Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The significance of the battle of Marathon
Ancient and medieval historiography herodotus
Ancient and medieval historiography herodotus
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The significance of the battle of Marathon
Herodotus was born in 484 BCE in Halicarnassus in Asia Minor. Halicarnassus is located in modern day Turkey and was under Persian rule until Alexander the Great captured in in 334 BCE at the siege of Halicarnassus. Throughout of his youth, he devoted himself to reading and traveling due to the political restrictions the Persians had in his homeland. He traveled through Asia Minor and through parts of European Greece. After one of his relatives was executed by the tyrant of Halicarnassus, Lygdamis, Herodotus decided to leave for Samos, and later he made his way to Athens, where he lived a life full of fame and praised for his literary works. Herodotus wrote the Histories, which mainly tells the story of the Persian invasion of the Greek mainland …show more content…
Prior to the defeat in Marathon, the Persian military was known for their superiority and lack of mercy in combat. Therefore, the victory of the Athenians over the Persians served as a boost of morale for Athenians and as merits for later to proclaim Athenian superiority. Athens was known, not for its ground troops, but for its superior naval power. Therefore, this victory was even greater because they were able to defeat the Persians inland without the aid of the Spartans. As Herodotus writes in the Histories “… but the Athenians in close array fell upon them, and fought in a manner worthy of being recorded.” Like Peter Green, author of The Greco-Persian Wars explains, “psychologically, the legend became almost more important than the actual battle.” Following the defeat of the Persians at Marathon, as described in the article by J. A. S. Evans, the Greek world was divided in two, there was those who glorified the battle, and those who believed that this was not a great victory that saved and assured the freedom of the Greeks from Persian rule. It was only natural for Athenians to glorify this victory and by glorifying it, they tampered with the historical accounts and the historical facts of the battle. These inaccuracies are not Herodotus fault; they exist due to the oral traditions that were in place at the time of his research. Therefore, by the time Herodotus started to investigate the Persian Wars, the Battle of Marathon had a pro-Athenian undertone to
All these battles had significant impacts to either the war or the moral of the Greek Army. The most significant Battles were The Battle of Salamis and The Battle of Plataea. These battles also saw the contributions of many key individuals, which lead to the victory of the Greeks in the ends as well as the rise of the Greek navy. These Key individuals included Leonidas, Themistocles, Eurybiades and Pausanias. They all had major roles and all contributed differently through out the Persian invasions leading to the victory of the Greeks of the
(http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/text?lookup-trm+ov+8.5&vers=engligh&browse+1). In conclusion, the Greeks defeated the Persians in the Persian Wars aided by unforgettable acts of heroism, divine support, and most importantly, Greek unity.
Although the Spartans and Athenians fought for almost 20 years, there was a time when they lived in harmony. Almost 15 years before any disturbances the Athenians and Spartans fought together in the Persian war. During the Persian war, the Spartans were thriving in their fight against the Persians, however over time the Persians began to grow stronger. After being to lose their fighting streak, the Athenians came in to help the Spartans and bring an end to Persian dominance once and for all (The Delian League, 1). After defeating the Persians in 449 B.C., the...
However, Heroditus’ Histories briefly detail the major events of the war, and relays them as if they were historical fact. Heroditus’ account of the war differs slightly from Homer’s version, and he is well aware of this. After relating the tale of Alexander (Paris) carrying off Helen, Heroditus writes:... ... middle of paper ... ...
The battle of Thermopylae was the Greek’s first stand against the massive army of King Xerxes, and was the most influential battle of the entire war. Up to this point, the Persian army was seen as too massive and powerful to be stopped. The once warring city-states of Greece knew they couldn’t stand against the Persians alone, and knew in order to defend their homeland they would have to unite. A unity of command was agreed upon; King Leonidas of Sparta was chosen to lead the Greek forces. He was chosen to lead because of the unsurpassed warring abilities the Spartans were so well known for made him perfect for the objective of stopping the Persians.
There are times in history that something will happen and it will defy all logic. It was one of those times when a few Greek city/states joined together and defeated the invasion force of the massive Persian Empire. The Greeks were able to win the Greco-Persian War because of their naval victories over the Persians, a few key strategic victories on land, as well as the cause for which they were fighting. The naval victories were the most important contribution to the overall success against the Persians. The Persian fleet was protecting the land forces from being outflanked and after they were defeated the longer had that protection. While the Greeks had very few overall victories in battle they did have some strategic victories. The Battle of Thermopylae is an example of a strategic success for the Greeks. The morale of the Persian army was extremely affected by the stout resistance put up by King Leonidas and his fellow Spartans. The Greeks fought so hard against overwhelming odds because of what they were fighting for. They were fighting for their country and their freedom. They fought so hard because they did not want to let down the man next to them in the formation. Several things contributed to the Greeks success against the Persian invasion that happened during the Second Greco-Persian War.
This paper will offer a commentary on Herodotus’ Histories 2.129-135. Book Two of Histories concerns itself with Egypt; specifically chapters 99-182 detail rulers of Egypt both legendary and actual. Book Two is distinct from the other books in Histories as it is in this book that we predominantly experience Herodotus as an investigator. More precisely it is in Book Two that Herodotus treats first person experience not as direct evidence but as a method of assessing the accounts of others. Chapters 129-135 provide us with the tale of King Mycerinus as recounted by whom Herodotus refers to in 2.127 as simply ‘ÆGYPTIOI’. These Egyptians are referred to at various points in Book Two and at times appear to refer to what might be termed ‘Egyptians in general’ . However, we can make a reasonable assumption in this instance, given what has been stated before at 2.99 and what is stated later at 2.142, that the Egyptians that provide Herodotus with the tale of King Mycerinus are probably priests. It should not be assumed that priests are any more reliable than the lay Egyptian in Histories however; the Egyptian priesthood did not necessarily concern itself with historical accuracy. Indeed the inclusion of priests may simply be a Herodotean literary device designed to reinforce his reader’s credulity.
Herodotus was an interesting historian. His way of displaying a historical event such as the Persian War is different from how I expect a modern day historian to write it. He does not try to focus only on the Persian war but he goes into detail some times of the lineage of the rulers of the city-states even though that serves little relevance to the actual war. The accounts of history I am used to reading are more focused on the bigger issue and the historians do not deviate on long trains of side thoughts such as Herodotus does. Herodotus style of writing had me confused because he often would start on one topic and in the next couple of sentences move on to another topic before coming back to his main point about a paragraph down. I had to
As seen throughout The Odyssey, a hero is perceived as a person who achieves great success never before seen and whose legacy lives beyond their years. Since The Odyssey was written around the eighth century BCE, the people that we view as heros in present day tend to embody different traits than the heroes of that time. Even though the word, “hero” does not have one specific definition, a hero is generally categorized as someone who is idolized for their bravery and does anything necessary to defend their people. Although Odysseus embodies the Homeric ideals of heroism in that he accomplishes triumphs that others have not, his successes are the product of divine intervention and his actions were primarily selfish; therefore, he is not a true
King Darius sent a large force to punish Athens with its interference. The Persian army landed at Marathon where Athenian forces attacked. Though they were outnumbered 2 to 1 they emerged victorious. Athens had convinced Sparta and other city-states to join them in their battles.
One of the most significant battles in antiquity was fought on the narrow, tree strewn plain of Marathon, in September, 490 BC. There, the Athenian army defeated a Persian force more than twice its size, because of superior leadership, training and equipment. The battle of Marathon has provided inspiration to the underdogs throughout history. In 490 BC, the Athenians proved that superior strategy, and technology can claim victory over massive numbers.
The Battle of Thermopylae began in 480 BC and was a product of the Greeks attempt help defend the Ionians from the Persians. This irritated the Persian Emperor, Xerxes, because he thought of Greece as a small kingdom that had no place revolting against the Persian Empire. The Athenians sympathized with the Ionians because the Persians had also tried to invade Greece on multiple occasions. The Athenians provided feeble help to the Ionians and in retaliation the Persians struck at athens (23B). Xerxes was known to be irrational with his temper, and may have thought of his invasion as retaliation for the fact that his father, Darius the Great, was defeated at the Battle of Marathon against the Greeks. His temper was so great that at Hellas Point he had the water whipped because it would not obey him (E49). One of several Greek war leaders in the Battle of Thermopylae was Leonidas, the second born son of King Anaxandridas. It was not until his half brother was killed under controversial circumstances that Leonidas rose to power (G72). Apart from misconceptions spread by the popular film “300,” the three hundred Spartans did not go into battle alone, and were accompanied by over eight hundred allies. Nevertheless, the Persians still outnumbered the Greeks ten to one, which is why it is incredible that the Greeks were able to hold them for three days before eventually losing that specific battle. Despite losing the battle in terms of soldiers and defending greece, the battle of thermopylae was somewhat successful in that it was a demonstration of the courage of greek soldiers, impressive battle tactics,
The Battle of Salamis is said to be one of the most important battles in all of history. It was a naval battle fought between the massive Persian army and smaller Greek army in the Bay of Salamis in 480 BCE. This battle was one of the many battles that were a part of the Greco-Persian war. This paper will explore the events leading up to the battle, the battle itself, including advantages and disadvantages both sides had on one and other, and finally will discuss the affects the result of this battle had on each side. Surprisingly, the much smaller Greek army defeated the Persians at the Battle of Salamis. How did this happen, one may ask? Although the Persians appeared to have the military advantage in this battle, particularly in terms of sheer size and numbers, the Greeks successfully defeated them with the help of their leaders, tactics, and many Persian blunders.
Herodotus observation and research upon the Scythians’ religion and folklore provides an insight to other groups. Herodotus begins by providing a myth from the Scythians which is described for the purpose of their origin. He states, “According to the Scythians, theirs is the youngest of all nations…he carried the gold home, and the elder brothers reacted to this event by agreeing to surrender the entire kingdom to the youngest” (4.5). Herodotus gives the myth of Colaxis, the youngest of his siblings, winning his throne by a burning gold deflaming for only him which he was able to to convince his brothers to grant him the kingdom. On the other hand, Greeks interpret their own story of how the first Scythian ruler came to power. (4.10) provides
The two Greeks writing primarily about Greece, Herodotus and Thucydides, were predominantly writers that concerned themselves mostly with wars and the data surrounding Greek and the combatant’s life during the time of war. Herodotus is considered the father of history, while Thucydides is in turn considered to have modified his method of writing to more exacting standards of accuracy. Herodotus, from Halicarnussus (a city in now-modern Turkey, then a city in the Greek province of Caria), wrote about the origins and customs of people, towns, regions, constitutions, politics of Egypt, Arabia and India, Scythia, Libya, and Thrace (Breisach 2007). His writing style is best described as a self-styled historian, convinced of his self-importance and knowledge, sure to insert his personal viewpoint wherever he deemed it necessary so as to impar...