Some good reading about ancient Greece - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Parade Ground (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=2) +--- Forum: Historical Discussion (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=17) +--- Thread: Some good reading about ancient Greece (/showthread.php?tid=42772)

Some good reading about ancient Greece - D-Day_Dodger - 10-21-2007 Lately I have been reading quite a few books by the American historian Victor Davis Hanson who is an acknowledged expert on ancient Greece. His book "The Wars of the Ancient Greeks", part of the Cassell History of Warfare series is an excellent introduction to Greek warfare. From the Mycenaean Age and the Age of Homer and the classical heroes to the rise of the city state and hoplite warfare; from the glory days of the Greek-Persian Wars to the self-inficted brutality of the Peloponnesian War; from the conquest of the Greek city states by Philip of Macedinia and his son Alexander the Great to the division of Alexander's empire among his generals (The Successors) to the eventual Roman submission of Greece, Hanson does a good job of showing the changing nature of warfare and tactics. Another good book by Hanson is "A War Like No Other - How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War". While Hanson follows the course of the war his emphasis is one explaining why the participants fought as they did and why the nature of the civil war destroyed forever the traditional Greek practice of letting border disputes be settled in a 30 minute clash between heavily armoured hoplite infantry in phalanx formation. Hanson explores the causes and effects of the plague which took 80,000 Athenian lives, how the rise of terror on both sides resulting in frequent massacres and mass executions. Hanson explores Greek siege craft, naval warfare and numerous other aspects of the war. The Peloponnesian War has to be one of the most confusing wars in history, but after reading Hanson's book I have a much clearer idea of why the strategy and tactics of the antagonists evolved as they did. The last book I wanted to recommed by Hanson is called Carnage and Culture. He looks at a number of famous battles between western societies and non-western societies and explores why the West almost always comes out on top. The battles he covers are Salamis/Platea, Gaugamela, Cannae, Lepanto, Cortes' conquest of the Aztec capital of Tenotichlan, the battle of Tours, the defense of Rorke's Drift, the battle of Midway and the Tet Offensive. Hanson argues that there were and continue to be certain aspects of western culture that give western countries a significant advantage when engaging non-western cultures. Why is it he asks that technological advances in weaponry almost always tend to favour the West. The answer to Hanson is in the egalitarian aspect of Western societies. The principles of democracy, free enquiry and exchange of ideas, scientific investigation and the free market that western culture are based upon were missing in the Persian, Aztec, Ottoman or Zulu empires. It was technology and discipline, not bravery (no side ever has a monopoly on that) that allowed 300 armoured Spartan hoplites to defeat thousands of Persian infantry or 100 British Redcoats armed with Martini-Henry rifles to stand against a Zulu army. He makes the point that all these battles were fought in the other guys territory or on the periphery of Western nations. No invading armies of Aztecs or Zulus ever threatened Spain or England. The great Ottoman empire, that would advance to the gates of Vienna, was defeated at Lepanto (the largest sea battle in history) due to inferior ships, cannon and tactics and their inability to analyse defeat as anything other than an expression of the wrath of God. Even Western defeats like Cannae which cost Rome 50,000 of its best infantry, serve to illustrate that a state like Rome that was based on the principles of egalitarianism and civic militarism could replace these horrendous losses without resorting to forced conscription. Hanson's arguments seem to wear a bit thin when it comes to the chapters on the Battle of Midway and especially the Tet Offensive which ends up being a rant against the anti-war movement and the liberal media who he blames for undermining the war effort. Another criticism of this book is his ignoring the threat that the Mongol Horde posed to the west. The Mongols could have and, by all accounts, would have overrun Europe, had it not been for an act of God in the form of the death of the Great Khan and the recall of the high ranking Mongol generals like Subadai. Despite the short comings of this book it is quite thought provoking and full of interesting little historical tidbits.