0
The decisive defeat of the Spartan hoplite army by the armed forces of Thebes at the battle of Leuctra in 371 B.C. ended an epoch in Greek military history and permanently altered the Greek balance of power.
1 answer
Sparta was created in the 9th Century as a strickly militaristic society and lasted right up until they were defeated in the battle of Leuctra in 371 BC.
So about 2300 years ago...
1 answer
Thebes was , at different times , allied with Sparta when it was mutually beneficial to both . For example there was a Theban contingent , The Sacred Band , with Sparta at the Battle of Thermopylae . (Thebes effectively ended Spartan influence and prestige by defeating the Spartans at the Battle of Leuctra .)
1 answer
Sparta had a limited number of the armoured infantry (hoplites) which was progressively eroded in battles over 100 years faster than they could breed replacements. They began to use their helots (serfs) to replace the losses, but they were not the same quality heavy infantry, so after the losses of a defeated by Thebes at Leuctra in 371 BCE Sparta could no longer raise a credible army. Although Thebes and Athens were later over-run by Macedonia, Sparta just didn't have the numbers to make a comeback.
2 answers
Sparta and Thebes squared off for battle in 371 BC, BCE, at the battle of Battle of Leuctra. The Thebians had correctly predicted how the Spartans would employ their version of the phalanx and countered with their own. Thebes won this battle.
1 answer
In a long long history of poleis named Sparta,among others,Thebes did defeat Sparta.But the event was quite late in Spartan history when not much of the famous system was existing anymore,not hard armored hoplites,superior trained troops..In that time (early 4th BC) there were only few hundred of Spartan citizen soldiers existing in the city.
2 answers
Two battles actually, one to Thebes, and then again to the Romans when they conquered all of Greece.
Another view:
The Spartans lost quite a few battles, from early struggles in the Peloponnese, Messenia when they had to call in the Athenians to help them recover, Sphacteria after which they called a truce with Athens, several sea battles, through to the defeat at Corinth, then against Thebes at Leuctra, and as a waning power, losses during the 2nd Century BCE after which Sparta became militarily impotent.
1 answer
The Spartans were first weakened by a loss to the Thebans in 371 at the Battle of Leuctra. They were defeated there because the opposing general used an ingenious strategy to which they did not adapt quickly enough.
Because Spartan citizenship was limited to those born and trained in Sparta, they could not replace their lost troops quickly. Also, the population of enslaved helots in Sparta was far larger than the ruling class of warriors. After the loss at Leuctra, a wave of helot uprisings further weakened the country.
Even so, Sparta remained a strong force in the region. Even Alexander the Great refused to invade it.
Sparta eventually joined the Achaean League and which was then conquered by Rome, but Sparta still retained its unique culture. Even after the fall of the Roman army in 378 BC, a Spartan army phalanx defeated a band of Visigoths in battle.
Sparta never really fell. It's unique culture slipped out of practice in the face of increased interaction with surrounding states. It's strict adherence to inherited citizenship also kept it from remaining independent of its neighbors. It just couldn't breed enough warriors to remain isolated.
1 answer
Thebes in Egypt is famous because it was the capitol of Ancient Egypt during the New Kingdom.
Thebes in Greece is famous because it was a major power during the period of the city-states. It was a major rival of Athens, sided with the Persians during Xerxes' invasion of Greece in 480 BC, and ended the power of Sparta at the Battle of Leuctra in 371 BC. Thebes was conquered and destroyed as a power by Phillip II of Macedon and his son, Alexander the Great, in 335 BC after their elite military group, the Sacred Band of Thebes, was destroyed in 338 BC.
1 answer
There have been many accounts of ancient Greek and Roman battle tactics. One particular ancient Greek battle however, stands out with regards to the later term of attacking with a concentrated force. At the Battle of Leuctra in 371 BC, the Theban general, Epaminondas defeated a Spartan army by adding over powering strength to one part of his battle line and attacked, breaking through the Spartan battle lines.As warfare progressed, the concentration idea began to take hold among generals from Rome to Bull Run.
1 answer
It varied over the centuries - there were early defeats which we don't hear of; after power and their military system was consolidated they lost few, including Hysiaeagainst Argos in 669 BCE, Tegea in 660 BCE ; thereafter it protected itself by forming the Peloponnesian League with other Dorian city-states such as Corinth, Megara, Tegea Elis etc. It had setbacks in Messenia 460 BCE and Pylos and Sphacteria 425 BCE, but by using the combined power given by the League it continued to win battles, including the 27-year war with Athens 431-404 BCE. After this, when at its peak, a falling military population exposed it to rising city-states, culminating in the loss to Thebes at Leuctra in 471 BCE. After this it did not regain power and avoided military confrontations.
1 answer
Being allotted seven serfs each to support them, the Spartan warriors were able to devote themselves to training - the equivalent of a modern regular army, while other cities got by on part-time militias, their farmers getting a training day each couple of weeks in between ploughing their fields. The Spartans also, to reduce the threat of serf uprisings when they were away at war, each took seven serfs as light infantry with them, so a Spartan army of 5,000 armoured warriors numbered 40,000, as opposed to the other cities taking one light infantryman per armoured warrior = 10,000.
However the wars they were involved in progressively reduced their pool of warriors, and eventually after a series of serious battles their numbers so dwindled that they could no longer field an effective army after their defeat by Thebes at Leuctra in 371 BCE.
1 answer
Philip II did not conquer Greece, he ended the individual Greek civil wars tafter the Peloponnesian Wars and united Greece under Macedonian Hegemony.
As the eminent historian J.B. Bury writes:
As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes.
1 answer
Philip never took an interest in conquering Greece. He united Greece under Macedonian Hegemony in order to attack Persia and free the Greek states in Asia Minor that the Persians were harassing.
- As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
1 answer
"Sparta broke with a sharp snap because it could not bend. The Spartans failed to rebound after Leuctra because they could not find a way to deviate from entrenched habits of rigid hierarchy, state terrorism, and social conformity. Leuctra was Sparta's fate because those habits led the Spartans to surround themselves by enemies abroad, while simultaneously feeding the angry hunger of those restive internal subjects who would happily have eaten the few remaining Similars raw."
"revolutionary plot by a group of Inferiors, led by one Cinadon. The hatred of Cinadon and his fellows for the Spartan system was summed up in their expressed willingness to 'devour the Similars raw.' Like the boy and the fox, Spartan society was, almost literally, being consumed from the inside."
Josiah Ober and originally published in the Summer 1998 edition of MHQ. Journal of Military History.
Sparta fell because it could not maintain (replace) an adequate number of its warrior elite similars. They relied heavily on helots to make up the numbers and these helots went from slaves to free men mercenaries.
Sparta made too many enemies with all around them and had internal bickering with non elites.
Spartas enemies learnt their tactics and how to beat them over decades.
Militarily the tactic sending too few men makes victory impossible and death inevitable, even if its heroic.
Sparta did not have an adequate economic income,
ALL ANSWERS ARE SOMEWHAT TRUE AND AT THE SAME TIME FALSE>THE REASON WAS TIME AND CHANGE. Sparta did not fall when it was in it's peak,but long after,when there were only crumbles of earlier glory.So it has nothing to do with flexibility but simply TIME.
4 answers
Macedonia is a Greek province on the northern Greek peninsula so no it is not fighting its own people.
Unlike today when the country is united, in ancient times when Greece was a collection of states with differing political systems there was a constant fight for hegemony over the other states.
As the eminent historian J.B. Bury writes:
- As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
1 answer
Their citizen population, and hence its army size, was limited to the productivity of the Spartan warrior class. With a succession of wars over two centuries, the war loses exceeded the male birth rate, and so Sparta's army shrank. After the Spartan defeats at Tegyra 375 BCE and Leuctra 371 BCE, Sparta could no longer field a credible army, became entirely defensive and sank into obscurity.
3 answers
Phillip II. But he together with his allied Greek states defeated the Athenians with their allied Greek states.
The opposing sides in Chaeronea were:
Side A'
Macedonia, Thessaly, Epirus, Aetolia, Northern Phocis, Epicnemidian Locrians*
Side B'
Athens, Beotian League (Thebes, etc), Euboean League, Achaean League, Corinth, Megara, Corcyra, Acarnania, Ambracia, Southern Phocis.
Neutral sides
Sparta, Argos, Arcadia, Messene. The three last had alliances both with Athens and Philip but their pro-Macedonian activity of 344/3 BEC showed they were leaning towards Philip. However they didn't sent aid to Chaeronea in Philip's side because of the blocking in Isthmus by Corinth and Megara. Sparta had withdrawn almost entirely from Greek affairs in 344 BCE.
[*] Elis had an alliance with Philip though they didn't take part in Chaeronea but showed their pro-macedonian feelings by joining their forces with Philip in the invasion of Laconia in the autumn of 338 BCE.
- As the eminent historian J. B. Bury writes:
- If the chances of another issue to the battle of Chaeronea have been exaggerated, the significance of that event has been often misrepresented. The battle of Chaeronea belongs to the same historical series as the battles of Aegospotami (405 B.C.) and Leuctra (371B.C.).
- As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
2 answers
Well the country of Sparta no longer exist's but the capital still does, the country of Sparta was around until the year 1834 when a war between Sparta and Greece ended up with Sparta being absorbed by the rest of Greece
6 answers
The Theban's did not 'conquer' Sparta, nobody did. They defeated them in the Battle of Leuctra, 371 BC (109 years after the Persians failed invasion). Led by Epaminondas, he tactically for the first time ever changed his phalanx. He turned his Phanlanx's weakest point (left side) into it's strongest, allowing his 'stronger' phalanx to clash with Spartan's strong point and a 50 men deep, his phalanx crushed the Spartan's strongest right side. He also staggered the advance of his right phalanx and in doing so by the time his 'strongest' point had broken through and routed the Spartan's strong point his remaining phalanx had advanced to clash with Spartan's, only that the Spartan's were left with no strong point and as the phalanx was broken it failed.
This was the first, last and only time the Spartan's were defeated at full strength and ulitimately led to the entire Spartan demise.
2 answers
Sparta was a closed society, and losses of citizens in wars could not be replaced. These losses had been accumulating during the Peloponnese War in the 4th Century, and were compounded in the wars against the Theban confederation at Leuctra in 372 BCE, and Mantinea 362 BCE. As a consequence, as a rural community with a now low warrior strength, it simply didn't have the resources. Although Sparta joined with Arcadia and Achaea to block the pass at Thermopylae to prevent Philip of Macedon's push south, it subsequently decided it could no longer take the field with hostile neighbours Arcadia and Messenia (which Thebes had liberated from Spartan rule) threatening its territory. In consequence Sparta stayed at home as Philip overcame Greece.
3 answers
There were many battles between Athens and Sparta. They also fought on the same side several times. There was a war between Athens and its allies and Sparta and its allies, which we now call the Peloponnesian War (431-404 BCE) for no good reason, as it was fought throughout the Mediterranean from Sicily to Asia Minor. It contained many battles. Did you have one in particular in mind?
6 answers
King Philip was father of Alexander the Great. He built a strong army and won the support of some city-states that opposed Athens. A great Athenian statesman and public speaker, Demosthenes, warned of this new threat, but the quarrelsome city-states could not unite soon enough to stop Philip. In 338 B.C., at Chaeronea Philip's united Greek forces crushed the Athenian Greek alliance. The Athenians lost what they loved most, hegemony over the Greek states.
As the eminent historian J. B. Bury wrote:
As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River.Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
1 answer
The Principle of War - concentration of force - began in the distant past when tribesment ganged together for mutual support and buildup of power. The descriptions of the Trojan War show fighting by individual warriors. but this was a regression - we have battles by the Egyptians in the Second Century BCE where mass charges by chariots and supporting infantry clearly exhibit this. The Greeks fought in close formation, their armour and shields melded into a mass formation, recorded from the 6th Century BCE. The Romans adopted open formations and defeated the Greek phalanxes in the 3rd Century BCE. So the concentration of force idea was implemented as far back as you choose to go - from a tribe attacking en mass 5,000 years ago in Mesopotamia and Egypt to various more sophisticated manoeuvres in battles in recent millennia.
2 answers
After the Peloponnesian War, a defeated Athens became a second level power. The Greek cities continued their usual pattern of fighting each other under various coalitions, with at first Sparta dominant, then Thebes which defeated it. Persia intervened, imposing the King's Peace to stop the fighting spilling over into its territories.
This fighting allowed the rise of Macedonia in the background. Philip II was able to secure his borders and consolidate his power in northern Greece and then turn his attention to unifying Greece for the campaign against Persia.
As the eminent J. B. Bury Writes:
"As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed".
1 answer
After the Peloponnesian War, a defeated Athens became a second level power. The Greek cities continued their usual pattern of fighting each other under various coalitions, with at first Sparta dominant, then Thebes which defeated it. Persia intervened, imposing the King's Peace to stop the fighting spilling over into its territories.
This fighting allowed the rise of Macedonia in the background. Philip II was able to secure his borders and consolidate his power in northern Greece and then turn his attention to unifying Greece for the campaign against Persia.
As the eminent J. B. Bury Writes:
"As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed".
1 answer
Philip II of the ancient Greek kingdom of Macedonia, never conquered Greece. He brought the Greek states together, some by diplomacy and negotiations, others by force and united Greece under Macedonian Hegemony.
As the eminent historian J. B. Bury writes:
- As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
2 answers
In May 1863 during the American Civil War, Confederate general Robert E Lee defeated a Union army twice the size of his own at the Battle of Chancellorsville, Virginia. This was significant in the view of many historians as the confidence (perhaps over-confidence) this gave Lee that his troops could always prevail over any opponent was a major factor which led to the Confederacy embarking upon the invasion of the North which culminated in the Battle of Gettysburg in July of that same year.
3 answers
Alexander wanted to get started conquering ASAP. He got his first opportunity almost immediately. Some of the Greek city-states saw the ascension of the 20-year-old Alexander as a chance to regain their independence from the leadership of the Macedonians. Alexander took care of the little rebellion post-haste. To set an example, he completely razed the Greek city of Thebes in 335 B.C., killing most of the population -- including women and children -- and enslaving those few left alive. After that the Greeks were happily united behind Alexander and he could focus his attention on expanding the empire. He immediately began pushing east, against the old enemy Persia -- which his father never succeeded in defeating. After winning a battle for the city of Gordium, Alexander is said to have solved the famously tricky Gordian Knot. He sliced through the thing with his sword rather than fool around it. A legend supposedly foretold that whoever solved this puzzle would rule all of Asia. Alexander rapidly moved on to destroy the city of Tyre ... push through Palestine, Syria, Iran, and Afghanistan ... and conquer Egypt (or, depending on your perspective, "liberate" Egypt from the Persians). In bloody battle after bloody battle the Persian Empire and most of the known world fell to the hero Alexander and his Macedonian war machine. Inheriting a kingdom from his father didn't really please Alexander. What kind of hero gets everything given to him? This wouldn't satisfy Achilles or Hercules and it wouldn't satisfy him.
Note: Greece was a loose conglomerate of city states with various political structures. They battled each other as often if not more in disputes over borders and more importantly over hegemony over the rest of Greece.
As the eminent historian J.B. Bury writes:
If the chances of another issue to the battle of Chaeronea have been exaggerated, the significance of that event has been often misrepresented. The battle of Chaeronea belongs to the same historical series as the battles of Aegospotami (405 B.C.) and Leuctra (371B.C.).
As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes.
4 answers
But still to clarify, nobody ever 'took' or 'took over' Sparta. The Roman's reffered to the Spartan's as their 'Cousins' as they had great respect for them and their military accomplishments. Instead the Roman's used the remaining Spartan's to train them and to battle for Rome on missions to rid Rome of any remaining enemies.
As for Phillip II and Alexander of Macedonia, neither set foot in Sparta. The story goes, after refusal of entry to Sparta yet the remainder of Greece allowed Phillip in, Phillip sent the Spartan's a letter claiming that 'If I marched my army down the Sparta, it would flatten Sparta to the ground.' The Laconic wit of the Spartan's simply replied, 'IF'! As to say, Phillip never did and nor did Alexander. After Alexander's accomplishments he returned many gifts to Greece with the exception of the Spartan's, as they stood to defy them.
Sparta simply could not re-populate its army after a crushing defeat to the Thebans led by Epaminondas at the Battle of Leuctra. And so simply slipped away into the history books, and there's not a lot about them as they were warriors not historians.
1 answer
In the middle of the 4th century BCE (or, BC), Philip II of Macedon wanted to go to war with Greece because of the natural rivalry that existed between his own nation and the many Greek-states to Macedon's south. For many years, the Greek-states had been dominant in the region; through Philip's leadership, that dominance was overturned in Macedon's favor.
3 answers
Alexander of macedon. later named Alexander the great.
you can read a part of his glory in the letter that he sent to the perian king darius just before the battle of issus at the link below [last paragraph]
i post it here too.
: "Your ancestors came into Macedonia and the rest of Greece and treated us ill, without any previous injury from us. I, having been appointed commander4nchief of the Greeks, and wishing to take revenge on the Persians, crossed over into Asia, hostilities being begun by you. For you sent aid to the Perinthians,' who were dealing unjustly with my father; and Ochus sent forces into Thrace, which was under our rule. My father was killed by conspirators whom you instigated5 as you have yourself boasted to all in your letters; and after slaying Arses, as well as Bagoas, and unjustly seizing the throne contrary to the law of the Persians, and ruling your subjects unjustly, you sent unfriendly letters about me to the Greeks, urging them to wage war with me. You have also despatched money to the Lacedaemonians, and certain other Greeks; but none of the States received it, except the Lacedaemonians. As your agents corrupted my friends, and were striving to dissolve the league which I had formed among the Greeks, I took the field against you, because you were the party who commenced the hostility. Since I have vanquished your generals and viceroys in the previous battle, and now yourself and your forces in like manner, I am, by the gift of the gods, in possession of your land. As many of the men who fought in your army as were not killed in the battle, but fled to me for refuge, I am protecting; and they are with me, not against their own will, but they are serving in my army as volunteers. Come to me therefore~ since I am lord of all Asia; but if you are afraid you may suffer any harsh treatment from me in case you come to me, send some of your friends to receive pledges of safety from me. Come to me then, and ask for your mother, wife, and children, and anything else you wish. For whatever you ask for you will receiv e; and nothing shall be denied you. But for the future, whenever you send to me, send to me as the king of Asia, and do not address to me your wishes as to an equal; but if you are in need of anything, speak to me as to the man who is lord of all your territories. If you act otherwise, I shah deliberate concerning you as an evil-doer; and if you dispute my right to the kingdom, stay and fight another battle for it; but do not run away. For wherever you may be, I intend to march against you. "
3 answers
The Spartans never really recovered from the huge loss of life in 465 BC earthquake and subsequent helot revolt as well as wars with Argives and Arcadians (except Mantineans) which came immediately after epic war with Persia, and basically ended in the eve of the Great earthquake.
Wounded Sparta then embarked on a very tough, civil war equivalent - Peloponnesian war(s). But it ended it not as a former military power, though still strong, but as more of a political power, which at the end of an exausting war gave them a victory. But at what cost? Spartan system crumbled, adn with citizen population decimated, their army was no longer an elite, their warriors weren't bred from childhood to be the best in Greece, but most of the army were now either free semi trained periokoi (second class citizens) or even freed helots (public slaves).
Finally, Thebans, which rose to power in Greece in 4th century BC after almost 800 years since last heyday, defeated Spartan army in the battle of Leuctra in 371 BC, officially ending the very slow process of Spartan power fading, which started almost immediately after Persian wars. That wasn't the first nor the last defeat Spartans had suffered, but it was probably the most decisive, as it never recovered its power.
But only few decades later, Thebans also fell to the power of Alexander the Great and Hellenistic kingdoms, who again, after Alexander's death soon fell to the Romans, together with entire Greece.
Sparta was slowly reduced to a remote village, a Roman tourist attraction, and in the early middle ages, after several barbarian attacks and fall of Rome, it ceased to exist until refounded by modern Greeks as Sparti in the end of 19th century where it still stands.
9 answers
Philip never conquered Greece. With various methods, he brought the Greeks together and united them under Macedonian hegemony through the formation of the Pan-Hellenic league of Corinth.
After the Peloponnesian Wars, the Greeks who had a history of disunity were even more disjointed. Athens had been defeated by Sparta, and Sparta was in turn defeated by Thebes which was the leading political power in Greece. Philip took advantage and built up his military and reinforced his alliances. Demosthenes of Athens who held a personal grudge with Philip after being snubbed at the Macedonian royal court spoke against the threat from Macedonia to Athenian hegemony.
[10] When, Athenians, will you take the necessary action? What are you waiting for? Until you are compelled, I presume. But what are we to think of what is happening now? For my own part I think that for a free people there can be no greater compulsion than shame for their position. Or tell me, are you content to run round and ask one another, "Is there any news today?" Could there be any news more startling than that a Macedonian is triumphing over Athenians and settling the destiny of Hellas?
Demosthenes. Demosthenes with an English translation by J. H. Vince, M.A. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1930.
Also, while the Athenian allies may have had an advantage in quality, Philip had a greater advantage in numbers. The Macedonian Army was larger and more modern. The phalanx infantry formation used by the Thebans to defeat Sparta was improved by the Macedonians with longer spears and ranks of sixteen instead of eight. After an enemy had been broken up by the Macedonian phalanx, the Macedonian heavy cavalry charged in for the kill.
On the battlefield of Chaeronea, Macedonia and its Greek allies met with the Athenians and their allies from the Greek city states....
As the eminent historian J. B. Bury writes:
- If the chances of another issue to the battle of Chaeronea have been exaggerated, the significance of that event has been often misrepresented. The battle of Chaeronea belongs to the same historical series as the battles of Aegospotami (405 B.C.) and Leuctra (371B.C.).
- As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
7 answers
Philip II of Macedonia but as a Greek himself he never conquered Greeks or Greece in the context that this loaded question implies. Philip II united Greece (Hellas), under Macedonian Hegemony and together they conquered Persia.
- Quote: It is difficult to imagine that Philip II's policy toward Greece was an end in itself. Once his Balkan borders had been secured his general course seems to have been directed toward the establishment of stability in Greece, NOT CONQUEST.
6 answers
Macedonia never conquered "Greece" in the context that this question implies. Macedonia united Greece (Hellas), under Macedonian Hegemony and went on and conquered Persia.
- Quote: It is difficult to imagine that Philip II's policy toward Greece was an end in itself. Once his Balkan borders had been secured his general course seems to have been directed toward the establishment of stability in Greece, NOT CONQUEST.
One of the main falsifications of ancient Macedonian history has to do with the mistaken claim, used mostly by propagandists from the Former Yugoslav Republic (FYROM) that Macedonians confronted a "united" Greek army in Chaeronea and 'conquered Greece'.
Put in context:
The opposing sides in Chaeronea were:
Side A'
Macedonia, Thessaly, Epirus, Aetolia, Northern Phocis, Epicnemidian Locrians*
Side B'
Athens, Beotian League (Thebes, etc), Euboean League, Achaean League, Corinth, Megara, Corcyra, Acarnania, Ambracia, Southern Phocis.
Neutral sides
Sparta, Argos, Arcadia, Messene.
The three last had alliances both with Athens and Philip but their pro-Macedonian activity of 344/3 BEC showed they were leaning towards Philip. However, they didn't send aid to Chaeronea in Philip's side because of the blocking in Isthmus by Corinth and Megara. Sparta had withdrawn almost entirely from Greek affairs in 344 BCE.
[*] Elis had an alliance with Philip though they didn't take part in Chaeronea but showed their pro-Macedonian feelings by joining their forces with Philip in the invasion of Laconia in the autumn of 338 BCE. If this is translated by the propagandists of the Former Yugoslav Republic to mean that Macedonians confronted a "United" Greek army then in Coronea Spartans also confronted a "United" Greek army. Battle of Coronea (394 BCE) Combatants Sparta Vs Thebes, Argos, and other Greek allies
As the eminent historian J. B. Bury writes:
- If the chances of another issue to the battle of Chaeronea have been exaggerated, the significance of that event has been often misrepresented. The battle of Chaeronea belongs to the same historical series as the battles of Aegospotami (405 B.C.) and Leuctra (371B.C.).
- As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
- THE BATTLE OF CHAERONEA - Philip called the Congress of Corinth, during which all the Greek states, except Sparta, entered a Hellenic League against Persia, under Macedonian hegemony. The league council had proportional representation and was presided over by a chairman, replaced by the Macedonian king in wartime. The autonomy of the members was guaranteed, existing constitutions were not to be altered, and no private property was to be confiscated. There was no tribute required and no more than four garrisons-Thebes, Corinth, Chalcis, and Ambracia. The king had supreme military command, and the Amphictyonic Council served as a court of appeals. Philip announced plans for a campaign against the Persian Empire.
2 answers
The Macedonian King Phillip II first ruler to unite Greece under Macedonian hegemony. He never "conquered" Greece.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexander the Great was following Phillip II dream of uniting Greece and Macedonia.
Macedonia never conquered Greece in the context that this loaded question implies. Macedonia united Greece (Hellas), under Macedonian Hegemony and together they conquered Persia.
- Quote: It is difficult to imagine that Philip II's policy toward Greece was an end in itself. Once his Balkan borders had been secured his general course seems to have been directed toward the establishment of stability in Greece, NOT CONQUEST.
~ E.N.Borza, "On the Shadows of Olympus" (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990) page 230
One of the main falsifications of ancient Macedonian history has to do with the mistaken claim, used mostly by propagandists from the Former Yugoslav Republic (FYROM) that Macedonians confronted a "united" Greek army in Chaeronia and 'conquered Greece'.
Put in context:
The opposing sides in Chaeronea were:
Side A'
Macedonia, Thessaly, Epirus, Aetolia, Northern Phocis, Epicnemidian Locrians*
Side B'
Athens, Beotian League (Thebes, etc), Euboean League, Achaean League, Corinth, Megara, Corcyra, Acarnania, Ambracia, Southern Phocis.
Neutral sides
Sparta, Argos, Arcadia, Messene. The three last had alliances both with Athens and Philip but their pro-Macedonian activity of 344/3 BEC showed they were leaning towards Philip. However they didn't sent aid to Chaeronea in Philip's side because of the blocking in Isthmus by Corinth and Megara. Sparta had withdrawn almost entirely from Greek affairs in 344 BCE.
[*] Elis had an alliance with Philip though they didn't take part in Chaeronea but showed their pro-macedonian feelings by joining their forces with Philip in the invasion of Laconia in the autumn of 338 BCE.
If this is translated by the propagandists of the Former Yugoslav Republic to mean that Macedonians confronted a "United" Greek army then in Coronea Spartans also confronted a "United" Greek army.
Battle of Coronea (394 BCE)
Combatants
Sparta Vs Thebes, Argos, and other Greek allies
- As the eminent historian J. B. Bury writes:
- If the chances of another issue to the battle of Chaeronea have been exaggerated, the significance of that event has been often misrepresented. The battle of Chaeronea belongs to the same historical series as the battles of Aegospotami (405 B.C.) and Leuctra (371B.C.).
- As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
- THE BATTLE OF CHAERONEA - Philip called the Congress of Corinth, during which all the Greek states, except Sparta, entered a Hellenic League against Persia, under Macedonian hegemony. The league council had proportional representation and was presided over by a chairman, replaced by the Macedonian king in wartime. The autonomy of the members was guaranteed, existing constitutions were not to be altered, and no private property was to be confiscated. There was no tribute required and no more than four garrisons-Thebes, Corinth, Chalcis, and Ambracia. The king had supreme military command, and the Amphictyonic Council served as a court of appeals. Philip announced plans for a campaign against the Persian Empire.
~ "Encyclopaedia of World History" 6th Edition 2001
1 answer
After the Peloponnesian war, the city states were dishevelled. This gave the opportunity for Philip II to build a professional army, innovate his fighting equipment and strategies and build his wealth. He then proceeded to secure his northern borders against foreign threat and begin to work uniting the Greeks into one nation that could be used to combat the might of Persia. He used many tactics, some diplomatic, some subversive and some with outright force. Athens held the place of hegemony among the Greeks, and the orator Demosthenes, who had a personal grudge against Philip for snubbing him at the Macedonian court, tried to warn the Athenians of Philips intent to take the leadership of Greece.
he warned:
[10] When, Athenians, will you take the necessary action? What are you waiting for? Until you are compelled, I presume. But what are we to think of what is happening now? For my own part I think that for a free people there can be no greater compulsion than shame for their position. Or tell me, are you content to run round and ask one another, "Is there any news today?" Could there be any news more startling than that a Macedonian is triumphing over Athenians and settling the destiny of Hellas?
Demosthenes. Demosthenes with an English translation by J. H. Vince, M.A. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1930.
As the eminent historian J. B. Bury writes:
As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River.Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
1 answer
Philip never took an interest in conquering Greece. He united Greece under Macedonian Hegemony in order to attack Persia and free the Greek states in Asia Minor that the Persians were harassing.
- As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
6 answers
1. actra
2. aftra
3. antra
4. arthrogastra
5. aspidistra
6. astra
7. atra
8. bactra
9. balestra
10. bextra
11. brachelytra
12. brahmaputra
13. caitra
14. calyptra
15. castra
16. centra
17. cetra
18. chittra
19. cintra
20. claustra
21. cleopatra
22. clytemnestra
23. conistra
24. contra
25. dicentra
26. dielytra
27. dioptra
28. dtra
29. electra
30. elytra
31. extra
32. fenestra
33. finestra
34. foutra
35. gyromitra
36. haematocolpometra
37. haustra
38. hematocolpometra
39. hematometra
40. hemelytra
41. hydrometra
42. intra
43. kamasutra
44. kenitra
45. leuctra
46. levitra
47. lochiometra
48. lustra
49. lutra
50. lystra
51. mactra
52. maharashtra
53. mantra
54. matra
55. metra
56. mitra
57. mostra
58. muttra
59. netra
60. neutra
61. nitra
62. olestra
63. ondatra
64. orchestra
65. ostra
66. palaestra
67. palestra
68. petra
69. physometra
70. plectra
71. pneumohydrometra
72. pyometra
73. pyophysometra
74. ranatra
75. recurvirostra
76. ristra
77. rostra
78. sastra
79. sequestra
80. shastra
81. sinatra
82. sintra
83. sistra
84. sitra
85. socotra
86. solenogastra
87. spectra
88. spirometra
89. stra
90. sumatra
91. sutra
92. tantra
93. tetra
94. tra
95. triquetra
96. ultra
97. xiphiplastra
98. yantra
99. zarathustra some may not work i just grabbed these off rhymezone.com check it out next time u need a rhyme Cleopatra
2 answers
The war not only devastated southern Greece and left it weak, it didn't solve anything and the southern Greek city-states continued to fight each other after it was over. This left Philip, over 50 years later, with an easier target, and he was able to defeat the weakened and divided cities, which he manipulated and also defeated those who stood out against his march towards claiming hegemony of Greece.
7 answers
Demosthenes of Athens warned the Athenians. He was protecting Athenian interests and hegemony over Greece. Demosthenes harbored a personal grudge against Philip because of the humiliation he suffered when he lost his power of speech at the Macedonian court (Aischines, On the Embassy 35), Demosthenes called Philip a barbarian but he would call anyone he did not like a barbarian, including fellow Athenians (Dem. 21.150). Some propagandists have used this word to claim that Macedonian were not thought of as Greek by the rest of Greece but the word, at least in some uses by Demosthenes and others, should be understood as a generic insult. Thus, for example, in some parts of the USA people are dubious that people from other parts are "real Americans."
· [10] When, Athenians, will you take the necessary action? What are you waiting for? Until you are compelled, I presume. But what are we to think of what is happening now? For my own part I think that for a free people there can be no greater compulsion than shame for their position. Or tell me, are you content to run round and ask one another, "Is there any news today?" Could there be any news more startling than that a Macedonian is triumphing over Athenians and settling the destiny of Hellas? ~ Demosthenes. Demosthenes with an English translation by J. H. Vince, M.A. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1930. Demosthenes, after failing to convince that Macedonians were barbarians, in order to uprise Athenians and after the success of a united Greece under Macedonian hegemony said: "No king of the Hellenes had ever conquered Egypt with the exception only of Alexander, and that he did without war..."
"Even though Xerxes had a huge host with him, he was a barbarian and was defeated by the prudence of the Hellenes; whereas Alexander the Hellene (GREEK) has already engaged in 13 battles and has not been defeated once."
[2.3.4.-5; Oration of Demosthenes] When the battle of hegemony was fought it was the Athenians and their ally Greeks that met the Macedonians and their ally Greeks on the fields of Chaeronea. From this, the Pan-Hellenic league of Corinth was created with Macedonia as hegemon over the other states. The emiment historian J. B. Bury writes: As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
2 answers
Alexanders father king Philip of Macedonia established himself as hegemon (leader) by the depression of some Greek states, political alliances and the dependency or subjection of others.
- Philip first drove Phocis out of Thessaly freeing Thessaly and then subdued Phocis. Supported by Thebes and Thessaly, Macedon took control of Phocis' votes in the Amphictyonic League, a Greek religious organization formed to support the greater temples of Apollo and Demeter. Athens accepted Macedon into the League despite Demosthenes oration warning that Philip was a threat to Athenian independence and place among the Greek states.
- Most of the Peloponnesians saw Philip as the guarantor of their freedom and sent a joint embassy to Athens to express their grievances against Demosthenes' activities. In response to these complaints, Demosthenes delivered the Second Philippic, a vehement personal attack against Philip.
- Chaeronea saw the Greek allied states led by Athens and the Greek allied states led by Macedon meet on the battlefield. Macedon was victorious and formed the league of Corinth which united Greece in Philips campaign against Greece's long-time enemy, Persia.
- On his assassination, his son Alexander took over. When Thebes allied itself with Persia and revolted. Alexander TURNED OVER the decision of what was to be done with Thebes to the ALLIES in the Corinthian league who participated in the military action.
"These decided to secure the Cadmea with a garrison, but to raze the city to the ground and distribute amongst the allies' whatever lands were not sacred. Women and children, and any surviving Theban men, they would sell into slavery". - Arrian 1.9.9-10
With Greece stabilized, Alexander turned his sights to Persia oppressing the Greeks in Asia Minor as his father had planned.
4 answers
Demosthenes of Athens warned the Athenians. He was protecting Athenian interests and hegemony over Greece. Demosthenes harbored a personal grudge against Philip because of the humiliation he suffered when he lost his power of speech at the Macedonian court (Aischines, On the Embassy 35), Demosthenes called Philip a barbarian but he would call anyone he did not like a barbarian, including fellow Athenians (Dem. 21.150). Some propagandists have used this word to claim that Macedonian were not thought of as Greek by the rest of Greece but the word, at least in some uses by Demosthenes and others, should be understood as a generic insult. Thus, for example, in some parts of the USA people are dubious that people from other parts are "real Americans."
· [10] When, Athenians, will you take the necessary action? What are you waiting for? Until you are compelled, I presume. But what are we to think of what is happening now? For my own part I think that for a free people there can be no greater compulsion than shame for their position. Or tell me, are you content to run round and ask one another, "Is there any news today?" Could there be any news more startling than that a Macedonian is triumphing over Athenians and settling the destiny of Hellas? ~ Demosthenes. Demosthenes with an English translation by J. H. Vince, M.A. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1930. Demosthenes, after failing to convince that Macedonians were barbarians, in order to uprise Athenians and after the success of a united Greece under Macedonian hegemony said: "No king of the Hellenes had ever conquered Egypt with the exception only of Alexander, and that he did without war..."
"Even though Xerxes had a huge host with him, he was a barbarian and was defeated by the prudence of the Hellenes; whereas Alexander the Hellene (GREEK) has already engaged in 13 battles and has not been defeated once."
[2.3.4.-5; Oration of Demosthenes] When the battle of hegemony was fought it was the Athenians and their ally Greeks that met the Macedonians and their ally Greeks on the fields of Chaeronea. From this, the Pan-Hellenic league of Corinth was created with Macedonia as hegemon over the other states. The emiment historian J. B. Bury writes: As the hegemony or first place among Greek states had passed successively from Athens to Sparta, and to Thebes, so now it passed to Macedon. The statement that Greek liberty perished on the plain of Chaeronea is as true or as false as that it perished on the field of Leuctra or the strand of the Goat's River. Whenever a Greek state became supreme, that supremacy entailed the depression of some states and the dependency or subjection of others. Athens was reduced to a secondary place by Macedon, and Thebes fared still worse; but we must not forget what Sparta, in the day of her triumph, did to Athens, or the more evil things which Thebes proposed.
3 answers
It's ambitious king Philip II, by a mixture of conquest, bribery and political deals, established dominance of the Greek world. After his assassination, his son Alexander took over his father's project of conquering the Persian Empire.
8 answers
In short: nothing different from the rest of the Greeks, just better. A LOT better.
Now the long answer:
The question depends on the time period, but if I take it that you are most interested in 5th century BC fighting (the time of the Peloponnesian War between the Spartans and the Athenian Empire 431-404BC) then the answer is simple: pretty much like all the other Greek city-states of the 5th century BC. The difference is they were a LOT better at it than all the other Greek city-states-- until their defeat by the Thebans in 371BC at the Battle of Leuctra marked the collapse of the Spartan system.
So first, how did the Greeks fight? The 6th and 5th centuries BC marked the development of what historian Victor Davis Hanson categorises as Hellenic Agrarian War: city-states whose economies depended on agriculture tended to fight each other over fertile land, with armies composed largely of landed (i.e. owning) farmers, with property qualifications for participation in the state and the army. These warriors were called hoplites, after their "hoplon" or heavy shield. Hoplites wore upwards of 35kg of armour, and can be classed as heavy infantry. These hoplites fought in close-ranked formations--each man shielding his vulnerable right side with the shield of the man on his right--of usually 8-ranks deep, which were called "phalanxes."
Phalanxes were largely composed of heavy infantry, but did also include a small number of protective cavalry (composed of the rich, who could afford a horse) and light-infantry called peltasts, who were from poorer classes and could not afford either horse, nor the hoplite's expensive armour. Since the stirrup had not yet been invented, the cavalry were of limited use as the riders could not "charge home" and were restricted to throwing javelins--and so were really only useful for pursuit, or some scouting. The peltasts used bows, slings, and throwing javelins, but got out of the way when the phalanxes met.
The phalanx is a cumbersome, limited type of formation, which depended on level ground to operated. Greek warfare in the 6th and 5th centuries BC were almost completely devoid of what we might call "tactics": quite simply, two phalanxes met on some mutually-agreed open ground, then advanced until they were within a hundred metres of each other or so, then charged at each other in close formation. When the two sides met the contest usually lasted only a few minutes, maybe up to an hour, of pushing and stabbing with their spears and, at the worst, their short swords. One side would eventually break, drop their heavy shields and swords, and run. The winning side was usually two tired to chase, as the losers could run away faster once their kit was dropped. The winners would collect the dropped equipment and erect large "trophies" of their victories. Casualties were usually about 15% of the total engaged forces, with 2/3rds on the losing side, according to V.D. Hanson and others. Leadership was provided by an appointed general (in the case of the rest of Greece) or a "Battle King" (in the case of Sparta, where this was an inherited position) who fought in the front rank of the right-wing of the army--where, one might realise, actual leadership other than bravery was impossible, and death common.
So what made the Spartans so fearsome? Professionalism. Spartan society depended on slave labour on a massive scale, provided by captive "helots", the population of the entire state of Messania, who did all the farming and labour so that the very small number of Spartan citizens could pursue the art of war. Thus freed from the farming that occupied the rest of the Greeks, Spartan warriors trained from the age of 7 onwards in communal barracks--you can look this up elsewhere--for war. Fighting in close ranks in the phalanx is hard, very hard--lack of professionalism or training meant a break in the "shield wall" and so defeat. Since they could train at this from youth, all the time, the Spartan army was the best at this type of warfare. They marched in perfect step to the tune of pipes (something like modern bagpipes), did not cheer or scream at all, as other city-state hoplite armies did, and kept in perfect order. And unique amongst 5th century Greeks, they were dressed in uniform--scarlet cloaks, and bronze shields with a lamda painted on them (like an upended letter "V"--this was the Greek initial for Lakedaimon, their name for their city). The approach of this silent, scarlet death-machine of life-long professional killers was enough to make almost every army in the ancient world break and run before they had even met.
But full Spartan warriors were pretty thin on the ground, and over time there were fewer and fewer of them, and the Spartans depended more and more on freed-slave soldiers and Perioeci, or non-citizen free men. Allies were also required. So for instance, at the battle of Thermopylae (of the movie "300" fame) there were about 300 full-Spartan warriors ("Spartiates"), but at least another 600 Helots and/or Perioeci. On top of that there were at least 5,000 other allied troops. At Leuctra there might have been only 500 Spartiates amongst an allied army of over 10,000--not because, like at Thermopylae, most of the army stayed at home, but because the Spartan society was collapsing and there were no more Spartans to send.
As a quick note, almost all armies in Greece at the time were very poor at siege warfare. They lacked the equipment and the tactics to storm cities, and usually depended on starving out the enemy inside the walls, or on treachery to get someone inside the city to open the gates.
Through the length of the Peloponnesian War hoplite battle became less and less common (if you were there, would YOU choose to fight the Spartans?) and so hoplite armour and phalanx formations became less and less common. War was conducted by raiding parties and marines, and so the peltast became more and more common. The Peloponnesian war was not won by Spartan hoplites, but by the Spartan navy and marines (funded by gold from the hated Persians, and made up largely of allies and mercenaries under Spartan command) who destroyed the mainstay of the Athenian Empire, their navy (once feared at sea as much as the Spartans were feared on land), at the battle of Aegospotamia, in the modern Sea of Marmara, in 405 BC.
KCG, Reading, UK.
4 answers
