"Why did Greece go to war with Persia during this time period" (1 Viewer)

[obimoshman1234]

just wondering how other people would go about answering that uestion. So if u dont mind just leaving like an outline of ur answer so i can compare to what i wrote would be cool ty.

 

[Rhanoct]

ummm.. isn't it more why did persia go to war with greece? 1) policy of eastern expansion 2) revenge for the burning of sardis

greece could either go to war with persia or be absorbed into the empire..

hope i'm not missing something obvious >:|

 

[2inspr]

Well obvious points-
- Defend homeland
-Increase political power in region by showing strength
-perhaps for glory
-Hatred of persians
-revenge for previous battles

etc ect.....

 

[-may-cat-]

ummm.. isn't it more why did persia go to war with greece? 1) policy of eastern expansion 2) revenge for the burning of sardis

greece could either go to war with persia or be absorbed into the empire..

hope i'm not missing something obvious >:|

yes this is true, but i think the question is asking why greece did not allow itself to become a subject state to persia, why it said no and faught back- ie the differences between greece and other states that peacefully became part of the persian empire.

I would start all the way back at persian imperialism under Cyrus:
- greeks who considered themselves semi-independent automatically became subject allies after fall of Lydia

- Setting up of tyrannies (which the greeks hated)

- Cambyses forcing greeks to make ships for naval warfare against Egypt whom they were friendly with

-Similarly Darius forcing Greeks to attack Scythia (i think its scythia?) whom they were friendly with BUT, were pushed back at Danube river SHOWING PERSIA IS NOT UNSTOPABLE

-Ionian Revolt, would look at both Herodotus' veiw and Fine's opposing veiw
- Naxos and Aristagoras
- Reasons for Athens involvement, reasons for eretrias involvement (blood debt)
- why sparta did not go
- Sardis
- Lade/Miletos- collapse of revolt

- Expedition of Mardonius/Expedition of Datis and Artaphernes/Marathon:
- Athens forced to defend itself
- After the win at Marathon Greece believed they really could beat Persia.

 

[obimoshman1234]

ok what i wrote is what i got in my trials ok not persia with greece rather greece with persia. i will wait for couple more replies then outline what i did cause apparently i answered it correctly according to my teacher who marked this section. But so far 2inspr and may-cat on right track but u must remember its the whole time period and that the Persian wars continued until 448 bc when treaty was signed but thats all i will say.

 

[-may-cat-]

ok what i wrote is what i got in my trials ok not persia with greece rather greece with persia. i will wait for couple more replies then outline what i did cause apparently i answered it correctly according to my teacher who marked this section. But so far 2inspr and may-cat on right track but u must remember its the whole time period and that the Persian wars continued until 448 bc when treaty was signed but thats all i will say.

I did the same exam as you but did not choose this question. The way i interpreted it was the reasoning why the greeks got involved in warfare with the persians.

When discussing how i would tackle this question with my teacher, he told me not to get sucked into the trap of describing why the greeks went to the individual battles themselves, instead to look at the underlying reasons for the whole war and focus on how different historians have portrayed these reasons, not going anywhere past Marathon in terms of description of individual battles.

Did you go further then Marathon? In Ancient it is highly possible that two essays could argue in completly different ways and both receive full marks

 

[24hrs]

Syllabus says:

1 Persian Wars

- origins: Persian imperialism, Ionian Revolt

=================
Surely this would be it?

 

[obimoshman1234]

I did the same exam as you but did not choose this question. The way i interpreted it was the reasoning why the greeks got involved in warfare with the persians.

When discussing how i would tackle this question with my teacher, he told me not to get sucked into the trap of describing why the greeks went to the individual battles themselves, instead to look at the underlying reasons for the whole war and focus on how different historians have portrayed these reasons, not going anywhere past Marathon in terms of description of individual battles.

Did you go further then Marathon? In Ancient it is highly possible that two essays could argue in completly different ways and both receive full marks

Yea i went further than marathon pretty much i went till 448 bc when treaty was signed. Mainly saying how ionian revolt was techically act of war by greece which is is if u think about it. Then continued to say that war with persia inevitable and the battles which occured on greek soil are proof of this and that the greeks went to war for defencsive reasons. Then continued on saying how Greece CONTINUED or in otherwords went to war again through Delian league and the actions they took up and the reasons for this. I didnt get ful marks mainly cause i didnt argue strongly enough on the inevitability of the war i.e. mentioning themistocles preparations creating athenian fleet that sorta stuff. I mean i didnt actually describe one battle at all but rather mention them and the outcomes really i didnt think it would need describtion of battle.

But i guess ur right may-cat both answers probably right what school u go to anyway????????

 

[-may-cat-]

Yea i went further than marathon pretty much i went till 448 bc when treaty was signed. Mainly saying how ionian revolt was techically act of war by greece which is is if u think about it. Then continued to say that war with persia inevitable and the battles which occured on greek soil are proof of this and that the greeks went to war for defencsive reasons. Then continued on saying how Greece CONTINUED or in otherwords went to war again through Delian league and the actions they took up and the reasons for this. I didnt get ful marks mainly cause i didnt argue strongly enough on the inevitability of the war i.e. mentioning themistocles preparations creating athenian fleet that sorta stuff. I mean i didnt actually describe one battle at all but rather mention them and the outcomes really i didnt think it would need describtion of battle.

But i guess ur right may-cat both answers probably right what school u go to anyway????????

I go to mosman high. I can see your argument, i think both answers would probably be acceptable, as long as you were strong in your justifications

 

[obimoshman1234]

yea that why i didnt get full marks cause i didnt put enough evidence for the inevitability of the war but cool now i haev another way to approach this uestion and other people can see how it should be answered lol

 

[-may-cat-]

yea that why i didnt get full marks cause i didnt put enough evidence for the inevitability of the war but cool now i haev another way to approach this uestion and other people can see how it should be answered lol

yea, i love ancient history like that, how different conclusions can be made depending on how you choose to view the sources.

 

[myonlyhope90]

LOL

I had this question...

I did really bad... I only got 15/25 for it...

The only thing I could think of in the exam was 'Freedom'...

I talked extensively about the Ionian revolt... I seriously lacked sources...

 

[360 x]

hey in relation to the question, cant help you out but i got a gold mine of quotes and sources if you need them for that area ; )
got anything on pompeii and herculaneum ?

 

[Darus]

The reasons were pritty damn simple, basically the whole system of government and pride that the majority of the major greek states held was against the tyrants and submitting to the will of the enemies (primarily Athens, and Sparta, who organised the unified greek state alliance thing, whatever that was called.). But with the most tow powerful nations in greece at this time against submission, and with the fabled Spartan warrior strength then the greeks rallyed behind them.

But basically, Persia made war cause of ionian revolt and the original plan to take over greece by Cyrus (also their whole lust for world domination).

Greeks went to war as opposed to surrendering because of:-
- Rejection of persian tyranny and rule.
- Long standing .... lets call it unease, between the two nations
- The prime greek states willing to band together.
- The spartan reputation of being unbeatable in battle
- Inside information given by miltieades (i know its spelt wrong, so sue me)

im missing a few things, but i cant really be bothered right now.

Oh yes and the final reason for all wars that have happened since the dawn of time, old men with too much pride and ego willing to make long winded speeches to send off young men to die so that they can live in even more comfort and be called patriots.

 

[Book Freak]

There are various reasons:
- Defence.
- Free states under Persian control. etc.

But there is also the fact that they had no choice in the matter. Remember the Persians invaded, it was either fight or lie down and let them burn the country to cinders and kill them all. Personally, I think I'd fight