenians
I will aid and succour (support) the Athenian people if any one wrongs the Athenian people.
I will be obedient to the Athenian people.
Bradley: “This decree leaves no doubt that the original members of the League were now
very much subjects of an imperial power.”
- In 440 BC, islands of Samos involved in dispute with city of Mytlilene
- Athens demanded Samos stop fighting
- Athens established a garrison and democratic government
- When Athenian fleet left Samos, democracy was overthrown
- Samos to be punished before other states followed example
- Samos defeated and became a tribute paying subject state
- By 440BC all member states except Chios and Lesbos were subjects of Athens
- Athens had created an empire
NATURE OF ATHENIAN IMPERIALISM, CHANGING RELATIONS WITH ALLIES
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
Athens was able to strip autonomy from members of the Delian League and create an
empire.
Most evidence is from Thucydides, Plutarch and Aristides’ epigraphical evidence of the
Athenian Tribute Lists- inscriptions on stone stele containing allied cities and their annual
contributions, set up in the Agora.
- At first, League allies were in classes of those providing ships, or providing money
- Those providing ships had more autonomy
- Athens took agency by persuading allies to provide money, to organise and man the fleet
- Manny allies voluntarily transferred fleets, paying crews and upkeep while Athens
had control of ships
- 460s brought 3 classes
- Non-tributary allies who provided ships, in late 460s only Samos, Lesbos and Chios
- Samos lost status in revolt of 440-39BC
- Tributary allies that regained their independence: Status of Thasos following failed
revolt of 465-63BC
- Athens wanted to push allies from the first to second class then into third
- New member states joined the league in the third class
USE OF FORCE AGAINST ALLIES
- The imperialistic leadership of Pericles was intensely patriotic, he believed in Athens
greatness
- Pericles called for the empire to be maintained and any threats quickly assessed
Thucydides: “For this position it was the allies themselves who are to blame. Because of
this reluctance of there's two face military service, most of them, to avoid serving
abroad, had assessments made by which, instead of producing ships, they were to pay a
corresponding sum of money The result was at the Athenian Navy group at the expense,
and when they Revolt it they always found themselves inadequately armed and
inexperienced in war.”
- Allies who tried to leave forced to remain as members e.g. Thasos 465 BC
- Athens reprimanded members who looked beyond League interests e.g. Samos
440-39
- States who weren't members would be forced in e.g. Carystus 472BC
- Even with no perceivable Persian danger, states would be forced in e.g. Skyrus
474-73
CLERUCHY
- Athenian Chleruchies were established away from Athens, lower classes sent there
- Cleruchs who settled them remained Athenian citizens
- Settlements were strategically positioned controlled waterways provided sale ports of
call for the fleet and acted as watchdogs of the empire
- Cleruchies part of Pericles’ social policy to relieve unemployment
- Established on the islands of Andros, Naxos, Euboea and in the Chaldic,
Dardanelles, and Chersonese areas
- Pericles led 1000 Cleruchs to reestablish Athenian control of the Chersonese, vital
for corn trade of Black Sea
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
MILITARY GARRISONS
- Installed garrisons among allies, fear of rebellion
- Military garrisons placed on suspect states, became an army of occupation
- Ensured future loyalty, protected Athenian inspectors and commissioners sent to get
tribute and install puppet governments for Athens
POLITICAL CONTROL
- Athens replaced oligarchic, Persian style tyranny with Athenian democracy
- Though imperialistic, states favoured democracy
- Control of legal affairs expanded over time, initially just political matters
- Seen in the Erythrae Decree (453-52 BC), though autonomy of local courts limited
upon time of the Chalcis Decree (446-45 BC)
…: “In the case of exile, death, and loss of political rights…, there shall be reference to
Athens…”
OATH PERMANENCY
- The oath taken by allies it was a subtle form of control with religious connotations
- Throwing iron bars into the sea implied permanency, came to imply unambiguous
subservience to Athens
The Erythrae Decree: “I will perform my duties as councillor to the best of my ability and
faithfully to the people of Erythrae end of Athens and the allies. I will not revolt from the
people of Athens nor will I permit another to do so.”
- 7 years later the citizens of Chalcis made promises solely to Athens
…: “I will not Revolt against me a thing and people by any art or device, either in word or
in deed.” “I will pay the tribute to the Athenians.” “I will aid and succour the Athenian
people if anyone wrongs the Athenian people.” “I will be obedient to the Athenian
people.”
- Refusal to sign the Oath lost citizenship and property was confiscated
- 447BC, the Cleinias Decree informed League cities of Athens continuing annual
collections
- Refusal or reduced payments would have to plead cases in Athenian courts
- Tribute reassessed every 4 years and published at the Great Panathenaic Festival
where each state sent delegates
- Contributions furthered Pericles’ building program, developed democracy and
maintained widespread Athenian forces
Plutarch: Records when Pericles’ policy denounced as “bare-faced tyranny”, he replied
“That the athenians we're not obliged to give the allies any account with how their money
was spent and provided that they carried the war for them and kept the Persians away.”
- Athens used surplus as it wished
CONTROL OF FINANCES
- Athens enforced the uniformity of weights, measures & coinage throughout the
empire
- Silver coins used in areas of Athens control, local mints closed down and local
currencies taken to Athens to be melted down and reminted
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Made trade easier, though “allies” resented the loss of their independence and
individuality
The Coinage Decree: 450-46 BC 10 brought in these measures and were rigorously
enforced “And for the future, the Secretary of the Council shall add to the oath of the
Council (taken on entering office) the following: ‘If anyone' strikes sillier coinage in these
cities, or does not employ Athenian currency, weights and measures, I will punish and
penalise him in accordance with previous decree…”
- In early days, the League treasury was controlled by the Congress of the Allies
- 454 BC it was moved from Delos to Athens on grounds of security
- Congress of the Allies ceased to meet and League treasury became part of Athens
- Athenian assembly controlled League funds, spent on security of the Empire
- Funds used for sacred treasury of Athena; Athenian building projects etc
- Athenians dominated economic activity of the empire
- Coin reminting showed lack of independence for ally city states
CONTROL OF FOREIGN POLICY
- Forbidden to leave the alliance, unable to contact Persia or Sparta unless
sanctioned by Athens and unable to engage in war with other members
- 440, Samos stood up for its rights to go to war with Mytilene, another member
- When Samos refused to accept Athenian arbitration, Pericles took 40 ships to
reassert Athenian control
- Pericles seized hostages, set up a garrison and democracy
- Samian leaders tested Athens’ power by overthrowing democracy
- Samos had to be subdued before Persians intervened or allies followed them
- Took a siege of 9 months to end Samos’ independent existence; forced to pull down
walls, surrender its fleet, pay sum of 1276 talents and swear oath of loyalty
KEY DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENTS: INFLUENCE OF THETE
During the 30 years after the Persian Wars, when the Delian League was being transformed into
the Athenian Empire, Athens underwent important political, social and economic changes.
- Result of the change was radical democracy of the mid 5th Century BC
- Democratic developments directly related to the outcome of PW and development of
Athenian Empire
- Strategoi such as Themistocles and Aristides were popular with voters after war
- In 5th Century BC Greece, strategos commonly military leader and politician
- Themistocles, Cimon, Aristides and Pericles outstanding generals and politicians
- Thetes became important after PW, lowest & largest class in Athenian society
- Owned no land estates and worked for wages unlike upper class
- Thetes were the rowers in the Athenian navy, manned fleet at Salamis
- Also the men that rowed ships that built Athenian empire-- wealthiest, most influential
city of Mediterranean world
- Upon important role, they demanded more say in the political decision making
process
- Any man wanting to be elected by his tribe as strategos had to note ‘people power’ of
Thetes
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
ATHENIAN DEMOCRACY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 5TH CENTURY BC
- Statesman Cleisthenes laid the foundations of the 5th century Athenian democracy
just before 500BC
- Cleisthenes moved power from old aristocratic families to an electoral redistribution
- Reorganised 139 demes (villages) of Attica into 10 new tribes, replaced former 4
- Redistributed political power from top property class of the state to the Thetes
- The Boule (council of 500), Ekklesia (assembly) and Dikasteria (the jury courts,
6000 with 600 from each tribe) were the institutions that transferred power
- Boule and Dikasteria members were chosen by lot from a list of citizens and their tribes
- The number that served meant Athenians participated in the government of their city
state
- Every male over 18 was to attend meetings of the Ekklesia to propose and pass laws
- Ekklesia met 40 times per year and their decisions were final, most powerful body
- Members of Boule had job of preparing the agenda for Ekklesia meetings and carrying
out decisions
- Strategoi were leaders of the state, members of Ekklesia looked up to them and could be
persuaded and influenced by them
- The Anchorship and Areopagus- 2 aristocratic features of government- influential
at beginning of 5th century
- By 440 after 50 years of democratic reform, most of their powers gone or transferred to
Boule, Ekklesia and Dikasteria
KEY DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENTS: CITIZENSHIP LAW
In 451 BC, Pericles introduced a citizenship law that decreed ‘a person should not have
the rights of citizenship unless both his parents had been citizens’.
- Pericles wanted to restrict civic benefits to Athenians in Athens’ growing empire
- Common for poor Atheninas and non-Athenians to marry
- Law improved position of Athenian women, men forced to marry in their state
- By 450BC, the city of Athens became crowded
- Pericles’ cleruchies on islands of the empire redistributed Athenian citizens
- Traditional ideas of high classes being politically decisive was challenged by radical idea
that except for military, there should be equal involvement of all
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Direct election still used for officials with roles of expertise such as strategoi, architects,
public works supervisors etc
By mid 5th century, Athens’ radical democracy rested control over state affairs with the
masses
Initiatives of reformers such as Cleisthenes, Ephialtes and Pericles, moved
Athenians political decision making to male citizens of the Boule, Ekklesia and jury
KEY DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENTS: OSTRACISM
Athenians used ostracism for the first time in 487 BC, exiling a politician for a period of 10
years.
- Offered people a choice between leaders, used by Athenian leaders to rid opponents
- Each year in assembly a vote was taken by Athenians on whether to hold an
ostracism
- If voted yes, ostracism was held 2 months later
- Purpose to protect young democracy from a return to days of the tyrants
- At hands of ambitious 5th century politicians, became double edged sword
Plutarch: "This sentence of ostracism was not in itself a punishment for wrongdoing. It
was described for the sake of appearances as a measure to curtail and humble a man's
power and prestige in cases where these had grown oppressive; but in reality it was a
humane device for appeasing the people's jealousy, which could thus vent its desire to
do harm, not by inflicting some irreparable injury, but by a sentence of ten years'
banishment ... Each voter took an ostrakon, or piece of earthenware, wrote on it the name
of the citizen he wished to be banished and carried it to a part of the market-place which
was fenced off with a circular paling. Then the archons first counted the total number of
votes cast, for if there were less than 6000, the ostracism was void. After this they sorted
the votes and the man who had the most recorded against his name was proclaimed to
be exiled for ten years, with the right however, to receive the income from his estate.
The story goes that on this occasion, while the votes were being written down, an
illiterate and uncouth rustic handed his piece of earthenware to Aristides and asked him
to write the name Aristides on it. The latter was astonished and asked the man what harm
Aristides had ever done him. 'None whatever,' was the reply, I do not even know the
fellow, but I am sick of hearing him called 'The Just' everywhere!' When he heard this
Aristides said nothing, but wrote his name on the ostrakon and handed it back".
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
ATHENS AND SPARTA
IMPACT OF THE PERSIAN WARS
+
NATURE, COMPOSITION AND ACTIVITIES OF THE PELOPONNESIAN LEAGUE:
SPARTAN RESPONSE TO ATHENIAN IMPERIALISM
In 500 BC, Athens and Sparta emerged as the leading city states in Greece.
- Sparta’s reputation as military leader based on history of warfare against
Peloponnesians and development of the Peloponnesian League
- Sparta remained conservative and oligarchic while Athens moved to democracy
- Both city states spoke the same language, worshipped the same gods and could
find common cause against the enemy
- Both worked together throughout Xerxes 480-79BC invasion
- PW changed the military and political dynamic of both
- Atheniens had shown a claim to leadership that they were keen to develop
- Tensions after wars when Spartans requested Athenians abandon rebuilding their
fortifications that protected the city from attack
- Athenians delayed response to Sparta until they were finished on Themistocles’ advice
- Impact of PW for their relations was development of Delian League
- Spartans not interested in Aegean concerns and passed League leadership to Athens
- Cordial relations of war-years maintained, then Athenian imperialism concerned
Sparta
- Cimon made policy of cooperation with Sparta, believed in shared power for Greece
with Spartan land power and Athenian sea power
- Policy successful for some time
SPARTAN RESPONSE TO ATHENIAN IMPERIALISM
Revolt of Thasos 465 BC ⇾
- Island of Thasos revolted from Delian League
- Appealed to Sparta by helping invade Attica
- Spartans unable to help after earthquake and Messenian helot revolt, suppressed after
10 years
- Athenians defeated Thasians and imposed harsh terms
Messenian Revolt ⇾
- Helots revolted, fled to Mount Ithome where Spartans besieged but did not dislodge
- Spartans appealed to help from allies, Cimon led Athenian expedition to help
- Spartans rebuffed Athenian offer, a major insult to Cimon
Eclipse of Cimon ⇾
- Cimon’s role in Athenian humiliation gave his political rivals ammunition
- In addition his opposition to democratic reform declined his popularity
- Cimon was ostracised in 461BC
461BC ⇾
- Turning point in their relationship, Cimon’s pro-Spartan policy thoroughly discredited
ANCIENT HISTORY NOTES
-
Pericles rose to pursue ambitious, imperialistic policy to extend Athens’ power in
Greek mainland and open routes & markets for Athenian maritime trade
Athens wanted to extend to Corinthian Gulf, brought Athens into conflict with Sparta’s
top ally Corinth
Corinth wealthy with trade in Sicily and the west
Brought Athens and Sparta into war, supported by Peloponnesian allies
SPARTA AND PELOPONNESIAN LEAGUE
The Peloponnesian League was a confederation of states allied to and led by Sparta, the
leading city state of the Peloponnese. Ancient Greeks referred to the league as ‘the
Lakedaemonians and their allies’.
- Members are like to Sparta but not each other, secession was legally impossible
- If there was no League war allies could fight each other
…: Swore an oath “to have the same friends and the same enemies as Sparta and to
follow the Spartans…”
- Each ally had one vote in League Congress, met to decide policy, binding on all allies
- Sparta bound itself to give military assistance to members attacked by a third party
- Only Sparta could summon League Congress
- Sparta approved the policies it favoured, a majority vote needed to implement it
- In war, Sparta held command, appointed Spartan officers, decided number of troops
allies provided and strategy employed
ACTIVITIES OF THE PELOPONNESIAN LEAGUE 461-446BC
Major activities of the Peloponnesian League in this period
involved battles against Athens and their allies.
- First Peloponnesian War between 461 and 446 BC
response by Sparta and Allies to Athenian imperialism in
centre Greece