The Battle of Marathon, fought in 490 BC, has just about everything you could want: an underdog against a powerful, expanding kingdom headed by an overconfident ruler; opposing tactics and strategy; bold personalities; powerful warriors sporting their characteristic garb; suspense, confusion, chaos and power. And on top of all this it carries with it a kind of weight that is near unquantifiable. For, as Richard Billows argues in his book, Marathon: How One Battle Changed Western Civilization, the battle was essential in enabling Western Civilization to evolve and exist as we know it. Had Athens lost the battle it’s highly unlikely that we’d have democracy in the shape and form which we now do — or, more to the point, at all. And the same, Billows further argues, can be said for our notions of philosophy, science, and art. A great deal was at stake, then, when Athens and its allies found themselves pitted against the powerful kingdom of Persia near the beginning of the 5th century.
Billows, a professor at Columbia University, provides a comprehensive look at this critical battle, giving a detailed account not only of the day of, but also important developments happening in 7th- and 6th-century Greece, long before the battle took place. Homer’s enormous — really incalculable — influence on the Greeks is given particular attention, notably the role and value of aristeia (bestness) and arête (excellence) in the lives of men. The deeply competitive spirit of the Greeks, both on an individual level and on a city-state level, is also explored. So, too, is the population increase of the 7th and 6th centuries, the interaction and cultural accumulations from others (including the Phoenicians, from whom the Greeks developed their alphabet), and, crucially, the rise of a “middle class.” This latter phenomenon, as Billows makes clear, had enormous and far-reaching consequences, including the ushering in of the “Age of Tyrants.”
These tyrannos, which, in the Greek sense referred to “an autocratic usurper who did not hold power according to traditional rules and norms,” were pivotal in shifting the balance of power. Previously, as sources like Hesiod show, it had been the elite nobles who harnessed power; but with the growing “middle class” and their desire to detach themselves from the aristocrats, the political landscape changed. Many men who had previously held power were either killed or exiled. And along with this dynamic shift of political power there came a gradual “process of state formation.” Both these factors paved the way for something which would have tremendous implications for the Battle of Marathon: hoplite warfare.
This new style of fighting contrasted sharply with the aristocratic fighting found in Homer’s Iliad. As opposed to the elite engaged primarily in single combat, this type of warfare brought in the middle class – indeed depended on it – and revolved around heavily armed infantry men (hoplites) and their execution of the phalanx tactic. Billows goes to some length describing the discipline behind this tactic as well as what the new citizen-solider hoplites meant for this newly reformed social and political society. Also on the topic of warfare Billows provides a considerable discussion on Sparta, Athens’ distant neighbor to the southwest. As is well known, the Spartans maintained an austere and militaristic way of life, devoted to raising consummate fighters. It was this supreme dedication which gave them “a reputation for invincibility in warfare.”
Turning from the development of the Greeks in the 7th and 6th centuries, Billows transitions to the rise of the Persians. The fall of Nineveh in 612 BC, the capital of the Assyrian Empire, drastically shook up the region, leaving four kingdoms vying for power, with the Medes as one of the strongest. But the Median Empire, ruled by Astyages, was overthrown by his grandson, Cyrus. Billows describes this event as “essentially an internal coup,” one which resulted in the Median Empire becoming the Persian Empire. Cyrus would go on to gain the Lydian kingdom as well as conquer Babylon in 539. When he died in 530, his son Cambyses succeeded him; and when Cambyses died in 522, he was succeeded by Darius — the man who would bring Persian attack against Athens. Billows highlights Darius’ effectiveness as a ruler, pointing out his ability to squash uprisings, organize the empire into twenty provinces, and form a highly capable army.
After turning to the Greeks once more, this time to look at the Athenians and their nascent democracy around the 500s BC, Billows finally makes it to the Battle of Marathon itself. Here Miltiades, an Athenian general, plays a central role. It was Miltiades’ bold and innovative tactics — ones that “were more than a hundred years ahead of their time” — which were so influential in producing an Athenian victory. But before any actual tactics could be used the Athenians faced a crucial decision from the outset. With the Persians landed at the bay of Marathon, 26 miles or so from Athens, the Athenians (plus 600 Plataians as allies), had to decide whether to go and fight, or stay in the city and fortify. After much debate, it was Miltiades’ decision to go and attack which won the day — and which turned out to be successful. For it was at the plain of Marathon, as Billows lays it out step-by-step, that the Persians, after playing a joint waiting game with the Athenians, decided to send some of its forces around the bay to attack the city of Athens itself. This was worrisome news; but it also meant that the Athenians now had a chance to fight the Persians with relatively more equal numbers, and then still make it back to Athens in order to defend the city (though it turned out they wouldn’t need to fight, once there). It was an incredibly bold plan requiring almost superhuman endurance. But it worked, and it gave the Athenians a decisive victory over the Persians.
In the final chapter of the book, Billows examines the consequences of this glorious, Athenian victory. What did it mean for them? And, from a larger perspective, what did it mean for the subsequent playing out of Western civilization? As for the former, one strand of thought put forward by Billows is that of Athens’ gradual understanding of the significance and meaning of the battle. As Billows is quick to remind the reader, victory at Marathon was not the end of Persian attack; just ten years later they would have to fight again. To put everything in perspective, then, took time. But there is no doubt that the Athenians expressed great pride in the immediate aftermath of their astounding win. As for the latter question, Billows argues that one of the most significant consequences of a Persian victory would have been the loss of democracy. He writes, “Athenian democracy would have disappeared, only fifteen years after its invention, and would be known to history, if at all, only as a brief and failed experiment.” In addition to this, a Persian victory would almost certainly have meant the loss of the great cultural innovations of the Athenians. From the plays of Sophocles to the philosophy and science of Aristotle, future Western civilization would have missed out on a plethora of extraordinary achievements—both artistic and intellectual.
Billows does a convincing job in making the case for this, though what might have been more interesting is a honed discussion on why Marathon was such a decisive battle for Western civilization rather than, say, the battle that followed ten years later. To be sure, he does put forward specifics for why he points to Marathon, but I wished the discussion had been deeper and more detailed at points. Other places in the book also (mildly) suffer from tight analysis, but this is probably in large put due to the breadth that Billows aims to cover in his book. And indeed while the grand scope of the book does have its value, the book could have benefited from better editing. The lengthy section on the Spartans, for instance, though interesting in its own right, is probably unnecessary (at least at that length) considering that the Spartans did not have any direct participation in the Battle of Marathon. There are other instances of relatively superfluous discussion, including one on our modern-day marathon and its roots going back to Pheidippides’ run. Again, all this is interesting stuff; but too many sections which are not directly related to the battle and its consequences — which, after all, is ostensibly what the book is about — does end up slightly weakening Billows’s otherwise terrific book.
Spectatio 