Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News Books Media Book Reviews

Gates of Fire 92

Posted by Hemos from the down-in-a-ring-of-fire dept.
CACL, oh he of the great name, has given us a nice review of Gates of Fire. Gates of Fire is historical fiction set during the Greek Golden Age, historically accurate, with stomach-wrenching battle scenes. Click below to learn more if the thought of being a Spartan gives you great joy.
Gates of Fire
author Steven Pressfield
pages 442
publisher Bantam Books, 10/1999
rating 9/10
reviewer CACL
ISBN 0553580531
summary An adrenalin rush that makes you want to be a Spartan

The Scenario

In 480 BC, The Persian Empire under Xerxes sent two million men into the Greek peninsula intending to incorporate the territory into their ever expanding realm. 300 Spartans, trained since childhood that the only thing worth being was a warrior, met the Persians at Thermopylae with only a handful of allies. The place was carefully chosen so that the Spartans could not be surrounded and just swept from the field. They still lost. They went into it knowing they never had a chance, but they managed to kill hundreds of thousands of the enemy, and buy time for the rest of Greece to rally and drive the Persians out of Europe. This battle is consistently rated in the top five most influential of all time. The Spartans literally managed to save western civilization as we know it.

Steven Pressfield manages to weave a convincing narrative told through a squire of the Spartans, who narrates his story to Xerxes after the Spartan defeat at Thermopylae. Xerxes wants to know what it is about the Spartans that made them stand the field, and is worried about what 5,000 Spartans could do when only 300 nearly beat his best army. The squire, Xeo, was the guy who carried your extra spears into battle, and would pull your dead body out if things went poorly. Telling the story through him rather than a Spartan allows Pressfield to keep a distance from the inner working of the Spartan mindset that allowed him to reveal that world view one piece at a time.

What emerges is a story that is sure to make your testosterone pump up a few levels. Not that women cannot enjoy this story. The female characters in the story are, if anything, tougher than their Spartan husbands. This is also not a tale of gratuitous physical violence, despite the subject matter. War is hell, and Pressfield spends alot of time discussing why that is, and what sorts of courage it takes for a man to go into it again and again, and the courage a woman has in watching him go.

What's Bad?

The biggest thing that is bad is that Spartans are now a cheesey mascot for the Michigan State sports teams. But still, this book does have it's weak points. The beginning is slow to build, but once you get through the first chapter, you're in clear water. I also found some of the personal details surrounding the life of the protagonist to be gratuitous, and not meaningfully enhancing the story itself.

The book can also be brutal. An early scene involves a boy who receives a beating, but rather than cry out and admit weakness, he allows himself to be beaten to death. The battle descriptions are also pretty rough, but no more than what they really would have been at the time. It's not these are bad features of the book, just something you may want to know if you have a weak stomach.

What's Good?

Pressfield has done his research. His acknowledgments at the end of the book cite some historians, including John Keegan, who are the best alive today. He's also done his own reading of ancient texts and historians, allowing him to paint a picture of ancient Hellenistic society that is fresh and accurate. You will really stop thinking of the classics as boring when you finish reading this book. The details of everything, from the set up of a Spartan farmhouse, to the lush detail on hoplite battle practices, in this book are well researched and rich.

Also, there is a lot of thought behind this book. The Spartans are not mindless fighters, they have deep rooted philosophies that Pressfield tries to project. The nature of courage is discussed intelligently and at length. The idea of polis, those things that make a city more than a group of bricks, is discussed in a better way than a hundred pompous community building papers I've read lately. This book deserves its status on the bestseller list.

So What's In It For Me?

"Although extraordinary valor was displayed by the entire corps of Spartans and Thespians, yet bravest of all was declared the Spartan Dienekes. It is said that on the eve of battle, he was told by a native of Trachis that the Persian archers were so numerous that, when they fired their volleys, the mass of arrows blocked out the sun. Dienekes, however, quite undaunted by this prospect, remarked with a laugh, 'Good. Then we'll have our battle in the shade.'" Herodotus, The Histories

You will get a glimpse into a life you will probably never have, of men the type you will never meet and leadership that you will never see. You will look at your own arms and imagine them clad in bronze armor and carrying a spear in defense of your people. You will look at your friends and wonder how they would fare at your side shielding you against maddened attackers. You will be, for only a passing moment, a Spartan.

Purchase this book at fatbrain.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gates of Fire More

Gates of Fire

Comments Filter:

  • Great Book, good review... (Score:3)

    by jeff_C ( 19805 ) on Thursday December 23, 1999 @06:12AM (#1449782)
    I read Gates of Fire this summer and loved it. This is definately one you can't put down once you get into it. Pressfield does a wonderful job of inventing believable characters from a period of history (ancient Greece) I've always had a hard time relating too.

    His next book Tides of War [fatbrain.com] is due to be published in March, and is also set in ancient Greece this time about General Alcibiades, Athens most brilliant millitary leader. His first book Legend of Bagger Vance [fatbrain.com] is kind of a mystic novel about golf and life, and while good, is not in the same league as Gates of Fire.

    <RANT> As for all the posts wondering how this is News for Nerds, most of us enjoy a good book, this is a good book, hence the review. It was obvious from the topic is wasn't going to be about technology, why did you click through and read it? Better yet, why did you take the time to post 'This doesn't belong on Slashdot!!'? Noone forced you to read it, noone forced you to reply, and noone voted you Editor-in-Chief of Slashdot. </RANT>

  • That literature would not exist if the Persians had accomplished their goal.

    Actually, the Persians were wonderful (by any standards) to their conquered lands. They did not rape, pillage, burn like the standard conquering armies. The Persians allowed conquered lands to practice their religions and govern in their own ways. All they did was collect taxes. One reason why they were so succesful.

    So the libraries would have still stood.
  • Start your commentary (or your subject) with:

    This will probably be labeled as flamebate, but...

    or a similar variation always works.

    As for an idea on how to be constantly moderated down, select a similar sig:
  • 3 things any geek I've ever known has been into to one degree or another.

  • Very fun book to read, some might argue that there was too much detail, but I found it absolutely fascinating. If I were the reviewer, I'd also add Mary Renault as an influence, as well as Keegan. Not that I have many complaints about the review, just wanted to mention that.

    The main reason I'm posting this is to mention that his next book, which is due out in April of 2000, is about Alcibiades and the Peloponnesian War, in case any of you are into that. I have a couple of friends who are majorly into that era, and although I'm not (mainly because I'm not very familiar with it), I'm looking to learning about it, just as I learned so much from Gates of Fire

    Cheers,
    ZicoKnows@hotmail.com

  • The Romans would sheath their battle sword, pull out this short sword, and chase down the enemy from behind, using the "Pike" to stab the anus and genitals of the fleeing enemy, leaving the injured to a slow painful death by infection.


    A Pike is an entirely different weapon. A Pike is similar to a PoleArm or Spear, usually they would be set slightly buried in the ground butt first by foot soldiers to discourage horsemen from charging their lines. Traditionally these foot soldiers would be backed up by Archers or Crossbowmen, during a siege the Catapults would be behind them, and beyond that on a hill would be the commander of the army with runners and signal flags or mirrors.

    Kintanon
  • I second the recommendation; a very good book.

    --
    It's October 6th. Where's W2K? Over the horizon again, eh?
  • Which was a short throwing spear, light enough to be carried in multiple. It was standard in the Athenian army, and I believe the spears that Roman legionaires carried were along the same design if not the exact same thing.

    And if you're chasing fleeing enemies, it's a lot easier to hit them with a five-foot poking weapon than a two-foot stabbing one.

    JennyWL, SCA member and therefore amateur historian
  • I'm going to remember this, next time I fire a Pilum up the tailpipe of a retreating Kilrathi in Wing Commander.
  • There are some further things which are not correct. The Spartan army and the allies from Theben and Athens knew that they are betrayed and would die. They sacrified themselves to let the main army retreat. The main army was able to refortyfy at Maraton. Some time later they could reinforce their troops with a further Spartanian army and from other greek kingdoms and even Macedonian ones. Well, the biggest battle not involved with the persian wars was one of the last battles between romans and greeks. About 40.000 people should have fought and died on the greek side. It is total unbelievebale that the more than some 10.000 people should have fought 400 BC in the persian wars.

    But I will consider having a look into the book if I can get it in the library.
  • OK, this may seem like a crass publicity stunt, but this week is the 10 year anniversary of Operation Just Cause where over 2000 Rangers parachuted onto hot Drop Zones at two airfields in Panama. Red tracers met each aircraft as they unloaded thier human combat loads. There is a memorial site with combatant narratives here [75thrangers.org]. If you think the Rangers had a twisted sense of humor, I can't imagine what it was like being a Spartan.
  • I read it and thought it was a great book. I would recommend it.

  • I was always under the impression that Leonidas was at Thermopylae to guard the flank of a Greek fleet at Artemision, which was fighting to keep the Persians out of protected waters behind the island of Euboea, so that when the weather shifted many of their ships would sink. However, at the time of the battle, that fleet had already left, but there weren't decent communications and Leonidas didn't know that he could have pulled back from the pass.


    There was also a faction of Spartans siding with the Persians, and Xerxes' minions had bribed the Oracle to declare that a Spartan king must fall (with the implication that he'd be replaced by the Spartan who was with Xerxes, who was a disaffected member of one of the Phaetries), or Sparta itself would be destroyed. Sparta herself wasn't unified enough to figure out what course of action they were going to take, so Leonidas, who was one of the kings at the time, went North with all the forces he could control himself or vassals and allies he could get to go. In a way, Leonidas' death was more important as a catalyst for the rest of the Spartans to get their act together and defend Greece, than it was in pure military terms.


    It's all very interesting that at the time the battle was fought, according to the religious establishment at the time, the Greeks as a whole weren't just fighting the Persians, but going against the word of their Gods, as revealed to the Oracle. Impressive, huh?


  • I read the book and it's excellent -- historically accurate and very evocative at the same time. It's particularly interesting at a time when current ideas of bravery and masculinity are so mixed up. The Spartans' thoughts on the subject seem quite cogent. If you really want to get into the subject matter, read it along with Stephen Ambrose's "Citizen Soldiers" and Dave Grossman's "On Killing." Then, for a laugh, read Susan Faludi's "Stiffed."
  • Now this is a pretty good article. I am eager to buy it.

    By the way, during the Roman Empire, I have heard the Roman army had a small sword called a "Pike".

    Most opposing forces were no match for the Roman army, so the enemy would turn and run after a short fight with the Romans.

    The Romans would sheath their battle sword, pull out this short sword, and chase down the enemy from behind, using the "Pike" to stab the anus and genitals of the fleeing enemy, leaving the injured to a slow painful death by infection.

    I have heard this was the Roman's favorite part of the battle. Confirm or deny, anyone? Brutal, to say the least.

  • Actually... ``Stuff that matters''. I mean it.
    (and BTW Greeks are cool, both ancient and modern)
  • Slashdot is evolving into a site which contains stuff that the editors like.

    That is the way to go. Lifestyle sites where groups of people with similar interests chat and contribute info and stories.

    So I think that the "News for Nerds, stuff that matters" wording is correct..
  • Those of you who enjoy comic books may wish to check out Frank Miller's _300_, published
    last year as a 5-issue miniseries and recently reprinted as a single volume. It's another telling of the same battle, but with some very nice visuals. (Not that there's anything wrong with traditional books where you have to make up the visuals, of course.)
  • sorry about quoting the wrong weapon, and i wish i could recall which class i heard that tale in. it's been 5 yrs. out now, so my memory is fading.

    i think it may have a gen ed. class on infectious diseases, but it's just been too long.

    So, perhaps I can evade the wrath of the moderator with a quick story on kill ratios, which is really what this story is about.

    How about a kill ratio of 150,000 to 1?

    Richard Lederer, in his book "The Miracle of Language", describes a translation error that some feel led directly to the nuclear attack on Japan.

    July 26th, 1945: The Potsdam Declaration demands Japan's unconditional surrender.

    Japan's Imperial cabinet is interested in surrender, in the face of the fall of the other axis powers, but needs time to politically organize the military and citizens of Japan.

    The cabinet releases a statement using the word "Mokusatsu", which is usually translated as "We are considering it" or "We are ignoring it" (depending on context). The english translator erred, and the official english broadcast from Japan stated the the Imperial Cabinet was ignoring the Potsdam Declaration.

    Not wanting to lose face in the aftermath of the error, the Imperial Cabinet decided not to retract the statement, and instead ignored the Declaration!

    On July 28th, most allied newspapers carried the story that Japan had chosen to ignore the Potsdam Declaration. Within weeks, 150,000 Japanese were dead, and a world nuclear race ensued.

    (ISBN: 0-671-02811-1; paperback, ppgs. 77-78).
  • I just finished reading this book less than 10 minutes ago, and now I get online and behold, its on Slashdot... I must say, this was an excellent book. I've always been a fan of fantasy type books, and its a nice change to see an interesting novel of this type thats actually based in history.
  • Gates of Fire was interesting, but I thought that it didn't live up to its full potential as a piece of historical fiction. The role of historical fiction is to convey the gravity of the situation on hand, and Gates of Fire seemed to botch up on many of the most essential events. It has its share of pathos, true, but when it really counted, GOF just treated the most exciting scenes just as it did the others. There should be a difference in attention to detail, at least.
    Pressfield seems to have done his research for this book, and I commend him on that. However, I don't think that it would be right to say that this is a wholly accurate portrayal of Sparta. Sparta, being the martial society as it was, didn't have any native historians. What we know now is based upon scraps of archaeological evidence here and there, writings from historians 400+ years after the heyday of Sparta (Plutarch comes to mind.. Herodotus is a bit more trustworthy), and just pure conjecture. I think that Pressfield trusted the latter of those methods in devising his image of the core of Spartan society. However, I find many of his examples debatable, especially in the description of the Spartan home life: how could such a contrast between the [exaggerated] training of the soldiers and their idyllic little cottages a few miles away? Something seemed off about that.
    And where were the perioeci (free men around Sparta, but not Spartans; the middle rung in the ladder between slave and Spartiate) in the book? The author probably omitted describing them for the sake of focus, but I think that because the perioeci was part of the core of the Spartan society, they deserved some recognition.

    As I can see from the posts, some have misinterpreted Sparta. Here's just a little bit in defense of the guys:

    * The fact the the ratio between slaves to Spartans was 20:1 draws a lot of heat. "How," many ask, "can anybody say the Spartans were a good race when so many slaves existed?" Because the Spartans were out to war so often, they needed somebody to stay at home and keep the city productive. The result was MUCH increased freedom for women (the amount of freedom the Women were given was nearly 2000 years ahead of its time; even the wife of Leonidas commented, "in what other race does one find the women ruling the men?") and more slaves to work the farms. But when you put Sparta in contrast to its other Greek rival, Athens was just as bad. There was kind of a quality versus quantity tradeoff: while the Spartan slaves worked the farms and such (and annually had war declared on them to keep them in line), many of the Athenian slaves were sent to the silver mines where the expected average lifespan of the silverworker was measured in months.
    * No, the Spartans did not have a homosexual "sacred band" or "sacred pairs" or institutionalized homosexuality. Thebes was the city that had the Sacred Band, and with that army, it crushed the degraded forces of Sparta around the 4th Century BC. Homosexuality undoubtedly existed in Sparta, as it does in every society, but it wasn't just something that inevitably happened to a soldier in the Spartan army. Some have suggested sexual activity within the barracks divisions of the hoplites due to their being together as a group through many, many traumatic experiences for years... but then again, others say that is wrong. It's up for debate there.
    * To assume the Spartan society was stupid simply due to lack of archaelogical evidence is wrong. The Spartans didn't believe in frivolous writing; as a result, very little survives to this day. People are people; every society has its own intellectuals. Perhaps Sparta didn't tap its mental resources as much as Athens did, but it certainly wasn't a society of neanderthals.

    If one is interested in a closer look on hoplite warfare to supplement the reading of Gates of Fire, check out "The Western Way of War" by Victor Davis Hanson. This provideds an exceptional look into not only the ancient battles of long ago, but also the nature of hoplite warfare as well as the state of the actual individuals inside those crimson panoplies.

    Also, if Gates of Fire inspired some to become "philakones" (Sparta nerds) like myself, check out a website that a friend and I are constructing on the subject. http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~sparta/

    ..and yes, the book did make me want to be a Spartan. But I thought of that long ago... ;P

    Kevin

  • i read that comic! talk about pervy.. kevin
  • At the very least this book sounds good to me. I can't imagine actually being in a hand to hand battle, and I am sure that this paints quite an accurate picture.

    Merry Christmas everyone!

    .
  • Oh.. Gates like things that you can open.. I had another Gates in mind ;-)
  • ...the reason that this book review appears on a technical news site is because its full of impressive hardware right? No? What about software then? Not that either? Well, surely it must have something techy in it? Surely?


  • Thermopylae (Score:5)

    by costas ( 38724 ) on Thursday December 23, 1999 @04:43AM (#1449818) Homepage
    Being a Greek, it was a nice surprise seing this story on Slashdot. The battle of Thermopylae is one of our favorite historical moments as a nation. These days Thermopylae is just another spot on the highway, but if you take the time to visit the monument there, you'll see on the most gut-wrenching epitaphs I know about on the ancient memorial there: "Stranger, tell the Spartans that we lie here, having followed their rules".

    Also, I'd like to correct one common fallacy: there weren't just 300 Spartans at Thermopylae: they also had another 700 (I think) allies from Thebes. Still, the odds were like 500:1 --consider that military science says you only need 6:1 to take a well-defended position...

    And at the end they only lost due to treason --a local shepherd who the Persians bribed, guided some Persian soldiers through the rough paths of the area around the Spartan stronghold, surrounding them...

    Spartan society was one of the strictest, most autocratic of ancient times, but noone can claim they had no valor...


    engineers never lie; we just approximate the truth.
  • I studied this subject matter in High School in Ireland for 5 years. This battle was in second year and I remember being captivated by the whole story.
    Anyone interested in ancient battles involving Spartans Vs. Other Greeks should look up the siege of Platea, where the Spartans laid siege to the small city (Platea) and were actually held off by ingenious inventions of the defenders. They stories of how they defeated the Spartan's advanced siege equipment with basic tools might remind you of writing code for Windows though.
  • Am I the only one who read this as "Gates on Fire"?
  • >>The Spartans literally managed to save western civilization as we know it.

    I don't see history as a western movie. There are no guys in black hats or guys in white hats. The Persians weren't all bad, and the Greeks weren't all good.

    LK
  • You know, I bet the democratic greeks went democratic just to be as different as possible from the Spartans.
  • Of course I know the Persians weren't Muslims

    Indeed, and the Greeks weren't Christians, so it's tough to predict how the world would have been if the Persians had got their wicked way. Perhaps the same? Or perhaps, a few years ago, Iraq, as the world's self-elected world policeman, would have been bombing the Comanche Nation to get them to withdraw from oil-rich lands of the Kickapoo?

    Who knows.

    Regards, Ralph.

  • There is an interesting article called Natural Killers -- Turning the Tide of Battle [army.mil], which raises some interesting points.

    "A natural killer is a person who has a predisposition to kill--he enjoys combat and feels little or no remorse about killing the enemy. These men have existed throughout the history of warfare, and their feats have often been hailed as heroic. They constitute less than 4 percent of the force, yet some studies show that they do almost half of the killing."

    Fascinating. Looks like the spartans were able to condense those few into a single elite unit.

    but this also raises some interesting questions about Our system of social values, since the military naturally wants certains values in people that are not always the best ones to have in a peaceful society.

  • I read this a few months ago - I found to be highly enjoyable.
  • (OK, I know Persia became Iran not Iraq, but let's leave that aside to enjoy the irony a little more.)

  • Re:Be a spartan? No way! (Score:3)

    by costas ( 38724 ) on Thursday December 23, 1999 @07:10AM (#1449834) Homepage
    Well, yeah Sparta wasn't a happy place to live back in those days, and if you visit the actual city (I am Greek, BTW) you will see why --it's locked in by high mountains all around; it just looks gloomy ;-)

    At any rate, you're right on all points --modern Greek history books estimate the Persian army to have been closer to ~300-500k rather than 2M. Also, look at what the poor Persians were carrying --cotton uniforms with wick shields and spears-- and their training --they had the draft; most of the army was peasants and farmers, only Xerxes' personal guard were professional soldiers. They went against highly trained warriors (male Spartan citizens, who were the only eligible to fight for Sparta were training for war as a full-time job) clad in brass armor, brass shields, spears and swords.

    That's why it took 500:1 to get past Thermopylae --and then it took treason (another curious trivia: the name of the traitor "Ephialtes" has passed on to modern Greek language as "nightmare"/"supreme traitor").

    Plus you have to consider the Spartan motivation: male Spartans grew up training for war; and when they went into battle their mothers gave them their shields (carrying the family insignia) with this wish: "bring it back or be carried on it [i.e. die]".


    engineers never lie; we just approximate the truth.

  • Just ranting... (Score:3)

    by David A. Madore ( 30444 ) on Thursday December 23, 1999 @07:24AM (#1449837) Homepage

    > The Spartans literally managed to save western civilization as we know it.

    Now that's an interesting exaggeration if I saw one. The Spartans certainly made a great display of courage at Thermopylæ, but even if we want to take that reductive view of things (whereby the Greeks are the ``good guys'' and the Persians are the ``bad guys''), the Athenians should be the real heroes. After all, they had beaten Darius at Marathon ten years earlier, in 490 (first Median war), and they destroyed Xerxes' fleet in Salamis. Granted, Leonidas and his brave Spartans probably bought the Athenians time, but Athens nevertheless was sacked by Xerxes in 480 — and despite this the Greeks were victorious.

    Besides, this reductive point of view leaves much to be desired. Who are the great men (i.e. scientists) of Greece? Thales, Anaximander, Anaxagoras, Empedocles, Democritus and the like, I would say: see any Athenians there? any Spartans? Definitely not. Athens only produced Plato and Aristotle, who merely served to justify much of the philosophical mumbo-jumbo that was qualified as ``science'' during the Middle Ages; and Sparta produced nothing of note, and is now an unremarkable village of the Peloponnesus (sic transit). Thales lived in Miletus, which was taken by the Persians at the end of the VIth century (and no Athenians or Spartans rose to the arms to defend their comrades against Media).

    In any case, later on, Sparta made war upon its former ally, Athens, and won. Then Thebes warred against Sparta and won. Then Alexander (the ``Great'') made war upon Greece and won. Then the Romans conquerred the shreds of Alexander's Empire. But even Rome fell in its time, and Constantinople much later on. And after all that, civilization is as we know it; I do not think there is much point in asking what would have happened otherwise.

    What is the moral? I don't know. But certainly, civilization cannot be saved by military victories, but by the thinkers who perpetuate it. (There is this very pretty quote in Montaigne's Essays, which bears some relation to the subject: Anaximenes would have asked Pythagoras, ``For what reason should I trouble myself to seek out the secrets of the stars, having death and slavery continually before my eyes.'' The ``death and slavery'' in question, is of course, the war against Persia.) Likewise, when Constantinople fell in 1453, it was not the end of the world, but the onset of the Renaissance.

    I thank the League of Delos no more than I thank Xerxes. As for the Spartans (or the Thebans, for that matter), I hold some sympathy for them in that they glorified homosexuality, but they were assuredly not a very pleasant people.

    My apologies for this rant.

  • a man-boy sexual relationship was shunned in sparta, and would have resulted in exile from the city. as the book explains, to be seperated from one's city is to lose one's identity--the worst thing in the world--so no boy-fucking was done.

    you're thinking "athens" here, buddy. as for homosexuality in general, it wasn't discouraged per se, but it wasn't a state institution, either. i won't bother to bring up the multitudes of theories about Spartan homosexuality, but I recommend you read the many books on the subject of Greek homosexuality before you make an inflammatory blanket statement like that. kevin

  • For those of you wondering where the title comes from, "Thermopylae" translates into something like "warm gates." Presumably, the author decided that "Gates of Fire" sounded more impressive.
  • "the hot gates" was a common nickname among the greeks at the time. apparently, it was quite a tourist attraction.. in fact, the spartans made use of the provisions of the visitors to their advantage during the duration of the battle of Thermopylae.

    yeah, "gates of fire" probably sells more books.

    Kevin

  • consider that military science says you only need 6:1 to take a well-defended position

    Trivial I know... but I believe it's 3:1 for an even match.
  • >Now that's an interesting exaggeration if I saw >one. The Spartans certainly made a great display >of courage at Thermopylæ, but even if we want to >take that reductive view of things (whereby the >Greeks are the ``good guys'' and the Persians are >the ``bad guys''), the Athenians should be the >real heroes. After all, they had beaten Darius at >Marathon ten years earlier, in 490 (first Median >war), and they destroyed Xerxes' fleet in >Salamis. Granted, Leonidas and his brave Spartans >probably bought the Athenians time, but Athens >nevertheless was sacked by Xerxes in 480 — >and despite this the Greeks were victorious.
    --
    Many think that the Spartans actually won at Thermopylae, actually. They lost in terms of pure military numbers, but they *succeeded* in delivering the message that the Greeks were indominatable. Don't you think Xerxes was scared shitless by this brilliant show of military prowess on the behalf by a handful of Spartans? Don't you think this could have massively affected the actual endpoint of the entire war?

    You failed to mention the battle of Plataea. The Spartans were the major players in that skirmish, and when they were able to flex their accumulated military muscle, they kicked the Persians' asses right out of Greece. I accredit the victory of the Persian War to the Spartans--the Athenians marked the turning point at Marathon--but the Spartans brought the ordeal to a decisive finish.
    --

    >Besides, this reductive point of view leaves much >to be desired. Who are the great men (i.e. >scientists) of Greece? Thales, Anaximander, >Anaxagoras, Empedocles, Democritus and the like, >I would say: see any Athenians there? any >Spartans? Definitely not. Athens only produced >Plato and Aristotle, who merely served to justify >much of the philosophical mumbo-jumbo that was >qualified as ``science'' during the Middle Ages; >and Sparta produced nothing of note, and is now >an unremarkable village of the Peloponnesus (sic >transit). Thales lived in Miletus, which was >taken by the Persians at the end of the VIth >century (and no Athenians or Spartans rose to the >arms to defend their comrades against Media).
    --
    The purpose of this piece of historical fiction was to portray the battle of Thermopylae and the mindset of the soldiers who fought in it, not somehow tie together all notable figures of Greek history and get them to work in a big wacky purely fictional plot. It's reduced for a reason: for example, when I write an autobiography, will I write about my escapades with every single major celebrity in America? No... they don't have anything to do with me. Same with Thermopylae and Plato.
    --
    >I thank the League of Delos no more than I thank >Xerxes. As for the Spartans (or the Thebans, for >that matter), I hold some sympathy for them in >that they glorified homosexuality, but they were >assuredly not a very pleasant people.
    --
    Nah, I don't think they glorified homosexuality at all. The Athenians certainly did--pederasty was an integral part of male society--but in comparison to the Spartans, the Spartans hardly even mentioned it. Homosexuality was tolerated, unremarkable even, in Spartan society between peers--but never was it encouraged or endorsed by the state (the sexual practices of homosexuality require one to be "passive", or feminine, which sacrifices the all-important characteristic of masculinity.) Boy-love was shunned, even punished, in Sparta if it was pursued to sexual ends.

    Thebes, on the other hand... yeah, they glorified it all right.


    I think the Spartans would have been a fine people--but in a different way. Our [American] society certainly isn't kind in comparison to the majority of other established societies (all this damn corporatism! advertisement! hiss)
    Sometimes I wish I could have meet or perhaps even been a Spartan--what an interesting experience that might've been. mm, pass me more of that tasty black bloody porridge!

    Kevin
  • That was certainly not his vision of things, nor was it the vision of the Greeks of the time.
  • We run a radio streaming service, and one of our customers is a Gay radio station. Imagine my surprise, and mirth, at hearing a recruiting add on GAAY radio.

    "So where did you hear our adds, son?"
    "I'm sorry, I can't tell you that, sir."

  • I thought it was because it had "Gates" in the title.
  • From an historic perspective, without Greek civilization surviving the Persian invasion (i.e. they became another servitor nation to the Persian empire), western society would look a lot different.

    Besides, who said western society was good?

    Frank Miller also did a very very nice piece of work last year, short-run comic series "300" about... you guessed it, the Spartans at Thermopylae. Doesn't have the depth that a careful historic treatment does, but it is a fine example of what can be done in the comic medium for a story of true heroism.
  • Some insight from Asimov's history book: 'The Greeks'

    • Spartans used to kill the babies that did not look healthy and strong at birth.
    • Military service began at the age of seven, and the boys were trained from the beginning to fight with very heavy weapons.
    • They ate only what was absolutely necessary, and the food was awful. Other Greeks said that their food was the best for an army, because after trying it they wanted to die.
    Glub.

    Asimov also tells something about the size of the armies at Thermopylae. He says the two million figure must have been an exaggeration, because such an army would have been impossible to feed and manage at the time. He believed the Persians to be no more than 300,000 men.

    Also, according to him, the Spartans were 300, with some allies from Thebes and other places, about 7,000 men in all. Some of them surrendered, but the Spartans and some of their allies refused and were slaughtered. They lost because some traitor with knowledge of the region helped Xerxes to surround them.
  • Tecnically, it's 'news for nerds' if only two people (nerds) are interested in it.

    If you don't like it, then don't read it. It's not like Slashdot is filled with hundreds of OT atricles daily. You could always right a review of a good technical book yourself to make up for it.

    The true signs of Slashdot on the brink of destruction would be when RobLimo writes about something he understands, or when JonKatz ponders whether McDonald's hates geeks because the forgot the Pokemon toy in his happy meal.
    ~~~~~~~~~
    auntfloyd
  • The Persians weren't all bad, and the Greeks weren't all good.

    Correct. The Persians under that time (though not necesarily with Xerces), were much more civilized than their Western contemporaries. The majority of the work in mathematics and medecine (which we still use today) was coming from the Persians. It trully was a great civilization.
  • So now History and literature are "the bottom of the barrel"? Why, thank you, said the Humanities *nerds* in unison...

  • OK, how about you go find a technical book on a subject you know, and write a review? The idea behind "user submitted content", which is one of the coolest things about /. (and the web), is USER + SUBMISSION = CONTENT. If you want more technical content, submit more technical content. I personally prefer to take it as it is and see what the universe is up to today.

    And the Story about Ping [slashdot.org] is still my favorite /. review of all time.

  • Classical Greek history (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This site is increadle if you want any information pn classical greek history and culture.
    http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/
    Spartan girls are naked thighed and man crazy.
    -- ancient graffiti found at a greek archealogical site
  • Never heard of such a thing in my three years working towards a degree in ancient mediteranean civilizations. The Romans had no "Battle Sword", the standard issue sword, the gladius, was a short sword with about 2 feet of blade. It's very difficult to wield a long blade effectively in close order infantry formations. The legionaries were known to hold back one of their three spears for chasing the enemy after they had been routed... or for holding the enemy off as the legion retreated... and these spears are sometimes incorrectly reffered to as pikes. And, hell, EVERYONE's favorite part of battle is the part where you know you have won and lived, and nothing says victory like chasing down and killing the enemy as they flee. 8P

    Another great fictional book about Thermopylae is Frank Miller's graphic novel '300'. Beutiful art and a great angle on the battle.

    -=RR=-

  • Never heard of such a thing in my three years working towards a degree in ancient mediteranean civilizations. The Romans had no "Battle Sword", the standard issue sword, the gladius, was a short sword with about 2 feet of blade. It's very difficult to wield a long blade effectively in close order infantry formations. The legionaries were known to hold back one of their three spears for chasing the enemy after they had been routed... or for holding the enemy off as the legion retreated... and these spears are sometimes incorrectly reffered to as pikes. And, hell, everyone's favorite part of battle is the part where you know you have won and lived, and nothing says victory like chasing down and killing the enemy as they flee.

    Another great fictional book about Thermopylae is Frank Miller's graphic novel '300'. Beutiful art and a great angle on the battle.

    -=RR=-

  • Good question, bad punctuation. Good, bad, and ugly people asside, you might start to find an answer to this by reading Heroditus's account of this war. There are plenty of good translations around. It's difficult to see western culture through itself, and this is a very western document, but it's forgien enough to modern people to be instructive.

    Greek concepts of citezenship, law, and philosopy in general were different, and their reapearance as a whole is questionable. It can be argued that the greeks invented proof and applied it to more than geometry. The Athenians compared the various forms of govenment they knew of and debated their merits in an open forum. They published their ideas for the sake of it. Criticism, reason, proof, publication, and the whole world view that promotes these things can all be found in ancient Greek literature. That literature would not exist if the Persians had accomplished their goal. Though the core of these thing can be found in most western cultures (languages that attribute responsibilty for actions unequivically, loose rule by weak monarchs, and constant energetic strugle) the world would be much poorer without the early flowering of the Greeks.

    Heroditus has one interesting story that would not seem very forgien here. The Persian king heard about the Olympic games. When he learned to his suprise that there was no monetary prize and that the athletes were only competing for honor and recognition, he decided that his invasion would never work. This story seems far to western to have been true. Go read it for yourself!

  • Having found the referenced article fascinating, I browsed up a level and found yet more good stuff. Might I recommend "Leadership in the Information Age" [army.mil]:

    "The US Army leadership culture will need to evolve to deal with a different type of soldier. Currently, those professionals who best understand emerging IT find a hostile climate in the services. People adept at using the new technology are ridiculed as being "nerds" or "geeks" and not true soldiers. However, 21st-century Army leaders need to recognize that moving and shooting apply to the information medium as well. When the fog and friction of combat begin to stress the information systems, a successful leader needs to be technically proficient to continue the mission with degraded systems and improvise new solutions."

    ("If you can hack, Uncle Sam wants YOU!")

    Any /.ers who think that the military is just for testosterone-crazed lunkheads should also take a look at some of these papers. Yeah, the pay sucks compared to Silicon Valley IPO-mania, and it's a "government job" in the sense of a lot of regulation and what-not, but there's still a lot of fascinating work, both on a technological ("look at this neat tool!") and human ("how can we get more out of our people and processes") related, going on, and there are some really smart people working their asses off on it.

    Many of the principles the military is trying to encourage can be applied directly to business. Place your "Natural killers" in positions where they can slay your competitors. (They sound perfect for marketing and sales!) Make sure your support personnel aren't just $5/hour drones who say "try rebooting and reinstalling Windows", but that they've got the clue to figure stuff out for your customers when the chips are down. Lead your company or your team, or find someone who can - so you can let them do the leading while you develop the cool technology without having to worry about the day-to-day hassles of management.

    And back to the original topic of the Spartans at Thermopylae - I once heard that the Klingons of Star Trek were loosely based on the warriors of feudal Japan. I think we've pretty much dispelled that myth today, and made sure that the book review more than qualifies as "news for nerds" :-)

  • Very cool site, Costas. Way to go. At least a Web page with both Greek and Turkish flags together without the use of phrases like "barbarian, subhuman invaders" etc. However, I wonder what the comments will look like when number of members increase. You have a very tough job ahead of you. My guess is that you will spend most of your free time cleansing the forums.
    --

    BluetoothCentral.com [bluetoothcentral.com]
    A site for everything Bluetooth. Coming in January 2000.
  • Just a note, you have to be careful when dealing with numbers in ancient and medieval history. Historians of the time were not as concerned with getting the facts right as historians are today. To them, good storytelling and capturing the essence of the moment were more important than dull but accurate statistics.

    For example, a professor I once took a Crusades course with suggested that any medieval descriptions of the sizes of armies should be divided by at least ten in order to estimate their real size.

    I won't say that there is no way the Persian army could have numbered 2M but think of the logistics required to transport 2 million soldiers along with horses and, most importantly, food. Remember that Athens at the time might have had a population of only 50 000-100 000; it's unlikely that in those times, even a large city, let alone the hills of northern Greece or Turkey could have supported a foraging army of that size.

    Furthermore, the task of organizing two million men into a fighting force with only the most primitive of communications (once set in motion, a the phalanx units of the day were uncontrollable, but even arranging two million men into a square would take a lot of work!) or of taking that many people away from the farms without causing mass starvation makes an army of that size unlikely.

    I'd believe the Spartans were outnumbered 10:1, maybe even 50:1, but 500:1 sounds pretty dubious.
  • I too did not like that statement. As if the Spartans had failed, we'd still be living in the dark ages, or what? The ideas from greece at the time that have helped form the "Western Civilization" of today would have survived anyway. And the Persians sure did their part forming those ideas too.

    The evolution of civilization isn't a battle between ideas were one has to defeat all the others. They are endlessly merging and influencing each other. (Cultures aren't proprietary, they are more like Free software, to make this post fit for /. =)

    It is impossible to keep foreign ideas out. Just look at China before the brits came. Or Soviet, or what is happening in China today. And given the widespread fear of Islam that's poisoning the Western countries today, I find such a statement rather disturbing. (Of course I know the Persians weren't Muslims(sp?), but I think you can see the connection.)

    I think the "Western Civilizations" really would be better of if they had borrowed a bit of the view on other religions from the Islamic empire of medeival europe.

    And I put "s around "Western Civilization" as I, like Ghandi, think it would still be a good idea.

  • And the Persians sure did their part forming those ideas too.

    Heck, more than half the Greek classics studied in the West after 1300 were translated from copies captured in Moorish Spain. So the Persians are responsible for the survival of Classical Greek culture in Western Europe, in spite of the Spartans :-).

Slashdot Top Deals

It's a naive, domestic operating system without any breeding, but I think you'll be amused by its presumption.

Close