The Persian Wars: Expansion or Retribution?

A look at the Wars that united a Country and doomed an Empire

Oct 16, 2009

The Persian Wars are often looked at from the viewpoint of the Greeks, mainly the Athenians and Spartans. This article will look at the events from a Persian perspective.

The Persian Wars, or Greco-Persian wars, from 499BC to 450BC were an event that united Greece against a foreign invader. The formerly fragmented and separate City-States of Greece had come together, quite remarkably, to defend their homeland. Herodotus notes this as 'the greeks who had banded themselves together.' This is the first time the city-states of Greece are referred to collectively as "Greeks", highlighting their newfound unity. But was the Persian invasion of Greece motivated by further expansion of their Empire? Or was it simply retribution for earlier actions comitted against them by the Athenians?

Ionian Revolt

The Ionian revolt against Persian rule in Asia Minor from 499-493 BC would be the event that set in motion the Persian invasion of Greece. The Athenians, and the Eretrians had supported the revolt with troops that led to many Ionian victories and the sacriligious (at least to the Persians) act of burning the regional capital, Sardis. Even though the revolt was eventually put down by the Persians, the acts of the Athenians and Eretrians would not be forgotten by Darius. He vowed to punish them and set about the invasion of Greece.

The First Persian War

The Peloponnese could be considered a gateway to the rest of the Mediterranean. Greece is strategically placed to act as a base from which to strike into Western Europe. With Italy only a short distance over the Adriatic, land and a whole host of natural resources would not be far. It could also be argued that Darius wished to suppress the possibility of further revolt. By taking Greece, he could cut off any help that the Ionians may have.

One could ask the question; why would the Persian Empire wish to add Greece to its lands? At the time the Greek City-States were a collection of fragmented societies who were, more often than not, in disputes with each other, or at war with each other, if they were even aware of each other. The Greek landscape is harsh, mostly unyielding and saturated with rocky mountainous patches that act as natural barriers, making movement across it difficult. What it can offer in the way of natural resources is also slim.

Darius Defeated, Xerxes Takes Over

After the defeat at Marathon, the Persian armies left Greece to re-group. The seemingly invincible power had been embarrassed by the fragmented and scattered City-States of Greece under Athens. The initiation of a second war led by Xerxes (Darius' son) only inflames the argument about the Persian motive for war. Inscensed further by defeat, does Xerxes now wish for total retribution against Athens and Sparta? Or does a a second war highlight how desperate the Persians were to add Greece to its Empire?

Second Persian War

Spartan and Athenian defiance, even more so after the first Persian war, may have driven the new king Xerxes to exact revenge. Not only for the honour of his father, but to impress his new subjects. New kings would often try to out-do their predeccessors to show themselves as worthy for the job. A show of military strength would also quash any "ambitious" noblemen in Persia or any possible rebellions.

The argument that the invasion was simply a means for Persia to exact revenge on Athens and Sparta is strengthened when one considers that neither of the aforementioned City-States was asked for the offering of Earth and Water that all others were asked for. Persia was prepared to declare war on those states no matter what. Asking other City-States could have been to simply reduce the possibility of Greece uniting. Many of the arguments against the second war mimick those of the first. A lack of resources, no gold mines, and nothing of worth to gain from the land that the Persians did not already have in their massive Empire.

Greek Perspective

When one takes a look from the perspective of the Greek City-States, especially those of Sparta and Athens, it is hard not to subscribe to the view that the Persians were looking to expand their empire and were defeated whilst attempting that. The shame is that we have little evidence from the Persians and history to contrast. However, if one subscribes to the view that the Persians were after retribution, then, despite the defeats, surely they were successful. They had sacked Athens twice during the course of the wars and had ravaged much of the Greek mainland before leaving.

Undecided?

This is an argument that will go on and on as long as the war is studied. This article will hopefully have provided more food for thought on the war and will hopefully have shed more light on the Persian perspective.

Sources:

Burstein, Donlan, Pomeroy, Roberts, 'Ancient Greece - A Political, Social and Cultural History' - Oxford University Press, 1999

The copyright of the article The Persian Wars: Expansion or Retribution? in Near Eastern History is owned by James Tennant. Permission to republish The Persian Wars: Expansion or Retribution? in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.