Thermopylae is arguably the most famous battle site in history. It is most famous because of a battle that took place 2500 years ago in 480 B.C. between the Greeks and Persians. Authors Myke Cole and Michael Livingston argue that there is much we don’t know or misperceive about the battle and its location. Together, they make their succinct and thorough arguments in their new book, “The Killing Ground: A Biography of Thermopylae.”
The book’s focal point is more about the location of Thermopylae and less about its famous battle. However, the battle plays a crucial role in describing the location, such as its passes, three gates, terrain, and why it was a nearly perfect place to make stands against invading armies. “Stands” is the operative word, as Mr. Cole and Mr. Livingston show that Thermopylae has been the location of numerous battles over the millennia.
The first battle the authors present is a little-known affair between the Phocians and the Thessalians that took place before 480 B.C. Not much about it is known due to lack of sources, which is understandable considering they cite the ancient historian Herodotus, considered the father of history. Based on this simple analysis, the authors make the obvious, but necessary presumption that Thermopylae was the location of previous battles.
Mr. Cole and Mr. Livingston, however, press on to 480 B.C. where they lay out Thermopylae’s geography, the groundwork for discussing the location for future battles and standoffs.
480 B.C.
The authors point out that Herodotus wrote about the Battle of Thermopylae 50 years after the fact in his book “Histories.” By addressing this battle, the authors are able to chart the terrain’s layout, describe the locations and accessibility of the passes (such as the Oiti Pass, the Kleisoura Pass, and Thermopylae Pass), pinpoint the distance from the sea to Mount Kallidromo (a natural border along the Malian Gulf), and estimate the size of areas where fights took place.Breaking down these geographical elements, Mr. Cole and Mr. Livingston can dispense with some of Herodotus’s hyperbole. One such statement concerns the size of the Persian army, which he said contained 3 million men. Many scholars take exception to this number and scale it down. The authors do the same, and justify the decision with simplified mathematics, how soldiers are lined up, and how long a line of 3 million soldiers would be.
Breaking this section down only reiterates the authors’ warnings that statements by Herodotus, along with many ancient historians, can’t always be taken at face value. This is not to say that the authors are disrespectful toward the ancient historians; if anything, they are the complete opposite. They prove to be genuinely grateful for the efforts of these writers, because without them, the world would know nothing of these moments. They further lament the fact that some ancient authors were not as thorough in detailing past events as Herodotus, Plutarch, Diodorus, or Pausanias (all ancient historians referenced in the book).
Related Stories
The authors lower the total to a conservative number of 100,000, while dispensing with the myth that there were only 300 Spartans combatting the invasion. They calculate by way of ancient sources that there were approximately 8,000 Greeks (although this is hardly a new assessment, it is nonetheless necessary to inform the reader).
In the grand scheme, 8,000 isn’t much better than 300, when the invading force is around 100,000. Nonetheless, Mr. Cole and Mr. Livingston clearly demonstrate that the Spartans, led by the famed King Leonidas, were not on a suicide mission. The authors brilliantly discuss, based on sources and physically surveying the terrain, that Leonidas actually had a good strategy. Unfortunately for the Greeks, they were unable to put that strategy into motion.
Terrain as a Deterrent
After reviewing the 480 B.C. battle, Mr. Cole and Mr. Livingston cover the next 2500 years, discussing battles that took place during Alexander the Great’s reign, the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, and World War II. In some instances, the threat of battle ebbs because of the difficulties Thermopylae presents to invaders. The landscape as a mere deterrent proves just how important Thermopylae has been to the Greeks over millennia.
Mr. Cole and Mr. Livingston demonstrate this importance even when source material is limited. For instance, one chapter is fewer than two pages long. Some sources inform the reader that an invasion is in preparation, but upon arriving at Thermopylae, the sources go quiet. The authors conclude that if a source’s narrative ends before a battle begins, it is highly likely the battle did not happen, which is probably due to Thermopylae’s role as a natural fortress. Overall, the book demonstrates the importance that natural landscapes, whether mountainous regions or deserts, play in deterring battle and bloodshed.
A Minor Complaint
“The Killing Ground” is a thoroughly documented work on what could be history’s most famous battleground. It is a prominent example of why location and terrain are paramount in choosing to go to battle. It also proves that historical beliefs based on ancient sources can be wrong, or at least skewed. Historiography as a science continues to improve, but because people write history, and people are citizens of specific countries with biases for and against other countries, people, places, and things, it will never be perfect. Historiography’s standard, however, has been established: It requires eliminating bias in the telling of a story. In a sense, Mr. Cole and Mr. Livingston got this right.They discuss how ancient writers’ biases created a negative view of other tribes, nationalities, or empires. The authors preferred to use, and I think overuse, the term “othered.” In an attempt to normalize the enemies mentioned in the ancient works, they at times disregard the antique writers’ views by suggesting that they were merely “othering” their enemies. In many cases, this may be true. But in the case of action in battle, where the ancient writers describe their enemies as practically being madmen and disregarding how many died in pursuit of victory, the authors demur. This type of berserk mentality has been well documented even as late as the mid-20th century.
Many of the authors’ claims and corrections to history are based on knowable facts or convincing analyses. Yet making inscrutable claims, or ones countered by modern historical knowledge leaves the authors on unstable ground. Furthermore, their early indignation about the movie “300” and the Persian army’s portrayal seems to suggest they were conflating an accurate retelling (that is, Herodotus’s “Histories”) with a clearly fictionalized version of the Battle of Thermopylae. To suggest that the movie was an attempt at “othering” is to take the film and one’s self too seriously, which ultimately posits unseriousness into the book.
Aside from the slight bend toward ill-conceived social commentary, which proves to be a very small percentage of the book, “The Killing Ground” is a great addition to understanding of a famous battle and location, as well as the idea of the importance of location.
‘The Killing Ground: A Biography of Thermopylae’
By Myke Cole and Michael Livingston
Osprey Publishing, Feb. 6, 2024
Hardcover: 304 pages
Would you like to see other kinds of arts and culture articles? Please email us your story ideas or feedback at [email protected]
