Wouldn't it be better for Greeks to submit under Persian rule in 480BC?

That's the problem of reasonable alternate history, change one thing and you pretty much change everything

because greek ideals are rooted primarily in concepts like individualism (the olympics as a celebration of the individual hero), independence (city-states galore), non-greek as "barbarian" (everything they've ever written about another culture), etc.

it would develop differently but it would be nothing like the ancient greece we know today.

>Greek ideals are squashed
Why would they? Persians wasn't interesting in cultural dominance, all they wanted was taxes. I mean, look at Jews - if anything, their culture flourished under Persian rule. On the other hand, Greek ideas and culture would influence the entire Middle East 200 years earlier. Just like Roman dominance didn't bring end to the Greek culture, so wouldn't the Persian one. And again, without constant internal warfare there would more Greeks to colonize, to produce these ideas and to spread them.
>that's where the "classical" period originates
Yes, but why would Persian dominance prevent it from happening? Instead of spending wealth on navy, armies and mercenaries, instead of loosing a large part of their population to warfare, instead of getting their land pillaged and looted every 5 years, Greeks would have all the money and time to create the arts they like, and they would find a ready buyers for in in the East.
>everything would have stagnated under persian rule and western civilization wouldn't exist.
Why would it stagnate? It didn't stagnate under Romans.

>it would be nothing like the ancient greece we know today
Ah duh, but you said "stagnated" not "develop differently"

>taxes
>reasonable

Persians didn't practice slavery and outlawed it, Greekbookun.

Because it has nothing to do with having money or free time to create, that's what I think you're not understanding here. The entire reason for the Classical phase of Greek history is due to their victory over what they considered barbarism and tyranny. The Parthenon for example is essentially all their anti-Persian sentiment erected into a building.
>Why would it stagnate? It didn't stagnate under Romans.
That's heavily debatable. What Greek works of art or literature or philosophy from the Roman period are greater or at least on par with those from the Classical or Hellenistic periods?

How about those Neo-Platonic schools and scholars the Sassanid Persians allowed to flourish during their last golden age when rhetoric and other "pagan" philosophical schools were be closed by Justin and his successors?

None of this is true. The Ionian Greeks flourished under Persian rule, their commerce was actually enhanced after Cyrus the Great annexed them after defeating the Lydian Empire, ports became larger, and Darius the Great was even promoting Persians, Medes, and Greeks to intermarry and being fluent in both languages of their parents.

So you're arguing that Neo-Platonic schools of late antiquity are equal with Plato and the OG Platonism itself? Come on now.

I'm arguing that its proof that in late Antiquity/early medieval times, the "pagan" philosophies of many different sorts were being shut down, suppressed, and destroyed in the Byzantine/Eastern Roman Empire because of its incompatibility with its Christian outlook while the Persians actively encouraged them to migrate to their lands, like the Academy of Gondishapur to continue without being suppressed since many Persian rulers were interested in philosophy.

Its proof there they were able to rival their prior glory.

I think your view is too Atheno-centric, like most of the historiography.
> The entire reason for the Classical phase of Greek history is due to their victory over what they considered barbarism and tyranny.
You have to remember that most of the Greeks sided with Perisans in 480, and Greek history after 430BC was a huge dick sucking contest with Persians providing the dick to suck. So supposed Greek antagonism with Persians was Athenian meme they used for some time to keep their prestige up and "allies" in check.
> Classical phase of Greek history
I think the name is misleading. It was golden age for Athens, that's for sure, but at the expense of the other Greeks Athenians subdued. Like, can you provide non-Athenian examples of the supposed "Classical phase of Greek history"?

It's Atheno-centric because Athens, along with a few others, were the city-states that truly made a mark on Greek history in the long run, hell even in the short run. Every city had some minor claim to fame - maybe in mythology, perhaps birthing a notable philosopher or artist - but it was rare to epitomize all of that and then some.

>Like, can you provide non-Athenian examples of the supposed "Classical phase of Greek history"?
Corinth and Thebes had high cultural output in that period.

>t. simpering torie cuckold

> Corinth and Thebes had high cultural output in that period.
Like what? How it was different from the previous or the next periods? I guess it didn't help that Thebes was occupied by Athenians for 10 years in the middle of the supposed "Golden age" and had to fight for several years to regain independency. My point is, there was no "Classical Greek Golden Age" at the time, only Athenian one.

Also doesn't hurt or help his claim that the "Delian League" was an excuse for the Athenians to make their own empire and the main reason for Athens fall was due to their greed and growth was being focused solely in their own lands while everyone else was getting shitted on during this supposed "Greek" Golden Age.

>Carthage becomes the dominant force instead of Rome
>conquers more of the Middle East than of Europe, looks more like the Umayyad Caliphate with Southern Italy and Greece
>collapse of the Carthaginian empire causes the Middle East to be in shambles, dark age of the Middle East
>Western Europe is largely unaffected and continues on its daily lives
>Western European empire forms to fill the power vacuum left by the Carthaginians
>Several European empires come and go, until eventually there is one in Eastern Europe centered in Ukraine, one centered in Germany that's the largest, and a smaller one in Spain
>the German one that is the most powerful begins to decline while Middle Easterners begin exploring the world
>Middle Easterners settle the Americas, filling the whole area with brown people
>the European empire collapses
>in this alternate modern age European extremists vie for power and terrorize Middle Eastern and American cities
I realized how retarded this was half-way through but I was too deep to stop don't judge

Honestly the Greeks weren't that white and neither were the Romans, they influenced the Arabic world just about as much as they influenced the Western World, it's just that the Arabs had a huge third empire that influenced them while Western Europe broke up into several different states

And no matter what Arabs say, Arabs are vastly different than Persians. Unless you're Iranian.

Speaking of Carthage, the only reason they didn't end up getting their shit kicked in by the Persians like everyone else in the 6th and 5th centuries was because the Phoenicians in Tyre absolutely refused to accept Cambyses II orders to sail against their kin.

Latins and Italics were a lot more fair skinned then Greeks, back then or now though. And also what the fuck are you babbling with about Arabs vs Iranians and Persians.

Why were most of their statues painted to be light skinned with hair colours like red? Look at the physical description of the Roman emperors and they all seem quite white to me.

>Why would they? Persians wasn't interesting in cultural dominance, all they wanted was taxes.

Maybe you should read about the development of Greek thought?

The Greek enlightenment period was the 6th century BC on the Ionian Coast (Asia Minor).
When the Persians came it ended, completely, and moved to Greece proper (Athens mostly).

Look at the corruption and shit the fermented in the Persian controlled Greek cities.

Look at how Persia, even after the absorption of the most intellectually forward thinking population in the region, never achieved any great technological or philosophical advances.

Anybody seriously contemplating the question in the OP is either John Green or just ignorant.

Also lol @ idiots considering post-Classical Greek thought in Late Antiquity Persia. It wouldn't have existed if OP came to pass.

>Honestly the Greeks weren't that white and neither were the Romans

I see I've been baited.
There are still blonde-haired and blue-eyed Greeks even today. My entire family has light coloured eyes and half is blonde/brown hair and half is light-brown to black hair.

This 'greeks aren't even white' thing is a German invention from the 19th century meant as racial propaganda, claiming the Ancient Greeks and Romans were Germanic Aryans and the modern peoples are shitskin half breeds, but this is false and it can be proven false by linguistic, genetic, cultural, and historical analysis - as in there is continuity in all these areas.

Amusing that its usually still German, French, and Northern Europeans who continue to spew this bullshit to distinguish themselves.

>Greek enlightenment period was in the 6th century BC on the Ionian Coast (Asia Minor)
You mean the "enlightenment period" where Croesus and his predecessors in the Lydian Empire were choking the living shit out of their coffers and manpower for his power games with the Neo-Babylonian Empire and Median Empire?

Where all the tyrants were running things as local governors who were greatly despised and were suppressing the regular populace? Sure was an amazing enlightenment period which is why I guess the Ionian Greeks ran to Cyrus with open arms.

>fair skinned modern Greeks
I'm sure there are those in Greece, but most of the Greeks I saw in Thessalkoniki last summer were pretty olive skinned. Hell you can easily tell apart an Italian from a Greek or Sicilian pretty easily for that matter.

It began prior to Croesus, and Croesus' empire lasted all of like 30 years there buddy.

Persians controlled the Ionian coast for near on 200 years. Cyrus was a benevolent ruler, sure. Too bad he died right afterwards and his son was assassinated. Darius was notoriously inept as a statesman and Greeks from Miletus and elsewhere were turned to death as slaves by the Persians.

The Tyrants started the enlightenment, and until they got carte blanche from the Persians they weren't malevolent bastards hellbent on abusing the populace.

You can trace most developments of the Greek temple orders to Ephesus and Smyrna. After they lost their independence they produced nothing until Alexander freed them and it resulted in the greatest of the seven wonders of the world.

>I'm sure there are those in Greece, but most of the Greeks I saw in Thessalkoniki last summer were pretty olive skinned. Hell you can easily tell apart an Italian from a Greek or Sicilian pretty easily for that matter.

They live in constant sunlight about 50% closer to the equator than Germans or Swedes or whatever you want to compare them to. Wow, they have pigment to their skin. Must not be white.

>Darius was seriously inept as a statesman
Stopped caring about anything you said after this bullshit.

It's OK John, I don't watch your videos so there's no reason you should read my posts.

But really, you should research the rampant corruption of the satraps and tyrants and learn about the horrible system Darius fostered.

There is a reason the Persian Empire never achieved anything of worth after Cambyses' death, and D-man is it.

And man, did those Ionians love Persian rule, which is exactly why they started a revolt a generation later.

Clearly Greeks do not like to be ruled by tyrants from Asia, whether Lydian or Persian. So if you're still trying to argue that they were/would be happier and better off under that kind of rule (as you've been attempting to argue this whole thread), you're doing a very bad job.

>Croesus empire lasted all of like 30 years
Croesus was the last native Lydian ruler of a dynasty that stretched back to the 8th century, you silly user. The Lydian empire itself stretches back another dynasty or two a further 400 or so years before even that, so nah.
>son was assassinated
Speculation.
>Darius was notoriously inept
Bullshit. Darius was arguably one of the most gifted administrators and rulers in the entirety of the history of the Mediterranean world if not in the entirety of history. You conveniently are bullshiting here and entirely ignoring the corruption and ambition of men like Aristagoras, whose so fucking reviled that even Herodotus, Thucydides and every other Greek commentator blames him for everything rightfully. Anyway onto point a) one Darius continued the policies of Cyrus by not enforcing any heavy taxes, religious acknowledgements, or military force on the Ionian Greeks. Two, under Datis and Mardonius even after the Ionian Revolt was suppressed, all Ionian Tyrants were exiled and democracies were enforced with minimal Persian intervention.

>Tyrant started the enlightenment
No they didn't. They got their "carte blanche" when Aristagoras was rightfully fearful of pissing off Darius the Great a second time when he realized how much Aristagoras was embezzling funds and tributes and his failed attempt at conqueror new territory, so he started the revolt on lies and half truths. There was no abuse by the Persians on the Ionian Greeks even after the end of the Ionian Revolt and Miletus got singularly treated with its population being resettled in Phygria.

>They live in constant sunlight about 50% closer to the equator than Germans or Swedes or whatever you want to compare them to. Wow they have pigment to their skin. Must not be white.
Holy shit you are one paranoid delusional fuck. I never said Greeks are non-white. I said you are swarthier even compare to the fairly tanned Italians.

You have zero idea about anything you are talking about relating to either Ionian Greeks or the Persian Empire. Darius established a system of checks and balances with the satraps, war secretaries, and court agents to keep things in line. And I consider adding about large swathe of the entire Indus River Valley into the Persian Empire, suppressing the Egyptian revolt that left the empire to continue another two hundreds to be pretty damn good.

So far your full of shit though. Also explain to me how or why the Ionian Greeks would hate Persian vassalage when there is not a single mention of any revolts or uprisings before or after its return to the Achaemeneids after the dismantling of the Athenian Empire?

Sure there was an occasional ambitious or rebellious satrap. So too was there a Roman proconsul or provincial governor or overly fucking power hungry senator. That doesn't mean the system is necessarily flawed.

Anyway keep trying to move the goal posts, dude, its amusing.

Croesus was the one who conquered the Ionians, so he is our starting point with regards to discussing the duration of Lydian rule over Greeks. A couple of decades.

It's accepted, AFAIK, that Darius likely had Cambyses assassinated so he could assume the throne.

> Darius established a system of checks and balances with the satraps, war secretaries, and court agents to keep things in line.

This is why you think he was a good statesman? He set up those checks and balances because, as a usurper, he lacked legitimacy. He doled out satraps and military commands on the basis of 'this guy probably won't kill me'. Each system of redundancy he added was to minimize embezzlement and abuse of power, and each resulted in more bribery and more corruption.

>And I consider adding about large swathe of the entire Indus River Valley into the Persian Empire, suppressing the Egyptian revolt that left the empire to continue another two hundreds to be pretty damn good.

It is pretty generous to say it survived 200 more years. After the Greek expedition to Persia in ~401 BC the Empire was a house of cards.

This is the same Empire that lost it's entire naval force to Athens and suffered 30 years of constant defeats and raids after his death. Good on him for keeping Egypt though since that was the one territory that resisted Greek assault in the 5th century?

>So far your full of shit though. Also explain to me how or why the Ionian Greeks would hate Persian vassalage when there is not a single mention of any revolts or uprisings before or after its return to the Achaemeneids after the dismantling of the Athenian Empire?

This is well known, referring to Alexander's liberation of the coast. It's said the Ephesians refused Alexander's offer to pay for the new Artemision because they remembered the wrath of the Persians the last time the Greeks 'liberated' them.

Darius had Didyma destroyed when Miletus tried to revolt the first time and after the failed Athenian sponsored revolts they did, in fact, lose a lot of their religious freedoms.

This entire thread reads like a critical analysis of Classical (Athenian) Greece using some retarded post-colonial diversity lens.

Waaaah Athens was mean
Waaaah why didn't they stop fighting and submit to foreign conquerers
Waaaah whyd the Greeks ruin Darius' perfect governance model with their corruption
Waaaah Tyrants, as though they were all horrible people loathed by their citizens.

>Croesus was the one who conquered the Ionians
That's not what you said, you said "Croesus empire lasted all of 30 years", implying the Lydian Empire was a short lived one.
>It's accepted, AFAIK, that Darius likely had Cambyses assassinated so he could assume the throne.
No it isn't.
>That's why you think he was a good statesman?
No, that's just one of the reasons.
>He set up those checks and balances because as a usurper
>Usurper
He was not an usurper, you pedantic obstinate liar. He was directly related to Cyrus and Cambyses, his father, Hystapes, was also related to both prior rulers and was one of Cyrus the Great's most trusted governors and generals. He had blood ties to the Achaemenid family and was an Achaemenid himself, Smerdis was the usurper. The system was set up so it could prevent rebellions or governors from amassing too much power.
>He doled out satraps and military commands on the basis
Stop making things up, you exaggerating sack of shit. Datis, Mardonius, Darieos, and others like them who got military commands or governorship positions was done via a system of merit. The other conspirators who helped Darius remove Smerdis from power were of course rewarded but he was no fucking usurper, your knowledge of Persian history is awful.
>After the Greek expedition to Persia in 401 BC
Why are you ignoring the Athenian army of veteran elites who were annihilated to the last man trying to run back from a failed siege against a smaller Persian force in Egypt? Or the Spartan fleet that was ruined by Atarxerxes so badly they sued for peace to the Persians rather then the Athenians in submission?

Or the Athenians getting booted out of Asia Minor by the Persians three times in a row after the decline of the Delian League once men like Atarxerxes II and III showed they had the initiative to deal with the Greeks.

Its not "generous at all", its completely factual.

So yes my cherrypicking friend, you have zero idea of what you are talking about.

Who are you babbling to here?

Let's see: your claims are contradicted by both Greek and Persian records. There is not a single revolt and religious freedom and autonomy was restored to the Ionian Greeks in exchange for continued submission to the Persians even after the Ionian Revolt.

Miletus is the only major city destroyed and its population was NOT enslaved but simply resettled, and this is due to Aristagoras being the main conspirator and founder of the Ionian Revolt in the first place and formerly, the tyrant of Miletus. This is also only done after SEVERAL repeated attempts to get Miletus to surrender after every other Ionian city was pacified and the murder of multiple Persian envoys and messengers, which was taboo.

Get over yourself.

should've known it was gonna be a shitshow the moment that guy stated that the greeks would still be able to make their art, write their drama, preach their philosophies, and so on under persian control. as if the only requirements for those things is economic and military stability.

>Darius had Didyma destroyed when Miletus tried to revolt the first time
Olmstead calls this pure speculation and bullshit. The main reason for Miletus was devestated was the refusal to submit, the massacre of Persian and Median colonial families in the province, and the burning of Sardis which was a major factor.

Sure thing, samefag kun.
>In a.d. 489, the Nestorian Christian theological and scientific center in Edessa was ordered closed by the Byzantine emperor Zeno, and was transferred and absorbed into the School of Nisibis in Turkey,[3] also known as Nisibīn, then under Persian rule. Here, Nestorian scholars, together with Hellenistic philosophers banished from Athens by Justinian in 529, carried out important research in medicine, astronomy, and mathematics.[4]

>In a.d. 489
oh cool, some irrelevant shit from a millennium later. yeah let's compare the classical greeks and achaemenids to the eastern roman christians and sassanids.

>It's accepted, AFAIK, that Darius likely had Cambyses assassinated.
I have never run across anything in any academic, scholarly, or historical article that has claimed or asserted Darius was involved in Cambyses death. In fact the most well known theory was his own dagger stabbed him in the thigh and he died several days later in madness from the infection that set in.
>Darius
>not a good statesman
You mean the guy who carried out a shit ton of building projects, built his own canal in Egypt linking the Nile river with the Red Sea? The guy who built and founded dozens of cities all over the Persian empire, reformed a universal currency in the form of the Daric, developed roads, and reorganized the satraps and bureaucracy which was effectively so efficient that Alexander used pretty much the same system centuries later wasn't a good statesman?

That's a pretty dumb assertion of you, user.
>After the Greek expedition to Persia
Like the other user points out, later wars between the Persians and Greeks had the Persians winning more often, regaining control of the hithero formerly "independent" Ionian Cities, enforcing the King's Peace on Athens and Sparta, and so on.

He posted an example of Persians allowing and encouraging non-Christian Greeks to continue with philosophies, metaphysics, and sciences like they had before hand. And the Sassanids are generally less tolerant then the Achaemenids, you sure lack a lot of reading comprehension, dude.

he posted something so far removed from what we're talking about it's laughable. you can't just ignore 1000 years of history and jump to some point down the road when persians were nice to greeks. you can't skip alexander and hellenism, roman ascendancy, parthia, etc.

come back with some examples of classical greek culture flourishing under the achaemenids and we can actually discuss the topic at hand.

>Romans
The Byzantines are Romans and were less tolerant then the Persians.
>Parthia
Were massive Greekboos. Funny you mention that, I bet you don't even acknowledge Pontus which was a mixed dynasty of Persian and Greek kings.
>come back
Learn how to post like a normal human being first.

>Learn how to post like a normal human being first.
hilarious.
you're the guy claiming that ancient greeks would be able to flourish under the achaemenids, because exiled philosophers were able to keep their school under the sassanids a thousand years later under completely different circumstances?
i'm honestly baffled by your lunar leaps in logic. it's at the point where i'm not sure if you're just baiting me, or are some kind of iranian nationalist.

>Why are you ignoring the Athenian army of veteran elites who were annihilated to the last man trying to run back from a failed siege against a smaller Persian force in Egypt?

I didn't. I mentioned it specifically, be congratulating Darius for holding Egypt.

>Or the Athenians getting booted out of Asia Minor by the Persians three times in a row after the decline of the Delian League once men like Atarxerxes II and III showed they had the initiative to deal with the Greeks.

Xenophon. An Greek army marched half way across the Persian Empire, WON THE THRONE, and then marched back without any local assistance. They suffered no defeats and over half their number returned home.

Come on, dude. You're going to discuss Persian military victories over the Greeks? The two largest expeditions in recorded history to up until the Persian Wars were... the Persian Wars. Two of the most humiliating defeats in history to this day.

Now lets fast forward a decade and examine the exploits of Cimon, who crippled the Persian's western holdings.

Anyways, the point of this thread is 'Would the Greeks have been better off submitting'.

The answer is a resounding 'No'. 'Miletus wasn't enslaved'. Rofl

The Persians were breaking the legs of Greek sculptors so they couldn't escape and would work them to death, faggot. Persian atrocities are well documented and it IS accepted that Darius fostered rampant corruption. I'm not going to waste my time with some retard who thinks Greek thought could have flourished under Persian rule when Persia accomplished nothing in any sphere until Parthia.

>I didn't.
You specifically ignored it or are totally ignorant of its existence in the first place.
>Xenophon
I'm well aware of Xenophon, all of these Persian victories happened well after this under energized men like Atarxerxes II and Atarerxerxes III. Still interesting how you haven't put up any evidence to counter the information Richard Frye and Olmstead have given us of an unbiased view of Persian interactions with the Greeks. Or how you still aren't acknowledging that military power swung back into Persian advantage from the 4th century up until Philip II's death and the rise of Alexander.

>Miletus was enslaved
Nice meme.
>The Persians were breaking the legs of Greek sculptors
Funny, because we have tens of thousands of administrative records from Parsagarde and Persepolis accounting for paid wages, salaries, and money transfers to artisans and laborers based off their skill level and experience, and a large number of them were from Ionian Greek colonies and polises.
>Persian atrocities are well documented
You are still making things up I see.
>and it IS accepted that Darius fostered rampant corruption
No it isn't. Your just forcing a nonsensical uncorroborated made up entirely subjective opinion as fact.

You are a compulsive liar, my friend.

Post like a normal human being.

>if i repeat it enough, maybe I can distract him from how retarded i am
unfortunately for you, that's a problem you can't avoid.

Who are you quoting, shitposter kun?

just quoting the shitposts here and here

>shitposts
The only ones documented so far are Try again.

they're shitposts because they called you out on your lack of knowledge about the topic, your inability to make apt comparisons, and your pathetic attempt at a patronizing dismissal to cover up your ignorance? whatever gives you that extra self-esteem boost, user.

>Xenophon
Xenophon in his Anabsis outright admits the 10,000 were hampered by Persian guerrilla tactics, ambushes, and frequent skirmishes. Also they didn't win the "throne" in any shape or format because Cyrus the Younger was killed at Cunaxa and the envelopment of Atarxerxes I's army after the collapse of the right wing was going to lead to the Ten Thousand getting massacred until they retreated from the battle.

The other user is right, you do cherrypick whatever fits your narrative bullshit to push an agenda that is both biased and outright academically dishonest. Its a fucking pity this is such a common mindset in Veeky Forums in general because of rampant nationalistic bullshit from people like you.

What dishonest, my shitposting autistic ad naseum repeating retard? You keep trying to move the goal posts, because I posted an example of Greeks prospering under the Sassanids who chose to accept Khosrau I's proposal to migrate to Persia lands to continue their philosophical practices.

The fact that overwhelming majority of Ionian Greek cities and colonies continued to prosper economically and culturally while mainland Greeks were left behind is an absolute fact, so no amount of backpedaling falsely accusing bullshit from you is going to change that.]

Now go ahead and keep defending your ignorance, while defending yourself and the bullshiting user who thinks there's some magical consensus to push his made up theory that Darius assassinated Cambyses and was an "inept statesman" shared by zero academic or scholars then or now.

>The fact that overwhelming majority of Ionian Greek cities and colonies continued to prosper economically and culturally while mainland Greeks were left behind

>Mainland Greeks were left behind
>Mainland Greeks
>Left behind

>I'm right
>Olmstead isn't!

>prosper economically and culturally
>and culturally
Here we are full circle. And you're still wrong an entire thread later. Every time someone asks you to post examples of Greeks producing anything culturally valuable under Persian dominion, you either ignore it or move the goal posts. Which brings squarely to the next point
>You keep trying to move the goal posts
That's literally what you did when you
>posted an example of Greeks prospering under the Sassanids who chose to accept Khosrau I's proposal to migrate to Persia lands to continue their philosophical practices.
you absolute fucking mental case.

>Here we are full circle.
Your autism certainly does that.
>move goal posts
Pot to kettle mate, you might want to stop on this because you are utterly guilty of this fallacy repeatedly.
>No u
Great rebuttal.
>insert more ad hominems and personal attacks
Nah, anyway put on a trip so I can filter you please.

Good to see you still haven't posted any evidence to support your claim. At least you're consistent. Ignorant, but consistent.
>ad hominems and personal attacks
The ones that followed "Learn to post like a normal human being"? Lol, go fuck yourself.

>evidence
From the retard who made up inane theories and claims that are completely out of the blue about the Persians without providing any evidence yourself? Hilarious.
>go fuck yourself
Amazing debating decorum, my autistic shitposter.

>made up inane theories and claims that are completely out of the blue about the Persians
Where?
>insert more ad hominems and personal attacks
Palpable irony. Which was also the last point I made, guess that flew over your head.

When are you to going to geta room Athena-boo and turkroach nationalist

>> You have to pay some reasonable taxes.
get a load of this liberal

Enough of this. I'm not going to provide citations from Anabasis because I don't have a copy here. You'll have to accept Wikipedia, which is more than you've given:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cunaxa

> Only the Greek mercenaries, who had not heard of Cyrus's death and were heavily armed, stood firm. Clearchus advanced against the much larger right wing of Artaxerxes' army and sent it into retreat. Meanwhile, Artaxerxes' troops took the Greek encampment and destroyed their food supplies.
>According to the Greek soldier and writer Xenophon, the Greek heavy troops scattered their opposition twice; only one Greek was even wounded. Only after the battle did they hear that Cyrus himself had been killed, making their victory irrelevant and the expedition a failure.

Darius & Cambyses:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambyses_II

>Some modern historians suspect that Cambyses was assassinated, either by Darius as the first step to usurping the empire for himself, or by supporters of Bardiya.[12]

>[12]
> Van De Mieroop, Marc (2003). A History of the Ancient Near East: Ca. 3000–323 BCE. "Blackwell History of the Ancient World" series. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-0-631-22552-2.

I have read this theory in a book personally. I do not recall the title or author. Here is a citation for the theory in another, however. Have fun.

>Greeks didn't revolt
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionian_Revolt
>At the heart of the rebellion was the dissatisfaction of the Greek cities of Asia Minor with the tyrants appointed by Persia to rule them, along with the individual actions of two Milesian tyrants, Histiaeus and Aristagoras.

>with the tyrants appointed by Persia to rule them
>with the tyrants appointed by Persia to rule them
>with the tyrants appointed by Persia to rule them

When I said 'Tyrants started the enlightenment' I meant Greek ones, sorry.

>The fact that overwhelming majority of Ionian Greek cities and colonies continued to prosper economically and culturally while mainland Greeks were left behind

Seriously? How did they proper culturally.
>Socrates
>Plato
>Aristotle
These guys set the stage for philosophy for the next 200-1500 years, depending on how you want to look at it.

Zeno is probably next on the list and he was 100 years after Cyprus was liberated.

Jesus, the advances in Athenian theatre... Tragedies and comedies.

Zeus at Olympia
The entirety of the Athenian Acropolis
The colossal temples of Maegna Greca
The start of Classical sculpture, the Temple of Aphaea....

The rise of Macedon, of Alexander.. the downfall of Persia.

Jesus Christ, you're babbling about Neo-Platonic schools flourishing under (Hellenized) Persian rule, when Plato himself was a product of a free Athens, which was supposedly 'left behind' culturally.

You realize the Parthian and Sassanid attitude towards Hellenic philosophy could only exist because of Greco-Macedonian rule & trade, a result of the 'economically and left behind' free Greeks?

Fuuuuuck you're stupid.

I'm not a Turk, so try again with the "cockroach" /pol/ bullshit.

>Where?
Are you pretending to be stupid? Don't fucking be so intentionally obstinate, you are transparent as fuck you liar, stop playing the obfuscation bullshit because it will never wrok.

>Xenophon
>only one Greek was wounded
As palpably unreliable as his claim that Cyrus fielded an army of over 100,000 men in several battles or his "writings" about the manpower that the Median armies and Lydian armies possessed.

Hyperbolic crap.

>Van de Mieroop
His claims were rebuked by multiple sources, modern and ancient. And I have used Olmstead multiple times, you mongoloid.

>Sassanids
>Hellenized
Fuuuuuuuuck you're stupid.

I hope not even Turks are this stupid.

Over 6,000 are said to have made it back to Greece. They did win the battle, and they did fight their way home, and they made it. Persians got wrecked.

>Olmstead
Might as well just use Rostovtzeff for Roman history and call it a day right?

>Sassanids
>not influenced by Greek thought
pick 1
by your own admission they were glad to accept greek scholars and theologians faggot

>Some modern historians
>one guy
What a great and overwhelming modern historical revisionism, one singular individual whose contradicted by multiple authors, both contemporary and modern and the best you can provide is a fucking link to source without the actual passages or excerpts? And anyone is supposed to be blown away by this?

>this attempt at poisoning the well
Retard, you are painfully moronic.

>Greeks didn't revolt
Who said they didn't revolt? Who denied the Ionian Revolt in the first place, what's with the strawman arguments here?

>with the tyrants appointed by Persia to rule them
Which is why after the Ionian Revolt as both Thucylides and Herodotus reports, Mardonoius and several of the Persian commanders that were Darius the Great's son in laws via marriage of his daughters, demolished any remaining Ionian tyrant or oligrachy and replaced them with democracies.

>I hope not even Turks are this stupid.
Certainly, faggots like you are at any rate.
>win the battle
>retreat and run away
Nice meme.
>Olmstead
Unlike whatever unsourced shit you are using, he's one of the greatest authorities on ancient Iranian history, get over it and cry me a river.
>Sassanids
>influenced by Greek thought
Hellenization is the complete assimilation by Greek culture, language, and religion. Persian kings having an interest in their philosphies doesn't mean they are "influenced" by them. The Sassanids rode in on their power base because Iranians hate Greek culture which is why the Arsacids became so unpopular by the middle of their reign they abandoned patronizing Greek artists, writers, using Greek in their court, and returned to more native Iranian traditions.

>this /pol/ tier based racism
I bet you are the Greek fag from earlier probably unironically supports Golden Dawn and goes to Stormfront for your history lessons. Get the fuck out of here.

Holy shit you guys are faggits. At the end of the day Greek will still need to pay debt and Iran will still be a shit hole. You will also both be miserable cunts who think winning a debate on a mongolian rice cooking website will make your dick grow longer.

Having a discussion is cool but getting this ass - blasted is literal autism.

>Won't trust Xenophon
>Cites Herodotus

>Knowledge of history doesn't change after 63 years

>picking on my misuse of the word hellenism
>ignoring the fact that the most important innovations in western culture for a thousand years came from free Greece

>1200 miles from home
>Win battle
>Go to crown your guy king
>Hes dead
>Offer it to his friend
>no thanks
>Offer it to random satrap
>no thanks
>survive the assassination of your leadership
>no allies
>no food
>march 800 miles through hostile territory
>defeat all challengers
>get home

Yeah what a crushing defeat.
>this /pol/ tier based racism
>muh racism
pic related, shame on me for continuing for so long when you've obviously been trolling from the start.

Thats the difference between abstractpolitik and realpolitik. Sure they would have lost less people and money, but they wanted to be free, they were fighting for a purpose.

>muh 450k strong Lydian army
>muh 200k strong Persian army
You can stop any time now, piss-ant kun.

Also

>can't refute Olmstead
>can't refute Herod
>can't refute any other sources that corroborate and counter your claims
>retarded conspiracy theories that aren't recognized by academia
>but still try to present them as fact
Get the fuck out of here.

>most important innovations in western culture
That'd be Rome, Staupheonolopos, despite whatever you want to spin about Greece.

>submitting to the will of others for the sake of it
>arguing things realized in hindsight

You are an idiot, aren't you?

>implying Rome was anything other than a Latin imitation of Greek civilization

Does identity and self determination under ones own flag mean nothing anymore for today's world?

OP you are an honorary turkroach, I hope you read this after you prayed in the direction of mecca.

>Rome at its best
>Disregards Hoplite combat system and tactics
>Cicero one of Rome's most popular writers and politicians hates Greeks
>Romans commonly see Greeks as Oriental degenerates and deviants
>only use Greeks as educated slaves
Sure is a lot of "Greekboos" in Rome huh?

The 10,000 lost half their number due to Persian ambushes and skirmishes. The Anabasis does not go into specific detail at ALL but the Persians and their allies were usually implied to be using slingers, archers, darts, and javelins to inflict losses on the 10,000. Either way, by the time they got back home their around either reduced to or at literally half their original numbers.

The core factor is while Xenophon wrote the Anabasis, there is a heavy factor of self-glorification, exaggeration, and what not to glorify himself in particular, and the Greeks in general. You know even to this day, modern archaeologists and Iranianologists have been to the site in Iraq. And its extremely likely only "one Greek" was killed.

I don't know about your personal opinion but I'm pretty certain there's a lot of blemishing going on from Xenophon that probably omits the fact the Persians very likely drove the 10,000 from the field, which would logically make more sense for the Greeks to send a delegation to Atarxerxes after his brother was dead to get them out of Persian lands.

>*extremely UNLIKELY one Greek was only wounded or killed

>their own kin

who exactly?

Carthage was founded by Phoenicians, it was their most important colony. Tyre was annexed by Cyrus the Great and Cambyses, his son and successor, attempted multiple expansions of the Persian Empire in North Africa. He did well in Egypt, as well as against the Libyans, Eithopians, and Nubians. But his attempt to go deeper lost him a veteran army that had served his father and attempts to go westwards in North Africa was refused by Phoenicians in Tyre from going against their kinsmen at Carthage.

Imagine how much this might change history if Carthage never survived as an independent power and the Punic Wars never happened since the Persians would hold them as vassals.

Eh, I just used that image because it's they only one of John ">Alexander >the >Great" Green I have
>the Greeks weren't that white and neither were the Romans
You're full of bullshit though

> Imagine how much this might change history if Carthage never survived as an independent power and the Punic Wars never happened since the Persians would hold them as vassals.
With Persians controlling Balkans and North Africa Italia would fall to them automatically in some way or another. Still, I think Herodotus is making stuff up, I doubt Persians gave a shit about a place you can reach only by sailing for weeks.