Alexander the Great: Part 3 - Into India

Darius is dead, Alexander has control of Peria and her riches, and he's about to be on the move once more. But he still has some unfinished business; Alexander first hunted down and killed Bessus, the man who had Darius murdered. Bessus had killed Darius largely to curry favour with Alexander but it backfired horribly; Alexander did not see himself as a usurper, but more of the rightful ruler (he considered himself god-like, so he could pretty much justify whatever he wished). He did, however, see Bessus as a usurper - and he wouldn't tolerate having a usurper living in his kingdom. That was the end of Bessus, who really just gambled and lost.

The art on Alexander's sarcophagus. Even in death, he's
trampling and conquering Persians. 

At this point Alexander's lands were massive, but he still desired more. They would continue travelling to India, towards the ocean and his final goal. He would take a stone to the neck and an arrow to the leg in getting there, furthering the number of wounds Alexander took on his expedition- but that wouldn't stop him. There were plenty more lands to conquer, but for the first time he was beginning to run out of steam. Cavalry could no longer be brought along with the same numbers as they were taking up too much food, and were pretty well replaced with Asian soldiers. This upset his original Macedonian army, as they saw him as becoming too lenient towards Persian ways; his army had a very, very large Asian contingent, he began to dress in a more Persian manner, and he began dropping hints that his men should get with some of the Persian women - making him somewhat of a conquering Cupid. The men were not interested in such an arrangement, however, and the "new and improved" soldiers were not welcomed with open arms by Alexander's old guard. 

On one particularly hot night, with tempers flaring and alcohol not in short supply, he got in an argument with one of his Macedonian generals, Cleitus (not Cletus, of Simpsons fame). Alexander had been boasting about his accomplishments, perhaps without giving enough credit to his incredibly loyal Macedonian army who have really put up with a lot at this point. This enraged Cleitus who called him on it, starting a yelling match between himself and the king. Alexander took one of the swords of his guards and stabbed Cleitus, killing him during his drunken rage - an action that would both lead to a great deal of regret for Alexander, as well as furthering the rift that was already growing between his old soldiers and himself. Those soldiers, however, realized that if they were to desert, they didn't really have anywhere to go. Unfortunately for them, they were stuck there, remaining with their leader not entirely out of loyalty anymore, but also out of necessity. 

The death of Cleitus. It was the first
cause of overacting in an artist's depiction
of a historical event. 

In spite of the difficulties, Alexander continued to march to India with 15,000 Macedonian soldiers still with him, but a vast army of Asians with him as well - their numbers are terribly uncertain, but can be as low as 20,000 to as high as 120,000, depending on your source. Realistically, it's probably somewhere in between, but it's important to know that the Macedonians are definitely in the minority, although they still have the highest positions in the military. 

His first contact with an Indian army was with a warlord named Porus, with a large supply of elephants and a larger supply of men. Elephants were difficult to fight as horses would be terrified of them and thus wouldn't charge towards them, preventing them from being used as a shock tactic. Even though Alexander's supply of cavalry were dwindling, they were still a critical part of his army, and the battles against Porus proved difficult. They still, however, emerged on top - but with a number of casualties including the death of his beloved horse. During the battle Alexander personally killed Porus' son - which makes the next part exceptionally strange. After the battle had finished and the Indian army was mostly defeated, Porus and Alexander spoke and discussed terms. Porus, a large and imposing man refused to be treated like anything else but a ruler in spite of his defeat, which impressed Alexander, prompting them to create somewhat of an alliance. This happened shortly after Alexander killed his kid and ravaged his army. It was a different time back then, I guess. 

Continuing through India finally (finally!) pushed the Greeks over the edge. By now they have been starved twice (!),  killed an estimated 750,000 people (!!!), and travelled 11,250 miles over their campaign (!!!!!), but it was the weather that finished them (?). Three months of rain mixed with massive snakes and scorpions slowing their advances proved to be the straw that broke the admittedly patient camel's back. Alexander tried to rouse them to continue, but they would finally be hearing none of it, and they finally began their return trip home. Unbeknownst to Alexander, they were just 600 miles short of the ocean, their goal. So that old quotation you hear about Alexander weeping for there were no lands left to conquer? Yeah, that's bogus. Ultimately he went home unhappy as he had not yet seen the end of the world. 

Porus was huge and fought beside elephants.
I'm terribly confused how he lost this fight.

The return trip home - in which the Macedonians went to their true home and Alexander to Babylon, which in itself is telling of Alexander's turn towards Persian culture as time wore on - was just as fraught with peril as the conquest itself. They still had to fight through Indian warriors slowing their retreat, but the Greeks were so tired and weary they almost refused to fight. One battle found Alexander charging in with just a few soldiers to shame his men into following him. The charge almost cost him his life as he was separated from the group, taking an arrow in the chest shortly after that almost killed him. 

It wasn't just soldiers that were killing the army, though - drought, floods, snakes, poisons... everything in existence was felling them in some regard. In their return, they had 85,000 people (including non-combatants) which slimmed down to a meager 25,000 in the sixty days they took crossing the desert - but they did make it home, but only to a vengeful, angry and paranoid Alexander. He began to purge a number of his commanders whom he did not believe to be loyal, stretching the rift between him and his men further. The strongest blow to Alexander's psyche came at the death of his beloved Hephaestion, causing him to go on a rampage and slaughter a massive number of Cosseans - a warrior tribe independant of Persia - as a sacrifice to his spirit. In the wake of his grief, he drank more than ever before (which is saying something) which led to his death, likely caused by a mix of malaria made worse by the excess of alcohol. That, or poison. That was a possibility too. 

Alexander the Great died at the age of 33. He left successors, but no heredity. Soon his lands were split apart and his empire fell just ten years after his death. But that isn't to say he didn't leave a legacy - he sent back an incredible pile of riches, became one of the most powerful men to have ever lived, and from what it sounds like, drank more in his 33 years than ten men would in their lifetime.

_______________________________________

The information for this blog was taken from "Alexander the Great: Journey to the End of the Earth" by Norman F. Cantor. 

Alexander the Great: Part 1 - A Champion is Born

This is Philip II. Apparently. All these
old face statues look identical to me.

Alexander the Great was one of the greatest conquerors who has ever lived. Beginning in Greece, his empire stretched south through Egypt, back up north towards Afghanistan, Iran, and a number of middle eastern countries you hear about on the news but can't quite match on a map, and finally so far east as to reach India to quarrel with elephants. Alexander was the original rock star - well, minus the music. He became rich beyond reason, had as many women (and men) as he pleased, fought in the front lines of his army despite being their ruler, and drank to the point of such wild excess that he died barely into his thirties. As any man, he also had a number of faults - excluding the whores and drink, which at the time was seemingly as taboo as sneezing is today. Violent, angry, cruel, and ambitious at the cost of countless lives of others, Alexander wasn't necessarily "great" in the traditional sense. He was great in scope and size; great in the way that the sky and ocean are great. He was larger than life, so much so that he was quite convinced he was a god. In fact, there were quite a few that would readily agree with him.

Of course all of this didn't happen in a day. Alexander was born in 356 B.C. into a position of royalty, son of Philip II and the heir to the throne of Macedon, a land in northern Greece. Philip was in the process of moving south to consolidate his power across all of Greece, and by the time Alexander was twenty years old (when I was twenty I was playing World of Warcraft - also, still today) and ready to take the thrown, he would have all of Greece under his rule - somewhat. Sparta and Athens, historically the strongest Greek cities, resisted the takeover but not so strongly as to openly revolt. They were mostly in a "fine, rule here, but don't try to boss us around" situation. He left it to Alexander to deal with that problem.

In spite of his status as royalty, Alexander wasn't given a free ride, far from a spoiled child with everything handed to him. He was made strong by a denial of luxury, and to some degree necessities. It made him strong, resistant to pain and familiar with starvation and thirst, characteristics that would play strongly into the roles later in his life. (Come to think of it, it probably didn't help with his streak of cruelty.) That isn't to say he wasn't given advantages, however; from the age of five he was trained to be a warrior, but also taught in math and sciences. He was taught by none other than Aristotle, thought to be one of the greatest minds of all time - right up there with Alex Trebek (rumour has it no one tells him the answers, he just knows if they're right or wrong). All of this created a powerful man; trained to fight by what we can assume are the best Macedon had to offer, and taught by one of the Greeks' finest. He embodied the core of ancient Greek culture; full of logic and reason, but ultimately violent and cruel.

Alexander on the left and Hephaestion on the right. How could
Alexander ever resist those luscious curls?

He also had a few, shall we say, interesting parts of his personal life that may disrupt the manly-man 300 (or 300: Rise of an Empire!) archetype we would naturally assume he was. What might surprise you is he was quite bisexual - leaning towards the male persuasion if anything. He was particularly enamoured with Hephaestion, a man whom he deemly loved and followed him on all of his adventures until his death. This wasn't really an issue back then. There wasn't a stigma around homosexuality until around 400 A.D. when the Christians came and told them that they just weren't doing it right. Many men - particularly military men - saw their wives as breeders, a means to further their family name and not much else. Now, some of you may be thinking "wow, this is surprisingly socially progressive! This is awesome! Why can't we just be more like the ancient Greeks, and be that accepting?".  Well. They didn't just like men. They were quite fond of... well, young men. So uh... lets just forget about that. He did have multiple wives and countless whores too, by the way.

As for his non-sexual partners...

Aristotle tutoring Alexander. This is proof
that school has been boring students
for millennia. 

Alexander and his father were vastly different. Philip had the ability to withhold his anger, and prefered subtlety and tricks to gain power over his adversaries. Alexander held no such control; he preferred brute force and decisive action. While they both drank heavily, it would set the younger in a violent rage directed at his friends (you'll hear more about this later), but the father at his enemies. In a sense, it worked for the two of them; you would likely not want to be about brute force when your empire is still at least relatively small, but Alexander could afford that risk when he already has a large enemy at his beck and call. I would guess that Philip's style helped him to consolidate his power in Greece, while Alexander's ambition and force helped to take that and further an empire. What a team, right?

Well, not quite. Their relationship was rocky. His father married Cleopatra (not that Cleopatra) which upset him as he became worried about his rights to succession. There was already the typical stress of impatience, as Alexander felt he was ready for the main role but the boss didn't feel like stepping down. Making the problem worse, Cleopatra went and popped out a second kid that was a male. What followed was a large Maury-esque family feud, in which Philip may have implied Alexander wasn't up for succession anymore. It caused quite the rift. Philip then went east to Asia minor to begin a conquerin', where he was assassinated - which is either an incredible coincidence or Alexander had a hand in it. In all fairness a scorned lover of Philip stabbed him, so it might have actually been a coincidence, but it's also likely Alexander may have paid him to do what he already had reason to do regardless. 

Either way. Philip is dead, and in comes Alexander. Taking the reins at the tender age of twenty, he stood poised to strike into Asia against the long-running enemy of the Greeks - Persia. Awaiting him were vast deserts, countless battles, and an army led by Darius, the King of Kings.

Uh oh.

The Battle of Marathon: Part 4 - The Finale

I left you with Persia poised to attack Greece, forcing a number of Greek cities to surrender out of the sheer threat of violence. As you remember from 300 (man, I can't stop linking it back to that movie even though it's not even the same battle) the Persians came in and demanded earth and water - in which Leonidas heroically power-kicks him into a seemingly endless pit of death while yelling "THIS - IS - SPARTA!", a line that has now been relentlessly parodied. That is how the Persians went about it. They would send an emissary (probably not Peter Mensah in the real life version) and he would demand earth and water, a symbolic gesture of surrender. While many turned it over and submitted, Sparta and Athens refused, bringing them to war.

The Persian infantry, possibly the
famed Immortals. With that name they
best make sure they're really good.

So how would Athens and Sparta stand a chance against the Persian horde, especially with a number of Greek cities at least kind of on the side of Persia? Their first step was to make the new-found allies of the Persians fear the Greeks more than their new overlords. They went very different than it is now; food cannot be airdropped, proper sanitation is a dream, disease can very well kill more of your army than the enemy ever will.
about trouncing the traitors, preventing the Persians from having cities to land in and host their massive armies while they prepared for the onslaught. Keep in mind that war back in the day was

Before I get to Persia landing on Greece, I would like to establish just how much of a superpower they were. Their total landmass stretched over 7.5 million square miles with 40 million people in their civilization. Athens and the surrounding area was was less than 4,000 and only 150,000 citizens lived within. Now, it's important to note that the larger a civilization gets it's reasonable to assume that they won't be able to control everything as well as a smaller one. Not to mention Athens is fighting on their home turf, so they'll be able to bring in more of their soldiers than the opposition. They also wouldn't be able to send the entirety of their military overseas, especially at once. The author of the book I'm getting this from (see the bottom of the page) makes an educated guess that there were 14,000 Athenian hoplites, 9,000 of those showing up at Marathon with the possibility of slaves added in as well. As for the Persians, they likely had 35,000 infantry and archers with the addition of 1,000 cavalry with the addition of all of the sailors that would accompany the boat (which is more than you'd think - about 50,000). So, in a nutshell: Persia is massive, but cannot bring the entirety of their force to the doorstep of Athens. Athens is significantly smaller, but can bring a much higher percentage of their force. Nevertheless, Persia still has the far superior numbers.

A modern depiction of a hoplite. If I were a horse, I
wouldn't want to go near that either.

So who had the advantage? There are a number of factors to throw in here, and if I were a betting man at the time I'd stay the heck out of it entirely. The Greek defense was a strong, veteran force, the victors of a great number of battles in recent history, allowing their generals to become well-versed in tactics. They were well prepared to git-er-done. In addition to this, the Greek's armour and weapons were vastly superior. They had bronze breastplates, much better suited to keeping them alive than the scale and leather (and sometimes even wooden helmets, apparently) that they would be up against. A persian shield, typically made of wood, could perhaps stop an arrow but it sure as heck was not able to stop a hoplite spear. Now you could argue the cavalry would make a huge difference and tip the tides in favour of the Athenians, but here's the thing - horses don't like running into large numbers of pointed sticks. A phalanx formation, in which all the hoplites essentially go shoulder to shoulder and form a nearly impenetrable wall, prevent the horses from ever wanting to go full throttle in there and scatter the ranks. The Persian fighting style needed the cavalry to displace the enemy infantry, allowing the archers to pick them off afterwards - but against a solid, well-trained force that holds formation, they were going to have to go toe to toe.

While all this looks overwhelmingly in favour of the Greeks now, there are a few things to note; Athens did not bring any archers nor cavalry. They were strictly an infantry force. How would they survive the first initial volleys of arrows that the Persians typically use to slow up a force to allow the cavalry to move through? Second, Sparta (who was vehemently religious) was having a festival and refused to meet them at Marathon during that time. It's like they asked for help during Christmas, but they assured them they'd show up after boxing day. In addition to all this, Persia was not an army to be trifled with. In 300, they were essentially fodder trained in death screams and slow motion falling, but in reality these were battle-hardened soldiers that have been rolling through pretty well everything in their past for the greater part of the past century. They were going to put up a fight.

So where we stand: Persia lands with a huge force, Athens is at their gates ready to meet them soon but not yet leaving their city. Here's how the battle goes.

A... plate? depicting a Persian and Greek fighting.
Dinner must have been a violent event.

Persia was actually in some logistics trouble; running short on food and having far too small of places to crap (this is actually a much larger issue than you'd think, going back to the whole disease thing I mentioned earlier) and they were planning on temporarily retreating back to their boats. They started loading stuff up, most notably the cavalry. Imagine trying to pack 1,000 horses in and out of boats - it's a brutal task, and one that would take a very long amount of time. The Athenians knew they had to attack then, before the cavalry could be set up, and damage their force enough that they would no longer wish to return or at least be so damaged when they did they'd have a better chance. So they moved out of their city and got in battle formations. The Persians were at this point not too worried about this; they did this fairly often, almost as a way of keeping the enemy on their toes. But this time something was a little different; the Athenians started to sing.

Now this wasn't some campfire singing stuff, this was battle hymn, terrify the enemy and bolster your forces kind of singing. That's when they started walking. The Persians were not horribly ill-prepared, the archers having been in place but the cavalry mostly absent. The Athenians crept closer, and as they moved they broke out into a light jogging pace. This is the time the Persian archers would typically shine; they'd level the forces as they approached, leaving room for the rest of the army to take care of the rest. But that's when the Athenians went into full battle mode and decided it was best to run, full sprint, right at the enemy. Having never seen this before, the archers greatly mistimed their shots and most sailed off into nothing, missing their marks due to the the speed throwing them off. The Greeks met them with such force they practically rolled over the Persian army, breaking through and finding the relatively defenseless archers. The Persians moved into full retreat, with a resulting resounding Athenian victory. 6,000 Persians were killed at the cost of 192 Greeks.

The Greeks sent a messenger back to Athens to tell them of their victory, and if he actually did run the length of a marathon (probably slightly less) and then die after declaring the win is a little muddled. Without getting into a massive discussion on if this actually happened... lets just leave it at a "maybe".

The Spartans arrived the following morning to see the devastation. It makes you wonder if they were disappointed they missed the show.

The Battle of Marathon: Part 3 - The Greeks and the Beginnings of War

When you think about ancient classes of warriors of hundreds or thousands of years ago you'll typically find yourself with some variety of picture in your mind - stereotypical depictions of lone samurai or knights clad in gleaming, beautiful armour - and when you read about the actual style, visually or otherwise, you might find yourself rather disappointed. Knights back in the day don't look as closely to my Diablo III characters as much as I would hope, and I'm getting the sneaking suspicion that Samurai Jack might be fictional. Athens and Sparta in their prime, however, live up to all the hype and all the excitement that you see in movies. In fact, in the latest, mediocre 300 movie where the Athenians are depicted as simple farmer folk who can't fight all that well (but are still inexplicably jacked beyond belief) actually sells them short a little. Sparta on the other hand is just as battle hardened and fear inspiring as everything you've heard.

But anyways - time for historical fact. There will be plenty of time (and one should always make time) for 300 later.

A statue of an Athenian, the richer,
weaker version of a Spartan. Still
pretty tough to beat though.

Athens came to flourish not as a warrior state (well, not entirely), nor as a farming one. The soil wasn't particularly great around the area so they had to make a living through other means, and those means just happened to be trade. They became exceedingly wealthy, although still far, far, far less wealthy than Persia out east through means of being the go-between from all the other Greek cities. A lot of people, 300: Rise of an Empire included, depict them as militarily weak due to this very reason - but that's simply not the case. They still fought with fair regularity, at one point holding off the advance of Sparta itself. At the time of Marathon they still had generals that had fought in previous wars that provided a sense of calm and a veteran backing to their military force. In addition to all this, they were the founders of democracy; that doesn't just mean they can feel a pompous sense of superiority (although it totally does mean that) but it would also mean that they very well might fight harder. A soldier that is fighting for himself and his people rather than for a tyrant or king is going to be more inclined to put it all on the line.

So what about Sparta? I said earlier they live up to their high modern standards of the pinnacle of warrior-hood, and the reason being they had to make everything about war out of necessity of keeping their lifestyle. Some time ago they grew to dominate the surrounding people, not quite enslaving them, but... pretty darn close. They gave them terrible enough conditions (making them send their resources up the line, high taxes, that sort of stuff) that the lowers - called Helots - may very well revolt. If they're to revolt, then Sparta had better make sure they won. The best deterrent to revolt is to get so, so, so ridiculously good at warfare that no one dare try to fight them. The result was a Spartan society that didn't have to worry about farming, and focus entirely on becoming a living, breathing force of military power. The problem is they couldn't really venture out a conquerin' because the moment the bulk of the military wandered off, the Helots would revolt. Essentially, Sparta was so tough that the toughest nails would say they were as tough as Spartans. But to convince them to leave their door, no matter how high the stakes, is another matter altogether. 

Spartans made of bronze are actually
softer than the real life version.

So that's what's going on back home in Greece when they get word that Ionia is revolting over the high taxes and ruined economy that Persia has caused. Athens moves to help, but Sparta, taking a look at some shifty-eyed half-slaves, decides to stay home and work out a little more. The Athenians, to their credit, went and burned down Sardis, the former capital of the Lydians turned Persian city, but had to bid a hasty retreat after confronting too strong of a Persian force. After they leave, Ionia, the Greek-owned city states south of Lydia and across the water from Greece, falls to Persian might. In addition to that, Athens just poked the bear that clawed them. 

Persia at this time is essentially an unstoppable war machine. They're taking territory left right and centre, created the greatest empire the world had known at that time, and were poised to attack mainland Greece. Their army was so strong that the cities of Greece didn't fight, but instead just rolled right over and agreed to join Persia out of fear of, you know, the whole death and destruction thing that happens when you don't immediately surrender to a ridiculously giant army. Well, I guess I should say most Greek cities turned.

Sparta and Athens are making a stand.

Famous Historical Figures Say the Darndest Things!

1. "For after they had completed the conquest of the cities, they picked out the most handsome boys and castrated them, making them eunuchs instead of males. And they dragged off the most beautiful virgins to the King. After they had carried out these threats, they also set fire to the cities and to their sanctuaries, too." This. This right here is why they surrendered to the Persians.
2. "The Spartan's life is so unendurable that it is no wonder he throws it away lightly in battle." An Athenian said this about the Spartan way of growing up, notoriously a brutal way of living that makes you pretty well unbreakable.

The Battle of Marathon: Part 2 - Cyrus

I know this goes well, well before the Battle of Marathon, and perhaps the title of the last couple blogs is a touch misleading, but gosh darn it the Persian stuff is crazy interesting. There's been baby prejudice (though both eating them and attempting to murder them), psychotic kings, and enough political intrigue to pass for a "poignant" television show on HBO. And just like a good HBO drama, there are a plethora of characters with separate backstories that all somehow link together into one little package. Lets meet them:

Astyages, the king of Media - brutal and cold, fond of infanticide.
Harpagos, general in Astyages army - he may have eaten his own son, but notably against infanticide.

Without the taking of Lydia,
Cyrus the Great may have only
been known as "the pretty good".

Cyrus, Persian baby - narrowly avoiding his murder as an infant, he's rising up and a little angry.

Cyrus grew up to become a member of what was a very small Persian population. They were also a population that was rather upset with the rule of Astyages, and understandably - I believe I've done well enough to show that he was not a pleasant fellow. Eventually the Persians got fed up with him to the point that a revolt was now in the cards. Astyages, in all his infinite wisdom, decided to send Harpagos to quell the rebellion. Keep in mind this is the very same Harpagos that quite possibly ate his own son earlier due to the trickery of the king (at least according to the Greek historian that is going to be pretty well the only source we're going to get on the matter). Somehow - somehow! - Astyages didn't see any possible discontent within the ranks. The result was a Median force that went to stomp out a rebellion, but ended joining it instead. Suddenly, Harpagos was buddy buddy with the leader of the rising Persian force - none other than Cyrus, the child prophesized to usurp the king of Media, Astyages.

Fearing the worst after hearing the news of his general moving to the other side, he sent out another force to meet them - but that force brought the king in chains and turned him over. It really makes you think just how terrible this guy was to his people. He gets undermined at every turn. While Astyages' fate becomes a little muddled after this (but we can presume it didn't lead to a very positive outcome) what's really important is the fact that Persia and Media essentially merged - well, not entirely, but for all we need to know, they're essentially one and the same. Unfortunately for them, they had little time to celebrate as Lydia, the powerful and rich land to the west got word and wasn't really too fond of having a strong military power on their border while not knowing of their intents.

Croseus, the leader of Lydia, feels it's a good idea to let the Greeks know of the impending threat and sends for some help before this force to the east truly becomes a powerful and established army. They quickly hop on board, knowing that any army that's big and strong but isn't of their own flesh and blood is inherently a negative. Feeling confident in their wealthy, Greek-supported fighting force, Croseus sets out to check on the Persians. He moves to defend the city of Sardis before his allies arrive. He's also a little overconfident; thinking these Persians won't put up much of a fight, he sends home a large number of his men, except for his trump card - his expert cavalry force, enough to rival anyone against him basically on their own.

Croesus, shares my personal desires of being immortalized
on jars after my death.

The Persia/Media army, with Cyrus at the helm, suddenly realize that war is coming and the stakes are high. If they don't hit them now, they're going to be going against one heck of an army when the Greeks arrive, so they have no choice but to knock these guys off before they can become unified and stronger than ever. Croesus, powerful army of cavalry at his side, moves to meet the Persians in the open field. However, Cyrus had a trick up his sleeve, as he knew this was to be the case.

Camels.

Horses are notoriously skittish creatures, and when they see something new and unexpected they may not be so willing to charge into battle towards it. Knowing this to be true, Cyrus leads a great number of men on camels into the fray, terrifying the horses and sending them anywhere but where they needed to go. The Persian archers only had an undefended, scared, and defenceless infantry to deal with. It was a rout. Lydian forces retreated as fast as they could, back towards Sardis to defend the walls and lick their wounds.

Camels. The beast that scared the tremendous
cavalry force of Croesus into submission.
Camels. Really.

Unfortunately for Cyrus, attacking a walled city usually ended up in siege warfare that could take weeks, and time was not on his side. Knowing reinforcements were on the way, he had to act fast and take them out as soon as possible. Now, there's a story that Herodotus relates to the siege that should be taken with a grain of salt. It's hard to say exactly how true it is, or if it's just a good story to pass along. He says the Persians spotted a section of the walls where it was so tall that it was virtually undefended. A Persian scout was watching this section and saw a defender drop his helmet off the edge by accident, and climbed down a section of the wall to retrieve it, and returned without much issue. A Persian scout saw this and reported it back to the generals, showing them how to climb a section of seemingly unscalable wall where the defenders would be scarce. They had the rather easy decision of saying that was the place to attack from. The end result was an annihilation of the city much faster than a traditional siege. Croesus had an unknown fate, but that hardly matters - Persia took their capital and made it their city. While the story may sound far fetched at first, archaeological evidence was found (somehow) that could very well relate it to truth. After finding what is very likely to be the spot of attack, they found the remains of a man the appropriate age for a soldier, with arms broken from what may be desperately defending sword attacks, in a position that likely would have had him thrown from the wall. The icing on the cake was finding a helmet roughly the age of when Cyrus would have attacked just feet from his body. Who knows? Could be true.

So I leave you with Cyrus at the helm, strong as ever, having defeated the Lydians. Greece is already not too fond of them. We'll see how this plays out.

The Battle of Marathon: Part 1 - Astyages and Media

This is pretty typical for the Persians
in 300.

You know, you have to feel for Persia. The 300 movies - the original and Rise of an Empire - don't really give them a fair shake. Their armies are ruled by Xerxes, a gold-speedo wearing god-villain whose sole purpose seems to be to make the viewer feel uncomfortable, and in the later, they're led by Eva Green, whose sole purpose is to reveal as much as possible while still technically wearing armour. Their soldiers are not referred to as cannon fodder strictly because cannons have not yet been invented. It makes you wonder how these men seemingly made of paper and a battle plan that consists of hopefully drowning their opponents by flooding the battlefield with their blood ever came to be a force that would ever possibly defeat the Spartans and Athenians that are seemingly made of stone. Perhaps they just thought paper covers rock?

Persia's rise to power is actually pretty dang interesting, filled with violence, betrayals, and possible baby-eating. Therefore it seems fair to give a bit of background on the combatants in the Battle of Marathon before we get to all the fighting.

First, a bit of geography here. Greece is across the Aegean Sea from four important territories; Lydia, Persia, Media and Ionia. Lydia became super rich (largely due to the fact that they likely created the first coin) and powerful enough that Greece was paying tribute to it. Media and Persia were closely linked ethnically, culturally and geographically, but Persia was smaller and somewhat of an underdog. Ionia was a Greek controlled city state but on the same side of the Aegean as the rest of them. That's the basics of what you need to know to understand all this.

This is a depiction of Astyages' dream. I'd be
a paranoid freak-show if I dreamt crap like this too.

However, none of those places yet matter without a little character development. The king of Media, Astyages, is where this all begins (sort of). He was more than a little paranoid, certainly a fair lot cruel, and definitely not opposed to the occasional murder. He also dreamed in what must be rather nightmarish fashion, as he foresaw a his daughter leading to his eventual death and downfall while she rises up and takes the throne. His dream-seers (or interpreters, fortune tellers, what have you) told him that it could be the husband of his daughter, so he got her to pretty much just go out and marry a wimp. Problem solved on that front. However, she had a son, and that son may just prove to be the usurper after all. The reasonable progression of thought here for Astyages was it would be easiest to bump off the usurper if he had not yet mastered the art of crawling yet, and ordered a commander of his army, Harpagos, to kill the child. Yes - Astyages ordered the death of a baby because he felt threatened.

Harpagos, likely having some sort of, well, pretty darn reasonable qualms with murdering infants, tricked Astyages. He found a few Persians who just had their infant die and convinced them to do the old switcharoo. Yes, he switched out the babies and took the dead one to present to Astyages - and it worked. The name of the saved baby and son of the daughter of Astyages was Cyrus - born into a world where he narrowly avoids his murder and prophesied to go take the throne from his gramps. It's like a thousand year old episode of Maury. 

Herodotus; the guy just looks like
a historian.

Here's where it gets a little less PG-13 and falls more into the horror genre. Astages got word of the trick Harpagos played on him and invited him for dinner where he (I warn you, this is not for the faint of heart) chopped up Harpagos' son and fed it to him. (As a side-note, Astyages had those dream-readers impaled.) I believe it's safe to say that Astyages is the villain of this story. At this point it seems fair to remind everyone that all of these stories have to be taken with a grain of salt. Astyages reined from 585-550 BC. They weren't exactly recording all this. The majority of the information comes from archaeological evidence and the reports of Herodotus, a Greek historian. There's only so much value you can put on the accuracy, but unfortunately, it's what we've got. To his credit, plenty of the physical evidence left behind, as little as there may be, seems to match up fairly well with his reports.


So here's where we stand thus far; Cyrus is now separate from Media and surviving the wrath of Astyages. Harpagos is most certainly down in the dumps. Astyages is working through his severe psychological issues that have led to his war on infancy. Stay tuned for part two - the revenge of Cyrus!

Leonidas

Leonidas. The hero king of Sparta - not just a regular king, but a hero king. The name itself means "son of the lion." For comparison, my name means "light;dark" as if even my name itself is plagued by indecision. He is even said to be a descendant of Heracles himself. To say the least, Leonidas was born with some mighty big sandals to fill. 

Despite being born into a royal family, Leonidas was not set to take the throne from birth. Having an older brother, Cleomenes, means that he was second in line. In addition to missing out on the crown, he also had to have a freaking terrible childhood, especially considering what a lot of ancient history royalty would receive. All male Spartans, except for the first born males of royalty (curse you, lucky Cleomenes!) were sent to the agoge. This was basically boot camp done Spartan style... so, basically just much worse than boot camp. Also, it's for kids. 

The purpose of the agoge was education and training for all forms of Greek life. This meant stealth, loyalty, military training, hunting, dancing (I bet Leo' was a wonderful dancer), singing (Sweet home Apollonia...) and social preparation (which I can only assume is some form of beating). If this doesn't sound so bad, consider the fact that the military training had a lot to do with learning pain tolerance - and there aren't a lot of ways to learn pain tolerance. Oh, and the stealth? They would starve the kids so they would learn how to steal, thus learning stealth. The penalties for stealing were also quite harsh, so they best learn quick. When they completed the schooling with what I assume is a diploma made from an enemy warrior's scalp, they were named the "walls of Sparta". Add being a wall to Leonidas' impressive list of titles. 

Leonidas taking "wall of Sparta" too
literally, becoming stone.

Sometime while he's stealing apples and bread ninja style and singing about it later, Leonidas' brother became king upon the death of his father. Unfortunately for the new king Cleomenes, he kinda lost his mind and was exiled out of the city. Now it was time for our 300 action star to take the throne. As a side note, Leonidas also married Cleomenes daughter, Gorgo. I assume that despite the fact that it's incest, Leonidas just couldn't resist such a beautiful and womanly name such as that (it falls one letter short of gorgon, a hideous mythological creature, and one letter shy of gorgos, which means dreadful. Gorgo must have been a hideous baby).

Being a king wasn't going to be an easy job. Persia was at their doorstep, standing tall with one of the largest armies on record, ready to attack a much smaller Greece. Regardless, Leonidas was poised for war. However, he wasn't simply allowed to go to war as he so pleased, and he needed to visit an Oracle in order to be blessed by the gods before he could leave to fight; this is where they told him that one incredibly powerful bastion of manhood was about to fall - Leondias or Sparta. Naturally, he left to go fight. Leonidas was chosen to lead the combined Greek forces and meet Persia in a narrow pass that was the only way to the heartland. 

Soon the battle of Thermopyle was underway. Leonidas took a mere three hundred men to fight the vast armies of Persia, along with a number of men from Athens and other allied Greek city states of whom he met along the way. He eventually roused a number of them to battle, likely about 7,500. However, that was still a paltry number considering who was to meet on the field; Xerxes, the Persian leader. Oh, and he also had somewhere between 100,000 to 200,000 men with him. I suppose they're pretty important to mention.

The wikipedia description for this picture
claimed him to be "heroically nude".  Not even
once have I been called that.

On the first day of battle 2,500 Greeks died but at the cost of 20,000 Persian lives, two of which were Xerxes' brothers. The Immortals, the elite fighting squad of the Persian army (bear in mind the majority of the Persians were poorly equipped slaves) were deployed to break the ranks of the well trained, battle hardened Spartan force, but to no avail. The line was holding. It went down in history as one of the best examples of the benefits of using terrain to aid a battle, as well as proper training and equipment. It also went down in history as being the coolest last stand battle ever. The latter may be more opinion based.

In the end, Leonidas was killed due to the narrow pass that provided these advantages being made useless due to a secondary route that allowed the Persians to flank the Spartans. This was made known to the Persians by a Greek traitor named Ephialtes, a man whose name has gone down in history as a traitorous prick for centuries. Upon hearing the Persians were going to rout them, Leonidas sent the majority of his men back to safety, but stayed to ensure their safety in their retreat. What a baller. While he may have been defeated, allowing the Persian armies to roll through and take over Athens, other Greeks took up the charge and pushed Xerxes back after he removed much of his army after fearing being trapped in Greek lands. 

Leonidas, contrary to popular modern depictions, did not defeat his enemies in slow motion.

Famous Historical Figures Say the Darndest Things!

1. "Come and take!" A statue has since been put up in Greece with the words "Come and Take" engraved on it. Supposedly that is what Leonidas yelled when the Persians asked them to lay down their weapons. 300 may have exaggerated, but a lot of the over-the-top one-liners in that movie were recorded words from the son of a lion himself and the army at his side.
2. "Have a good breakfast, men, for we dine in Hades!" Leonidas said this on the morning of what would be their death at the hands of the Persians.