Download The contribution of Miltiades and Leonidas

Assess the contribution of Miltiades and Leonidas to the course of the
Persian Wars.
Miltiades played a crucial role in the Greek victory in the First Persian War, both by
persuading the Athenian Assembly to face the Persians at Marathon, and by leading the
Greeks to victory there. Leonidas’ role in the Second Persian War was also important,
however it was far more symbolic than strategic. His last stand at Thermopylae served as an
inspiration to the Greeks, persuading them that they could successfully resist the Persian
menace.
When Darius’ army reached Greece in 490 BC, it outnumbered the Greeks by three to one.
However, thanks to the quick thinking and persuasive power of Miltiades, the Athenian
Assembly agreed to face the invaders at Marathon rather than further south.
Having fought with the Persians in Thrace, Miltiades knew that their equipment was
inferior to that of his own troops. The Greek hoplites were equipped with bronze armour,
bronze grieves and a bronze helmet. They also carried a sword, a spear and a bronze or
wooden shield. The Persians, by contrast, had very little armour and only wicker shields.
They relied instead on their archers and cavalry to inflict the fatal blow. It was for this
reason that Miltiades ordered his forces at Marathon to hold the high, forested ground,
where the Persian cavalry could not manoeuvre.
Both sides faced off against each other for several days, with neither willing to strike first
and give away the advantage. Finally, Miltiades persuaded the Athenian commander-inchief, Callimachus, to order an attack. Herodotus’ account does not tell us why he took this
risk, but the fact that it makes no mention of the Persian cavalry in the ensuing battle
suggests that Miltiades might have taken advantage of a tactical error on the Persians’ part.
Victor Ehrenburg believes that the Persian commander, Datis, had sent his cavalry by ship to
capture Athens once he realised that Miltiades was not budging from his position. A
Byzantine source called the Suda provides evidence of this. Another possibility is that the
Persians’ horses were grazing at the time and not ready for battle. Either way, the decision
to put the cavalry out of action was a crucial mistake, and gave Miltiades the chance to end
the stalemate.
Miltiades’ plan of attack was brilliant. When the Greeks got to within a mile of the
Persians, he ordered that the centre of his line be weakened and the flanks reinforced. He
then directed his troops to run towards the Persians, to minimise the impact of their
archers. As the battle raged, the Persians pushed the Greek centre back, inadvertently
allowing themselves to be encircled by the Greeks. Miltiades now ordered his flanks to close
in on the Persians, trapping them in a killing zone. Those Persians that could do so broke and
ran – some back to their ships, others into the nearby swamp where they drowned. The rest
were cut to pieces by the Greeks. 6,400 of them died on the battlefield that day; countless
others died in the swamp. The Greeks lost just 200 men, plus Callimachus, their nominal
commander.
Now Miltiades ordered his forces south to defend Athens from the Persian fleet, and when
the Persians reached the Bay of Phalerum they found the Athenians lined up in defence of
their city. The two forces faced off against each other for a while, then Datis ordered his
forces home. The First Persian War was over, thanks in large part to the leadership of
Miltiades.
Although Leonidas’ contribution to the Greek victory in the Second Persian War was
nowhere near as significant as that of Miltiades in the First, it was still important. It was he
who made the decision to face the Persians at Thermopylae rather than further north at the
Vale of Tempe in Thessaly. Having reached the Vale, he realised that it could be bypassed by
the Persians, so made the important decision to face them further south.
Leonidas chose the pass at Thermopylae because it was extremely narrow (about 100
metres wide at its maximum) and had an ancient wall at its narrowest point which, if
repaired, offered protection. This terrain perfectly suited the Greeks, as the Persians could
not use their cavalry. Only the Persian archers posed a threat, but their arrows could not
easily penetrate the Greeks’ shields and armour. Hence, Leonidas hoped to hold off Xerxes’
massive army with his force of just 8,000 men. (The plan also depended on the Greek navy
keeping the Persian fleet out of the Straits of Skiathos.)
The one weakness the Greeks faced was a shepherd’s path through the hills. If the
Persians used this, they could outflank Leonidas’ force. As such, the king sent 1,000 hoplites
from Phocis to defend it, all the while hoping the Persians would not hear of its existence.
The strategy, though risky, was probably the best that could have been devised, given the
Greeks’ dire plight.
Upon reaching Thermopylae, Xerxes ordered his troops to wait for several days, hoping
the Greeks would surrender. When they did not, he attacked.
For two days the Persian infantry was repulsed by Leonidas’ force. Even Xerxes’ best
troops – the Immortals – failed to break through. Finally, a Greek traitor named Ephialtes
guided the Persians through the shepherd’s pass, and they were able to outflank the
Greeks.
Realising the battle was lost, Leonidas ordered all but his 300 Spartans and another 1,200
Greeks to retreat. According to Herodotus, he stayed behind because the Oracle of Delphi
had prophesied that a Spartan king would have to die as the price for saving Greece.
However, it seems more likely that the last stand he made was a means of protecting the
Greek withdrawal.
In the ensuing battle, the Spartans moved into the wider part of the pass so they could kill
as many Persians as possible. In the end, their Greek allies surrendered, but the 300
Spartans fought to the last. As prophesised, King Leonidas lost his life.
The Battle of Thermopylae was a major victory for the Persians. Its importance to the
Greeks lay not in the fact that it delayed the Persian advance; in fact, it did so by only a
handful of days. Instead, it served as an inspirational example to the rest of the Greece. A
small force had held off the might of Persia, and was only undone by the actions of a traitor.
Even more impressive was the sacrifice made by Leonidas and his men, who were willing to
die rather than submit to tyranny. It served as a rallying cry to the 31 members of the
Hellenic League, keeping them united till the war was won. This was the Spartan king’s
contribution to the Second Persian War.
Hence it can be seen that both Miltiades and Leonidas played crucial roles in the two wars
with Persia – Miltiades as a general who plotted victory, Leonidas as an inspirational leader
in defeat.