Talk:Battle of Salamis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
WikiProject Iran Battle of Salamis is part of WikiProject Iran, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Iran-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the Project's importance scale.
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. To participate, improve this article or visit the project page for more information.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article is on a subject of High-importance within classical antiquity.
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Portal:Zoroastrianism
 Zoroastrianism Portal
This article is supported by WikiProject Zoroastrianism, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Zoroastrianism-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

I removed this text, since I found it not very informative (when did it take place) and hardly an encylopedia entry ("most stupendous moment in history"). The second part of the article isn't actually that bad, but I removed it anyway. I replaced it with a short article, which needs a lot of work, perhaps with some of this text in edited form. jheijmans

"From the Story of the Greatest Nations and the World's Famous Events (1913).

The Greek Victory of Salamis is on of the most stupendous moments of history, a battle which was to decide the fate of all the future ages. Greece overthrew Persia. Europe snatched from Asia that rulership of the world which Europe has held ever since.Asia had been the first home of all wealth and splendor and empire; but Asia had surrendered itself to the power of one man, the Persian tyrant Xerxes I. His people were his servants, almost his slaves. Had he conquered the Greeks also, mankind might have continued slaves forever.

But the Greeks, though few in number, were free men and strong of soul, and they defied the tyrant. Xerxes sent his whole mighty navy to crush them. So sure was he of victory that he had a throne erected on the sea-shore in order that he might watch, like a theatrical performance, the downfall of the Greeks. He also brought with him the lords and ladies of his court to enjoy the spectacle. But the ships of the Greeks, with their sharp prows, crushed the Persian vessels. The Greeks said their gods fought for them, and that these visionary gods hovered in the air directing the strife, while priests offered sacrifice to them, and the Greek commander, Themistocles, stood above his men with folded arms, in triumph. Xerxes, in despair and fury, beholds the unforeseen destruction of his navy. He fled back to Persia, and shutting himself in his palace spent the rest of his life in idle pleasure. Never again did he appear in battle."

Contents

[edit] Minor error?

I know nothing of greek history, and was just browsing when under "preparations" I noted this apparent contradiction:

"The Spartans had no ships and only hoplites to contribute [...]", and further down

"There were 180 ships from Athens, 40 from Corinth, 30 from Aegina, 20 from Chalcis, 20 from Megara, 16 from Sparta, 15 from Sicyon, [...]"

Maybe I misunderstood? --Teeks 13:55, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Well, Herodotus says Sparta had 16 ships, so I assume the anon who added that sentence was just mistaken. Maybe Herodotus isn't 100% trustworthy but there must have been a tradition of Sparta having ships for him to report (I don't think he would have made it up entirely). Whatever Sparta's military dominance, I doubt the rest of the city-states would have agreed to let them be in charge if they didn't have any ships at all. The rest of that sentence was "The Spartans had no ships and only hoplites to contribute (who would not be of much use on board a trireme)," which is also not true, because, as mentioned later, "The Greek and Persian ships rammed each other and something similar to a land battle ensued." The Greeks (and Romans) tended to fight naval battles like land battles with ships. It's fixed now. Adam Bishop 18:46, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The Spartans did contribute some triremes; they maintained a nominal fleet merely out of obligation, as Spartan territory was contiguous w/ the sea. The original statement, that they had merely hoplites to contribute, is an exaggeration based on the fact that the Spartans valued infantrymen over naval ships.

[edit] Before the Persian Invasion, Earth and Water (greek: ΓΗ ΚΑΙ ΥΔΩΡ)

Before the Persians attacked Greece, Xerxes send messengers. First the Messengers arrived in Athens and announced that Xerxes and the Persians wanted only "earth and water" , after this request the Athenias brute smacked them and send them away. Then the messengers visited the city of Sparta , the Spartans where not so polite as the Athenians and the next thing they did was to throw them in a water well so that the messengers could from now on receive "as much earth and water" they need.

[edit] After the Battle of Salamis

The oars of the greek ships where operated by free men in contrast to the persian ships which where operated by slaves. So after the battle the remaining persian ships had tried to flee in the coasts of Asia over the Aegean see. The rage of the greeks was so huge that they hunted them over the Aegean sea so that "no one left alive". Note: In the specific battle nowhere is mentioned the word "prisoners", because simply there where none. All persians should die because of the aggresive policy of Persia those days to attack Greece every 2 to 5 years.

[edit] What was the Number of Ships?

I read on a site called Hellas:net that the Persians only had 450-485 Triremes. Are you talking about all ships not just Triremes and is their claim historically accurate? --Ben Goldman 15:19, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

That's the number Herodotus gives, and it should probably be mentioned more explicitly that there was probably not that many (for me, it is always implicit that numbers given by Herodotus are exaggerated). I've never been to the Saronic Gulf but I can't imagine 1600 ships would fit in there :) I don't think all 1200 Persian ships were triremes, according to Herodotus, but neither were the 400 Greek ships - he just says "ships", at least in the English translation. Adam Bishop 23:30, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You know I have some problems with the barbaric view of Perisa. People continue to call citizens of Peria servants or slaves. Under the Cyrus cylinder arguably the first charter of rights. Everyone in Persia had the right to compensation for work. Persepolis was built with paid labour unlike Athens which was made by slaves. Ironic how Persia is undemocratic while we have the charter and Sparta has the Helots and Athens' in 430 BCE has 80 000 slaves of their total 150 000 population, 53% of population (JUST DISGUSTING) [By the way Greeks will be furious, I know, but I'm English I don't mind]. Oh yeah, also in Athens that does include 60 000 women which were treated like garbage. Unlike in Persia, my good friends.

Hey Adam, that site you show looks believable (professional) however, from the best of my knowledge, the persians never deployed triremes. I thought they had larger and harder to maneuver ships by the phoenecians. But the numbers make more sense, in terms of battleships I think that after Artemisium and the storms Xerxes could not have that many ships. Because Herodotus I think claims 2000 ships were on xerxes' exhbedition, however modern historians claim roughly 1200, coincidentally the same amount at salamis, catch my drift this does not seem to work. Also if we think logically if xerxes truely had 1200 ships at the seige, and 200 casualties (17% of starting fleet) would not seem like a lot to cocky xerxes considering Greece losing 40 ships to 370 making a 11% loss of fleet. xerxes would have continued the assault. However had the number of battleships been near 400 like you said then half of his fleet would have been wiped out. This makes more sense because he needs a few ships to get back to persia along with a small regiment. Also this would show that salamis was a lot more catastrophic for xerxes.

 As a Greek, I can say this. The word 'Barbarian' used by the ancient Greeks to describe more or
 less everybody else, did not at the time have the meaning that it does today. Because their 
 language sounded in the ears of the Greeks like 'bar bar bar', the terms barbarian was used for 
 those speaking other languages (I know Greek might sound the same to you too). Therefore, it did 
 not have the meaning it has today. Of course when somebody is attacking you, you will use all you 
 bitterness against them. All races use their own arguments (mostly to justify their actions) to 
 describe their enemies.But I do not think that anybody can argue that the Persian civilization and
 empire was not an important civilization in history. On the contrary. 
 Other than that, the use of slaves was widespread at the time. Everybody used them, although some
 (slaves) were more lucky than others. In Athens for example the slaves had better treatment, it 
 was not allowed to their masters to mistreat them or kill them and in general they had it ok for 
 slaves. In Sparta on the other hand it was not so good. Let us not forget that this was almost 
 2.500 years ago. Slaves existed in other parts of the world less than 200 years ago.

[edit] Persians had heavier ships?

According to Strauss's account ("The Battle of Salamis"), the Greeks stayed within the narrows because their ships were heavier, and would be less affected by the wind than the lighter Persian triremes. For this reason I am deleting the terms "heavier" and "lighter" from the description of "the battle" on the main page. Correct me if I'm wrong???

I would like to see some evidence or sources for this Persian ship casualties of up to 500. I am not aware of any sources claiming that, how about we keep it at the previous sourced 200 casualties. And when there are some reliable sources presented here we can change it back to a range 200-500. --Arsenous Commodore 18:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:MilHist Assessment

An excellent excellent start. There's an infobox, pictures and maps, and extensive details. I wonder if there is anything more to be added on such an incredibly famous battle? In addition, just a few minor stylistic improvements - (1) the introduction does not state, or even imply, the incredible fame and importance of this battle. If I came across this article, somehow having never heard of Salamis, I'd read the intro and think "oh, this is just another one of those battles from those Greek wars that I never understood anything about", and I'd move on. As it stands now, you have to scroll all the way to the bottom in order to see anything about the importance and fame of the battle. (2) I wonder if there is any better way to organize the listing of the numbers of ships. Obviously, regular paragraph form will look quite confusing and ugly, and a table would likely take up just as much space as the list... can anything be done here? Maybe a table with multiple columns? Otherwise, a very nice article for a very major topic. Not, unfortunately, up to FA status, which is where I think we'd all like to see Salamis, but it's on the way there. LordAmeth 13:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Artemisia

I hate to ruin feminist revisionist plans - but way it is written is clearly planned to pump Artemisia into some kind of Xena warrior princess. The fact is she wrecklessly smashed ships from both Greek and Persian side - in fact this is in text but not made clear. From http://www.sarissa.org/war/persian_wars/per_fig.php - Artemisia was a Greek princess who ruled Harlicarnassus. She fought at Salamis on behalf of the Persians, but seemed to change allegiances as the situation demanded.

To expand on the previous authors' post, the citation for the Xerxes quote regarding Artemisia is wrong. It is listed as Herodotus VII, 88. Herodotus VII only recounts the battle of Thermopolye, not the battle of Salamis. I think that passage should be removed unless it can be correctly sourced.

[edit] Song

I think in the translation of the battle song "motherland" should be "fatherland". D. Fletcher


[edit] Who Bumped up the Casualty Figures

C'mon folks the least you could do when adding 300 ships to the Persian casualties is offer a source or reasoning explanation in the discussion board. No one is undermining the importance of Salamis for Hellas, but at Wikipedia we need to try to maintain an NPOV at all times. I'm taking the figure back to its original status until somebody posts a resonable and authoratative source for this significantly higher figure. --Arsenous Commodore 16:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Revamp of the Significance section

I rewrote the significance section because it was inaccurate and extremely biased. "The Greek victory protected the nascent and singular traditions of democracy and individual rights" is inaccurate, as the Persians wrote the first declaration of human rights, and the Greeks were much more guilty of human rights abuses than the Achaemenids. Also, this: " This meant the eventual flowering of Western culture, which would have been snuffed out completely, had the Persians overrun Greece." is without basis. There is no evidence to show that the Persians routinely "snuffed out" cultures: considering their policy of religious tolerance and government through satraps, it is very likely that, had Greece been conquered, Grecian culture would have flourished. (Look, for example, to the Jews, Babylonians, and Egyptians for examples.) And finally: "Due to the enormous and wide-ranging influence of Western culture on all of human civilization, as well as the huge success of Western culture in its own right, some claim that the world today would be fundamentally different had the Greeks lost at Salamis." doesn't have any place in the article: it is one thing to say that the battle fundamentally changed human history (it did) and another to spend a sentence or two glorifying Western civilization. Spectheintro 18:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)spectheintro

[edit] Spectheintro you must be joking

Spectheintro ,human rights as we know and mean them is a modern idea,a modern construct. The origin - among others - of modern western democratic values is ancient greece via renaissance and enlightment.Note the word I used origin.the modern status isn't equivalent to the ancient one,but the former is derived from and founded on the latter.

The post Persian Wars in general and post battle of Salamis in particular, acme of Greece in both geopolitical and cultural sense is crucially relevant and almost totally based on the victory of the Greeks over the Persians in the aforementioned wars.

" This meant the eventual flowering of Western culture, which would have been snuffed out completely, had the Persians overrun Greece." is without basis

your words above and of your post in general are at least naive.and saying naive is my understatemental way of being polite.
political correctness isn't history.

Thanatos|talk 21:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/a/t/Talk%7EBattle_of_Salamis_f143.html"