What do you think?
Rate this book
Marathon: How One Battle Changed Western Civilization
The Battle of Marathon in 490 B.C. is not only understood as the most decisive event in the struggle between the Greeks and the Persians, but can also be seen as perhaps the most significant moment in our collective history. 10,000 Athenian citizens faced a Persian military force of more than 25,000. Greek victory appeared impossible, but the men of Athens were tenacious and the Persians were defeated. Following the battle, the Athenian hoplite army ran 26.5 miles from Marathon to Athens to defend their port from the Persian navy. Although they had just run the great distance in heavy armor, the Athenians won the battle and drove the Persian forces from Attica. Greek freedom ensued and the achievements of the culture became much of the basis for Western civilization. In this comprehensive and engrossing treatment, Richard Billows captures the drama of that day 2500 years ago and the ramifications it has had throughout Western history.
287 pages, Kindle Edition
First published July 21, 2010
21 people are currently reading
376 people want to read
About the author
Richard A. Billows
8 books11 followersRichard Billows is a professor of history at Columbia University. His specialty is the Classical Mediterranean, especially the Hellenistic World post-Alexander. He holds an undergraduate degree in History from Oxford University, and a Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews
July 19, 2011
Have you ever seen a sporting event advertised to start at 7:00 only to tune in and find that is when the pregame begins? This book, on the pivotal battle at Marathon, is similar. The actual battle comes late in the book and covers only a dozen or so pages. This is due, really, to a dearth of information on the actual battle: it took place 2,500 years ago and lasted 2 hours.
But, don't worry, this book still delivers a compelling read. The Introduction and Chapters 1-4 (leading up to the penultimate chapter 5 covering the battle itself) can be seen as stand-alone essays. Billows begins by putting Marathon in context, both in Athenian time down to our own modern era.
The main idea advanced by Billows is that Western history would have been radically different had the Persians won at Marathon. Intertwined in this, he sees the burgeoning democracy - taking root in Athens - aiding the Athenians and the battle's outcome in turn advancing democracy.
Building up to the battle you will make stops in Ancient Greece, be introduced to Homer and understand the rise and power of the Persian Empire. The book closes with an interesting, and convincing, theory on what a Persian victory would have meant to Athenians, Greeks, and us.
2011 marks the 2,500th anniversary of the Battle of Marathon, do yourself a favor and read this book.
But, don't worry, this book still delivers a compelling read. The Introduction and Chapters 1-4 (leading up to the penultimate chapter 5 covering the battle itself) can be seen as stand-alone essays. Billows begins by putting Marathon in context, both in Athenian time down to our own modern era.
The main idea advanced by Billows is that Western history would have been radically different had the Persians won at Marathon. Intertwined in this, he sees the burgeoning democracy - taking root in Athens - aiding the Athenians and the battle's outcome in turn advancing democracy.
Building up to the battle you will make stops in Ancient Greece, be introduced to Homer and understand the rise and power of the Persian Empire. The book closes with an interesting, and convincing, theory on what a Persian victory would have meant to Athenians, Greeks, and us.
2011 marks the 2,500th anniversary of the Battle of Marathon, do yourself a favor and read this book.
December 1, 2019
Good info not just on the battle itself, but also the events leading up to it as well as the importance of the outcome.
June 2, 2020
Ancient Greek culture is fascinating. I really enjoyed this book, especially the last few chapters. I learned a lot too (though I would have learned more if my mind hadn't blanked out during some of the duller parts). One thing I know I'll remember is the Greek's horrible pride. They all strove to be best; therefore they didn't get along at all. This book mentions at least two instances where a group of Greeks betrayed their entire city to the enemy because it was to the advantage of their small group. Rather a negative memory, wouldn't you say? On the positive side, I'm impressed with the actual battle of Marathon. I'm glad the Greeks established a democratic government. I'd like to say I appreciate their contributions to literature, but I haven't actually read Homer, Herodotus, or Aristophanes. Richard Billows does say that these men, along with other Greek writers, influenced Western literature and still do today. So I guess I appreciate their contributions to art indirectly.
I'd love to read more about the ancient Greeks: nonfiction or fiction. Any recommendations?
I'd love to read more about the ancient Greeks: nonfiction or fiction. Any recommendations?
August 22, 2018
To πόσο σπουδαίος ήταν ο αρχαίος Ελληνικός πολιτισμός μπορεί να το καταλάβει κανένας καλύτερα από την προετοιμασία της μάχης παρά από την ίδια την μάχη.
August 31, 2013
This surprised me in what I liked and disliked about it. I found the first couple of chapters to be fascinating. Each chapter was broken up into topics that would basically help one understand how the Greeks and Persians ended up staring across from each other on the plain near Marathon so long ago.
First you learn about Athens in particular, and more generally about the Greeks and how they developed into the people they were in the centuries before the battle. Billows talks of how the cities developed economically and politically, how and why the phalanx system of fighting was developed and why the Greeks where particularly good fighters during that time period compared with the other civilizations of the time.
Then you learn about the Persians. Billows describes how the first Persian emperors overcame the older civilizations around them, how their armies were able to continually hold the empire together and then at times even grow as they conquered new lands. There first dealings with the Ionian Greeks in Asia Minor are described which set the stage for all the other events to come.
After describing the series of events that would eventually lead these to peoples to war, Billows then describes the Persian campaign that eventually leads to their defeat on the field of battle at Marathon.
A lot of time is spent discussing the development of Athenian democracy, which I found to be the slowest part of the book, but in general this is a great book. It is one of those books that enlightens you in ways you never imagined when you picked it up off the bookstore shelf.
First you learn about Athens in particular, and more generally about the Greeks and how they developed into the people they were in the centuries before the battle. Billows talks of how the cities developed economically and politically, how and why the phalanx system of fighting was developed and why the Greeks where particularly good fighters during that time period compared with the other civilizations of the time.
Then you learn about the Persians. Billows describes how the first Persian emperors overcame the older civilizations around them, how their armies were able to continually hold the empire together and then at times even grow as they conquered new lands. There first dealings with the Ionian Greeks in Asia Minor are described which set the stage for all the other events to come.
After describing the series of events that would eventually lead these to peoples to war, Billows then describes the Persian campaign that eventually leads to their defeat on the field of battle at Marathon.
A lot of time is spent discussing the development of Athenian democracy, which I found to be the slowest part of the book, but in general this is a great book. It is one of those books that enlightens you in ways you never imagined when you picked it up off the bookstore shelf.
April 25, 2016
In this readable volume, Billows makes the case for Marathon as a decisive victory and examines how the legend evolved, how scholars have historically interpreted it, and how the battle became associated with the “marathon race.”
Billows gives the reader an efficient history of Greece from Homer’s time, along with topics like hoplite warfare, Spartan society, lyric poetry, the rise of Persia, and events in Athens and Ionia. He does a fine job describing the feat of Philippides, and how the whole legend is a bit unlikely due to fatigue and the fact that one would only run when in range of Persian arrows. Billows also argues that Miltiades deserves more credit. The description of the battle itself is not particularly strong, though. And his argument for the battle’s significance is basically just “things would have been different.” Also, this book is really just an overview of the time period.
A clear, well-written volume, even if it feels a bit padded, and the narrative is a little choppy and unfocused. He describes the Persians as “decadent.” Also, there are no endnotes and a few typos.
Billows gives the reader an efficient history of Greece from Homer’s time, along with topics like hoplite warfare, Spartan society, lyric poetry, the rise of Persia, and events in Athens and Ionia. He does a fine job describing the feat of Philippides, and how the whole legend is a bit unlikely due to fatigue and the fact that one would only run when in range of Persian arrows. Billows also argues that Miltiades deserves more credit. The description of the battle itself is not particularly strong, though. And his argument for the battle’s significance is basically just “things would have been different.” Also, this book is really just an overview of the time period.
A clear, well-written volume, even if it feels a bit padded, and the narrative is a little choppy and unfocused. He describes the Persians as “decadent.” Also, there are no endnotes and a few typos.
March 1, 2014
Actual Rating - 4 Stars
This is a very well written book but it has a misleading title. This is not a book about the battle of Marathon it is an introductory text about ancient Greece and Persia up to the point of the battle of Marathon. Of the six chapters in this book only one is dedicated to that battle, 4 to the histories of Greece and Persia to create context, and 1 to the aftereffects of the battle.
If you're looking to learn about the histories of ancient Greece and Persia culminating in an interesting battle this is for YOU but if you're looking for an intricate look at the actual battle then this is NOT for you.
I was familiar with a lot of the ancient Greek history covered in the beginning of this book so that's why I gave it a lower 3 stars.
This is a very well written book but it has a misleading title. This is not a book about the battle of Marathon it is an introductory text about ancient Greece and Persia up to the point of the battle of Marathon. Of the six chapters in this book only one is dedicated to that battle, 4 to the histories of Greece and Persia to create context, and 1 to the aftereffects of the battle.
If you're looking to learn about the histories of ancient Greece and Persia culminating in an interesting battle this is for YOU but if you're looking for an intricate look at the actual battle then this is NOT for you.
I was familiar with a lot of the ancient Greek history covered in the beginning of this book so that's why I gave it a lower 3 stars.
April 13, 2011
Very well written. Excellent history of the evolution of democracy in Greece, the Persian Empire, the events leading up to the battle, and its subsequent impact on Western culture.
May 10, 2018
More of a history of Ancient Greece and Persia than of the actual battle at Marathon.
November 24, 2020
This is far and away the best account and analysis of the Battle of Marathon that I have yet read. Author Richard Billows describes carefully the conditions that led to the rise of the Greek city states on the one hand, with particular attention to how the Athenian democratic experiment affected the military capabilities of the hoplites of that city-state, the growth and development of the Persian empire on the other, and the factors that sparked the Ionian Revolt, which brought the Greeks and Persians into confrontation. His description of the battle itself is vivid enough to give the reader some sense of what a Greek heavy infantryman must have experienced in the close combat of the day, while his explanation of the battle plan adopted by the Athenian commanders clarifies why the Greeks chose to leave their fortified city to face a Persian force several times their own strength. The analysis and description of the Athenians' legendary speed march from the battlefield outside of Marathon to meet the Persian fleet and thwart the enemy's plans for for an amphibious landing on the Attic coast captures the imagination, as does his foray - rare for a professional historian - into the realm of what might have happened had the Persian army prevailed at Marathon that day 2,500 years ago. I recommend this book enthusiastically to any student of ancient warfare or of the life of the Greek poleis.
January 19, 2025
A pesar de que la batalla de Maratón es cubierta en solo un capítulo de los 6 que tiene el libro, realmente vale la pena. Además debemos considerar que la batalla ocurrió hace 2500 años y no solo hay pocas fuentes sino que también hay que tenr en cuenta que solamente duró aproximadamente 2 o 3 horas (sin contar los acontecimientos previos y posteriores a la batalla). Es por esto que el relato de la batalla se hace un poco breve si lo comparamos con todo el desarrollo del libro en su totalidad. Igualmente es un libro excepcional y se disfruta tremendamente. Si te gusta la historia (especialmente la historia de la Grecia Antigua) y las batallas de la antiguedad, este libro es para tí. El autor hace un preámbulo que desarrolla a lo largo de cuatro capítulos antes de entrar a relatar la batalla para poner en contexto temporal, espacial, político, social, económico y cultural a la batalla de Maratón. Nos cuenta sobre también sobre el ejército Persa y sus características y porqué se convirtió en un Imperio poderoso. Finalmente en el sexto y último capítulo el autor nos habla de las consecuencias que tuvo la batalla. Es así que desarrolla que impacto tuvo la victoria Griega en Maratón para Grecia y la Civilización de Occidente así como también el impacto que hubiera tenido si la victoria hubiera sido Persa.
April 28, 2018
The point made in this book is interesting: that the impact of the battle of Marathon is underappreciated, and it's not widely understood that this was solely an Athenian military triumph that was accomplished without help from the Spartans. The authors states that Spartans get too much credit for military achievements in general, whereas the Athenians have a lot to be proud of in that arena. The author does a good job of explaining his premise and then stepping back in time to set up the situation that led to Marathon, then how it happened, and then a quick summation of why it mattered so much. All that structure is well and good in a general history.
However, the book isn't well-written, and while it's clear enough on most things, it often falls into boring lists of city-states, civic leaders or other stuff, none of which would mean anything to a general reader. In that sense,it falls into the trap of too specific for a general reader and not enough detail for someone with some prior knowledge. But it's meant to be a first book, not a comprehensive review.
The story goes something like this. Greece into about the 7th century BC was a series of small city-states that were constantly at war with each other. Some were more successful than others, but even the largest (like Sparta) had to ally themselves with a lot of other cities for defensive purposes. Along comes Athens, and the century of the 500's BC it develops a unique system of governance, combined with military excellence, that becomes the standard-bearer with which we are familiar. Rule of law, democracy, the start of drama and memorable sculpture and architecture, etc.
But within 15 years of this happening, the biggest empire the world had ever seen (up until that time), Persia, decides it's had enough of the upstart Greeks, and it sends an invasion force in 490 BC. Had Persia succeeded, all the stuff that Western civilization got from Greece probably wouldn't have happened, and it's "experiment" in participatory democracy would have been seen as inadequate to fighting to defend turf.
But Persia is defeated by Greek city-states, actually 3 times. The first time is a small-bore action on the edges of Greece, and the Athenians help to some degree with ships. The second time, Persia comes with a bigger force, and really goes after the leading cities and key islands in the Aegean. In this campaign, all goes well for Persia until Marathon. There on a wide plain 22-26 miles from Athens (depending on the path you take), the Athenians with a little help from one ally city-state (but no help from Sparta), defeat the feared Persian force. Then, on the same day, those soldiers march back to Athens with 60 lbs of weapons, shields and gear per person, and then arrive in time to stare down the Persian naval fleet that has arrived to take the city by sea while the soldiers were engaged at Marathon. The Persians sail away.
In the third effort, they return 20 years later and have their battles with Sparta, and those are better remembered, which is why we credit Sparta with defeating the Persians, rather than the Athenians.
In describing those battles (all three since the tactics were similar), the author explains how the Greeks used a different military style than did the Persians. The Greek "hoplite" army was heavily armored with heavy wood and copper round shields, copper helmets and shin guards. They were basically impregnable from the front, and when they got close enough they spiked people with heavy spears and swords. They could be beaten if you got on their flanks. The Persians carried small wicker shields and no real protection on their bodies, and they fought primary with arrows. They moved swiftly and coordinated with cavalry charges to create confusion in their opponents, and then charged in with small swords for the final kill. Power vs. speed.
At Marathon, however, the Greeks added a surprise. They moved across the plain as the aggressor, even though they had a great defensive position. When they reached about 150-200 yards from the enemy, they started to run, thus minimizing the time that arrows could hit them. And they smashed the lighter force with their power.
One of the best things about this book is how the author explains how all of the above was developed, and what was innovative at the time, and also what is known and what is legend. Example: Legend is that the Greeks ran nearly a mile across the fighting area to engage the Persians. Nonsense, says this author. Since they knew the Persian arrows didn't go much more than 150 yards, they wouldn't have started running until that point.
The other thing that this author does is explain how Athens' unique governance created an environment in which the brave decision to fight the Persians was taken. Since all citizens (that is, males who weren't slaves) had a voice in the government, a genuine voice, those citizens really did feel they had something to defend. This was a new idea in world culture, and it explained why a huge percentage of the eligible men came out to Marathon to do battle -- the author estimates something like 75% of the men who could afford the military equipment. Not only is it a contrast with the Persians, who had their core people as well conscripts from subjugated peoples, but it was different than Sparta, which had an elite warrior class that was built on required military service, but which always feared an internal uprising from oppressed peoples within Sparta's territory.
However, the book isn't well-written, and while it's clear enough on most things, it often falls into boring lists of city-states, civic leaders or other stuff, none of which would mean anything to a general reader. In that sense,it falls into the trap of too specific for a general reader and not enough detail for someone with some prior knowledge. But it's meant to be a first book, not a comprehensive review.
The story goes something like this. Greece into about the 7th century BC was a series of small city-states that were constantly at war with each other. Some were more successful than others, but even the largest (like Sparta) had to ally themselves with a lot of other cities for defensive purposes. Along comes Athens, and the century of the 500's BC it develops a unique system of governance, combined with military excellence, that becomes the standard-bearer with which we are familiar. Rule of law, democracy, the start of drama and memorable sculpture and architecture, etc.
But within 15 years of this happening, the biggest empire the world had ever seen (up until that time), Persia, decides it's had enough of the upstart Greeks, and it sends an invasion force in 490 BC. Had Persia succeeded, all the stuff that Western civilization got from Greece probably wouldn't have happened, and it's "experiment" in participatory democracy would have been seen as inadequate to fighting to defend turf.
But Persia is defeated by Greek city-states, actually 3 times. The first time is a small-bore action on the edges of Greece, and the Athenians help to some degree with ships. The second time, Persia comes with a bigger force, and really goes after the leading cities and key islands in the Aegean. In this campaign, all goes well for Persia until Marathon. There on a wide plain 22-26 miles from Athens (depending on the path you take), the Athenians with a little help from one ally city-state (but no help from Sparta), defeat the feared Persian force. Then, on the same day, those soldiers march back to Athens with 60 lbs of weapons, shields and gear per person, and then arrive in time to stare down the Persian naval fleet that has arrived to take the city by sea while the soldiers were engaged at Marathon. The Persians sail away.
In the third effort, they return 20 years later and have their battles with Sparta, and those are better remembered, which is why we credit Sparta with defeating the Persians, rather than the Athenians.
In describing those battles (all three since the tactics were similar), the author explains how the Greeks used a different military style than did the Persians. The Greek "hoplite" army was heavily armored with heavy wood and copper round shields, copper helmets and shin guards. They were basically impregnable from the front, and when they got close enough they spiked people with heavy spears and swords. They could be beaten if you got on their flanks. The Persians carried small wicker shields and no real protection on their bodies, and they fought primary with arrows. They moved swiftly and coordinated with cavalry charges to create confusion in their opponents, and then charged in with small swords for the final kill. Power vs. speed.
At Marathon, however, the Greeks added a surprise. They moved across the plain as the aggressor, even though they had a great defensive position. When they reached about 150-200 yards from the enemy, they started to run, thus minimizing the time that arrows could hit them. And they smashed the lighter force with their power.
One of the best things about this book is how the author explains how all of the above was developed, and what was innovative at the time, and also what is known and what is legend. Example: Legend is that the Greeks ran nearly a mile across the fighting area to engage the Persians. Nonsense, says this author. Since they knew the Persian arrows didn't go much more than 150 yards, they wouldn't have started running until that point.
The other thing that this author does is explain how Athens' unique governance created an environment in which the brave decision to fight the Persians was taken. Since all citizens (that is, males who weren't slaves) had a voice in the government, a genuine voice, those citizens really did feel they had something to defend. This was a new idea in world culture, and it explained why a huge percentage of the eligible men came out to Marathon to do battle -- the author estimates something like 75% of the men who could afford the military equipment. Not only is it a contrast with the Persians, who had their core people as well conscripts from subjugated peoples, but it was different than Sparta, which had an elite warrior class that was built on required military service, but which always feared an internal uprising from oppressed peoples within Sparta's territory.
September 18, 2010
Not quite as much history of the battle as I would have liked. A little repetitve also with the same facts repeated each chapter. Shed very little new material on Marathon and the impact on western civilization was mostly conclusory and not supported well.
December 29, 2010
A lot of interesting history, though it felt rushed and a little disheveled. Also, I think an academic historian would have some issues with some of his theories that were not well backed. But it was an interesting for a novice Greek history buff.
April 26, 2012
Marathon may not have saved Western civilization, but it certainly saved Athens, the cradle of democracy. The legend of Marathon and Philippides's run is not nearly as remarkable as the truth.
August 1, 2018
Vivid, rich and entertaining. I even felt for one moment how it must have been at the battlefield of Marathon. A must read for anyone interested in the decisive moment that shaped Western culture.
May 28, 2018
Far more than a book on the ancient battle, this novel details the story of Greece for the preceding centuries as well as how Persia and Greece came to a contest of wills in the first place. As such, it is a decent overview of both the cultural and military backgrounds of the two peoples as well as making a decent inroad into separating the fact from fiction.
It is a regrettable consequence of the author's stated wish to create an accessible book that he does not address the majority of the public opinion in his numerous claims of "The accepted opinion is that, but I believe this instead". Very often, this leads to claims which are insufficiently supported by facts and where the author would have done better by choosing a road which brings in more of the academic debate. It is my belief that he could have done so quite nicely as Mr Billows's style is generally good and readable though he also has a bit of a tendency to repeat certain turns of phrase.
Coming back, however, to the question of the myth as opposed to the reality it was quite good fun to read the mythology created by Roman historians and utilised by de Coubertin -- as is typical of these events, the truth of the march of Marathon (marathon?) and the run of Philippides from Athens to Sparta (to Athens) both far surpass that described in the legend of a singular run of approximately 42km.
I'll finish with the note that there is a lot of unexpected information in this book, and I found most of it really enjoyable. People solely hoping for an account of people killing each other will be disappointed, however; people looking for an account exploring potential reasons for why things happen will be pleased.
It is a regrettable consequence of the author's stated wish to create an accessible book that he does not address the majority of the public opinion in his numerous claims of "The accepted opinion is that, but I believe this instead". Very often, this leads to claims which are insufficiently supported by facts and where the author would have done better by choosing a road which brings in more of the academic debate. It is my belief that he could have done so quite nicely as Mr Billows's style is generally good and readable though he also has a bit of a tendency to repeat certain turns of phrase.
Coming back, however, to the question of the myth as opposed to the reality it was quite good fun to read the mythology created by Roman historians and utilised by de Coubertin -- as is typical of these events, the truth of the march of Marathon (marathon?) and the run of Philippides from Athens to Sparta (to Athens) both far surpass that described in the legend of a singular run of approximately 42km.
I'll finish with the note that there is a lot of unexpected information in this book, and I found most of it really enjoyable. People solely hoping for an account of people killing each other will be disappointed, however; people looking for an account exploring potential reasons for why things happen will be pleased.
May 12, 2023
Too much information, if you're not into history. and too little, if you're looking for something on Marathon.
Still, an absorbing history of Greece, the birth of democracy as opposed to tyranny, the development of Western thought in science and philosophy, which is the book's claim, and of the Spartans as a brief interlude before the Persian onslaught. Essentially, Billows shows us just what was at stake had the battle of Marathon gone the other way.
From philosophy to hoplite armour and Persian uniforms of trousers and long robes, to the birth and development of democracy and Athens as a city-state, to land reforms, to Solon the lawgiver, to the discontent of the Helots, to Persian cavalry tactics, whatever your particular interest is, you will (eventually, it is true) find it in this gem of ancient history.
The book abounds in legends, and in legends of legends, culled from various ancient sources; several stories are from Herodotus, but while not citing him exclusively, Billows brings Herodotus to life. And insofar as the Battle of Marathon itself, to read Billows's account is like reading Steven Pressfield: it is hard to judge which detail is fact, and which inspired imagination.
Still, an absorbing history of Greece, the birth of democracy as opposed to tyranny, the development of Western thought in science and philosophy, which is the book's claim, and of the Spartans as a brief interlude before the Persian onslaught. Essentially, Billows shows us just what was at stake had the battle of Marathon gone the other way.
From philosophy to hoplite armour and Persian uniforms of trousers and long robes, to the birth and development of democracy and Athens as a city-state, to land reforms, to Solon the lawgiver, to the discontent of the Helots, to Persian cavalry tactics, whatever your particular interest is, you will (eventually, it is true) find it in this gem of ancient history.
The book abounds in legends, and in legends of legends, culled from various ancient sources; several stories are from Herodotus, but while not citing him exclusively, Billows brings Herodotus to life. And insofar as the Battle of Marathon itself, to read Billows's account is like reading Steven Pressfield: it is hard to judge which detail is fact, and which inspired imagination.
March 1, 2018
Explore one of the most impactful battles in history, the battle of Marathon. Read about the twists and shocking turns that became the battle of Marathon. This book is better than any of the history books that they assign you in school. When you read this book, you’ll agree too. Instead of reading a boring book with little in details, you can read a book jam-packed with details, so many details in fact, that it feels like you lived the battle yourself. For example, the author includes detailed explanations on why and how the battle went the way that it did. He also backs up his explanations with facts and statistics.This book is also great because of its historical accuracy. For example, the book included first-hand accounts from the warriors of Marathon from their views and accounts. What are you waiting for?
September 21, 2021
As others have pointed out, the book's 304 pages devotes just thirty-one to the battle itself. Yet, for me, that was worth the price of admission. The Greeks (Athenians plus some Plataians) didn't just charge straight ahead relying on their superior arms and armor; there was actually some tactics employed. They put more guys on their wings, trusting them to roll up the Persian flanks before the Persians could break through the middle. Miltiades never seems to get enough credit for that idea, which Hannibal employed in a larger fashion at Cannae 174 years later. I forgive the prelude, the chapters devoted to the rise of the city-states and the beginnings of Athenian democracy (such as it was). They were a great refresher for me. By the way, Pheidippides' run is pretty much legend; there was some cavalry at Marathon and the news was important enough to put him or somebody on one and get his butt to the city in time to warn them of the approaching enemy fleet!
February 2, 2019
Nicely written, however, it is more of a summary of Ancient Greece than a book on the Battle of Marathon. If you have studied Greek history (I have extensively) then it is more a summary of the events before and allowed progression of Athenian culture after. So, if you don't know much about Ancient Greece this is awesome. If you have studied it and are expecting an in depth look at the battle you can forget it. The battle is finally addressed for a few pages about 270 pages into the book. Some interesting facts and he obviously knows a lot of Greek History but call it that, not a book on the Battle of Marathon. There are very few details on battle.
July 5, 2023
A very fine, even riveting, story of the Battle of Marathon
Readers may be surprised to be taken on a journey of the history of the great powers and cultures that preceded the improbable rise of 5th century Greece--fully two thirds of the book is dedicated to this broad historical review, so that when you finally arrive at the battle of Marathon, you understand the rich context of perhaps the most important battle in Western history and why this battle literally preserved the astonishing accomplishments in literature, philosophy, science, political theory, democracy, and architecture that are the foundation for Western civilization.
Readers may be surprised to be taken on a journey of the history of the great powers and cultures that preceded the improbable rise of 5th century Greece--fully two thirds of the book is dedicated to this broad historical review, so that when you finally arrive at the battle of Marathon, you understand the rich context of perhaps the most important battle in Western history and why this battle literally preserved the astonishing accomplishments in literature, philosophy, science, political theory, democracy, and architecture that are the foundation for Western civilization.
May 25, 2019
An accessible and well-written account of the Battle of Marathon, a seminal event in Western history, as Billows clearly illustrates.
The author does an amazing job at providing a glimpse at both Greek and Persian history for most of the book so that the significance and shock of the battle’s outcome is all the more impressed on the reader.
The book is quite obviously a cursory, popular-level, recounting of the events, and is by no means thorough. However, for someone like myself who admittedly does not know much about Greek history, it was just the thing to get my feet wet with.
The author does an amazing job at providing a glimpse at both Greek and Persian history for most of the book so that the significance and shock of the battle’s outcome is all the more impressed on the reader.
The book is quite obviously a cursory, popular-level, recounting of the events, and is by no means thorough. However, for someone like myself who admittedly does not know much about Greek history, it was just the thing to get my feet wet with.
August 16, 2022
A comprehensive description of the events at the Battle of Marathon. In some sense he reviews the build-up of the major players for some hundred or more preceding years, that is the Spartans, Athenians, and Persians.
His thesis is unremarkable as he simply concurs with a 2,500 year old sentiment about the importance of the battle. What I found most compelling is his discussion of Homeric values and aristeia versus defending Kleisthenes as the inventor of democracy, and that system's effect on setting conditions for the defense of Greece.
Excellent maps, bibliography, and other supplements.
His thesis is unremarkable as he simply concurs with a 2,500 year old sentiment about the importance of the battle. What I found most compelling is his discussion of Homeric values and aristeia versus defending Kleisthenes as the inventor of democracy, and that system's effect on setting conditions for the defense of Greece.
Excellent maps, bibliography, and other supplements.
August 25, 2019
Only two chapters are about the battle the rest is background. The chapters about the background are on the battle and on the consequences of it respectively. The book as a wjole is dry. Don't recommend.
June 2, 2021
Bene, ma non benissimo.
Partivo con grandi aspettative, purtroppo non del tutto soddisfatte. Il tema e l'esposizione sono ben legati e alcuni spunti interessanti.
Mi aspettavo quel qualcosa in più che lo avrebbe reso davvero al massimo livello.
Partivo con grandi aspettative, purtroppo non del tutto soddisfatte. Il tema e l'esposizione sono ben legati e alcuni spunti interessanti.
Mi aspettavo quel qualcosa in più che lo avrebbe reso davvero al massimo livello.
February 28, 2019
Very interesting analysis on the historical impact of the battle of Marathon.
March 18, 2023
The anti-spartan rhetoric is really quite amusing
November 18, 2011
Four days on a cruise ship, gone. Puzzled glances from inebriated hedonists, bearable. But, it was worth it. I'm finished, and I'm feeling more edified than I have in ages. Billows, after a slow introduction, does a good job of presenting a comprehensive and comprehensible arc of Middle and Near Eastern BCE history. I agree with his premise that Marathon was a nexus point that decided whether Western or Eastern civilization would be the driving force for the following millenium. Without the thinkers and artists that arose in fifth and fourth century Athens, the world as we know it would not and could not exist. To think that this burst of creativity, inquiry, and philosophy would simply have developed later or elsewhere - eons passed in the Americas, Africa, and Asia without similar developments (different amazing developments, to be sure, but not the ones that were the direct forefathers of the Renaissance and Enlightenment that led to our present civilization.) My only criticism with this book is Billows' attempt to correct 2000 years of Latinization of Greek names, making his reader stumble every time they encounter familiar classical names like Heredotos (Herodotus), Kleisthenes (Cleisthenes), or Aiskylos (Aeschylus). That train has left the station - leave the Attic spellings to the scholars, please.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews