Doryanthes Exec. Editor: Les Bursill OAM

1

Volume 4, Number 3, August 2011Volume 4, Number 3, August 2011Commemorating the 2500 years since the Commemorating the 2500 years since the

Battle of MarathonBattle of Marathon

The “Soros” The Tumulus of the Athenians at MarathonThe “Soros” The Tumulus of the Athenians at Marathon

The Journal of History and Heritage The Journal of History and Heritage for Southern Sydneyfor Southern Sydney

ISSN 1835-9817 (Print) ISSN 1835-9825 (Online)ISSN 1835-9817 (Print) ISSN 1835-9825 (Online)Price $7.00 (Aus)Price $7.00 (Aus)

Doryanthes The Gymea Lily (spec. Doryanthes excelsa) From Greek “dory”: a spear and “anthos”: a flower, referring to the spear- like flowering stems; excelsa: from Latin excelsus: elevated, high, referring to the tall flower spikes.

Go to www.doryanthes.info

. 

The articles published herein are copyright © and may not be reproduced without permission of the author.

2

ISSN 1835-9817 (Print) - ISSN 1835-9825 (Online)The publishers of this Journal known as “Doryanthes” are Leslie Bursill and Mary Jacobs trading

as “Dharawal Publishers Inc. 2009”The business address of this publication is 10 Porter Road Engadine NSW, 2233.

Les.bursill@gmail.com www.doryanthes.info

Index of Articles Page NumberEditorial – Garriock Duncan 3McLeod Award Notes

Gleanings - Sue Duyker

4

5

The Soros at Marathon-Garriock Duncan

Marathon, Salamis and Plataea- Garriock Duncan

7

10

Those Who Dare to Remain In Place: Hoplite Warfare—the Evidence from the Nicholson Museum - Pamela Chauvel

15

Index of Articles Page Number

Cornelius Nepos: Life of MiltiadesTranslated with an historical commentary - 23Garriock Duncan

A Marathon Effort.An Australian at the first Modern Olympics- 33Merle Kavanagh

The First Marathon Race- Garriock Duncan 36

Scattered Seeds - Garriock Duncan 37

Book Reviews. Richard A. Billows, Marathon – Professor Edward Duyker 42Film Reviews The 300 Spartans and 300 – Michael Cooke 45

Editorial CommitteeChair/Editor/Publisher: Les Bursill, OAM, BA M.Litt UNE JP.

V/Chair: Garriock Duncan, BA(Hons) DipEd Syd MA Macq GradDipEdStud NSW MEd DipLangStud Syd.

Treasurer: Mary Jacobs, BEd Macq DipNat Nutr AustCollNaturalTherapies.

Film Review Editor: Michael Cooke, BEc LaT GradDipEd BA Melb MB VU.

Book Review Editor and Secretary: Adj. Prof. Edward Duyker, OAM, BA(Hons) LaT PhD Melb FAHA FLS FRHistS JP.

Committee Members:Sue Duyker, BEc BA(Asian Studies) ANU BSc(Arch.) B Arch Syd.Merle Kavanagh, DipFamHistStud SocAustGenealogists AssDipLocAppHist UNE.John Low, BA DipEd Syd DipLib CSU.

Editorial Policy;

1. All views expressed are those of the individual authors.

2. It is the Policy of this Journal that material published will meet the requirements of the Editorial Committee for content and style.

3. Appeals concerning non-publication will be considered. However decisions of the Editorial Committee will be final.

Les Bursill OAM on behalf of the Editorial Committee

The Ritchie Memorial Lecture for 2010, delivered at Sydney University, and entitled Marathon and the Persian Wars in the Imagination of the Greeks, was given by Prof. John Marincola of Florida State University. In the preamble to his lecture, Prof. Marincola identified 2011 as the 2500th anniversary of the Battle of Marathon (see: www.danaxtell.com/marathonanniversary). A quick mathematical exercise seems to indicate that 2011 is the 2501st anniversary. Reader, do not despair. The fault is not yours but that of Dionysius Exiguus, the man responsible for our dating system (see: R J Gould, Questioning the Millennium, 1997).

This edition of Doryanthes is the result of Prof. Marincola’s remark. Our original intention was for the entire edition to concern aspects of the Battle. That proved overly ambitious; it is now more accurate to say that this edition is inspired by the Battle of Marathon. The Table of Contents will reveal an eclectic mix of topics (including our regular features). We welcome a new contributor, Pamela Chauvel. Pamela works in educational programs at the Nicholson Museum (Usyd). She has written an article on hoplite warfare, based on material in the Museum. Two other articles deserve mention: the first is the translation and commentary on Cornelius Nepos, Life of Miltiades. As far as we can ascertain, this is the 1st English translation since the Loeb Classical Library edition of 1929; secondly, the article by Merle Kavanagh, linking the Battle, the modern Olympic Games and Australia’s first Olympic medallist.

How decisive was the Battle? It does not rate a mention in any Persian source, just another minor engagement on the edge of empire. However, for armchair warriors of Victorian England, the Battle was a seminal event in world history, or that is how Sir Edward Creasy (The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World from Marathon to Waterloo, 1851: (http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=4061) saw it. Creasy’s argument is, today, somewhat muted by the fact that he wrote before even the Crimean War, let alone the two World Wars or the wars of decolonialism since the end of World War II. As is often stated, the true decisive outcome of Marathon was the Battle of Salamis in 480 BC.

The Committee of Doryanthes would like to take this opportunity to make two announcements. The first is very close to home. Regular readers would recognise the name, Marika Low. Marika, the daughter of Committee Member, John Low, has been our intermittent correspondent on topics relating to classical archaeology. Earlier this year, Marika graduated from Sydney University with the degree of B.A., with 1st class honours in Archaeology. Marika is currently plying her trade as a practitioner of Australian Archaeology in the Pilbara region, WA.

Secondly, the publication of this edition of Doryanthes has been generously supported by a grant from the Classical Association of NSW, under the terms of The Ian McLeod Award Program, 2011.

Garriock Duncan

3

Editorial –

The Ian McLeod Award for the Promotion of Classical Studies (2011)

The chief object of the Classical Association New South Wales Inc. is to promote the development of classical studies in New South Wales. The Association was founded in 1909 and conducts a range of activities, including lectures, social functions, workshops and a Latin and Greek reading competition for school students. It sponsors the annual Sydney Latin Summer School and is the co-sponsor of the journal Classicum. The Association has close links with similar bodies in other states. For more information, see: http://classics.org.au/cansw/index.html.

In 2011, the Classical Association of New South Wales established the annual Ian McLeod Award to be first awarded in 2011. The Award will be granted to support a project which will promote in New South Wales the study of the culture of the ancient Mediterranean (before AD 700). The award is to give public recognition to the efforts of Ian McLeod, longtime Hon. Secretary of CANSW, and, for many years, Director of the Latin Summer School at the University of Sydney (both positions till 2009). The award will, in future, be awarded in the November of each year for a project to be completed in the following year. Funds will be awarded on a competitive basis, and the right to make no award on any occasion is reserved. The decision on which application or applications to approve will be made by a subcommittee of the Council of CANSW, consisting of the President or nominee, the Secretary, the Treasurer and one other Council member.

Within the overall context of promoting these objects, the Ian McLeod Award will be given to a project which in the judgment (and the absolute discretion) of the subcommittee either promotes classical studies via the press or electronic media, or promotes and advances classical studies in schools (at any level or all levels from Kindergarten to Year 12), or promotes and advances classical studies in adult and community education.

Doryanthes’ Project Submission:We are a community based magazine published quarterly since November (2008). It has a small print run of 35 copies (distributed mainly to institutional libraries) with an on-line mail out of 800+ copies. Past editions can be viewed at: www.doryanthes.info and click on archive), The magazine is not specifically a classical studies magazine but has increasingly published articles of classical interest.

Funding is sought for the publication in August, 2011, of a commemorative edition devoted to the Battle of Marathon. We seek a sum of $900 to publish an additional 100 print copies for distribution to local high schools.

Our submission was approved on May 2, 2011.

4

Gleanings from the Ancient World (August 2011)The Etruscans: A Classical FantasyFrom 6 July 2011, Nicholson Museum, University of Sydney, southern entrance to the Quadrangle, Manning Rd, CamperdownIn popular imagination the Etruscans are the very stuff of fantasy, myth and legend. Who are they, where did they come from, what does their language mean? In reality, although wiped out or assimilated by Rome, they have left us an extraordinarily rich heritage of art, jewellery, metal working, terracotta sculpture, urban planning, walls, and roads. Indeed, in the 6th century BC, the Etruscans were the most powerful people in the Mediterranean. So what went wrong?www.sydney.edu.au/museums/events_exhibitions/nicholson_exhibitions.shtml

Image: Details of a wall painting from the Tomb of the Leopards, Tarquinia, 5th century BC.

The Philo and the Jewish Community at Alexandria07:05pm, Tuesday 6 September 2011, Macquarie University, W6A308In conjunction with Sir Asher Joel Foundation, Professor Sarah Pearce (University of Southampton): The Philo and the Jewish Community at Alexandria. Professor Pearce is brought to Australia courtesy of ANU.For information contact SSEC@mq.edu.au

Higher School Certificate Study Days for Greek & Roman TopicsSaturday 17 September 2011, Macquarie University Greek & Roman Topics for the HSC.For information contact Macquarie Ancient History Association (MAHA)newsletter@ancienthistory.com.au

Diolkos for 1500 Years The Diolkos was a paved trackway which enabled boats to be moved overland across the Isthmus of Corinth. The shortcut allowed vessels to avoid the long dangerous sea route around the Peloponnese peninsula.

5

GleaningsWith Sue Duyker

The main function of the Diolkos was the transfer of goods, although in times of war it also became a preferred means of speeding up naval campaigns. It operated from circa 600 BC until the middle of the 1st century AD. The scale on which the Diolkos combined the two principles of the railway and the overland transport of ships was unique in antiquity.Photos of the remains of the Diolkos and details of the campaign to save this ancient monument are here: www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.427804384101.226818.660439101&l=3d11aff07f “Diolkos for 1500 Years” is an animated documentary short depicting the transport of a small 4th century BC merchant vessel over the ancient diolkos portage road. The film was initiated by the Society of Ancient Greek Technology, produced by the Technical Chamber of Greece, and directed by T.P. Tassios, N. Mikas, and G. Polyzos. It is available on YouTube in Greek and English versions. See the link, below.

corinthianmatters.com/the-isthmus/the-diolkos/diolkos-links-and-videos/

Marathon Commemorative Coin, AustraliaThe Perth Mint has marked the 2500th anniversary of the Battle of Marathon with the issue of a silvercommemorative coin.www.perthmint.com.au/catalogue/pheidippidis-marathon-run-2500th-anniversary-490bc-2010-1oz-silver-proof-coin.aspx

Finally, take advantage of the high Australian Dollar with this tempting event:

Athens Classic Marathon 2011Sunday 13 November 2011, starting at 9:00am The Athens Classic Marathon takes place on the reputed route where the agile Pheidippides ran with news of the victory of the Greeks over the Persians. The young man ran the 42 km from the battlefield to the capital as fast as he could, announced his joyous message, and died. The course of the Athens Classic Marathon gives you the possibility to challenge yourself and be part of history at the same time. For runners who wish to experience history but don’t fancy a 42km run in hilly Attica, the Athens Classic Marathon also features a 5km and a 10km run starting and finishing at the stadium in Athens.

Registration www.athensclassicmarathon.gr/marathon/fmain.aspx

The Soros at Marathon

6

Garriock Duncan

Regular readers of Doryanthes will notice a change in our front cover. For this edition, the image of the doryanthes has been rested and instead, readers will see a photo of the Soros at Marathon. As used by Herodotus (1.68.2, 2.78)1, soros has the meaning, coffin.2 This meaning, according to my modern Greek correspondent, is retained to this day. However, when driving into Marathon, do not look for a sign pointing to the Soros of Marathon. For modern Greek uses tymbros to denote the mound. So, look for the Tymbros of Marathon. Tymbros (LSJ, q.v., p. 1834a) is another classical Greek survivor and is probably a more precise term, since its standard English meaning is burial mound or tomb (see: Hdt, 1.45.3).

Greek hoplite warfare was a stylised experience and once the battle was over (the defeated having acknowledged their defeat), the tidying up of the battlefield took place. 3 This, of course, mainly meant dealing with the victims of both sides. The enemy dead would receive little attention. At Marathon, the Persian dead were left unburied for several days, since the late arriving Spartans were able to view the Medes (Hdt., 6.129). Eventually, the bodies were tossed into a nearby ditch, the location being lost till 1884/5.4

The Athenians were unable to savour their victory long. The Persians appear to have had a back up plan. For they sailed to Athens in the hope of effecting a landing at Phaleron before the Athenian force could return (Hdt., 6. 115). Miltiades force marched nine of the ten tribal regiments back to Athens to oppose the likely Persian landing (Hdt., 6.116.1) The tenth, under the command of Aristides was left to guard the battlefield (Plutarch [Plut.]., Aristides, 5 [pp. 114-115]).5

Thucydides, in his introduction to the funeral speech of Pericles (2.35-2.46) describes the usual method, by which Athens buried her military dead (2.34).6 As outlined by Thucydides, the bodies were brought back to Athens for burial. There was a signal exception - those, who fell at Marathon: for their singular and extraordinary valour [they] were interred on the spot where they fell (2.34.5). No doubt, this service was carried out by Aristides and the regiment of the Antiochis tribe. They buried the dead and raised a temporary trophy to the victory.7

Today, the burial site is crowned by the soros.8 When the mound was raised is a matter of debate.9 However, Pausanias does add some additional information - the mound was surmounted by stelai , inscribed with the names of the dead, arranged by tribe (2.32.3).1 References to Herodotus (henceforth cited as Hdt) are to: The Landmark Herodotus, ed. R B Strassler, Pantheon Books, New York, 2007.2 H G Liddell & R Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, 9ed., rev. H S Jones, OUP, 1940 (henceforth cited as LSJ), q.v., p. 1621a.3 V D Hanson, The Western Way of War, Hodder & Stoughton, 1989, pp. 197-209.4 See: B Petrakos, Marathon, The Archaeological Society at Athens, 1996, pp. 24-25. Some 640 years after the battle, when he visited the site, Pausanias was unable to locate the grave of the Persians (1.32.4). References to Pausanias are to: Pausanias, Guide to Greece 1: Central Greece, Penguin Classics, 1971.5 All references to Plutarch are to: Plutarch, The Rise and Fall of Athens, Penguin Classics, 1960.6 References to Thucydides are to: The Landmark Thucydides, ed. R B Strassler. Free Press, 1996.7 Petrakos, op. cit., pp. 26-27. Eventually, a memorial of white marble would be erected (Pausanias1.32.4). 8 Petrakos, op. cit., pp. 18-21.

7

No doubt, the disgrace of Miltiades in 489 (Hdt., 6.135; Nepos, Miltiades, 7) had an adverse effect on the renown of Marathon. However, there would be other memorials to the battle. These result from a concerted program of Cimon’s to assert the glory of Marathon and, hence, rehabilitate the reputation of his father, Miltiades.10 There were helmet dedications in the Athenian Treasury at Delphi11; the Marathon base built against the Athenian Treasury12; the inclusion of a statue of Mitliades in the monument of the Eponymous Heroes in the Agora at Athens (Pausanias, 10.10.1)13; the great Marathon painting in the Stoa Poikile in the Agora (Pausanias, 1.15.3)14; and the south frieze of the temple of Athena Nike on the Acropolis,15

However, there is another very evocative memorial to Athens. The great Athenian tragedian, Aeschylus, fought in both Marathon and Salamis. Yet his great historical tragedy on the Persian Wars, The Persians, is not about Marathon but Salamis.16 Indeed, it is possible that the first Greek ship to ram an enemy vessel at Salamis was that of Aeschylus’ brother, Ameinias.17 Yet when Aeschylus, reportedly, came to write his own epitaph, the only thing he chose to mention of his life was his presence at Marathon.18

This tomb in wheat-bearing Gela covers the dead Aeschylus, [son] of Euphorion, from Athens; the grove of Marathon can vouch for his famed valour, and the long-haired Mede who knew it well.19

Indeed, the site at Marathon retained such a special magic that it was still obvious when Pausanias visited some six hundred years after the battle:

The country district of Marathon, halfway between Athens and Carystus in Euboea, is where the barbarians landed in Attica, were beaten in battle, and lost some ships as they retreated. The grave on the plain is that of the Athenians; there are stones on it carved with the names of the dead in their tribes. The other grave is that of the Plataeans, Boeotians, and slaves: this was the first battle in which slaves fought.

One man, Miltiades, has a private memorial; he died later after failing at Paros and standing trial at Athens. Here every night you can hear the noise of

9 P Krentz ( The Battle of Marathon, Yale UP, 2010, p. 170) argues that the mound was raised quite soon after the battle, basing his decision on the date of pottery found in the mound.10 See: S Hornblower, The Greek World, 479-323 BC, 4ed, Routledge, 2011, pp. 18-19.11 R B Strassler, ed., The Landmark Herodotus, Pantheon Books, New York, 2007, fig. 6.117a (p, 476).12 For the text, see: C Fornara, Archaic Times to the End of the Peloponnesian War, John Hopkins UP, 1977, no. 50 (pp. 49-50). For the treasury, see: M Andronicos, Delphi, Ekdotike Athenon, 2002, pp. 24, 25, 26.13 On the monument, see: The Athenian Agora, American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1976, pp. 69, 70-72.14 On the Stoa Pokile (the Painted Stoa), see: J Camp, The Athenian Agora, Thames and Hudson, 1986, pp. 69-71; and The Athenian Agora, pp. 102-103.15 J Hurwitt, The Acropolis in the Age of Pericles, CUP, 2004, p. 86, and. figs. 74-75 (p.85)16 On the play, see: T W Hillard, “Aeschylus' Persae as Theatre”, Ancient History, 20(1), 1990, pp.6-15. For the text with commentary, see: H D Broadhead, The Persae of Aeschylus, CUP, 1960, and translation and commentary: A J Podlecki, Aeschylus, The Persans, Bristol Classical Press, 1991.17 This identification is not certain. See: Podlecki, op. cit., n. 9 (p. 120).18 Another brother, Cynegeiros, was killed At Marathon in the melee round the Persian ships (Hdt., 6.114).19 The translation is Petrakos’ (op. cit., p. 46). Also, see: R A Billows,Marathon, Overlook /Duckworth, 2010, pp.34-35.

8

whinnying horses and of men fighting. It has never done a man good to wait there and observe this closely, but if it happens against a man’s will the anger of the demonic spirits will not follow him. The people of Marathon worship as heroes those killed in the battle (1.32.3-4).

In a little under four years will occur the100th anniversary of the Gallipoli landing. We, in Australia, have, in a way, copied the Athenians. They, too, so impressed by the achievement, coined a special word to describe those, who fought at Marathon, Marathonomaches, (lit. “the fighter of/at Marathon”).20 The word acquired iconic status. Aristophanes’ usage indicates its currency,21 Though by the time of Aristophanes any surviving Marathon fighters would have been very elderly gentleman, even by our standards let alone those of the Athenians. By the time Pausanias arrived at Marathon, the celebrations of the victory were entering their seventh century. I wonder how Australia will still be celebrating the Gallipoli landing in another six hundred years.

In a speech given in Sparta in 432/1 prior to the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, some Athenian envoys describe the contribution of Athens to Greek victory in the Persian Wars. The envoys are keen to get across to the Spartans the extent of the Athenian contribution to the final victory over the Persians, though somewhat expectedly the envoys concentrate on Salamis rather than Plataea. In this context, there is not much scope to dwell on Marathon. However, in their preamble, as it were, to their comments on Salamis, there is a brief comment on Marathon—brief but significant:

We need not refer to remote antiquity…But to the Persian wars and the contemporary history we must refer…We assert that at Marathon, we were in the forefront of danger and faced the barbarian by ourselves (Thuc., 1.73.2, 4).

Marathon was never a Greek victory, it was always an Athenian victory. Today, the only monument to that victory, virtually intact, easily accessible and open to all, is the Soros at Marathon.

20 LSJ, q.v., p. 1080b. Interestingly, it seems that those Athenians, who fought at Salamis, were not deemed worthy of a similar honour. There is no word, Salaminomaches. At least, LSJ does not list one (see p. 1581b).21 Billows, op. cit., pp. 35-37; Krentz, op. cit., p. 177; Petrakos, op. cit., n. 56 (p. 187).

9

The Tymbros at Marathon

Marathon, Salamis and Plataea—a Survey of the Period, 490-479.

Garriock Duncan

The purpose of this edition of Doryanthes is to commemorate the 2500th anniversary of the Battle of Marathon. However battles do not occur in isolation but must be seen in context. So, the purpose of this introductory article is to sketch that context. I must supply a caveat, however. Though in honour of Marathon, this edition of Doryanthes will contain no detailed account of the battle.22

In my title, I omit the Battle of Thermopylae. While Thermopylae is, of course, a stirring example of courage and duty in the face of overwhelming odds, the battle had no lasting geo-political significance.23 Contrast this with the Battle of Salamis. Athens’ victory at Salamis (in 48024) triggered off an explosion of creativity for the next fifty years—as recorded in the Pentakontaetia of Thucydides25. Most of what you, readers, know of Ancient Greece probably happened in this fifty year period. It spawned drama, history, democracy and the Acropolis complex, with the Parthenon as its centre piece.26

We are told we live in one of those seminal points in history, when vast historical forces collide, i.e. a “Clash of Civilizations”, the outcome of which will determine the course of future history.27

Unfortunately, since we are living through the clash, we lack the appropriate detachment to pronounce on the validity of the claim. However, such clashes have occurred previously. One such clash was the succession of the wars between the Persians and the various Greek states in the 5th and 4th centuries. This period of conflict ended only with the decisive defeat of the Persian King, Darius III, at the Battle of Gaugamela in 331, or perhaps with the death of Alexander the Great in 323.28

The Persian Empire began in c. 550, when Cyrus, a Persian prince, rebelled against his Median overlord, Astyages (Herodotus [Hdt.], 1.123-130).29 The Persian Empire was an expansive one and came into contact with the Greeks, when Cyrus overwhelmed the 22 For readers, who wish to know more, I have supplied extensive notes. The works cited therein range from the popular to the scholarly. Additionally within the text, I have supplied references to the major ancient authorities.23 The battle did spawn the execrable film, 300. For a review, see: P Byrnes, “In the name of freedom”, Arts and Entertainment, p. 15, in The Sydney Morning Herald. Weekend Edition, April 6-8, 2007.24 All dates are BC.25 Thucydides [Thuc.], 1.89-118. References to Thucydides are to: The Landmark Thucydides, ed. R B Strassler. Free Press, 1996. For a convenient text (with commentary), see: A French, ed., The Athenian Half Century, Sydney UP, 1971.26 See the comment by Burn: A R Burn, Pericles and Athens, English Universities Pres, 1948, p. 114.27 See: S P Huntingdon, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order, Simon & Schuster, 1966. For a historical survey of clashes, see: A Pagden, Worlds at War, Random House, 2008.28 Eg: J Cassin-Scott, The Greek and Persian Wars, 500-323 BC, Men-at-Arms Series, Osprey, 1977.29 References to Herodotus are to: The Landmark Herodotus, ed. R B Strassler, Pantheon Books, New York, 2007) History calls Cyrus, Cyrus the Great, and he is probably better known from his appearance in the Old Testament. See: T A Bryant, ed., The New Compact Bible Dictionary, Zondervan Publishing House, 1967, “Cyrus”, q.v., p.p. 121b-122b; J M Court, ed., Dictionary of the Bible, Penguin, 2007, “Cyrus”, q.v., pp. 65-66.

10

Lydian Empire of Croesus (Hdt., 1.77-79.2-3). The Persians were content to exercise a loose control over their subject. The next stage in the narrative came with the emergence of Darius.30 The precise nature of Darius’ links with the previous dynasty is unknown.31

However, Darius claimed descent from Achaemenes, the legendary progenitor of the Persian royal family (Hdt., 1.125.2). By the end of the 6th century, the Persians had crossed over into Europe and established a foothold in Thrace (Hdt., 4.96, 118).

Behind this frontier, in Ionia, the Persians had appointed absolute rulers to exercise control over the Greek subjects of the Empire.32 Several of these rulers had been entrusted to guard the bridge across the Hellespont, by which Darius’ forces had crossed over into Europe. One of them, Histaeus (Hdt., 5.32.2-4), had ambitions of the tyranny of Naxos. 30 Darius also rates a mention in the Old Testament. (Bryant [n.8], “Darius”, q.v. 2, , p. 126b).31 See: Hdt., 3.70, 71-73, 76-79, 85-87.32 The correct term for these rulers is “tyrants”. However, the word does not yet have the pejorative sense acquired later (A Andrewes, The Greek Tyrants, Hutchinsons University Library, 1974, pp. 20-30). The term was first applied to the Lydian ruler, Gyges. (Hdt.,1.8-14; Andrewes, op. cit, n. 10, p. 155). See, also: C W Fornara, ed., Archaic Times to the End of the Peloponnesian War, John Hopkins UP, 1977, n. 8 (p. 11).

11

Hoplite Phalanx and below the Persian Enemy

His plans seem to have been exposed and in an attempt to evade punishment, he persuaded his son-in-law, Aristagoras (Hdt., 5.35-36) to rebel against the Persians. This revolt is better known as the Ionian Revolt.33 Athens and Eretria, on the island of Euboea, unwisely become involved in this revolt of Persia’s Greek subject (Hdt., 5.99). The high point of the revolt was the attack on Sardis, the Persian administrative centre for the region. The lower town, but not the citadel was captured. However, the temple of the Great Mother (Cybele) was accidentally burnt to the ground (Hdt., 5.101-102). The Greeks would come to rue this accident. Thereafter, Athens and Eretria withdrew from the revolt. The Greeks were finally defeated at the Battle of Lade in the harbour of Miletus, in 494 (Hdt., 6.14-18).

After the suppression of the revolt in 494, the Persian King, Darius planned a revenge attack on Athens and Eretria (Hdt., 5.105, 6.94). His initial attempt, in 492, ended in disaster on the northern Greek coast near Mt. Athos (Hdt., 6.44.2-3). A second attempt, two years later, saw the Persians landing on the northern coast of Attica at Marathon. The Persians had the advantage of local knowledge. Hippias, the last Pisitratid tyrant of Athens, was accompanying them (Hdt., 6.102, 107). It was on his advice that Marathon was chosen. Hippias’ father, Pisistratus, had landed there at the beginning of his last and successful attempt to become tyrant of Athens.34

The Athenians sought help from the Spartans but this was not forthcoming because of the Spartans’ religious scruples. The only assistance, the Athenians would receive, was a force of 1000 hoplites from Plataea. A hoplite force, under the overall command of Callimachus, the Archon Polemarch, marched north to confront the Persians. There were several days of inactivity and discussion on the part of the Athenians, As the Persians were about to withdraw and crucially, it seems, after the Persian cavalry had already re-embarked, the Athenians, on the day under the command of Miltiades, one of the new tribal generals (strategoi), attacked (Hdt., 6.104-111). A feature of the battle was the hoplite charge at the run against the Persian ranks, no doubt to minimize the danger afforded by the Persian archers (Hdt., 6.112).35 The Athenians shattered Darius’ ambition (Hdt., 6.113-114.36 A subsequent attempt by the Persians to attack Athens from the sea was thwarted when Miltiades led nine of the ten regiments on a forced march back to Athens (Hdt., 6.116). The tenth, under the command of Aristides was left to guard the battlefield (Plutarch [Plut.]., Aristides, 5 [pp. 114-115]).37

It would be ten years before the Persians, now ruled by Darius’ son, Xerxes, would return.. However, during that ten year period, the Athenians had made a truly bold decision to forego the pretence of being a land power, probably because of Sparta’s dominance in that area, and to become a sea power. In 483, an unexpected financial windfall was spent not on enlarging the hoplite force but instead on a significant expansions of Athens’ naval resources (Hdt., 7.143-144).38 The stage had been set for the battle of Salamis.

33 A R Burn, The Pelican History of Greece, Penguin, 1965, pp. 157-158; N G L Hammond, History of Greece to 323 BC, OUP, 1959, pp. 204-207.34 On the Pisistratid tyranny, see: Andrewes, pp. 100-115; W G Forrest, The Emergence of Greek Democracy, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1966, pp. 175-189; J D Smith, Athens under the Tyrants, Bristol Classical Press, 1989.35 Krentz disputes this. He argues that the charge was to negate the influence of Persian cavalry, i.e the Persian cavalry had not yet re-embarked (P Krentz, The Battle of Marathon, Yale UP, 2010, pp. 143-152).36 R A Billows, Marathon, Overlook Duckworth, 2010; Krentz; A Lloyd, Marathon, Souvenir Press, 2004; N Sekunda, Marathon, 490 BC, Osprey, 2002. Books on Marathon often have highly emotive subtitles: Billows, “How one Battle Changed Western Civilization”; Lloyd, “the story of civilizations on (a) collision course. This is not exclusive to Marathon; cf. the subtitle of Strauss (B Strauss, The Battle of Salamis, Simon & Schuster, 2004), “the naval encounter that saved Greece—and western civilization”.37 All references to Plutarch are to: Plutarch, The Rise and Fall of Athens, Penguin Classics, 1960.

12

In 480, Xerxes returned to demand the submission of all mainland Greece. In a rare display of unity, the major Greek states met in congress at Corinth to form a military alliance, the pan- Hellenic League, the command being entrusted to Sparta, to reject the Persian demand (Hdt., 7.172). 39 Xerxes’ invasion began in 480. A combined land and sea invasion force moved into Greece from Persian controlled territory to the north of Greece. The first major Greek opposition was at Thermopylae (Hdt., 7.200-239).40

A scratch force from several Greek states barred the Persian advance along the narrow coastal plain. After days of skirmishing and a minor naval engagement at nearby Artemisium (Hdt 8.1-11, 14-18)41, the Persians were able to turn the Greek position. A small rearguard, composed principally of Spartans, held the pass to the last man to enable the majority of the Greek force to escape.

38 Also Aristotle, Constitution of Athens, 22.7 (Penguin Classics, 1984); Plut., Themistocles, 4 (p. 80). See: J Hale, Lords of the Sea, Penguin, 2009, pp. 12-14.39 The Greeks may not have been united as imagined. See my article, “Greek Disunity in the Persian Wars”, Teaching History, 27(3), 1993, pp. 9-10.40 E Bradford, Thermopylae, MacMillan, 1980; P Cartledge, Thermopylae, Pan, 2006; R Matthews, The Battle of Thermopylae, The History Press, 2006.41 Hale, op.cit., pp. 45-51.

13

The

Spartans wished to abandon all of Greece north of the Isthmus of Corinth, but meanwhile the combined Greek fleet had taken up positions around the island of Salamis The Spartan admiral, Eurybiades, was no match for the guile of the commander of the Athenian contingent, Themistocles. Themistocles was able to convince the Persians to attack the combined Greek fleet, on terms favourable to the Greeks. The resulting Greek victory at Salamis was so decisive that Xerxes immediately returned to Persia after the battle (Hdt., 8.40-122).42 The Persian army was left to retire north without the support of Persian naval forces.

The next year, 479, the Persian army was brought to bay near the Boeotian town of Plataea (Hdt., 9.19-20).43 For once, the Spartans did not have any religious festivals to attend to and were able to field their full force. The resulting battle was a total victory for

42 H D Broadhead, The Persae of Aeschylus, CUP, 1960, pp. 322-339;Hale, pp. 55-71; V D Hanson, Why the West has Won, Faber & Faber, 2001, pp. 27-59; R Nelson, The Battle of Salamis, William Lumbscombe, 1975; Strauss, n. 15; W Shepherd, Salamis, 480 BC, Campaign Series, Osprey Publishing, 2010. 43 T Lendvai, “The Battle of Plataea, Pt. 1”, Teaching History, 37(3), 2003, 4-14; ibid, “The Battle of Plataea, Pt. 2”, Teaching History, 37(4), 2003, 56-61.

14

The Serpent Column – thesymbol of Greek Unity

the Greeks. However, the unity which had prevailed over the Persians at Plataea quickly began to fragment and future battle lines began to emerge. Since Salamis, the Greek naval forces, now under the practical command of Athens, had pursued the retreating remnants of the Persian navy across the Ionian sea and utterly destroyed them at the Battle of Mycale (Hdt., 9.90-107). This Greek victory at Mycale decisively tipped the balance of power in the favour of the Greeks.

After Mycale, all pretence of Greek unity was abandoned and Athens assumed control of the now naval war against the Persians. Sporadic fighting (principally the Battle of the Eurymedon River in 469 (Thucydides [Thuc.], 1.100.1)44 and the expedition to Egypt in 459 (Thuc., 1.104.1, 110)45 between the Delian League and the Persians continued for a number of years. This active phase of the Greek and Persian Wars was finally concluded by the Peace of Callias in c.449.46 Any future conflict between Greek and Persian would take place in Persian territory.47 Gradually that rift developed between the two former allies, Athens and Sparta, which Thucydides recognized as the true cause of the Peloponnesian War, 431-404 (Thuc., 1.23.6).48

Astute readers will have noticed that I have gone well beyond my remit, beyond 479. There are a number of dates used to mark the end of the Persian Wars.49 However, the traditional way of dividing Greek history into specific historical episodes chooses 479 as the dividing point between the Persian Wars and the next phase of Greek History.50

However, the date is not some modern intrusion. In fact, it was chosen by Herodotus. Herodotus was not a contemporary writer. He was writing some forty years later than the events he described. With the benefit of hindsight, he was able to appreciate a significant change had occurred in Greek history. 51The Hellenic League had been formed to fight for the freedom of the Greeks. The Hellenic League had collapsed in 479. The Spartans withdrew and Athens acquired control of what would become the Delian League, i.e. the alliance of Athens and her allies. What once had fought to free the Greeks, now became the instrument of their enslavement (cf. Thuc., 6.76.3). Herodotus wisely chose to cease his enquiries at 479. Henceforth, the dominant issue of Greek history is the expansionist policies of Athens, with their impact upon the interpretation of Greece’s history, whether it be previous or current.52

44 Hale (n. 17). 92-94. 45 V Ehrenberg, From Solon to Socrates, Methuen, 1973, 214; Hale (n. 17), pp. 99-103, 107-108; S Hornblower, The Greek World, 479-323 BC, Methuen, 1983, pp, 40-42.46 See: Ehrenberg op.cit., n. 74, pp. 445-446; Hale op.cit., pp. 108-109; G M de St Croix, The Origins of the Peloponnesian War, Duckworth, 1972, pp. 310-314.47 Thereafter, Persian involvement in Greek affairs was diplomatic and financial not military. Determined military conflict between the Greeks and the Persians did not begin again until the rise of the Macedonian kingdom in the mid 4th century B.C.48 See: D Kagan, The Outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, Cornell UP, 1969; de St. Croix.49 See Cassin-Scott, op.cit. and: P de Souza, The Greek and Persian Wars 499-386 BC, Essential Histories 36, Osprey, 2003.50 See the following titles: Hornblower op.cit; P Osborne, Greece in the Making, 1200-479 BC, Routledge, 199651 Osbourne, op cit,, pp. 351-352.52 See my article: “Inscriptions and the Politics of the Persian Wars”, Doryanthes, 2(1), February, 2009, pp. 33-39.

15

The Stoa in the Agora at Miletus

Those Who Dare to Remain In Place: Hoplite Warfare—the Evidence from the

Nicholson MuseumPamela Chauvel

…the Athenians came on, closed with the enemy along the line, and fought in a way not to be forgotten. They were the first Greeks, so far as I know, to charge at a run, and the first who dared to look without flinching at Persian dress and the men who wore it53

In 490BC a force of 10 000 Athenians and 1 000 Plataeans, outnumbered three to one, not only defeated the Persian army, but did so with comparatively low fatalities, 192 dead, compared to 6400 Persian deaths. This victory on the Plain of Marathon highlighted the superiority of hoplite armour and techniques when facing a lighter armed and less cohesive army.

But what was it really like for the men who fought in the Greek phalanx, who stood in their ranks and faced the bristling spears and flashing bronze shields of the enemy across the plain? Soldiers, fighting under Greek summer sun, faced dust from thousands of feet, entering eyes and mouths, obscuring vision already restricted by cumbersome helmets. As they held their spears high and raised their heavy shields did they feel fear or did they focus on holding their place in the phalanx until finally one side broke through and the defeated succumbed to panic and confusion?

So let each man hold to his place with legs well apart,Feet planted on the ground, biting his lip with his teeth….

Covered by the belly of his broad shieldIn his right hand let him brandish his mighty spearLet him shake the fearsome crest upon his head54

 

Although the Spartan poet Tyrtaeus was writing in the 7th century, the fragments of his poetry that survive have resonance for hoplite warfare.

In the sources there are only limited descriptions of battles from a soldier’s point of view.

53 Herodotus, The Histories, 6.113, translated by Aubrey de Selincourt (Penguin, 1954).54 Tyrtaeus, fr.11. 21-22, 24-26 in Andrew M. Miller, Greek Lyric: An Anthology in Translation (1996).

16

What took place was different from battle to battle and a composite picture can only be inferred from evidence which comes from three sources: archaeological, the actual armour and weapons found; written accounts; and depictions on vases and artworks. 

The Nicholson Museum at the University of Sydney contains several artefacts depicting warriors fighting, or going off to war. The images are idealized and heroic.  An example is the Antimenes Amphora (Fig 1), which depicts a mythical scene, yet has the characters equipped with armour and weapons of the 6th century.  The scene is of Herakles, wearing his characteristic lion skin, fighting Kyknos, son of Ares. In the middle stands Zeus, on the left supporting Herakles is the goddess Athena, and to the right, fighting with his son, is Ares.  Both Kyknos and Ares wear a bell cuirass, greaves, a short kilt and a Corinthian helmet, although with different styles of crest.  A lock of Kyknos’s long hair trails down his back.  Typical of hoplite battles, the weapons being used are thrusting spears.  The artist has indicated the outcome by having Herakles’ spear already piercing the shield of

17

Fig. 1: Antimenes Amphora (NM71.1), 525-500 BC

lean

forward, their weight on their front foot, bodies open.  Kyknos and Ares have their weight on the back foot, shield up in a defensive position.  It is evident that Herakles, the hero, will win.

Interestingly, Herakles and Kyknos are carrying a Boeotian shield. No actual version of this type of shield has been found yet it seems to be associated in artworks with heroic scenes, and pre-dates the round hoplon shield. The Dipylon shield on the Geometric krater (c.750-725BC) from the Nicholson Museum (fig 2) could be an earlier type of shield or a different artistic depiction of it. On the Antimenes Amphora, Athena and Ares hold round hoplon shields. Both Boeotian and hoplon shields employ an inner arm and hand grip but because of the different shield shapes, Herakles’ left arm is outstretched while Athena’s is bent.

18

Fig. 2: Dipylon Krater (NM46.41)750-725 BC

The double grip was an innovation that played an important role in the changing nature of military engagement in Greece.  Now the weight could be distributed by placing the left forearm through a metal band in the centre (porpax) and holding a leather hand grip (antilabe) at the rim.  The cup fragment (fig 3) shows the inside of the shield and its distinctive grip. The warriors’ stance is characteristic of artistic representations of military engagement, a wide legged stance with left foot forward. The shield was made of wood, often faced with bronze, measured about 1m, across and weighed about 7kg. The extra support provided by the porpax enabled the warrior to wield heavier shields than previously.  In addition, the deeply concave shape allowed the bearer to rest the shield on his shoulder, holding it at an angle slanted away from the body as shown in fig 4.  This cup fragment from Attica depicts a warrior farewelling his wife.  He wears a crested Corinthian helmet and carries a long thrusting spear.

The thrusting spear was the main weapon of the hoplite soldier.  As a back up he would also carry a short stabbing sword.  Spears were about 8 foot long with a butt spike or

19

Fig. 3: Fragment of an Attic Cup with Warriors Fighting (NM56.12).

Fig. 4: Attic Cup Fragment, Warrior farewelling his wife (NM56.18)

sauroter (“lizard killer”), useful as a back up when one’s spear broke. A bronze spear head from the Nicholson museum (fig 5) is socketed with a central rib and measures about 20cm

The black figure lekythos from 550-525 BC (fig 6) depicts two fighting warriors who face each other side on, shields angled and resting on their left shoulder. Each employs an overhead thrust with his spear. The target of an overhead attack such as this was to strike above the opponents shield to the unprotected area of the neck or even the head. A passage in the Iliad describing the Greek hero Ajax’s attack on a Trojan ally shows how grizzly such an injury could be: 

….sweeping in through the mass of the fighters,struck him at close quarters through the brazen cheeks of his helmet

20

Fig. 5: Bronze Spear Head (NM62.288).

Fig. 6: Attic Black Figure Lekythoswith Fighting Warriors.(NM49.07) 550-525 BC

and the helm crested with horse-hair was riven about the spearheadto the impact of the huge spear and the weight of the hand behind itand the brain ran from the wound along the spear by the eye-hole, bleeding.55

The other option for attack with a spear was underhand, aiming beneath the opponent’s shield to the unprotected area of the groin:

His head already white and his beard grizzled,Breathing out his valiant spirit in the dust,

Clutching his bloody genitals in his hands56

The victim in this case is an old man and it is worth noting that all Greek citizens between the age of 18 and 60 could expect to be called up to fight. There was no standing army as such but men were expected to provide their own armour and weapons and fight for their polis when required. The exception, of course, was Sparta.

The Spartans at this time were the most feared army in Greece, famous for their superior skill in hoplite warfare, and for their discipline. Unlike other Greeks they were trained from an early age in military skills. Just facing the Spartan army was enough to strike fear in the hearts of the opposing army. Thucydides describes the superior discipline of the Spartans as they advanced across the plain of Mantinaea (418 BC) slowly to the sound of many flute players positioned in the ranks, in contrast to the violent and angry approach of the Argives and their allies. This enabled the Spartans to advance steadily in step without breaking their ranks, as usually happens when large armies are moving forward to join battle.57

Spartan bravery is no where more legendary than in the story of the 300 at the Battle of Thermopylae, which took place ten years after the Battle of Marathon during the Persian’s 55 Homer, Iliad, Book 17.293-298, translated by Richmond Lattimore (University of Chicago Press, 1951).56 Tyrtaeus, fr.10.23-5.57 Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, 5.70 translated by Rex Warner (Penguin, 1954).

21

Fig. 7: Lead Votive Figurines fromtheTemple of Artemis Orthia,

Sparta (NM448.316.1-29)550-525BC

second invasion. A Persian scout, sent to spy on the enemy, was amazed to see the Spartans nonchalantly stripped for exercise while others were combing their long hair.

Compared to Athens, there is very little written evidence in their own words about the Spartans and the main archaeological evidence comes from the site of the Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia where, among other things, 100 000 small lead figurines have been found, many in the shape of hoplite soldiers. Left in the sanctuary as votive offerings, they were cast in shallow, single sided molds. Examples from the Nicholson Museum (fig 7) show them carrying a large hoplon shield embossed with either a wheel or rosette pattern, wearing a high plumed helmet and carrying a spear. Most of them face left with their shield held on the left side as you would expect. However, the one facing right is carrying his shield on the wrong arm, perhaps due to an error on the mold engravers part, forgetting to reverse the figure.58 This figure is also different to the others in that he isn’t standing in a characteristically wide leg stance.  Depending on what they could afford, since soldiers paid for their own equipment, many hoplites would not have worn every piece of ‘hoplite panoply’ (greaves, shield, breastplate, helmet, spear and sword) and there would have been many individual variations. Not only would the full panoply have been incredibly heavy (about 30kg59) and restrictive, it would have been incredibly hot (battles in the ancient world were fought in summer) and uncomfortable. Describing the battle at Pylos during the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides writes,

for most of the day, both sides held out, tired as they were with the fighting and the thirst and the sun” 60

As time went on, greaves and cuirass were often not worn. The change seems to be a combination of the effectiveness of the phalanx formation and efficacy of the large shields. This is supported by archaeological evidence that indicates that armour tended to get lighter, less cumbersome, and less expensive.

Early on, the cuirass was made out of bronze, covered the front and back and had an outward curve or bell shape to allow for movement as seen on the cup fragment (fig 3). The earliest example of a cuirass was found in a grave at Argos (c.750BC) although the workmanship suggests that this item had been in existence for some time.61 Later the cuirass changed to a shorter model, often made from linen or leather and with hinged strips of leather or metal hanging down to protect the groin while allowing maneuverability.

58 A.J.B Wace, “The Lead Figurines” in R.M. Dawkins, The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia at Sparta (London, 1929) p. 26959 Victor Davis Hanson, The Western Way of War (New York, 1989) p. 5660 Thuc. 4.3561 Oswyn Murray, Early Greece (Great Britain, 1980), p. 123.

22

Helmets also changed over time, becoming lighter and less restrictive. The bronze

Corinthian helmet seen on the black figure pottery in the Nicholson’s collection (figs 1,3,5,6,8) was predominant from 700–500 BC. The Corinthian helmet covered most of the soldier’s face and gave maximum protection. However, it only allowed the wearer to look forward so, was only suitable for fighting in close formation. It also had no opening for the ears which made hearing difficult. The fragment from a hydria (fig 8) depicts two different styles of helmet crests. The one on the left is fixed across the helmet while the other two are elevated and the soldier in the middle has taken off his helmet to reveal his long hair.

A small perfume oil jar from Rhodes (fig 9) in the Nicholson Museum, dated to around 600BC, portrays a different type of helmet and one that has only been found in artistic representations. This Ionian helmet has a semicircular forehead guard, hinged cheek

23

Fig, 8: Fragment of an Attic Hydria, Warriors Fighting. (NM97.68), 550-525 BC

Fig. 9: Warrior Head Vase(NM47.01), 625-600 BC

pieces and is more open than the Corinthian helmet, having no nose guard. The warrior himself has a moustache, suggesting maturity.

Over time, the more open Pilos style of

helmet (fig 10) was adopted. Usually made of metal or leather, this bronze example from an Etruscan tomb would have been padded inside but with no cradle to provide a buffer against blows to the head.

Therefore while there were changes to the armour worn by hoplite soldiers over time, two items remained consistent, the heavy shield and thrusting spear. While every battle was unique, it is possible to recreate a general sequence of events.

Usually an initial sacrifice for divination would be made before setting off for battle, then just prior to the armies’ engaging, another sacrifice, perhaps a ram, would be offered to ensure a favourable outcome as was done at the Battle of Marathon:

The dispositions made, and the preliminary sacrifices promising success, the word was given to move, and the Athenians advanced at a run62

This mode of engagement was highly irregular and surprised the Persians who did not quite believe their eyes when they saw the Athenians running at them from a mile away. This part of Herodotus’ story has been called into question by historians who believe that the weight of the hoplite panoply is such that about 200m. is as much as any soldier could endure at a run63 and still have energy left to hold up his weapons and do battle. Probably the hoplite armies approached at a walk until they came within about 200m. of the enemy, at which point they would lift up the pace into a jog.

The Commander-in-Chief gave the command to advance by beginning the paean, a marching song or chant designed to keep the phalanx in step and psychologically

62 Herod. 6.11263 Hanson, op. cit., p. 144.

24

Fig. 10: Bronze Pylos (NM82.29)4th Century BC

encourage the army while striking fear into the hearts of the enemy. The trumpeter sounded the call and the soldiers joined in the song. As the armies drew close together in battle the marching paean might be replaced by a war cry, eleleu.64

The classic phalanx formation was usually about 8 rows deep while the width varied according to the size of the army. Men lined up by locality so they were fighting alongside neighbours and relatives. At the Battle of Plataea in 479 BC, the Spartan army of 5000 would have been over 600 files wide.65 Given that the spears were about 8 feet long, only the first couple of rows would have been able to have their spears over their shoulders and ready to attack. The rows behind would need to keep theirs raised to avoid harming their fellow hoplites.

As to what happened next there has been much dispute, in particular as to how much the push (othismos) was an actual push with hoplites bracing themselves with their shields against the men in front or a metaphoric push to drive back the enemy with intensive fighting66 which seems the more probable. What the sources do emphasize is the need for each man to hold his place and play his part because it is only by doing so that the army can fight as a cohesive unit:

Those who dare to remain in place at one another’s sideand advance together toward hand-in-hand combat and the fore-fighters

they die in lesser numbers, and they save the army behind them67

As each man stood in line their shield gave more protection to their left side and it was this that caused armies to move to the right as Thucydides explains

because fear makes every man want to do his best to find protection for his unarmed side in the shield of the man next to him on the right68

So the two armies met, and what was effective at the battle of Marathon against large numbers of less well-armed troops became brutal when two hoplite armies met head on. Those at the front ranks could see a little more through their enclosed helmets than the men behind who would have had little idea of what was going on through the clamour and the dust.69

Yet despite differences in weaponry and fighting technique, the human face of war is universal. Thucydides description of the Athenian defeat during the Peloponnesian War captures the anguish in the face of defeat and at the loss of lives that is common to all wars:

The dead were unburied, and when any man recognized one of his friends lying among them, he was filled with grief and fear; and the living who, whether sick or wounded, were being left behind caused more pain than did the dead to

64 W. Kendrick Pritchett, The Greek State at War, Part 1 (University of California Press, 1971), p. 107.65 Paul Cartledge, The Spartans: The World of the Warrior Heroes of Ancient Greece (New York, 2004), p. 67.66 Hans van Wees argues that pushing as a method of attack would not be sustainable throughout the battle and that artistic representations show shields held at an angle, which wouldn’t be effective for pushing. “The Development of the Hoplite Phalanx: Iconography and reality in the seventh century” in War and Violence in Ancient Greece (The Classical Press of Wales, 2000), p. 131.67 Tyrtaeus fr. 11.11-1368 Thuc. 5.71.69 Thuc. 7.44 Comparing the chaos and confusion of a night battle: In daylight…even then they cannot see everything, and in fact no one knows much more than what is going on around himself.

25

those who were left alive, and were more pitiable than the lost. Their prayers and their lamentations made the rest feel impotent and helpless…..There was also a profound sense of shame and deep feelings of self-reproach.70

The hoplite soldiers depicted on black figure pottery in the Nicholson Museum pre-date the Battle of Marathon by up to half a century. Yet they can still provide evidence of the armour and weapons used by the Athenians when they faced the Persian army for the first time. While some elements might have been missing such as greaves and the Corinthian style of helmet, the large round shield with its double grip, the long spear and the way it was employed in an overhead thrust, remain the same.

Cornelius Nepos: Life of Miltiades

Translated with an historical commentary by: Garriock Duncan

INTRODUCTION: Those with some knowledge of Marathon and the Persian Wars are probably somewhat puzzled by my choice of Cornelius Nepos. Serious students of these topics are not going to consult him. They will concentrate on the Histories of Herodotus and the relevant biographies by Plutarch. Nepos represents a stage in the intellectual life of Rome towards the end of the republican period and we must assume the subjects of his (surviving) Lives were of interest to his contemporaries. Some of his biographies are short and they illustrate that the short answer is not just a modern phenomenon. If Plutarch wrote a life of Miltiades, it has not survived. So let us read the one by Cornelius Nepos.71

(i) The author: Cornelius Nepos is not widely known.72 Indeed, very few students of Roman History or Latin Literature today would be familiar with him. He was born c. 110 BC

70 Thuc. 7.75.71 For a brief discussion on the ancient sources for Marathon, see: Krentz, 2010, pp. 177-179; Sekunda, 2002, p. 94. Full bibliographic details will be found in the list of References at the end of this article.72 His first name (praenomen) is not known. For the pattern of Roman names, see: Duncan, 2009, pp. 18-19.

26

Bust of Miltiades

in Transpadane Gaul, from perhaps Pavia or Milan. 73 He knew the poet, Catullus, another Transpadane, though some twenty five years Nepos’ junior, and they exchanged mutual compliments for the other’s writings.74 There is no evidence of Nepos’ being in Rome before 65 BC, the year in which he says Atticus came back from Greece (Atticus, 4.5).75 He probably made the acquaintance of Cicero trough Atticus. Nepos was possibly a member of the literary salon hosted by Atticus. His relations with Cicero are problematic because of Nepos’ distaste for Cicero’s philosophical writings, of which he (Cicero) was inordinately proud.76 However, two books of Cicero’s letters were dedicated to Cornelius. 77 He spoke well of Mark Antony but showed no warmth for Octavian; he appears to have been totally apolitical.78

Nepos was a prolific writer. He wrote a universal history; biographies of several notable figures from Roman history, past and present; a geographical treatise; and even romantic poetry.79 The Life of Miltiades survives from his last work, de viris illustribus (“on Famous Men”), containing biographies of both Greeks and Romans and in many ways a precursor to Plutarch’s Parallel Lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans.80 However, Nepos is universally regarded as a very minor Latin writer.81

(ii) The translation: I would not normally have translated the Miltiades but rather just had recourse to a translation. It is indicative of the neglect of Nepos, that the requisite shelves of Fisher Library (Usyd) do not hold any (English) translation of Nepos.82 His style is generally reminiscent of Caesar but occasionally he tries the grand Ciceronian periodic sentence – alas, not well.83 I am very confident that no-one will ever need this translation as a crib when studying the Latin text of the Miltiades. So, I have not sought to provide a rigid literal translation. However, to give an indication of his grand style, I provide a very precise translation of the first sentence of the Miltiades, following as far as English allows, the word order of Nepos’ Latin.

For those who might want to try their hand at a piece of Nepotic Latin, I have included the text of the first sentence of Nepos’ preface (Praefatio, 1.1 – sorry, no translation):

Non dubito fore plerosque, Attice, qui hoc genus scripturae leve et non satis dignum summorum virorum personis iudicent, cum relatum legent quis musicam docuerit Epaminondam, aut in eius virtutibus commemorari, saltasse eum commode scienterque tibiis cantasse.

73 The date is calculated from his implication that he and Atticus, the friend of Cicero, were roughly aequales (i,e the same age): Atticus, 19.1. For “Transpadane”, see: Duncan, 2010, pp. 21-22.74 Horsfall,1989, p. 117.75 Horsfall , 1989, p. 32, fr. 38, and p. 118, n. on fr. 38.76 Cicero, Letters to Atticus, 16.5.5.77 Horsfall, 1989, p. xvi.78 Duff, 1953, pp. 309-310; Horsfall, 1989, p. xv.79 Duff, 1953, p. 310; Horsfall, 1989, p. xvii80 See: Geiger. 1985. There is another de viris illustribus surviving. This a late imperial work (4th century AD?) and concentrates solely on Roman legendary and republican figures. For a translation, see: Sherman, Jr., 1973. 1973). The authorship of Sextus Aurelius Victor is now rejected (Spawforth, 2003, p. 222b).81 See: Duff, 1953, pp. 311-312; Horsfall, 1989, pp. xviii-xix.82 The exception is Horsfall, 1989. However, he only provides a translation of the Cato and the Atticus.83 On his style, see: Duff, 1953, p. 312; Horsfall, 1989, pp. xviii-xix.

27

I have made use of a number of resources in preparing the translation and attached comments. The text used is that of Winstedt (1904) and I have checked my translation against that of Rolfe (1929). The notes are a collaborative effort . However, the main contribution is the commentary of Nipperdey (1879).84

The Commentary: The notes are purposefully detailed. For, I am sure that most readers will find the notes more useful than the text of Nepos. I have described the commentary as historical; Herodotean is probably more accurate. The notes are principally a cross reference to the edition of Strassler (2007).85 This is to be expected since Herodotus’ account is the standard. Indeed, it is rare to find an historian preferring Nepos’ version of any episode in the career of Miltiades II to that of Herodotus. The one exception I have come across is Green (1970).86

THE LIFE OF MILTIADES

Introductory Note: Unfortunately for Nepos, there are two Miltiades prominent in this period of Greek history. I am going to follow the practice of Hignett and Jeffery and call them, Miltiades I, and Miltiades II.87 Miltiades I was the son of Cypselus; whereas, Miltiades II was the son of Miltiades I’s younger half brother, Cimon. Further confusion is caused by the use of the same names in different generations, e.g. Miltiades II’s calling his own son, Cimon, after his grandfather. Needless to say, Nepos confused them both. (ch.s 1 and 2).88

1(1) [Concerning] Miltiades II, son of Cimon89, the Athenian, since, because of the antiquity of his family90, the renown of his ancestors and his own character91, he alone of all his family particularly excelled and he was of that age, that not only could his fellow citizens expect well of him but they could even take confidence that he would be the sort of person that he was known to be, it happened that the Athenians wished to send colonists to the Chersonese.92 (2)Since their number was great and many wished to take part in the

84 I must thank one of my students, Monica Naish, for translating Nipperdey’s German text.85 References to Herodotus are to: R B Strassler, ed., The Landmark Herodotus, Pantheon Books, 200786 One example. In his account of the failure of the Parian expedition pp. 44-45), Green’s text is based solely on Nepos (7.3).87 Hignett, 1952, Miltiades, q.v., index, p. 413b; Jeffrey, 1976, “Miltiades”, q.v., index, p. 268a.88 References without name of author or title of text are to Nepos, Miltiades.. For a stemma of the family, see: Higbie, 2007, p. 791. A brief account of relationships within the family is given by Herodotus (Hdt., 6.34, 38,103). Herodotus has obviously been confused by the use of the same names in different generations of the family (see Higbie, 2007, pp. 787-788). The later writer, Marcellinus, also records details of the stemma of the Philaids. His information probably only adds to the confusion (see: Fornara, 1977, n. 26, pp. 29-30 and n. 5, p. 30). For brief accounts of careers of the two Miltiades, see: Boardman, 1999, pp. 64-265 (Miliades I), 265-266 (Miliades II).89 Miltiades II married a Thracian women, Hegesipyle, and Cimon was their son (Plutarch [Plut.], Cimon, 4 (p. 144). All references to Plutarch are to: Plutarch, The Rise and Fall of Athens, Penguin Classics, 1960.90 The Philaids, the family to which both Miltiades belonged, ultimately claimed descent from Aeacus, son of Zeus (Herodotus {Hdt], 6.35.1). The claim of descent from a divine being was standard among the Graeco-Roman elites; cf. the claim by Julius Caesar that his family, the Julii Caesares were descended from Venus (Suetonius, The Deified Julius, 6.1). Throughout the Miltiades, Nepos always uses the Latin forms of Greek names. Unfortunately, uniformity is impossible. All Greek names will be spelled in the form familiar to English readers.91 Nepos uses the Latin, modestia, for the Greek, sophrosune (“prudence’). See: Adkins, 1972, pp. 128, 132.92 A chersonese (chersos [dry land] + nesos [island[) is the generic term in Greek for a peninsula (Liddell, 1964, q,v., p. 887a). The mention of the Thracians (1.2) make it obvious that the Thracian Chersonese, the modern Gallipoli Peninsula, is meant. The status of the colonists is unclear. Both Nepos (1.1) and Herodotus (6.36.7) mention settlers departing with

28

migration, envoys were chosen from among them and sent on a mission to consult Apollo as to whom would be the best leader to use. For, at that time, the Thracians were controlling the area and the issue would have to be resolved by arms. (3)To the envoys, the Pythian priestess mentioned Miltiades I by name and stated that they should take him with them. If they were to do this, the undertaking would turn out well.93 (4)Relying on this response by the oracle, Miltiades I set out by sea with a chosen band of followers.94 When he (i.e. Miltiades II) had reached Lemnos and was desiring to bring the inhabitants of the island under the power of the Athenians, and had demanded that they should do this of their own free will, the Lemnians mockingly replied that they would only do this when after setting out from his home he had reached Lemnos with the help of the Aquilo wind.95 For this wind, rising in the north, blows in the face of those setting out from Athens. (5)Miltiades II, having no time to lose, continued the course he was holding and arrived at the Chersonese.

2(1)After a short time there, when the forces of the barbarians had been scattered96 and the whole region, the object of his quest, was under his control, Miltiades II fortified those locations suitable for defensive positions. The large number of people he had brought with him, he allocated to farming. He enriched them by frequent raids. (2)He was supported in his endeavour no less by forethought than by luck. For, when thanks to the bravery of his soldiers he had crushed the enemy army, he resolved matters with the utmost fairness and decided to stay in that very place to live.97 (3) Among his followers, he enjoyed the position of a king, though he lacked the title,98 Miltiades II gained this position no less by his authority than by his sense of fair play. He did not stint in showing favour to the Athenians, from among whom he had set out. As a result, it came about that he gained a permanent position of authority no less with the consent of those, who had despatched him, than of those, with whom he has set out. (4)With the Chersonese organized in this way, Miltiades II returned to Lemnos and demanded, according to the agreement with them, the surrender of their city. The Lemnians had said that, when Miltiades II arrived there after setting out from his home before a north wind, they would surrender. He now lived in the Chersonese. (5)The Carians, then inhabiting Lemnos, although matters had turned out unexpectedly, did not dare resist, overcome not by the

Miltiades I. Nepos is silent about anyone returning with Miltiades II, whereas Herodotus mentions his return with initially a convoy of five ships (6.42.2). Given the Athenian context, it is likely that they were kleruchoi (Hornblower, 2003a, pp. 347b-348a). Although granted an allotment of land (kleros – Liddell, 19464, q.v., p. 436b) in foreign territory, they always retained their Athenian citizenship and the right to return to Athens (cf. Hdt., 4.156).93 Nepos account is significantly different to Herodotus’. It was the inhabitants of the Chersones, the Dolonci, who consulted the Pythian priestess about a war with a neighbouring people, the Apsinthians (Hdt., 6.34.1). The answer was that the first man to offer the envoys hospitality should be invited to become their leader (Hdt., 6.34.2). The envoys reached Athens before an offer of hospitality was made by Miltiades I (Hdt., 6.35.2). Miltiades I consulted the Pythian priestess and was told to accept their offer (Hdt., 6.35.3-36.1).94 Since Nepos is supposedly writing of Miltiades II, he does not mention the significant reverse suffered by Miltiades I. Miltiades I was captured by the Lampsacenes and only released because of the intervention of Croesus of Lydia (Hdt., 6.37). Nepos seems unawares that Miltiades II had, actually, been sent out by the Pisistratids, who “treated him well” (Hdt., 6.39.1). 95 It is Miltiades II, who gains Lemnos for Athens (Hdt., 137-140). Nepos talks of Miltiades II setting out from “home”, when he obviously means Athens. He will continue this usage, since it later allows Miltiades II to trick the Lemnians. (2.4). 96 The “barbarians’ are the Apsinthians (Hdt., 6.36.2)97 Hence the Chersonese now became his home rather than Athens. This justifies Miltiades I’s claim in 2.4.98 Miltiades II, like his uncle before him, Miltiades I, was tyrant of the Chersonese. Tyrants were relatively common in this era, eg the men of rank (3.1) and, of course, the {Pisistratids (8.1). Tyrant is a specific constitutional term and does not mean tyrant, in our sense.

29

argument of their opponents but rather their good luck, and moved from the island.99 With equal good luck, Miltiades II brought the rest of the islands, called the Cyclades, under the power of Athens.100

3(1)At the same time, Darius, King of the Persians, having brought an army over from Asia into Europe, decided to make war on the Scythians. He had a bridge built across the river Hister to bring over his forces. To safeguard the bridge in his absence, he appointed the men of rank he had brought with him from Ionia and Aeolis. 101 To each of these men he had given permanent rule of the cities they came from.102 (2)For he thought he could most easily retain under his power the Greek speakers who lived in Asia, if he had handed the cities over for safe keeping to his friends, who would have no hope of safety if he were overthrown. Among the number, to whom this guardianship was entrusted, was Miltiades II.103 (3)When frequent messengers brought news that Darius was conducting the campaign badly and was being hard pressed by the Scythians, Miltiades II encouraged the protectors of the bridge not to let slip the opportunity, presented by fate, of freeing Greece.104 (4)If Darius, together with the forces he had with him, were to perish, not only would Europe be safe, but also those of the Greek race, who lived in Asia, would be free from the domination of the Persians and the danger they represented. Indeed, this could be done easily. For once the bridge was broken up, the King would perish in a few days either from the weapons of the enemy or from lack of supplies.105 (5)When this plan met with general acceptance, Hestiaeus of Miletus, fearing it might be carried out, objected, saying that the impact on them, who held supreme power, was not the same as on the masses, because their power was bound up with the rule of the King. 106 When he was dead, they would be swept out of power and face the wrath of their citizens. Therefore he so recoiled from the plan of the others that he thought nothing more useful than strengthening the rule of the Persians. (6)Since the majority agreed with his opinion, Miltiades II, in no doubt that with so many aware of the plan it would soon reach the

99 The inhabitants of Lemnos were not Carians but Pelasgians (Hdt., 6.137; Thuc., 4.109.4). Herodotus provides the name of two cities on Lemnos – Hephaestia and Myrina. Hephaistia surrendered; Myrina did not and had to be put under siege (6.140.2).100 Nepos has badly confused Miltiades I and Miltiades II in 2. It was Miltiades II who gained control of Lemnos (Hdt., 6.137ff).. The story is too long to recount here. Thus, it was Miltiades II who sailed from home to Lemnos with the north wind (Hdt., 6.139.4-140.1) Lemnos was not one of the Cyclades (see map [Hdt., 445]. Lemnos is the un –named island s.w from Imbros). The Cyclades did not come under Athenian control till the formation of the Delian League (Thucydides [Thuc.], 1.98.2 – references are to: The Landmark Thucydides, ed. R B Strassler, The Free Press, 1996). The reference refers to the Athenian attack on Naxos, the principal island in the Cyclades (see note 32 [French, 1971, p. 35]). The Cyclades are mentioned in the list of Athnian allies on the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War (Thuc., 1.9.4).101 The bridge had, in fact, been built by the Ionians (Hdt., 4.89), Darius’ original plan had been to have the broken apart once his army crossed it. However, he was dissuaded of this course by Koes, son Exandros, of Mytilene, on the grounds that this would trap his army in Scythia (Hdt., 4.98). Darius, then, ordered the Ionians to guard the bridge for sixty days, and if he had not returned by then to dismantle the bridge (Hdt., 4.98).102 I.e. these rulers were tyrants.103 Nepos is now back on subject. Miltiades I died c. 519 and was succeeded by his half brother, Stesagoras. Miltiades I was held in high regard by his former subjects and a number of rituals were celebrated in his honour (Hdt., 6.38.1). Stesagoras only reigned for few years before he was killed (c. 516 BC). Thereafter, Miltiades II was sent out to the Chersonese by Hippias, the last Pisistratid tyrant of Athens (Hdt., 6.39.1)104 This argument was, in fact, advanced by the Scythians (Hdt., 4.133, 136). When the Ionians discussed the proposal of the Scythians, Miltiades II supported it (Hdt., 4.138.1)105 It was the strategy of the Scythians to lure Darius into staying too long and, then, for him to run out of supplies (Hdt., 4.130).106 Nepos’ narrative agrees closely with Herodotus’ at this point (Hdt., 4.138.2-3).

30

hearing of the King, abandoned the Chersonese and returned to Athens. 107 His scheme, although it failed, was, nonetheless, particularly worthy of praise, since it was more compatible with the freedom of all than his staying in power.108

4(1)Darius, however, when he had returned to Asia from Europe, heeding the advice of his companions to bring Greece under his sway109, put together a fleet of five hundred ships and put Datis and Artaphernes in command of it.110 Also, he gave them a force of two hundred thousand infantry and ten thousand cavalry. He maintained that the reason he was hostile to the Athenians was because with their help the Ionians had stormed Sardis and slaughtered the garrison.111 (2)The King’s commanders, once the fleet reached Euboia, speedily captured Eretria and carrying off all the citizens of that place sent them to the King in Asia.112 Then they moved to Attica and led their forces to the plain of Marathon.113 This is about ten miles from Athens. (3)The Athenians though greatly perturbed by this host so near and so large, only sought help from the Spartans. The Athenians despatched Phidippus, a runner of the type called hemerodromoe, to announce that help was needed quickly. 114 (4)At Athens, however, they elected ten generals to command the army.115 Among them was Miltiades II.116 Between them was a major

107 Nepos has lost several years, at this point. The episode of the bridge, found in Hdt. 4.136-137, is dated to c. 513 BC. Miltiades II did not return to Athens until several years later, in 493 BC (Hdt., 6.41). The bridge was partly dismantled to fool the Scythians (Hdt., 4.139-140). However, when the bridge was needed, Histaeus organised its repair and was responsible for Darius’ army crossing back over the Hister (Hdt., 6.141). For the later activities of Histaeus and his son-in-law, Aristagoras, see: Andrewes, 1974, pp. 124-127).108 Again, Nepos’ account is too simplified. Miltiades II did not leave the Chersonese on his own will nor in pursuit of any noble motives. He was, in fact, expelled by the Scythians but returned after a couple of years. (Hdt., 6.39-40). His final departure from the Chersonese was caused by his fear of the Phoenicians. In his flight, his eldest son, Metiochos, half brother to Cimon, was captured by the Phoenicians and handed over to the Persians, who treated him with all respect (Hdt., 6.141). On his return to Athens, Miltiades II was prosecuted for tyranny but was acquitted. (Hdt., 6.104.2).109 Darius had given instructions that whenever his dinner was served, he be reminded of the attack on Sardis (Hdt., 5.105, 6.94).110 Herodotus does not give a number for the infantry and cavalry nor for the various transport ships but only gives the size of the fleet, 600 vessels (6.95).111 This burning of Sardis occurred in 499 BC during the Ionian Revolt several years after Darius’ Scythian expedition. The Persian garrison was not slaughtered but had retired to the citadel and withstood the Ionian assault (Hdt., 5.100-101).112 In order to avoid the perils of Mt Athos, the Persians crossed the Aegean Sea (Hdt., 6.94), capturing Naxos on the way (Hdt., 6.96). Eretria fell to the Persians because of treachery (Hdt., 6.100-101). Athens did despatch 4000 kleruchs from the Chalcidice to help Eretria, but they left after being advised of internal unrest in Eretria (Hdt., 6.100.1)113 This was on the advice of Hippias, who was the adviser to the Persians on all things Athenian (Hdt., 6.102.1, 107).114 On the episode, see: Billows, 2010, pp. 41-42; Krentz, 2010, pp. 108-110; Usher, 1988, n. on Hdt., 105.1 (pp. 21-22). Herodotus (6.105.1) records the name as Philippides, which would mean something along the lines of “the son of the horse lover”. Strassler , 2007(n. 6.105.1a [p. 468]) records Nepos’ form, Pheidippides, as a variant. A very modern translation of the name would be “son of the horse sparer”. Horses were not unknown among the Athenian elite and so it is a mystery why Philippides did not ride a horse to Sparta and back. For the Philippides’ episode and the Spartans inability to respond immediately, see: Hdt., 6.105-106.115 The structure of the Athenian army had undergone significant changes as a result of the tribal reforms of Cleisthenes, c. 510 (Aristotle, Constitution of Athens, 21.2 [Penguin Classics, 1984]; Forrest, 1866, pp. 194-195). The old Ionian tribal system had been replaced by ten new locality based tribes (Hdt., 6.55.2; Hignett, 1952, pp. 133-143). It was the military force of each of the tribes, which now comprised the Athenian army (see: Osborne1996,,pp. 295-296)..116 Herodotus states that Miltiades II was the tenth general (6.103.1). Nepos omits the role Callimachus, the Archon Polemarch (Hdt., 6.109.2). thereby ignoring the fact that Callimachus was, officially, commander-in-chief of the Athenian force (Aristotle, Constitution of

31

dispute whether to defend themselves from behind their walls or to settle the matter by going out to meet the enemy.117 (5)Miltiades II, alone, especially urged them to take the field at the first opportunity.118 If this were done, it would both raise the spirits of the citizens, when they realised that there was no lack of confidence in their courage, and, for the same reason, it would make the enemy slower to act, if they were to notice that the Athenians dared commit to battle with such a puny force. 119

5(1)At this time, the only state to offer aid to the Athenians was the Plataeans. They sent a thousand soldiers.120 So, by their arrival the force was made up to ten thousand armed men.121 The force was ablaze with an amazing enthusiasm for battle. (2)As a result Miltiades II had more influence than his colleagues.122 So, the Athenians were persuaded by his influence to lead out their forces from the city and to set up camp in a suitable location. (3)Then, on the following day, with the army drawn up at the foot of mountains, in an area not completely open – for there were isolated trees in many places – battle was joined.123 The strategy was to use the height of the mountains as protection and to prevent themselves being surrounded by the enemy’s superiority in cavalry by the scattered trees.124 (4)Datis knew that the location was not suited to his troops, but nonetheless, relying on their number, he was eager to join battle.125This was all the more because he was of the opinion it would be beneficial to his troops to commit to battle before the Spartans arrived to bring help. So, he led forth one hundred thousand infantry and ten thousand cavalry and joined battle.126 (5)In the battle127, the valour of the Athenians so Athens, 2.2; Usher, 1988, nn. On Hdt., 103.1, 104.2, p. 21).117 In Herodotus, the order of events is different. Initially, the Athenians had acted promptly, marching out as soon as news of the landing was received (Hdt., 6.103.1) Then came the dispute over what course of action to follow (Hdt., 6.109.1, 110). 118 Nepos has exaggerated Miltiades II’s role. Clearly, there was an even split between the generals, since the deadlock was only broken by Callimachus’ casting his eleventh vote with Miltiades II (Hdt., 6.109.1). In spite of the support of his five colleagues, MiltiadesII did not have the confidence to launch the battle til his actual day of command (Hdt., 6.110). It is hard to imagine why Miltiades II had such influence. 119 The Persians were, in fact, dismissive of the Greek force (Hdt., 6.112.2)120 See: Hdt., 6.108.121 Traditionally, there were ten thousand Athenians and one thousand Plataeans. Herodotus gives no figures for either the size of the Athenian or Plataean force at Marathon. Nepos’ figure for the Athenians is supported by Pausanias (7.15.7). For the various estimates of ancient writers, see: Krent, 2010, p. 190, n. 3.. Also see the discussion of Sekunda, 2002, pp. 18-19.122 It is hard to imagine why Miltiades II had such influence. He had only returned to Athens in 493 BC, whereupon he was prosecuted for (but acquitted of) tyranny (Hdt., 6.104.2). However, Herodotus (6.132.1) supports Nepos. He was a wealthy man. When he left the Chersonese for Athens, he needed five ships to carry his treasure (Hdt., 6.41.1)123 This rather confused passage is a reference to the Athenians’ use of abbat(t)is – felled trees, untrimmed with branches facing out. It was a defensive tactic against enemy cavalry attack (Billows, 2010, p. 209; Lazenby 1993, p. 56).124 Herodotus does not describe the plain of Marathon. The only clue he provides is that it was the part of Attica most suited to cavalry operations (6.102). There has been significant change in the coastline since Marathon and it is no longer possible to reconstruct the landform of 490. However, see: Krentz, 2010, pp. 111-122. 125 Hippias had deliberately chosen Marathon because of its suitability for cavalry operations (Hdt., 6.102.126 Herodotus does not record the opinion of Datis, and in his account, it is the Athenians who attack the Persians (6.110). Herodotus makes no mention of cavalry participating in the battle on either side. He specifically mentions that the Athenians fought without the support of cavalry (6.112.2).127 Unfortunately, Nepos provides no account of the Athenian tactics nor how the battle unfolded. However, see Hdt., 6.111 (disposition of Athenian troops [Sekunda, 2002, pp. 54-55. 56, 57-58]), 112 (the charge of the Athenians [Krentz, 2010, pp. 142-153; Sekunda, 2002, pp. 64-65]), 113 (the fighting, in which Callimachus and one of the generals, Stesilaos, were both killed).

32

prevailed that they routed a force ten times their own number and caused such fear that the Persians did not make for their camp but rather their ships.128 Never before has there been a more glorious victory. For never has such a small force brought down such a mighty host.129

6(1)It does not seem inappropriate to consider what sort of reward was allocated to Miltiades II for this victory.130 In this way, it can easily be understood that the approach is the same in all states. (2) Just as once among the Roman people, awards were few and slight and consequently brought fame, but now are lavish and common, so we find it was once the same with the Athenians. (3)For, although he had preserved the freedom Athens and the whole of Greece, the following distinction was awarded to Miltiades II. When a picture of the Battle of Marathon was being painted in the portico called the Poikile, his likeness was place in the forefront of the group of ten generals as he was encouraging the soldiers and giving the order for battle.131 (4)After it gained greater power and was corrupted by the generosity of its magistrates132, the very same people voted three hundred statues for Demetrius of Phalerum.133

7(1)After this battle, the Athenians put Miltiades II in charge of a fleet of seventy ships to harry with war the islands which had aided the barbarians.134 During this command, he forced most of them to return to their allegiance; some he took by storm. (2) Of this group, the island of Paros was so buoyed up by its own resources, it could not be won over by argument. Miltiades landed troops from the ships and ringed the city with siege works, and cut it off from every source of supplies. Next, with mantlets set up and soldiers in the tortoise formation, he drew near to the walls of the city.135 (3)When he was on the

128 The Persians appear to have had a back up plan. For they sailed to Athens in the hope of effecting a landing at Phalerum before the Athenian force could return (Hdt., 6. 115). However, the hoplites returned in time to frustrate this plan (Hdt., 6. 116).129 This statement is certainly supported by the discrepant casualty figures – 192 Athenians vs. 6400 Persians (Hdt., 6.116). For some archaeological evidence of the battle, see: Strassler, 2007, figures 6.117a and b (p. 476). Fig.a includes a helmet found at Olympia, dedicated by Miltiades to Zeus.130 Nepos is unawares that he mentions a significant reward for Miltiades II in the next paragraph (7.1). For, the Athenians, purely on trust, since Miltiades II had not divulged his plans, voted him his expeditionary force (Hdt. 6.132.1).131 Nepos is displaying his careless attitude to chronology. The Stoa Poikile (the “Painted Stoa”, i.e. the Stoa with Paintings) was built as much as forty years after Marathon and is an aspect of the rehabilitation of Miltiade II’s reputation (Hornblower, 2002, p. 19; Sekunda, 2002, p. 85). Pausanias, the travel writer of ancient Greece, visited the Stoa in the 2nd century AD and , described the painting. However, while Miltiades II was given a prominent position, so was Callimachus (Camp. 1986, pp. 69, 71).132 Nepos has confused Athenian practice with Roman. In Athens, such endowments were made by the state not the magistrates.133 Demetrius of Phalerum (born c. 350 BC) was as an Athenian politician and writer. He belonged to the school of philosophy called the Peripatetics. A brilliant orator but indifferent writer, he probably was awarded the statues because of his achievement n maintaining Athens at peace within the wider Greek world (Bosworth, 2003, p. 448b). Demetrius of Phalerum is sometimes regarded as the author of the treatise, On Style (Grube,1965, p. 110). He was, also, one of Plutatch’s sources (Aristides, 1 [p. 109], 5 [p. 115]). Plutarch records two tradition regarding reaction to Miltiades II at Marathon . In Themistocles, 3 (p. 80) the whole country rang with his praise: however, in Cimon, 8 (p. 149), Miltiades is refused any honour.134 Miltiades II was able to use his political capital, resulting from the victory at Marathon to secure this command ((Hdt., 6.132.1). Herodotus makes no mention of other islands. The Parians had allegedly contributed one trireme to the Persian fleet (Hdt., 133.1).135 Nepos is probably thinking of Roman practice. The Greeks were not unawares of siegecraft. In fact, it was supposedly a particular Athenian skill. Nonetheless, virtually all successful Greek sieges were concluded either by starvation or treachery (Lazenby, 1996). The Greeks did use tortoises but they were the equivalent to the Roman mantlet, i.e. shed to cover attacking

33

point of taking the city, a grove on the distant mainland, which was visible from the island, caught fire at night, the result of some unknown cause. Upon seeing the flame, both the towns folk and the besiegers came to the conclusion that it was a signal raised by the marines of the King. (4)As a result, the Parians were dissuaded from surrender and Militiades II fearing that the fleet of the King was at hand, fired his siege works, which he had erected, returned to Athens with the same number of ships he had set out with but to the great anger of his fellow citizens.136 (5)Consequently, he was charged with treason on the grounds that, when he might have been able to take Paros by storm, he had been bribed by the King and had left with the matter unresolved.137 At the time, he was in ill health as a result of injuries, which he had suffered during the siege of the town. (6)Since he was unable to speak in his own defence, his brother, Stesagoras spoke for him.138 When the reason became known, he was not convicted of a capital charge but fined, the amount being assessed at fifty talents, the amount spent on fitting out the fleet.139 Because, he was, at the time, unable to pay the fine, he was put in chains in the state prison and there passed his last day.140

8(1)Although his charge derived from the episode at Paros, nonetheless his conviction was due to another reason. For the Athenians, because of the tyranny of Pisistratus, which had occurred a few years earlier, were greatly in fear of the power of all their fellow citizens.141 It did not seem that Miltiades II, a man with much experience in important military commands, could just be a private citizen, especially since he seemed to have

soldiers (Diodorus Siculus, , 12.28.2-3). The Greeks hoplite could not form the tortoise formation as used by the Romans, since it required rectangular shaped shields, which could lock together, and the hoplites carried a round shield (On Roman siegecraft, see: Webster, 1985, pp. 240-245).. In Herodotus, the Parians frustrate Miltiades II by some swift wall building ((6.133.3-4).136 This episode is not found in Herodotus (6.134). Miltiades II was persuaded to enter the sanctuary of Demeter by night. At some point in his escapade, he injures his leg seriously enough to warrant returning to Athens (Hdt., 6.134)..137 In Herodotus, the charge is ”deceiving the Athenians”. The charge was laid by Xanthipos son of Ariphron (6,136.1) and father of Pericles (6.131.1).138 Nepos has again confused Miltiades I with Miltiades II. Herodotus merely says the Miltiades II was defended by family and friend (6.136.2).We have met Stesagoras previously (6.38; see Higbie, 2007, p. 791), where he is the successor to Miltiades I as the tyrant of the Chersonnese.139 Miltiades II was let off the capital charge because of past services to Athens but fined 50 talents (Hdt., 6.135.2). Plutarch, Cimon, 4 (Penguin, p. 144), has the same amount.140 This not mentioned by Herodotus, who merely records his death ((6.136.2). Cimon, subsequently, paid the fine.141 This is the only reference to the Pisistratids in the text. The Pisistratid tyranny (Pisistratus and his two sons, Hippias and Hiparchus) lasted from 560 to 510 BC. Nepos glosses over the fact that MiltiadesII had, in fact, been despatched from Athens by the Pisitratids (Hdt., 6.39.1) to succeed his uncle Stesagoras (6.38)j Herodotus does not give any indication of the date of the murder of Miltiades II’s father by Hippias and Hipparchus (6.103.3). However, Miltiades II had , apparently, been on good terms with the Pisistratids for some years before his being sent out to the Chersonese. For, fragments of the inscription, listing the names of the archons eponymous, survive (Fornara, 1977, n. 23 [pp. 26-27]). The archon eponymous was a member of a boards of three archons (Aristotle, Constitution of Athens, 3.1, where the office is describes simply as the archon), The name of the archon eponymous was used to date he year in Athens; so, a position of considerable prestige, if not power (See: Fritz1964, n. 3 [pp. 150-151]; Hignett, 1952, p, 153). One fragment contains the name <.ILTIADE.> (See: French, 1987, p. 56, for an illustration of the fragment). The restoration, [M]ILTIADE[S], is virtually certain, i.e. Miltiades II (Fornara, 1977, p. 27, n. 2). The date, i.e. 524/523, can be restored from Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Roman Antiquities, 8.3.1). Since the name of Cleisthenes, the democratic reformer, is also mentioned on the stone, the inscription indicates a cosier relationship between the leading families of Athens and the Pisistratids than indicated by Herodotus (French, 1987, pp. 55-56).,

34

progressed from an acquaintance with to a desire for power, (3)For during all those years he lived on the Chersonese, he enjoyed permanent control and had been labelled tyrant. However, he was a fair one For he did not gain power by force but by the consent of his

fellow citizens and he retained it because of his character.142 All men are both thought and considered to be tyrants, who exercise power without any time limit in a state, which enjoyed democratic systems. (4)However, in the case of Miltiades II, there was not only the best of human nature but also remarkable identity with his fellow man, so that there was no-one so lowly, who did not have open access to him. He had great respect among all the Greek states, a noble name and the highest praise for his military achievements. The people, recognising these qualities, preferred him to be punished though innocent than they be in fear any longer.

142 Miltiades II was obviously a quick thinker as his trick over the Lemnians indicates (Hdt., 6.137-140). In spite of Nepos’ grand sentiments, Miltiades II gained the tyranny of the Chersonese by a rather dirty trick, and one which probably violated Greek concepts of hospitality. He maintained power with the help of a force of 500 mercenaries (6.39).

35

The Helmet dedicated by Miltiades in the Treasury of Athens at Delphi. A close examination reveals Miltiades name on the bottom rim of the left cheek.

References:Adkins. 1972, A W H, Moral Values and Political Behaviour in Ancient Greece, Chatto &

Windus,Andrewes, 1974, A, The Greek Tyrants, Hutchinsons University Library.Billows, 2010, R A, Marathon, Overlook Duckworth.Boardman, 1999, J R, The Greeks Overseas, 4ed., Thames & Hudson.Bosworth 2003, A B “Demetrius (3) of Phaleron” in Hornblower, 2003b, p. 448b.Camp, 1986, J, The Athenian Agora, Thames & Hudson.Duff, 1953, J D, A Literary History of Rome: the Golden Age, Benn.Duncan, 2009, G, “Women in the Shadow of Mt Vesuvius”, Doryanthes, 2(3), 2009, pp.

16-27.Duncan, 2010, G, “Como and the Pliny Boys”, Doryanthes, 3(1), February, pp. 18-22.Fornara, 1977, C, Archaic Times to the end of the Peloponnesian War, John Hopkins UP

(later pbk edition by CUP).Forrest, 1966, W G, The Emergence of Greek Democracy, Weidenfeld & Nicolson.French, 1971, A, The Athenian Half Century, Sydney UP.French, 1987, Sixth Century Athens: the Sources, Sydney UP.Fritz, , 1964, K von and E Kapp, Aristotle’s Constitution of Athens and Related Texts,

Hafner Publishing.Geiger, 1985, J, Cornelius Nepos and Ancient Political Biography, Historia Einzelschriften

– Heft 47.Green, 1970, P, ,Xerxes at Salamis, Praeger Publishing.Grube, 1965, G M A, The Greek and Latin Critics, Methuen.Higbie, 2007, C, “Aristocratic Families in Herodotus” in Strassler,, 2007, pp. 786-791.Hignett, 1952, C, A History of the Athenian Constitution to the End of the Fifth Century,

OUP.Hornbloqwer, 2002, The Greek World, 479-323 BC, Routledge.Hornblower, 2003a, S, “cleruchy”, in Hornblower, 2003b, pp. 347b-348a.Hornblower, 2003b, S, and A J S Spawforth, edd., The Oxford Classical Dictionary, 3ed.,

OUP.Horsfall. 1989, N, Cornelius Nepos, OUP.Jeffrey, 1976, L H, Archaic Greece: the City States c.700-500 B.C., Methuen.Krentz, 2010, P, The Battle of Marathon, Yale UP.Lazenby, 1993, J F, The Defence of Greece, 490-479 BC, Aris & Phillips.Lazenby, 1996, J F, “siegecraft, Greek”, in Hornblower, 1966, pp. 1405a-b.Liddell, 1964, H G, ed., An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon, OUP, reprint of 1889

edition.Nipperdey, 1879, K, Cornelius Nepos, Weidemann (Berlin).Osborne, 1996, R, Greece in the Making, 1200-479 BC, Routledge.Rolfe. 1929, J C, Cornelius Nepos: on Great Generals; on Great Historians, Loeb Classical

Library.Sekunda, 2002, N, Marathon, 490 BC, Osprey Publishing.Sherman, Jr. 1973, W K., Deeds of Famous Men, Oklahoma UP.Spawforth, 2003. A J S, “Aurelius Victor, Sextus”, in Hornblower, 2003b, p. 222b.Strassler, 2007, R B, ed., The Landmark Herodotus, Pantheon Books.Usher, 1988, S, Herodotus: the Persian Wars, Bristol Classical Press.Webster, 1985, G, The Roman Imperial Army, A & C Black.Winstedt, 1904, O, Cornelius Nepos: Vitae, Oxford Classical Texts.

36

37

A Marathon Effort.An Australian at the first Modern Olympics

Merle Kavanagh

Towards the end of the 19th century sport was becoming more popular, being encouraged in educational institutions and practiced in the wider community. This created interest in the revival of the Olympic Games particularly in Greece. The man whose enthusiasm brought action on this front was a Frenchman, Baron Pierre de Coubertin, who had been excited earlier by the archeological findings in Greece. As General Secretary of the Union of French Societies of Athletic Sports in June 1894, he organised a Congress in Paris at the Sorbonne. On the agenda he had listed ‘the possibility of reviving the Olympic Games” and had advocated the establishment of an international Olympic committee to organise the first Modern Olympics, hopefully in Paris. However, the new committee arranged the first games to be held in Greece, though not in Olympia which was isolated and in need of rebuilding. At their first meeting in Paris in June 1894, this honour was awarded to Athens.

Greece was fortunate that a wealthy architect from Alexandria, George Avroff, gave one million drachma, enabling them to build a white marble stadium for 60,000 people. The Panathinaiko Stadium, built in 330 B.C. was reconstructed and some events were held there, including the Opening and Closing ceremonies. King George 1 of Greece opened the first Modern Olympic Games at the foot of the Acropolis on 5 April 1896 and for the next ten days about 175 athletes from 14 nations competed, spurred on by the enthusiasm of mostly Greek spectators. These countries were Australia, Denmark, Hungary, Austria, France, Switzerland, Bulgaria, Great Britain, Sweden, Chile, Germany and the United States of America. The inclusion of Australia in this list did not occur until many years later and this tale will reveal the reason.

38

Panathinaiko Stadium in 1896

There were no national teams, as such, though several countries had sponsored groups. Australia was still five years away from Federation of the States and no representatives were sent on the long journey to Greece. However a young man, raised in Australia, won honours there. His story is inspiring and curious.

Edwin Harold Flack was born in Islington, East London on 5 November 1873. His family migrated to Australia before he was 5 years old, so he was schooled in his new country, attending Melbourne Grammar School from 1886–1892. He was a good student and keen on sport, competing in inter-club athletic events in Melbourne in the 1890s. As a foundation member and first secretary of the Melbourne Hare and Hounds Athletic Club he won several events including the Australasian Championship in November 1893 in 4m. 44 and the Victorian and half mile titles on the same afternoon in December 1894. Various distance titles were credited to him in club events at that time, the longest being 7 miles.

In 1892 Edwin joined his father, Joseph, in his accountancy partnership, Davey, Flack and Co. and to further his accountancy studies he was sent to England for additional training. There he joined Price Waterhouse in London, this arrangement being made by his father who had been an employee there. Edwin wasted no time in joining three athletic clubs—London Athletic Club, Hampton Court Hare and Hounds and Thames Hare and Hounds clubs. In 1895 Edwin won the Thames Hare and Hounds Challenge Cup over 4.75 miles and also won three of 8 other races for that club.

With the Modern Olympics preparations underway at that time, Edwin was keeping his options open, as either a spectator or competitor, by saving up leave from his employment. He had been told that his father was agreeable to his plans, provided he did not spend over ₤30 ($60). So when his leave was approved he booked the train and ship, departing in late March and arriving in Athens six days later on 1st April 1896, five days before the Games were due to start. He suffered from seasickness on the voyage and was not fully fit on arrival. The London Athletic Club had nominated him for the Games and he lodged and competed with other British athletes. One of these was George Robertson (later Sir George Robertson, Q.C.) who finished 4th in Shot Put and 5th in Discus. They ate at a nearby hotel and various restaurants as an Olympic Village for competitors in 1896 had not been part of the planning. These were the first Modern Olympics—the previous Games had ceased over1500 years ago.

There were about 175 athletes, representing 13 countries, with the majority from Greece. The Opening Ceremony on Easter Monday 6th April 1896 drew a crowd of 80,000 and Edwin was concerned that these people had to pay to watch this. He thought everyone should be able to attend this ceremony without charge. Edwin wore his Melbourne Grammar School sports uniform for all his events, the first being a heat of the 800 metres which he won in 2m.10 on the opening day.

On day two he beat the favourite, American Arthur Blake (Burke in some records), in the 1500 m. with a time of 4m.33.2. Edwin wrote in his diary “I made the pace all the way with Yankee Blake … I felt he was falling back and that I had him beat, finished up strong and fresh but he was quite done up”. He was obviously very pleased with his first medal, especially as it was the first win by a non-American in any track and field event at the Games. The Union Jack was raised and the British anthem ‘God Save the Queen’ was played. Edwin competed as part of the British group.

39

Day three was a change of venue for Edwin as he joined his friend, George, in the Lawn Tennis Competition at the Temple of Olympeion using a borrowed racquet. They lost to a Greek pair who eventually lost the final. The final of the 800 metres was also held that day and Edwin won in 2m.11.5. Once again the British flag and anthem celebrated Edwin’s win. He was described as “The Incomparable runner”.

On day four Edwin, flushed with success, determined to try for a third win. Despite not having previously competed over 10 miles (16 km.), he entered the first Marathon of the Modern Olympics. There were 25 runners, mostly Greeks, with 4 former placegetters—Edwin Flack, Arthur Blake, a Frenchman Lermusiaux and Hungarian, Kellner. Of course the Greeks were hoping for one of their countrymen to win this prestigious but exhausting event. George Averoff, the wealthy benefactor, had even offered the hand of his daughter in marriage to any Greek competitor who won the race.

At 2 p.m. in the heat of the day, the race began. The Frenchman led the pack and at the 10 km. mark Edwin was running second. By the 30 km. mark he led the runners, but at the 34 km. mark he was passed and collapsed at 37 km. It was a valiant effort for a man who had already raced and won two events in the previous three days. The Marathon was won by the Greek, Spiridon Louis who was showered with jewellery and flowers as he raced to the finish. The Greek spectators went wild!

Edwin, meantime, had been taken by carriage back to the Stadium where he was visited by Prince Nicholas of Greece who ordered a brandy eggnog to help him recover. His effort was the talk of the town. He wrote to his father “They tell me I have become the ‘Lion of Athens’. I could not go down the street without a small crowd of people following me on all sides.”

He was awarded 2 silver medals and 2 crowns of olive branches for his 2 wins. Winners received silver medals, and crowns of olive branches. Runners-up received bronze medals and the crowns of laurel branches. No gold medals were issued. It was reported in one newspaper that the Austrian flag was raised inadvertently for Edwin’s successes but this appears to be without basis. His wins were acknowledged as British.

Edwin left Athens on 18th April, three days after the closing ceremony of the ten-day Olympics, receiving a farewell “befitting Alexander the Great”. It would be forty years (1936) before his Olympic achievements were finally credited to Australia.

He apparently did not compete on his return to Australia, but became a keen golfer. The family business of which he was part, Flack and Flack, was a well-respected accountancy firm and was later absorbed by Price Waterhouse and Co.

He later joined the Australian Olympic Committee and became part of the first Australian delegation to attend an I.O.C. Congress. He was the founder and inaugural treasurer of the Henley on Yarra Regatta.

Edwin Flack was inducted into the Australian Sports and Athletics Hall of Fame and various streets, reserves, parks, events and poems have also honoured his name. When the centenary of the Modern Olympics were celebrated he was featured on a 45c stamp. A bronze statue of him was erected in High Street, Berwick, Vic. in 1998, noting “Our first gold medallist is truly a bronze Aussie”. He died on 10 January 1935 and his ashes interred in Berwick Cemetery and marked by a headstone.

40

References:www.victoria.org.au/edwin%flack.htmwww.kiat.net/Olympics/history/01athens.hmlFraser, Bryce, Macquarie Book of Events, 2nd impression, Macquarie Library, McMahon’s Pt., 1984, p.598.Barker, Anthony, When was that?, Chronology of Australia from 1788, John Ferguson Pty. Ltd., Surry Hills, 1988, p.221.

The First Marathon RaceGarriock Duncan

In this issue, Merle

41

Kavanagh has given us an account of the marathon race, in the first modern Olympic Games, held in Athens in 1894. The modern games were, of course, a revival of the ancient Olympics. While there were a number of foot races, none came anywhere near the length of the marathon.143 Edward Duyker in his review of Billows, Marathon (2010), also in this issue, mentions the marathon. Its invention in 1894 was meant to emulate Philippides’ legendary run from Marathon to Athens. An added bonus was that since the Games were being held in Athens, the race could actually start in Marathon and end in Athens.144

The only journey from Marathon to Athens, which Herodotus records is Miltiades’ force marching the majority of the Athenian force back to Athens to oppose a Persian landing (6.116).145 I n 1930, a young Nicholas Hammond made the journey on foot in about six hour.146 Herodotus does, of course, mention an epic run, but from Athens to Sparta. This was the run of the herald and professional long distance runner, Philippides (6.105.1). 147 Though, as Herodotus’ account makes clear, Philippides survived the run to and from Sparta. The episode is not recorded by Plutarch in his account of the battle; he only mentions the march back to Athens (Aristides, 5).

However, at some time, an account of a run by an individual from Marathon to Athens, immediately after. the battle emerged. In an essay, written some 600 years after the battle, Plutarch records a fragment of the 4th century BC historian, Heracleides Ponticus (On the Glory of Athens, 347c):

The news of the victory at Marathon was announced, as narrated by Heracleides Ponticus, by Thersippus Erchieus. However, most historians say that Eucles ran in panoply from the battle. As he reached the doors of the city’s archons, all he could say was, “Hail! We are victorious”, and he immediately passed away.

At some point, the various names provided by Plutarch dropped out and the the more widely known name of Philippides was inserted. This form of the anecdote is to be found in Lucian (A Slip of the Tongue when Greeting, 3):

It is said that Philippides was the first to run from Marathon to announce the victory. He said to the archons, who were assembled and worried about the outcome of the battle, “Joy, to you. We’ve won”. While telling the tidings he died: his last breath expiring with, “Joy to you”.

Philippides apparently returned from Sparta in sufficient time to join his tribal regiment in the Battle of Marathon. He survived and in recognition of his ability was given the task of taking news of the victory back to Athens.. Unfortunately, he did not survive this run. However, why go to this bother? Why not announce the victory by use of a pre-arranged signal? We know from Herodotus it was quite feasible to send a message by shield (6.115, 121.1, 123.1, 124.2).148

143 See: www.perseus.tufts.edu/Olympics/running 144 R A Billows, Marathon, Overlook / Duckworty,2010, pp. 50-52.145 The only event in the ancient Olympics, which bears any similarity to this march, was the race, of about 800m, in full hoplite armour.146 B Petrakos, Marathon, Archaeological Society at Athens, 1996, p. 31.147 On the episode, see: Billows, op. cit., pp. 41-42; P Krentz, The Battle of Marathon, Yale UP, 2010, pp. 108-110; S Usher, Herodotus: the Persian Wars, Bristol Classical Press, 1988, n. on Hdt., 6.105.1 (pp. 21-22). R Strassler, The Landmark Herodotus, Pantheon Books, 2007, n. 6.105.1a (p. 468) records Nepos’ form, Ph(e)idippides (Miltiades, 4.3) as a variant148 See: Billowa, op. cit., p. 228; Krentz, op. cit., pp. 161-163.

42

That the story of the run from Marathon by Thersippus/Eucles/Philippides is not mentioned by Herodotus almost certainly indicates that it is not historical. The story is probably a highly emotive variant of the hoplite forced march, since the putative runner did the distance in full armour. It is part of the mythologizing of Marathon, which occurred particularly mid 4th century BC, when Athens had to face the growing power of Macedonia. The story of

Marathon was used by to illustrate that the Marathonomachai would have stood up to Macedonia, with no thought of appeasement, nor of danger to themselves:

The Plateans, men of Athens, were the only Greek people who came to your aid at Marathon when Datis, the Persian king’s general, on leaving Eretria, after he had gained control over Euboea, disembarked in the area with a large army and began pillaging it. And, to this day, the picture in the Painted Portico displays a reminder of their courage; for each man is painted rushing to give support as fast as he could, the ones with the Boeotians hats (Demosthenes, against Neaera, 94).149

Contemporary Athenians were no match for the Plataeans of old.

VISITING THE MARATHON BATTLEFIELD

I have visited Marathon (Marathonas, in Greek) twice. Most readers would probably think once was enough, particularly if they had been there themselves. The first time was in 1989, together with my wife and our two young children (one aged 11 yrs; the other aged 9). We took the bus from Athens. The second time was in April, 2003, as Greece was preparing for the Athens’ Olympics of 2004. This time, we travelled by car, driven by our friend in Athens, Amalia (Emi) Louras..

149 See: J R Ellis and R D Milns, The Spectre of Philip, Sydney UP, 1970, pp. vii-viii; S Hornblower, The Greek World, 479-323 BC, 4ed., Routledge, 2011, pp. 284-285.

43

Scattered SeedsGarriock Duncan

The Modern Olympics In Athens

My advice is to do your research. Guide books sometimes give little real information (e.g. M Dubin, Greece: the Mainland, Dorling Kindersley, 2003, p. 145; P Hellander, et all, Greece, The Lonely Planet, 2008, p. 157). In 1989, in my naivety, I thought the bus would stop at the Athenian Memorial. It did eventually but long after we had gotten off.. In fact, we didn’t even make Marathon, at first. Once I saw a road sign, pointing to the Marathon Museum, we got off and walked down a very quiet country road until we came to the museum (about 2 km from the Athenian mound). However, it is not the Museum of the Battle of Marathon. It is, actually, the local district museum. So back to my original advice—do your research, first. The best place to look is in books on military history( e.g. N Sekunda, Marathon 490 BC, Osprey, 2002, pp. 88-92). After we retraced our steps, we caught a bus into Marathon before returning to Athens. We caught a brief glimpse of the Athenian mound as the bus passed nearby. Visiting Marathon and not seeing the Athenian Memorial surely is akin to visiting Athens and not seeing the Acropolis. So, I had to return.

It is now

impossible to get any appreciation of the landscape of 490 BC. This part of Greece, like Thermopylae to the north, has an active coastline and the plain of Marathon (not obvious to the casual visitor) is now significantly larger than it was in 490 BC. In 1851, it was still possible to get a feel for the battlefield as Creasy’s description makes clear (see reference in the Editorial):

The plain of Marathon, which is about twenty-two miles distant from Athens, lies along the bay of the same name on the north-eastern coast of Attica. The plain is nearly in the form of a crescent, and about six miles in length. It is about two miles broad in the centre, where the space between the mountains and the sea is the greatest, but it narrows towards either extremity, the mountains coming close down to the water at the horns of the bay. There is a valley trending from the middle of the plain, and a ravine comes down to it to the southward. Elsewhere, it is closely girt round on the land side by rugged limestone mountains, which are thickly studded with pines, olive-trees and cedars, and overgrown with the myrtle, arbutus, ,and the other low odiferous shrubs that everywhere perfume the Attic air. The level of the ground is now varied by the mound raised over those who fell in the battle, but it was an unbroken plain when the Persians encamped on it. There are marshes at each end, which are dry in spring and summer, and then offer no obstruction to the horseman, but are commonly flooded with rain, and so rendered

44

The Plain of Marathon from the south west

impracticable for cavalry in the autumn, the time of the year at which the action took place.

Creasy would no longer recognise Marathon. The marshes have been drained, and agriculture, along the ubiquitous development of coastal areas has totally transformed the area. Additionally, in 2003, Marathon seemed to be undergoing an economic boom. The rather depressed farms on the road to the Museum in 1989 had been replaced by opulent looking stud farms. The humble village bakery, we shopped at in 1989, was now a smart café, even a patisserie. Part of the reason for this boom was pretty obvious. Marathon was being olympified. Not surprisingly, the town was to be the starting point for the marathon race, the final event in the 2004 Athens Olympics, some eighteen months after our visit.

The upgrading of Marathon’s roads caused us some confusion but we eventually made the Athenian Mound (Tymbos Marathonon). The mound is situated in an open park—a paved pathway leads from the ticket box (it’s not free) to a path surrounding the base of the mound. It is not as high as you would expect and has apparently lost several metres in height since ancient times. The mound is fully grassed and showed no signs of excavation. I had thought that a doorway might have been inserted into the side of the mound but no. The only adornment was a funeral stele, in classic 5th century style (for the mound, see: P Krentz, The Battle of Marathon, Yale UP, 2010, pp. 122-129; B Petrakos, Marathon—Archaeological Guide, The Archaeological Society at Athens, 1996, pp. 18-24).

45

Entry to the

mound included entry to the Marathon Museum. So, that was our next stop. Having been there in 1989, I knew the location of the other mound, ostensibly that

of the Plataean dead (traditionally numbered at 12). Obviously, this mound was not nearly as ;large as the other. It is probably only a couple of metres high. In 1989, I stood on its apex and took some photos in the direction of the distant coast. Not so, in 2003. The area around the mound is not well looked after and it was difficult to get a clear view. What was clear was the metal door that has been let into the side of the mound providing access to its interior. However, it was very obvious that in both 1989 and 2003 not many bothered to visit the Plataeans (on the mound, see:Krentz, op. cit., pp. 129-130; Petrakos, op. cit., 65-67).

The Museum will probably surprise most people, since as I have said, it is the local archaeological museum It does contain part of the trophy monument erected to commemorate the victory of 490 BC (see: Krentz, op. cit., pp. 130, 132). Apart from local material (for a description of the contents, see: C Mee & A Spawforth, Greece—

an Oxford Archaeological Guide, OUP, 2001, pp. 117-118; Petrakos, op. cit, pp. 119-182), the museum contains a number of large pieces of Egyptian provenance, including a statue of Antinous, the favourite of the Emperor Hadrian (Patrakos, op. cit., pp. 76-77). Antinous died in mysterious circumstances while visiting Egypt with Hadrian in about 130 AD and was later deified (E Speller, Travelling with Hadrian, OUP, 2003, pp. 160-161). These Egyptian pieces come from the estate of Herodes Atticus.

Herodes Atticus (or, to give his full name, Lucius Vibullius Hipparchus Tiberius Claudius Atticus Herodes) was born in the Marathon area in 103 AD and died there in 179 AD. Herodes inherited a vast fortune from his father and used it to finance

46

Museum of Marathon

Part of the Victory Column of 490 BC

public works and buildings. If you do not visit the museum, the only link to this generous benefactor would be the theatre, which bears his name, by the Propylaea of the Acropolis, the Theatre of Herodes Atticus (not to be confused with the Theatre of Dionysus, near Metro Akropoli).

To be honest, unless you are an history afficionado, there is not a great deal to see. Day tripping Athenians probably visit the area to picnic at Lake Marathon. Emi was very keen to show us the lake. It was the first place she had been taken to, when as a new bride she arrived in Athens from Sydney with her former husband. Built in 1926, a curved wall of Pentelic marble holds back the waters of the Charadras and Varnavas streams to form a man made lake. It is quite a pretty spot, with a heavily wooded gully leading downstream from the dam wall. Up until 1956. Lake Marathon was Athens’ only water supply.

Being a tourist can generate an appetite. Back in 1989, we had lunch in the Plaza of Heroes (Marathon’s central square). We ate our sandwiches sitting on the curb in the dirt and dust of Marathon, while we waited for the bus back to Athens.. Our daily budget, then, was $AUD100 per day—all inclusive; accommodation, food, fare, everything. Indicative of how our national wealth has increased, these days I allocate $AUD200 to accommodation, alone. In 1989, our culinary treat was to buy a hot loaf, though more like an 18 cm long scone, from the afore mentioned bakery., We broke off chunks while it was still warm and ate them on the bus on the way back to Athens.

Again the situation has changed. As we drove back through Marathon, we chanced upon Taverna Ouzeri. We prevailed upon Emi to stop for lunch. Visible from the street was the spit. A whole sheep was being spit roasted. The Greek for this delicacy translates as screwed lamb. Let me tell you we certainly screwed that sheep well. It was not so much lunch but rather a banquet. My diary for the day lists six courses (sans dessert). The last course turned out to be a particular Greek delicacy—lamb neck stuffed with offal and spit roasted. Actually as we walked into the taverna I had noticed another spit with what I took to be joints of meat on it—the stuffed lamb neck. The lamb neck was great—the jury is still out on the stuffing.

Dedicated gourmands would have noticed that dessert was missing—what no baklava or galaktibouriko. Be calm—dessert was in hand.. On the way back to Athens, Emi needed to call into her work at Elefsina. My keen eyed wife noticed a branch of Papangallino’s (the Parrot). Dessert was secured. There are a number of Papangallino’s outlets in Athens. When next visiting Athens, if you have a sweet tooth, track one down. You won’t be disappointed. Once back in Athens, in spite of the extravagant lunch, we still had to eat the feast Emi had already prepared for us.

Emi has since returned to Marathon and the Marathon Museum, in particular. This time, she was showing her sister and brother-in-law the lories of Marathon.

47

Richard A. Billows, Marathon: How One Battle Changed Western Civilization, Overlook Duckworth, New York/London, 2010, Hardback, 304 pages, including maps, illustrations, chronology, glossary, bibliography and index, ISBN 978-1-59020-168-8 US, ISBN 978-0-71563-908-5 UK, US$30, CAN $37, UK £16.99, distributed in Australia by Scribe.

The reader does not need to be a classicist or deeply steeped in ancient history to enjoy this engaging book. After an introductory discussion of the legend of Marathon and its historiography—including the writings of George Grote (1794–1871), John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) and Sir Edward Shepherd Creasy (1812–1878)—Richard Billows, Professor of History at Columbia University, New York, provides a multifaceted overview of the Greek world in the sixth and seventh centuries BCE. He then surveys the rise of the vast Persian Empire and the evolution of the Athenian city-state. The author then discusses the growing conflict between the Persians and the Greeks, beginning with the conquest of Greek Ionian cities in Asia Minor. Prof. Billows argues that it was not imperial expansion, for expansion’s sake, but Darius I’s desire to secure his western provinces in the wake of Ionian revolts which engendered Persian determination to conquer the Aegean and the Greek mainland. Greece, of course, was not a united entity in the fifth century BCE, although a decade later the renewed Persian threat presented by Xerxes (son of Darius I), would eventually help forge an impressive alliance between the individual Greek states.

Despite cultural and linguistic commonalities, there were major differences between austere monarchical Sparta, where citizenship was the preserve of a rigorously martial elite which ruled an agricultural serfdom of conquered ‘helots’ with an iron fist, and Athens, a commercial maritime power, which, although a slave-owning society, was characterised by democratic decision making and the assumption of military responsibility by virtually all able-bodied men. Prof. Billows uses the tensions between the Spartan hard-men of the Peloponnesus and the democrats of Attica, as a canvas for exploring the legend of the Greek messenger Philippedes, grounded in the writings of Plutarch and Lucian six centuries after the Battle of Marathon. The run by Philippedes from Marathon to Athens, with the news of the Athenian victory, provided the inspiration for the modern marathon run (established at the 1896 Athens Olympics). But the historical sources also point to an earlier 450-kilometre run by Philippedes to Sparta, and back, to request help fending off

48

Book ReviewReviewed by Edward Duyker, Australian Catholic University/University of Sydney.

the Persian threat. Unfortunately, that help was not forthcoming. Lunar ritual proscriptions lead the Spartans to delay, forcing the Athenian citizen army to take on the might of the Persian Empire alone. Prof. Billows also sees the emblematic ethos of the marathon in the victorious Athenian hoplites (heavy infantrymen) running after victory on the Plain to Athens—each laden with some 30 kilograms of body armour, weaponry and a bonze embossed shield—to defend their city from a seaborne assault.

Marathon is an impressive work of insightful historical synthesis. Aside from the seminal texts of Herodotus and other classical authors, the author has made use of a vast array of other scholarly sources, both archaeological and historical. Occasionally he uses modern analogies and his prose is imbued with a great deal of wisdom and common sense when he analyses the evolution of military tactics and weaponry, and scrutinises the purported numbers of opposing armies and fleets. In building his story, Prof. Billows achieves a genuine dramatic conclusion with the events of that crucial day in 490 BCE, beginning with the manner in which the Athenian general Miltiades pressed for combat after the Persians had embarked their cavalry for a seaborne assault on undefended Athens. Fearful his army would haemorrhage men if it simply withdrew to defend the city from its battlements, Miltiades saw a window of opportunity to attack the weakened Persians while their cavalry was at sea rounding the Attic Peninsula. Although still very much outnumbered, Miltiades deployed a deliberately widened hoplite phalanx to reduce the risk of being outflanked. (Others have suggested that this was to draw the Persians forward in order to encourage their encirclement; if so, the tactic prefigured later Greek warfare, by a century.)

Over a kilometre wide, the left and right wings of the Greek phalanx still had the usual eight lines of hoplites, but the centre was only four lines deep. To minimise the time his army was exposed to Persian archers, a final running charge was prearranged with heavy shields raised high to deflect the arrows. Despite the enormous pressure put on the Greek centre, there was no Persian cavalry to threaten the wings of the Greek army or its rear. But the two wings of the Greek army were themselves able to outflank the Persians and turn inward. Ultimately, despite their smaller number, the crushing momentum of the heavily armed Greeks, with their long spears and impregnable shields, told against the Persians with their flimsy body armour and their shields of wicker. Much of the Persian centre was destroyed and the rest of the invading army fled to the beach to escape in their remaining vessels. Some fleeing Persians drowned in the neighbouring swamps. Others were killed on the beach and in the shallows as the Greeks pursued them to the water and captured seven Persian ships. Greek sources boasted 6400 Persian dead, for just 192 fallen Athenians. With the Persian infantry routed and the Persian fleet still to round Cape Sounion, Miltiades had just enough time to run overland with his victorious army and protect Athens. As a result, the Persian cavalry never landed. The words of Sir Edward Shepherd Creasy, in The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World: From Marathon to Waterloo (1851), echo through Billows’ book: http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=4061

‘The day of Marathon is the critical epoch in the history of the two nations. It broke forever the spell of Persian invincibility, which had paralysed

49

men’s minds. It generated among the Greeks the spirit which beat back Xerxes, and afterwards led on Xenophon, Agesilaus, and Alexander, in terrible retaliation through their Asiatic campaigns. It secured for mankind the intellectual treasures of Athens, the growth of free institutions, the liberal enlightenment of the Western World, and the gradual ascendancy of many ages of the great principles of European civilisation.’

Hypothetical history is always difficult territory. Richard Billows suggests that if the Athenians had been defeated, they would have been deported to other parts of the Persian Empire as happened to the inhabitants of other city states conquered by the Persians, such as those of Barka, in Cyrenaica, circa 510 BCE, those of Miletos in 494 BCE and the Eretrians shortly before Marathon. He argues cogently that the great flowering of classical Greek art, architecture, mathematics, philosophy and literature would not have occurred. And he suggests that democracy might have been seen as a failed experiment. Democracy, of course, evolved independently in other societies beside ancient Athens. There are clear examples in Ancient India and in many tribal societies around the globe. Mediaeval Iceland, Venice and Switzerland also offer striking contrasts to European feudalism. And British liberal democracy and the democratic revolutions in America and France were not contingent on the Athenian experiment—despite the surfacing of classical symbols and references, such as the Phyrigian cap (the symbol of manumitted Roman slaves) adopted by the Jacobin sans culottes. Furthermore, the cultural evolution of the Persian Empire might have been radically altered and enriched by its absorption of the Greeks, just as the Roman Empire later was–admittedly after their full flowering. Perhaps western civilisation was indeed ‘saved’ at Marathon, as Prof. Billows argues and as Edward Shepherd Creasy argued before him, but to my mind it is ironic that much of the splendour of Greek literature, philosophy, science and mathematics, was lost after the fall of Rome only to be reintroduced to Christian Europe, hundreds of years, later thanks to Muslim Arab and (let us not forget) Persian scholars, who had preserved it in translation!

Marathon is an easy read, with a useful bibliography and discussion of further reading. Prof. Billows, who has used his own translations from Greek texts, has chosen to revert to a number of indisputably more accurate, yet unfamiliar, phonetic versions of Greek names, such as Perikles instead of Pericles and Aischylos instead of Aeschylus. Despite warning his readers of his lack of consistency, I was personally glad that Herodotus had not been rendered ‘Irodotus’ and Athens not ‘Athenai’. Despite the didactic benefits of linguistic accuracy, communication is all too important and, unfortunately, I suspect that there will be a few readers who will not realise that Prof. Billows is referring to Aeschylus when he writes ‘Aischylos’, even though he lists the great tragedian’s plays early in the book. Learning and knowledge involve a good measure of making connections. I remember the delight I felt when I first learned that Aeschyllus was present on the field of Marathon and that the dramatist chose to commemorate this fact on his own epitaph. And I remember how my curiosity was sparked when I learned that my great-great-grandfather’s middle name ‘Darius’!

50

Film reviewMichael Cooke

A Clash of Civilisations:A review of: The 300 Spartans and 300.

Oh Stranger, tell the Spartans that we lie here obedient to their word.150

Well okay, then let’s finally talk about the enemy. Somebody, for some reason, nobody seems to be talking about who we’re up against and the sixth century barbarism they actually represent. These people saw

people’s heads off. They enslave women. They genitally mutilate their daughters. They do not behave by any cultural norms that are sensible to us. I’m speaking into a microphone that never would have been the product of their culture. And I’m living in a city where 3,000 of my neighbours were killed by thieves of

airplanes they never could have built.

150 Part of the opening narration in the 1962 film The Three Hundred Spartans. (Editor’s Note: This is the famous epitaph for the Spartans at Thermopylae by Simonides of Ceos [see: P J Parsons, “Simonides of Ceos”, in S Hornblower, et al., edd., The Oxford Classical Dictionary. 3ed, OUP, 1996, q.v., p. 1409a-b]. While Simonides wrote an epitaph for all the Greeks, who died at Thermopylae [Herodotus, 7.2228.1], this couplet was in honour of the Spartans, alone [Hdt., 7.228.2]. There are alternative renditions, eg. Simonides, fr. 212 [T F Higham, et al., edd., The Oxford Book of Greek Verse in Translation, OUP, 1996, p. 237] and Simonides, fr. 9 [ R Lattimore, Greek Lyrics, Chicago UP, 1960, p. 56]. The Greek text is conveniently found in Campbell [D A Campbell, Greek Lyric Poetry: a Selection, MacMillan, 1967] , fr. 92D [p. 98], with commentary [pp. 399-400].). Simonides is traditionally regarded as the writer of another epigram, honouring those who fought at Marathon: The Athenians, front-fighters of the Greeks at Marathon / destroyed the power of the gold-bearing Medes [R A Billows, Marathon, Overlook/Duckworth, 2010, p. 34]).

51

Frank Miller151

According to some, the 21st century is characterised by a clash of civilisations, notably the ‘war’ between Islam (medieval, Eastern and anti-democratic) and Christianity (Western, modern and progressive).152 But this view is by no means new in western historical discourse. One of the earliest incarnations was the Ancient Greeks portrayal of their wars with the Persian Empire (Achaemenid Empire)153. Historians like Herodotus and the playwright Aeschylus who had fought at Marathon portrayed the Greeks as freemen and bearers of civilisation, while the Achaemenid Empire was seen as barbaric and despotic.

This legacy was very much in the minds of makers of the 1962 film: The 300 Spartans. The film came at the tail-end of a long and fruitful period of epic historical films. Filmmakers took stories, heroes and famous battles from the past which were in accord with the political sensibilities of their own day. El Cid (1961), which gave a romantic sheen to the bloody destruction of Moorish Spain and the ascendency of Catholic Castile, was filmed in Franco’s Spain. The never-ending Ten Commandments 1958 (220 minutes), which reinforced Judeo-Christian values and the idea of the Jews being given Israel by Yahweh, was released in the year of the Suez Crisis.

The clash of civilisations is heralded at the start of The 300 Spartans when the Achaemenid Empire is portrayed as a ‘slave civilisation against the freedom-loving fractious Greeks’. This narration is intoned whilst we see the shrine commemorating the battle. Greek ideals are personified by Themistocles of Athens, beautifully and slyly played by Ralph Richardson. Leonidas, a hereditary king of Sparta, promises the support of Sparta in the coming conflict. Unable to gather the bulk of the Spartan army because of a religious festival, Leonidas takes his bodyguard of three hundred men to the pass at Thermopylae to meet their collective destiny.154

The film is an epic in the true sense of the word. It remains faithful to the lineaments of the story and authentically replicates the ancient paraphernalia of war. In the huge set-piece battles thousands of Greek soldiers were brought in to play the Achaemenidian army.155

The film was made in Greece on terrain similar to that on which the battles took place, and was exquisitely shot by Geoffrey Unsworth in cinemascope, giving the audience a panoramic view of the massed armies.

David Farrar is excellent as the Emperor Xerxes, conveying not only his physical presence but also the hubris of a man who sees himself as infallible and is seen as such by others. Unfortunately the juvenile leads have saccharine lines which are not improved by their

151 Frank Miller, creator of the comic book 300, on which the film 300 was based, speaking to Neal Conan, host of Talk of the Nation, an American National Public Radio program broadcast on 24 January 2007.152 The modern incarnation of this was given ideological wings by Samuel P. Huntington. See Said, Edward W. ( 2000), ‘The clash of definitions’ in Reflections on Exile and other literary and cultural essays, Granta Books, pp. 569-590, where he lucidly explains the argument and then demolishes it.153

? The Achaemenid Empire existed from 550 BC to 330BC. At its height it stretched from the Indus Valley in the east to Thrace and Macedonia in North Eastern Greece and eventually encompassed Egypt. It was eventually brought down by Alexander of Macedon. 154 There were not just 300 Spartans meeting the Persians. There was a force of around 5,000 which included 900 Spartan helots (slaves) and the rest made up by soldiers from across the Peloponnese. The Persian army according to modern estimates varied from 70,000 to 300,000.155

? Given the film’s espousal of democracy it is ironic that a few years later Greece was subjected to a coup d’état, the beginning of a military regime which lasted from 1967 to 1974 with the connivance of King Constantine, whom the film thanked for his support.

52

wooden acting, a problem accentuated by Richard Egan’s portrayal of Leonidas as a superannuated gridiron star.

The film is partially redeemed by its depiction of the clash between the armies. Hundreds of chariots thunder towards the Spartans; the Immortals march in endless columns like robots. The Spartans meet these insurmountable odds heroically, but in the end are betrayed and die in a hail of arrows. The battle sequences are excellent as tableaux, but weak in the depiction of the actual fighting. There are few scenes of individual combat, and even when Leonidas is killed we get no idea how it happened. Nevertheless it is still a good film and can be seen as a classic of its genre.

The director is Rudolph Maté, who began as a fine cinematographer in Hungarian films in the 1920s and emigrated to Hollywood in the 1930s, where he made his name as a director of film noir in the 1940s156. The Three Hundred Spartans was released in the year of the Cuban Missile crisis, and many critics saw it as a parable of the Cold War, the West being equated with the Greeks and the Soviet Union with the Achaemenid Empire. Given that the world had only recently come out of the Second World War and into the threat of nuclear Armageddon, a certain restraint is noticeable in the depiction of the clash of civilisations. The makers were well aware of the consequences of unlimited war that had turned Europe and parts of Asia into a charnel house, and of the need to come to some sort of détente with one’s enemies and economic competitors.

History marched on, with changes in technology and economic and political theory. Eastern Europe emerged from the shackles of the Soviet Union, which disintegrated in the 1990s, leaving the world with a single superpower. Capitalism dominated and state enterprises were deregulated or privatised around the globe. Citizens become consumers, and the rich and vacuous were invested with a glory that in the past was reserved for world leaders and the talented. Then came the 11th of September 2001, we now had an enemy to replace the Soviet Union and the clash of civilisation came once more to the fore.

At the same time the epic became profitable again, helped by computer generated imagery (CGI). Mel Gibson made his fine (though overwrought) film Braveheart (1995), with its echoes of Kubrick’s Spartacus (1960). Ridley Scott’s near masterpiece Gladiator (2000) combined the civilised elegy of Mann’s Fall of the Roman Empire (1964) with the latest in CGI.

Zack Synder’s 300 (2006) was based in style and content on Frank Miller’s graphic novel (i.e. comic) 300.157 Miller’s inspiration came from seeing The 300 Spartans as a young child and being moved by it. In this version the clear azure skies have gone, along with the wonderful barren Grecian landscape. In its place is a world denuded of colour: landscape as nightmare. The rituals and the world of ancient Sparta are distorted accordingly. There are gigantic wolves and even mammoths. Most of the action was shot in a studio, with computer imagery added later. The only brightness is the red of the slaughter and the Spartan cloaks.

156

? Rudolf Maté (Matheh) (1898-1964) was the principal cinematographer of Le passion de Jeanne d’ Arc (1928), Stella Dallas (1937) and Gilda (1947). He graduated to director in the late 1940s and directed classic films like DOA (1950), Union Station (1951), The Violent Men (1951) and The Dark Past (1950). By the time he directed the 300 Spartans his creative fire had dimmed.157

? The film is a medley of styles and influences. In the battle sequences one can see echoes of Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002). In the depiction of nature, the style of the film is reminiscent of the paintings of the Romantic artist Casper David Friedrich and of Goya’s black paintings.

53

The Spartans fight bare-bodied and with glistening muscles; their beauty is brutal, they grunt, grimace or roar, and live to kill. When they die in a sea of arrows there is no sense of grace or tragedy that the filmmakers presumably want to convey.158

The clash of civilisations is established early in the film. Emissaries from Xerxes ride into Leonidas’ palace, black and dressed in Arabian robes. They ask for the submission of the Spartans and Leonidas has them killed. Leonidas and his 300 march to Thermopylae, the sky darkens and their red cloaks gleam in the gloom. The Persians are depicted as effete or ugly, monsters or rabble: they are a slave army of Africans, Persians and Chinese. Xerxes is a giant whose face is festooned with chains and who is carried in a monstrous chariot.

300’s world brings male adolescent fantasy to life: a bare-breasted temple maiden, an ogre with a giant hammer, an enemy numbered in the tens of thousands; immortals with black masks that make them look like devils, a horde of elephants and even a rhinoceros. The Spartans stoutly beat off all their foes, but are betrayed by one of their own who should have been destroyed at birth because of his physical deformity. He turns traitor only when Leonidas rejects him because of a deformity which prevents his holding a shield to the right height in a phalanx. He is exaggeratedly grotesque, and the film implicitly justifies the eugenic practices of the Spartans. The battle sequences themselves are spectacular and violent. The Spartans efficiently thrust, swivel and leap, slicing the Asiatic hordes attempting to engulf them.

The film’s historical distortions and glamorised racism did not prevent its being embraced by a large proportion of the cinema-going public. But admiration for the achievements of Ancient Greece, including Sparta, should not blind us to its darker side. Sparta itself was a highly militarised and oligarchical society. It allowed (unlike Athens) considerable freedom to women, but in terms derived from the ideal of the warrior,159 and the tone of Spartan society was set not by the subtle, questing intellect but by the sword. Athens was the glory of ancient Greece, but the existence of the Greek social order everywhere was vitally dependent on slavery and even among the free, the franchise was limited. The Greek world was not alone in the Mediterranean region in complexity and sophistication, as witnessed by the Phoenicians and the Carthaginians. The Achaemenid Empire could be brutal and despotic, but the Greeks were sometimes no better, and Persian culture produced brilliant architecture, sculpture and prose.

Watching these films reminds me again that when we look at the past we should not expect to find replicas of our own ideals. Ancient Greece had, for all its towering achievements, many practices and beliefs that are alien to us. Nor need we see cultural and political differences as a ‘clash’ between us and the other, but rather as an opportunity for communication and exchange. Civilisations have always borrowed from each other, with or without acknowledgement. Greek thought and life met the East, were influenced accordingly and left their mark in turn. To know yourself should also be to know the other.

Such is life

158 The Antipodean connection in the film is embarrassing. David Wenham, a fine actor, is the narrator and the only survivor. His lithe frame has been filled out with muscles but his voice retains an unimpressive nasal twang which is unsuitable for the pseudo profundity of the lines he has to enunciate.

159 It was thought normal in Sparta that girls and young women should engage in the same strenuous physical exercise as boys.

54

Notice to Contributors

Doryanthes welcomes contributions, on any subject from members and non members, alike. Preference may be given to articles relating to Southern Sydney or to articles written by authors who live in southern Sydney.

Unless by prior arrangement, the preferred length for formal articles is 3000 words. Any annotation must be in the form of footnotes. The editors also seek short notes, book and film reviews.

Copyright of material published in Doryanthes is retained by the author. In the case of any subsequent publication, the editors of Doryanthes merely seek a statement of the prior publication in Doryanthes.

Contributions (articles, notes or reviews) may be sent to the publisher on disk or as email attachment (in both cases as Word files) to the publisher Les Bursill (les.bursill.gmail.com).

Membership

Doryanthes Inc. has two classes of membership:

(i) Subscription Members. The Doryanthes year runs from November till October. The annual subscription is $35 per year. In addition to the online version, subscription members are entitled to receive, per year, four hard copy editions of Doryanthes. Subscriptions should be forwarded to the Hon. Treasurer -

Mrs Mary Jacobs10 Porter RoadEngadine 2233

(ii) On-line Members: On-line members pay no annual subscription fee and receive four times per year the on-line copy of Doryanthes. Such members must provide the publisher, Les Bursill (les.bursill@gmail.com) with a current email address.

55