Ionian Revolt Causes

The event that directly led to the first Persian invasion of Greece was the Ionian Revolt, which lasted from 499 BC to 493 BC. The revolt began with Aristogoras, who was eager to secure himself a position of power. He thought that the way to do this would be to ingratiate himself with the Persians, and thought that he could do this by securing the Persians a great victory. Aristogoras convinced the Persians to attempt to siege Naxos, but when the siege failed, the Persians blamed Aristogoras. Looking to protect himself, Aristogoras persuaded the citizens of Miletus to rebel. With the citizens already unhappy with Persian rule, they were quick to support Aristogoras. The people of Miletus killed the local Persian garrison, and by doing this,

freed the city. However, they could not stand against Persia alone.

Luckily, Greece was looking for an excuse to rebel, and after encouragement from Aristogoras, followed Miletus and rebelled. The Ionian revolt then spread through many cities, and by 499 B.C., most Ionian cities were independent again. However, the success was only temporary. While the Persian army was slow to mobilize, they were effective once they were in motion. Aristogoras, having planned for this, appealed to the mainland Greeks to help. Sparta refused, but Athens agreed, and sent an entire army plus a navy to help. In 496 B.C., the Ionians and Athenians burned Sardis, and drove the Persians out of Asia Minor. Herodotus says that, “When King Darius was informed that Sardis had been captured and burned by the Athenians and the Ionians… He put the question, “Who are the Athenians?” and, having his answer, asked for a bow. He took it, fitted an arrow to it, and shot it into the sky, and as he sent it up he prayed, ‘Zeus, grant me the chance of punishing the Athenians.’ Having said that, he ordered one of his servants that, as often as a meal was set before him, the man should say three times, ‘Master, remember the

Athenians’.”
However, when the Persian army arrived in full force, the rebellion was ended quickly. The sheer size of their army meant that they were able to quickly overpower any who were still trying to rebel against them The Battle of Lade soon followed, but that also ended with Persian victory. Aristogoras was killed, his city destroyed, and Miletus simply ceased to exist. By 493 B.C., the entire rebellion had been crushed

After the fall of Eretria, the Persians sailed at landed on the bay of Marathon.

Within hours, news had reached Athens of the landing, and they had to make the decision about what to do. After a debate about what should be done, the decision was made to go to Marathon and fight the Persians. A strength of about 10,000 Athenians and 1,000 Plataeans faced a force of about 26,000 Persians. One of the reasons why this was such a significant battle for the Athenians was the way they strategized and overcame the Persians. Instead of using the typical phalanx formation, Miltiades ordered that the middle of the line had only a depth of four soldiers, while the flanks both had a depth of eight soldiers. This meant that the Greek line was as long as the Persian line, and was not able to be outflanked. The line of Greeks walked forward at a steady pace until they reached the line of archer effectiveness (200-400m, according to different sources). From here, they broke into a run to the Persian line. As expected, the middle of the Greek line had started to be pushed back fairly early on into the fight. However, the flanks were able to engulf the Persians. Herodotus says, “They fought a long time at Marathon. In the centre of the line the foreigners prevailed, where the Persians and Sacae were arrayed. The foreigners prevailed there and broke through in pursuit inland, but on each wing the Athenians and Plataeans prevailed. In victory they let the routed foreigners flee, and brought the

wings together to fight those who had broken through the centre.…” The battle was ended when the Persians at the centre of their line broke away and fled to their ships. The Athenians pursued them, and while the majority of them were able to get away, the Athenians managed to capture several. “…then followed the fleeing Persians and struck them down. When they reached the sea they demanded fire and laid hold of the Persian ships.” After the battle, Herodotus says that “sailed around Sunium, but the Athenians marched back to defend the city as fast as their feet could carry them and got there ahead of the foreigners.” When the Persians saw the Athenians waiting for them, they “sailed their ships back to Asia.”
The Battle of Marathon was significant for the Persians because, during this battle, they did a lot of things that they had never done before. The first was the way they set up their line. Instead of using the traditional phalanx formation, Miltiades went with another strategy, changing it so that the Greek line was as long as the Persian line, and so that they would not be outflanked. The second was the way they ran most of the way towards the Persian line. “When they had been set in order and the sacrifices were favourable, the Athenians were sent forth and charged the foreigners at a run. The space between the armies was no less than eight stadia. The Persians saw them running to attack and prepared to receive them, thinking the Athenians absolutely crazy, since they saw how few of them there were and that they ran up so fast without either cavalry or archers.” Herodotus suggests that it was the first time a Greek army had gone into battle like that, and the Persians were evidently surprised.

The second Persian invasion of Greece began in 480 BC. Many battles were held during this invasion, including Thermopylae, and the battle which ended the Persian invasion entirely: Plataea. It is hard to tell how many troops the Persians entered Greece with exactly, as different sources vary. While Herodotus estimated a force of about 2,500,000, modern estimates state that they had a lot fewer (between 300,000 - 500,000). However, it is evident that Xerxes thought he would be able to secure a victory simply by having a larger force than the Greeks. The defeat at Marathon showed the Persians that the Greeks were able to strategize and gain victory even when outnumbered, and Xerxes must have thought that they would be able to win over the Greeks simply by having a much larger army than them. However, this was not the case, as the Persians were still defeated by the cunning and strategy of the Greeks.

The battle of Thermopylae is one of the most famous battles in Ancient Greek history. It is fairly easy to see how the Persians won the battle. While the Persians lost more men, they still had the strategic upper hand and a much larger army, and were able to defeat the Greeks easily. At the start of the battle, the Spartans seemed to be winning. With minimal armour and only wicker shields, the Persians were no match for the heavily armed Spartans. Seeing that the battle was in the Spartans’ favour, Xerxes decided to send in his elite force – the Immortals. This was ten thousand elite soldiers against what remained of the Greek force. But the Spartans were still relentless. However, the Greek traitor Ephialtes informed the Persians of a pathway that wound around the mountains and came out behind the Spartans. Xerxes used this information, using the cover of night to follow the path and surround the Greeks. If Ephialtes had not told the Persian army of this path, the outcome might have been different and the battle still might have been in the favour of the Greeks. While the Greeks had a significantly smaller force than the Persians, they were heavily armed and the fighting skill to eliminate large amounts of the Persian army. Before Ephialtes had betrayed the Greeks, it had looked as though they might have had a chance at winning the battle against the Persians. However, with the Persian army surrounding them, the Spartan King Leonidas knew that the Greeks were not going to win. With this in mind, Leonidas sent everyone but his 300 Spartans home, and the Persians easily wiped out the Spartans who were left behind.
Both Diodorus and Herodotus write about the battle of Thermopylae. While the two accounts are generally similar, there are many differences, which makes it hard to know what the truth was, as some details are vastly different. Diodorus writes that “Leonidas then led a valiant night attack on the Persian camp,” so that the Persians would not be aware of how small the Greek force was. While Herodotus claims that the battle was by day, both Justin in his Epitome of Pompeius Trogus (“He exhorted his Spartans "to remember that, however they struggled, they must expect to perish; to take care not to show more resolution to stay than to fight;" adding that, "they must not wait till they were surrounded by the enemy, but when night afforded them opportunity, must surprise them in security and at their ease . . . They immediately seized their arms, and six hundred men rushed into the camp of five hundred thousand.”) and Plutarch in his On the Malice of Herodotus (“For when they perceived by night that they were encompassed by the barbarians, they marched straight to the enemies' camp, and got very near the King's pavilion, with a resolution to kill him and leave their lives about him.”) speak of the night attack. Also, as is usually the case with ancient battles, there is some difference in the size of the two armies in the different sources. While Herodotus says that the Greek army had a force of around 5,000, Diodorus says that they had an army of around 7,000. In these numbers, the story of the 300 Spartans is consistent, but the other figures change with each source, whether it be Herodotus, Diodorus, or someone completely different.
Ancient Greek culture is the foundations of Western civilisation. Had the Persian wars turned out differently – for example, had the Persians won – the civilisation we know today could be completely different. The Persian invasions provided the Greeks, specifically Athenians, with the opportunity to prove their superiority in battle, both land and naval. Athens gained power, and the Delian League was developed. As this happened, Athens flourished and so did the Athenian Empire. Hermann Bengtson, in his ‘History of Greece: From the Beginnings to the Byzantine Era’, says: “In terms of world history, the ramifications of the Greek triumph over the Persians are almost incalculable. By repulsing the assault of the East the Hellenes charted the political and cultural development of the West for an entire century. With the triumphant struggle for liberty by the Greeks, Europe was first born, both as a concept and as a reality….The freedom which permitted Greek culture to rise to the classical models in art, drama, philosophy and historiography, this Europe owes to those who fought at Salamis and Plataea….If we regard ourselves today as free thinking people, it is the Greeks who created the condition for this.” While there will always be differences in different accounts of the Persian invasions, it is clear that had the outcome been different and the Persians had won, western civilization would be entirely different. The culture we know today would be heavily influenced by the Persian culture, rather than the Greeks. As a lot of the language and traditions we know today come from Greek culture, a lot of these could be different, had the Persians been successful in their invasion of Greece.