Main Points

History is Now

In the Formative Era, Middle Eastern powers had fought over control of the Middle East, Chinese powers had fought over China, etc. In contrast, the Ancient Era in the Middle East was defined by the Greek and Roman wars with the native dynasties. The growth of empires of unprecedented size left them with no rivals except those in other geographic areas. And while India alone failed to grow beyond its borders and China was too isolated, the political and military history of Europe and the Middle East during the Ancient Era are inextricably entwined. The Greeks and Macedonians battled for centuries with the Persian Empire, and the Roman wars ultimately led to the destruction of both the Parthian and Sassanian dynasties.

The Greco-Persian War

The Persians conquered the kingdom of Lydia in Western Anatolia around 529 BC, the same year that Cyrus the Great died. His heir, Darius I, continued his predecesor's policies of toleration and justice. But this was a fateful chapter in the history of the Persian Empire, for this was the first time that the Persians had conquered a culturally Greek state. Darius followed the victory in Lydia by prosecuting war against the disorganized Greek city-states of Western Anatolia, which lay on the shores of the Aegean Sea. This outraged the newly minted city of Athens who in 499 BC sent aid to the Greek city-states of Anatolia. The Persians won anyway, but they were furious with Athens.

In 490 BC on Darius's orders, a massive navy transported the Persian army onto Greek soil. It is worth noting that while the Athenians called for help, no one responded, leaving Athens to face the onslaught alone. The Athenian war councils were hotly contested. A Persian army on Greek soil was an affront to the military Greeks, but a large group argued forcefully that the vaunted Persians were too much to cope with in open battle; they argued that Athens strong walls were their best defense. Nevertheless, more dynamic generals succeeded in carrying the day. They marched forth drawing up the Athenian army on the Plains of Marathon to face the most powerful army of the Middle East.

The Battle of Marathon was as unexpected as it was stunning; the Greek commanders unconventionally weakened the center of their army hoping it would bend but not break. In the event, this is exactly what happened, and though the Persians by all accounts outnumbered the Greeks, the reinforced Greek flanks clamped down, threatening to take the Persians from behind. The Persians army broke and fled to its ships. Darius was outraged when his army returned in defeat and swore vengeance against Athens. He immediately sent word throughout his empire to lay plans for a new expedition, one much larger and drawing on resources from all across the empire.

If Athenian support for the enemies of Darius in 499 BC was an affront to Persia, the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC was the first major defeat suffered by a Persian army. For Darius and the Persians it was no longer a matter of pride, but demonstrating to their vassals, that Greek victory was merely an unfortunate hiccup in Persia's continued supremacy. When he died in 486 BC, he was mourned throughout the empire, but the accesion of his son Xerxes made scarcely a ripple in Persia's plans for invasion. A massive army and navy were kept in close contact on the march to Greece, sometimes digging miles of canals to keep them united. In 480 BC, the extended preparations and engineering paid off as the Persians entered Greece. Exact numbers are always difficult to gauge from historical texts, but they may have been the largest army to invade Europe until D-Day in 1942.

On their march down through northern and central Greece, most kingdoms and city-states acknowledged Persian might by joining as vasals. Others remained neutral but hosted the Persians with the utmost tact; there was no hint of opposition until the Persians reached the narrow mountain defiles into southern Greece. There a Peloponnesian force lead by the Spartans joined with the Athenians to resist Persian rule and blockaded the massive Persian force at Thermopylae. The Persians were unable to benefit from their numerical superiority in the fortified mountain pass which allowed only a few soldiers to march abreast. With the aid of local supporters, however, they finally managed to slip a force through hidden mountain passes behind the Greeks.

This is where the legend of the 300 was born. Realizing they were about to be encircled, the Greeks could not retreat to safety without letting the main force bear down upon them. Therefore, 300 Spartan warriors volunteered to hold the pass while the rest of the Greeks fled south to fight again. The Spartans held their ground, a testament to their fierce military discipline, commitment to resisting the Persians on behalf of their freedom, and the awesome landscape that made Thermopylae a natural fortress; by the time the Persians had butchered the Spartans to the last man, the Greek army had successfully evaded them.

The massive Persian army next marched on Athens. They were stunned to find the city abandoned. In their rage, they sacked and burned Athens to the ground, then set off looking for the Greek armies, intent on victory. They managed to capture Greek prisoners who revealed that the army had fled aboard ship around the isle of Salamis; the massive Persian fleet was sent in hot pursuit. However, these prisoners were spies; playing a most dangerous game, the Greeks were desperate to engage the Persians in a place where the small number of powerful Greek ships could go one on one with the less powerful but far more numerous ships of Persia. When the lead ships of the Persian fleet poured through the Straits of Salamis, they were ambushed by the Athenian fleet.

The two navies crashed on a cold autumn morning, the Persians shocked by the sudden appearance of a fleet they believed to be miles away and headed in the opposite direction. The first ships of the Persian fleet were dispatched quickly, but soon the Greeks found themselves locked in the greatest naval battle of the Ancient Era. On the Greek side, Salamis gave the two navies limited space, allowing the stronger Greek ships to fight without being hopelessly surrounded by more numerous ships. Knowing that a decisive naval victory was the only way to prevent the Persians from ravaging Greece for years, they refused to retreat. The Persian admirals meanwhile still held a numerical advantage over the Greeks of more than two to one; while the narrow straits prevented them from using the fleet to their best ability, they also knew that the Greeks were unlikely to offer them a fair fight again. Neither side was willing to withdraw from their one best chance to win the war.

The battle raged all day. Only the fall of night could force the two determined fleets to disengage. As the sailors licked their wounds, the admirals of each fleet determined how much of their fleets had survived. According to the historical accounts, it was the Persians who first discovered that half their strength had been crushed at the Battle of Salamis, possibly the most important naval engagement in world history. The devastated Persian admirals ordered the fleet to slip away in the night. They survived but they never again chose to challenge the Greek fleet, giving the Greeks as stunning a victory as they had won in 490 BC at Marathon.

Without their navy to shield them, the Persian army faced the onset of winter with the daunting prospect of trying to feed the largest army ever assembled. Under other circumstances the Persian commanders would have ravaged Southern Greece to forage supplies. An unchallenged Athenian navy, however, was able to deposit Greek troops without warning anywhere they wished, and destroy the Persians one unit at a time. This forced the Persian commanders to accept that dispersing the army to live off the land would be suicidal. Therefore, the Persians reluctantly divided their army in half. One half consolidated itself safely inland to occupy the mainland, while the other half returned home to lessen the logistical nightmare of supplying so many troops. Some units sailed home aboard the remnants of the navy to bring news of the defeat home. However, most were forced to walk home exposed to the depredations of local kingdoms who were no longer awed by Persian invincibility. The news devastated the Persian court. Salamis marked the high point of Persian civilization. Occupying Greece and at the height of their power, never again would Persian fortunes rise so high.

That winter, in 479 BC, the army had settled into winter quarters. The Persians were therefore shocked when coalition forces led by Athens and Sparta drew up on the plains of Plataea opposite them. Sources are sometimes contradictory, but this was certainly the opportunity the Persians had been working for ever since they had entered Greece. With the odds in their favor, they deployed to meet the Greeks on the plains. The Greeks on the other hand had expected the Persians to fight on the defensive from their fortified camp, and seeing the Persians unexpectedly ready to give battle, withdrew to a more defensible position. This caused some of the coalition forces to be out of position when the Persians attacked. The Battle of Plataea was the largest land battle in world history to that point; a fitting climax to the war between the Persians and the Greeks – one civilization determined to reach beyond the Middle East and bring Europe into their orbit, the other determined to retain their freedom and traditions.

The Persians collided with the Greeks all along the line, and succeeded in smashing through the units which were out of position; they pushed through them and directly into the Spartan flank. There were stories of heroism on both sides across the battlefield, but the day was decided right there between the two greatest armies of their time, the Persians and the Spartans. And the Spartans carried the day. The Greeks sent the occupation force reeling back out of Greece; the largest Persian force in history faced a long march back to Persian lands, and they suffered even more grievously than the first army on their march home. Plataea ensured the security of Greece; never again would the Persians directly threaten Greece. These were the golden years of drama, poetry, politics, and philsophy in what is sometimes called the Hellenic Age of Ancient Greece.

The Interlude of "Peace"

However, the Persian Empire did not collapse; it's authority since the time of Cyrus had depended on its rule, not its army. However, the Persians still stung from the defeat, and while they never again attacked Greece, they used their vast wealth to destabalize the region. By supporting the Spartans in the Peloponnesian War (431 - 404 BC), Sparta was finally able to crush Athens. The bellicose Spartans in turn were so egotistical in victory, that they alienated their supporters, leaving Greece more divided than ever. It took almost 80 years, but by acting with great patience, Persia had ultimately undermined and destroyed the Greeks from within. It would have been better for them if they hadn't.

Their pettiness undermined much of the moral authority with which they ruled. Where the Battle of Salamis had not caused significant problems for the empire, their de facto victory over Greece in 404 BC came at a price. The Egyptians saw the Persian emperor's "victory" as a betrayal of Persian values; it's also likely that Egypt saw Persia's support of Sparta as a measure of the Persian army's weakness. Regardless, the Egyptians revolted in 404 BC and established their independence for several decades. In 380 BC, Persia's Indian provinces followed them; local dynasties achieved independence and Persian would never regain them. In 343 BC, Persia was finally able to reconquer Egypt. It was almost too late. With Greece mired in inter-city conflicts, it was a shadow of its former power, politically. It made Greece both vulnerable and bitterly hateful of the Persians; and while the Persians had no interest in renewing the Greek conflicts, the Greeks lacked only the means. And that was about to change.

The Persian-Macedonian War

The Peloponnesian War had turned Greece into a patchwork of city-states more bitterly divided and disorganized than ever. Despite their high level of culture and sophisticated military, their strength could no longer be united usefully. This of course is exactly what Persia desired and why the Greeks despised Persia now more than ever. However, weak states never remain weak for long and in 338 BC a tough, semi-barbaric king (basileus) conquered Greece; Philip II of Macedon. Philip was a talented ruler and innovative general. He shrewdly determined practical ways to minimize Greek resistance to his authority and thus solidfy his rule over the sophisticated city-states which he admired greatly. Most imporantly, he preyed on Greek hatred of Persia to unify the city-states with promises of a punitive expedition. However, he was unable to lead it when he was assassinated in 336 BC. So it was his son, Alexander III – who was probably behind the assassination – that led the Greek invasion of Persia in 334 BC.

The coalition was respectable by Greek standards; 30,000 infantry and 5,000 cavalry. The army was led by the elite Macedonian cavalry, the Companions, of which Alexander III himself was a part. They found a massive Persian army that outnumbered them at least two-to-one waiting for them on the opposite bank of the Granicus River. It would have been interesting to see how the Persian-Macedonian War unfolded if Philip had been in charge. His immediate need for the war was primarily to distract his unhappy new subjects, so how seriously he took the expedition is not really known. And yet he was the finest general of his time. It certainly would have been interesting.

Alexander III, however, was like his father but unlike his father: confident to the point of recklessness, fully convinced in his own extraordinary destiny, possessed of all his father's natural brilliance both on and off the battlefield, and when he was not too self-absorbed, a practical and shrewd ruler. And for what he was about to do, the Romans would christen him with the name by which he is now known to history, Alexander the Great. Undeterred by the superior numbers of the Persian army, he used highly unconventional yet insightful tactics to negate the disadvantage of crossing the river before his assault on the enemy's superior position. At one point, the Companions were cut off from the army and one of his generals had to save his life from a Persian axe which almost slaughtered him from behind. But Alexander's shock tactics and intelligence led the Macedonian forces to total victory.

The Battle of the Granicus River set the pattern for the entire Persian campaign. A uniquely talented general, Alexander repeatedly used his irrational attributes and the prowess of his troops to launch assaults against armies that dwarfed his own. The Persian emperor, Darius III, responded to the defeat along the Granicus River by taking personal command of the army. He massed approximately 100,000 troops, and when Alexander marched into Syria, Darius III circled behind him into Anatolia. While allowing the Macedonians freedom of movement, Darius III was determined to cut off Alexander's retreat in order to guarantee that a single victory would allow him to slaughter Alexander's entire force. Eager to make contact with the new army, Alexander returned and met the Persians on the border between Anatolia and Syria near the village of Issus in 333 BC. Deploying his troops in geometric formations of his own design, he routed the Persians from the field. He then proceeded along the east coast of the Mediterranean, accepting surrenders or conquering by seige city after city on the way to Egypt where he was acclaimed emperor and greeted as a savior in 332 BC.

Once these areas were deemed secure, he launched his assault on Mesopotamia. Darius III had now marshalled a new army, which also numbered around 100,000. They clashed at an obscure oasis in northern Mesopotamia, Gaugamela, in 331 BC. Alexander attacked with boldness and his innovative tactics, which allowed him to smash through the weakest portions of the Persian army to assault Darius III and his bodyguard, while the most powerful Persian units remained only partially engaged and had no impact on the outcome of the battle. As before, Darius III was able flee, but only by riding at a gallop and leaving all his supplies and treasure behind. However, his time had run out. He was assassinated by his principal general, and while the Persian military would keep up a resistance in the East, the death of Darius III in 331 BC is accepted as the date on which Alexander vanquished and took control of the Persian Empire.

He still had much work left to do, however. He marched south to capture Babylon and formally take control of Mesopotamia before marching east. In 330 BC, Alexander of Macedon sacked the Persian capital at Persepolis. When elements of the Persian army refused to surrender, Alexander chased them into the mountains, securing his conquest of Persia's eastern territories as he went. By 328 BC, Alexander ruled Greece, had conquered the entire Persian Empire, and marched into India, where he conquered the local states and seized control of the Indus River valley. It would be almost a thousand years before so large an empire was forged again.

In India, however, he could go no further. Undefeated in battle, his army mutinied and refused to march further east. There is little doubt that his army was dangerously low on morale. They had marched further and conquered more territory than any other army in history, usually against overwhelming odds. Nor did Alexander make it easy; his adoption of Persian court ceremony after 331 BC went down badly with the sophisticated Greeks, and even worse with the down-to-earth Macedonians he had grown up with. Thus Alexander made a long slow march back to Babylon where he established his court. Alexander spent his time triumphantly enjoying the riches of an Eastern monarch, but he was bitterly frustrated that his military campaigns had been ended. He settled down to the ancient Macedonian tradition of drinking yourself to death, and finally died after collapsing at a banquet in 323 BC.

Aftermath of Alexander the Great

Large scale warfare dominated the Middle East from 323 - 280 BC. Known as the Wars of the Diadochi (the Successors), these were the years when Alexander's generals futilely tried to catch his lightning in a bottle. One by one each succumbed to the combined might – or guile – of the others. This is when it became obvious that Alexander's most stunning achievement was not conquering the Persian Empire, but building and managing an army – and the generals – capable of doing it. After 280 BC, successful generals emerged by spending their time consolidating regional power first, and looking to expand second; this led to a balance of power.

A relatively stable dynasty emerged encompassing Greece and Macedon – the Antigonids. Another ruled Egypt, possibly the richest state, under the Ptolemies. The most successful dynasty, the Seluecids, gained control of Asia. However, Asia was also the most exposed and least defensible. The chief beneficiares of this arrangement was a native dynasty called the Parthians who declared their independence in 238 BC. While the last of Alexander's successor states, the Ptolemaic Empire of Egypt would survive until 30 BC. The Greek monarchies had lost their power long before then. The Parthians gradually gobbled up the Seluecid's eastern territories and would rule the Middle East for the next 300 years.

The Roman-Sassanian Wars

The Persian Empire and Hellenistic monarchies were the richest cultural period of the Middle East throughout the Ancient Era. This was partly due to the dynamic interchange between the two cultures. European control under Alexander the Great had flooded the Middle East like a great tide and slowly washed back into Europe as native dynasties gradually reclaimed the area from his successors. The European tide surged again under the Romans who seized Anatolia, Syria, and Egypt, but could not dislodge the Parthians from Mesopotamia. While the border flowed back and forth, the Romans never lost or gained very much territory for very long against first, the Parthians, and after 226 AD their successors, the Sassanian Dynasty. This balance of power was maintained for centuries until the Sassanian coup of 590 AD. With the help of the army, the Sassanian prince Khosrau II overthrew his father, only to be pushed aside by the leading general who proclaimed himself king.

Khosrau II was forced to flee and ultimately wound up in the court of the East Roman Emperor Maricius at Constantinople. Khosrau II was known for his cruelty and luxurious living as well as his lack of military and administrative training – this is what forced him to rely on his generals so heavily and had lost him the throne. The Senate was unanimous in its denunciation of Khosrau II, however, Maricius sent a Roman-led army to support Khosrau II's second bid for the throne. While Maricius was an excellent general and administrator, this was just one of many occasions where he lacked tact with his own subordinates.

In the unlikely event, Khosrau II's coalition force succeeded in placing him on the throne in 591 AD, and while his own subjects may not have been happy about this, he was scrupulously grateful to Mauricius; the Sassanians and the East Romans enjoyed a decade of peace and prosperous trade. It was exceptional especially for the fact that the Romans would not enjoy such a peace with the Middle Eastern powers for centuries, in some ways ever again.

While Mauricius had satisfactorily resolved issues with the Sassanians, this gave the East Romans for the first time an unfettered hand in dealing with the Slavic tribes who'd ravaged (and virtually destroyed) the Balkans for more than a century. Mauricius pushed the Slavs and Avars back across the Danube by 602 AD, when he committed the most famous of his tactless faux pas. Citing the empty treasury, Maricius refused to ransom Roman soldiers being held prisoner by the Slavs. The army sent a delegation headed by an officer named Phocas to make a personal plea to the emperor; for questioning his orders, Mauricius had him slapped before the court and sent him back to the Danube. With military morale perilously low, Mauricius then ordered the army to forage off the land throughout the winter, exposing them to attack in hostile territory. While Mauricius was shrewd politically in the sense that he had inherited massive debts and was gradually replenishing a devastated treasury, his aptitude for dealing with people failed him for the last time. The army raised the standard of revolt and declared Phocas emperor.

Phocas drove Mauricius from Constantinople and seized the throne, the first Roman coup since Constantine moved the capital to Constantinople in 330 AD. He lowered taxes which made him more popular than his predecesor, but he dealt so brutally with his opponents that the honeymoon was soon over. The most public example occurred when Mauricius and his family were captured; Mauricius was forced to await execution while he watched each of his sons put to death before him. As the body count mounted, Phocas became reviled and feared even by those who had welcomed him. He was supported only by his army which defended him from the East Romans leaving the Balkans undefended; the East Romans were never again able to expel the Slavs and Avars. Worse, Khosrau II immediately began a campaign of vengeance in honor of his patron, Mauricius; most historians have noted that it never seriously threatened any real harm to Mauricius's murder, but it certainly seized a lot of East Roman territory. Khosrau II conquered Egypt and all the important cities of the Mediterranean coast from Jerusalem in the South to Antioch in the North. The conquests brought the Sassanians to the peak of their empire territorially. This devastating blow was the final straw for the East Roman general of North Africa who revolted against Phocas.

When he suddenly died, his son Heraclius assumed command of the rebellion. Heraclius conquered his way to the doorstep of Constantinople, though he found many willing to defect to his side. When he reached the capital in 610 AD, it opened its gates to him and Phocas's own son-in-law and leader of his imperial guard turned Phocas over to him. When Heraclius read out the charges against him, Phocas insolently replied, "Will you do any better?" He was personally beheaded by the new emperor on the spot.

Heraclius now turned his attention to the Sassanians; in 613 AD, Heraclius attacked them at Antioch and was soundly defeated. He was forced to sue for peace and pay tribute to the Sassanians while he rejuvenated the empire. Phocas had butchered the men of the administration and squandered the resources of the empire in his desperate attempts to hold onto power. Heraclius was forced to rebuild the provinces that remained to the empire, but he was ever intent on regaining the sacred cities of Antioch and Jerusalem. In 622 AD, he felt strong enough to launch a cautious invasion of the Sassanian Empire. Heraclius and the Sassanian generals sparred with each other for years, each army carefully seeking out the best opportunity to destroy its rival. Only the failed seige of Constantinople in 626 AD by the Avars and Sassanians stands out as a major engagement during the course of the war. Not until 627 AD did Heraclius and his Sassanian nemesis each believe that they had found their moment to attack.

In the middle of the Mesopotamian desert near an old and forgotten set of ruins – now known to be the ancient city of Nineveh – the East Romans and Sassanians crashed together in a massive battle that raged all day. When it was over the Battle of Nineveh left the Sassanian Dynasty broken and Heraclius recovered all the territories seized by Khosrau II in 607 AD. However, rather than extend East Roman rule to historically Sassanian territory, he retained the Sassanians to limp on as a weak shadow of their former selves; like Septimus Severus, Heraclius preferred a weak and defeated enemy to overextending himself. Just because Heraclius did not want the Sassanians conquered didn't mean others weren't perfectly willing to do so; the end of the Sassanian Dynasty was not far off. In 642 AD the Muslim Arabs cast down the Sassanians at the Battle of Nehavend; this brought a close to the Ancient Era in the Middle East as Islam inaugurated the Medieval Era.

Greek civilization proved itself amazingly powerful, transforming small city-states into a powerful force for change and development. They were unlike anything yet seen except perhaps their Eastern Zhou contemporaries in China. While the Persians undermined the Hellenic Age of Greece by playing the city-states against each other, other cultures took advantage of their adversaries at least partly by adopting Greek civilization. This allowed first the Macedonians and then the Romans to rule large sections of the Middle East. This was about to change.

The advent of Islam inaugurated the Medieval Era and the Middle Eastern powers would become the most dominant culture on Earth – for a time threatening to conquer all of Europe. With the brief exception of the Crusades, no Europeans waged war in the Middle East except the slowly dying East Roman empire. Muslims squeezed the Christian world between the Middle Eastern powers and the Muslim dynasties of Spain, marking a complete reversal of fortune and speaking dramatically to which culture was the most dynamic and revolutionary instrument of innovation and change.