pothos.org

As the link below shows, the historian Paul Cartledge has recently published a book entitled "After Thermopylae The Oath of Plataea and the End of the Graeco-Persian Wars". In the book he reaches conclusions because of a little known oath supposebly made by the Greeks before the decisive battle of Plataea.

The link to the oginal text of the oath

http://s1246.photobucket.com/user/IamSy ... t=3&page=1

The oath used by the Athenians when they were about to fight against the barbarians:

" I will fight for as long as I live and
I will not choose a longer life to being free
and I will not abandon neither the leader of the army
nor the leader of my regiment be him dead or alive,
and I will not leave without the leaders commanding me so
and I will carry any order they issue,
and I will burry the dead of those who fought alongside us
and I will leave none without a burial

And after I win the battle I will plundre the city of Thebes
and I will not destroy neither the cities of Athens, Sparta and Plataea
nor any other city-ally, or will I accept them to starve to death
nor will I stop friend or foe from drinking from the earth's water founts,
and if I follow the oath's words with no exception,
may the city be healthy, and if I don't may sickness find it.
And may the city be impenetrable, otherwise may it be captured
and may its ground bear fruit, or else let it become sterile.
And may the women give birth to children similar to their parents,
and if not may they give birth to monsters,
and may the animals give birth to animals similar to their parents,
and if not may they give birth to monsters."


After they completed the oath and covered the sacrificed animals with their shields, they cursed while the trumpets were still playing, if they would break their oaths the punishment would be theirs to bear.

I haven't read the book by Carthledge yet as to know what his conclusions are. The oath is questioned for its authenticity ever since ancient times (Theopombos, Lykourgos against Leokrates 81, Diodorus Siculus Θ, 10,6), however, many researchers believe that the oath in its core is authentic because of its intensity that equals the extremely dangerous historical times. The Plataea battle - and not Thermoplylae- is internationaly regarded as the most decisive battle for the history of the Western Civilization. Also in line 5 (original text) there is the word that was discussed many times in the forum lately: Taxiarchos!

http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199747320.do

"The Battle of Plataea in 479 BCE is one of world history's unjustly neglected events. It decisively ended the threat of a Persian conquest of Greece. It involved tens of thousands of combatants, including the largest number of Greeks ever brought together in a common cause. For the Spartans, the driving force behind the Greek victory, the battle was sweet vengeance for their defeat at Thermopylae the year before. Why has this pivotal battle been so overlooked?

In After Thermopylae, Paul Cartledge masterfully reopens one of the great puzzles of ancient Greece to discover, as much as possible, what happened on the field of battle and, just as important, what happened to its memory. Part of the answer to these questions, Cartledge argues, can be found in a little-known oath reputedly sworn by the leaders of Athens, Sparta, and several other Greek city-states prior to the battle-the Oath of Plataea. Through an analysis of this oath, Cartledge provides a wealth of insight into ancient Greek culture. He shows, for example, that when the Athenians and Spartans were not fighting the Persians they were fighting themselves, including a propaganda war for control of the memory of Greece's defeat of the Persians. This helps explain why today we readily remember the Athenian-led victories at Marathon and Salamis but not Sparta's victory at Plataea. Indeed, the Oath illuminates Greek anxieties over historical memory and over the Athens-Sparta rivalry, which would erupt fifty years after Plataea in the Peloponnesian War. In addition, because the Oath was ultimately a religious document, Cartledge also uses it to highlight the profound role of religion and myth in ancient Greek life. With compelling and eye-opening detective work, After Thermopylae provides a long-overdue history of the Battle of Plataea and a rich portrait of the Greek ethos during one of the most critical periods in ancient history."

If that oath was indeed said there is an excuse for both the Greeks and Alexander for destroying Thebes.

Thank you for remembering this great - yet now underrated - battle. I'll add another element to stress its importance: the so-called serpentine column. This unique monument, still preserved (even if partially) in Instanbul Museum, is a bronze spiral of several snakes in which there are inscribed the names of all Greek cities that fought and won at Plataea . It seems that the Greeks knew well the importance of this battle, and it gives more evidence (or so I think) to the authenticity of the oath.

hiphys wrote:... the so-called serpentine column. This unique monument, still preserved (even if partially) in Instanbul Museum, is a bronze spiral of several snakes in which there are inscribed the names of all Greek cities that fought and won at Plataea .

Actually, the column still stands in the open air, in what was the area of the hippodrome (alongside the Blue Mosque). One of the two serpents' heads that crowned the column is in the Archaeological Museum, though.

Thank you for making clear the exact location of the column, and for the beautiful photo. However , according to Herodotus ( 9, 81), the snake had 'three heads'( trikàrenos òphis). This is one of the few ancient monuments still existing that are quoted by a near-contemporary author: over the snake heads were also a golden tripod and the whole extraordinary column was dedicated to Apollo in Delphi.

Just what is the original? I don't recall it in the narratyive histories, is it an inscription?

hiphys wrote:Thank you for making clear the exact location of the column, and for the beautiful photo. However , according to Herodotus ( 9, 81), the snake had 'three heads'( trikàrenos òphis). This is one of the few ancient monuments still existing that are quoted by a near-contemporary author: over the snake heads were also a golden tripod and the whole extraordinary column was dedicated to Apollo in Delphi.

Perhaps there were three - it's been a while since I read Herodotus.

As far as I recall, only one of the heads is extant ... so what happened to the others I don't know!

Oh, here it is ...

Thank you all for the information and the really rare photo of the head of the snake. To the Agesilaos: The great victory was celebrated with a monument erected in Delfi that beared the names of all the cities who stood against the Persians.Its the one in the photo of Marcus.Thank God at least the snake is protected from the weather etc,since the column is completely exposed. What a poor way to treat such a monument !

But where does the oath originate? I am familiar with the serpentine pillar...I am not that out of touch

Hadn't seen the head of a snake either though, doh!

I googled Plataean oath and came up with

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeIlmKjJoi0 Paul Cartledge's sales pitch

JSTOR: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/7 ... 2940609623

which says

the Oath of Plataea found on a stele at Acharnai and published in 1938 was indeed sworn by the Greeks before the battle in 479, despite Theopompus' ancient fulmination on the subject with which modern scholars (1972) have generally concurred.

Thank you very much Alexias.Just a little correction in the text you sent: The place the stele was found on is unknown, its just kept in the museum of Acarnai.This is the foto of the stele that contains the two oaths , the oath of the Athenian epheboi, and the oath of the Plataia.

http://s1246.photobucket.com/user/IamSy ... t=3&page=1
Date of the stele: late 4th BC

Interesting, but as Cawkwell's review shows there are areas of doubt about what is definitely a 4th Century stele, (possibly a copy of a fifth century original). this is very like the alleged 'Themistokles' Decree' in that it is later than the date of any original and includes suspicious material; that said copies of lost stele were erected, there are examples from the Athenian agora of stelai destroyed under the Oligarchy and re-erected by the democracy. Looks like another book on the list, Cartledge's claim that Plataea has been neglected seems exaggerated, however, I cannot think of a history of Greece that omits it, perhaps he means that Hollywood has ignored it, well...

agesilaos wrote: Cartledge's claim that Plataea has been neglected seems exaggerated, however, I cannot think of a history of Greece that omits it, perhaps he means that Hollywood has ignored it, well...

I've not read the book but perhaps Cartledge takes issue with the fact that the general view is that Salamis was the decisive battle of the war. I tend to agree with this view. The fleet was more than simply another arm of the armed forces: much of its duties revolved around supply. Once it was dealt with and taken out of the equation, the army was left to fend for itself. Strategically speaking Mardonius, in the end, did not have to force the issue at Plataea. The Persians had all of Greece north of Attica. Had he simply waited the Greeks out and avoided battle the alliance will have eventually collapsed into bickering as the alliance crumbled. Problem was, he could not and hence he forced the encounter. Supply is all and, sans fleet, he could not keep that army in the field indefinitely. Thucydides, who could know what Hermocrates said in Syracuse on the eve of the Athenian armada's arrival, put his own opinion into the Syracusan's mouth (6.33.4-6):

Few indeed have been the large armaments, either Hellenic or barbarian, that have gone far from home and been successful. They cannot be more numerous than the people of the country and their neighbours, all of whom fear leagues together; and if they miscarry for want of supplies in a foreign land, to those against whom their plans were laid none the less they leave renown, although they may themselves have been the main cause of their own discomfort. Thus these very Athenians rose by the defeat of the Mede, in a great measure due to accidental causes, from the mere fact that Athens had been the object of his attack; and this may very well be the case with us also.

The Athenians will face greater numbers and if they falter it will be though lack of supplies and their own errors in a foreign land far from their home. By these self same facts did the 'Mede' come a cropper against Athens. That is: errors, lack of supply and numbers no greater than their enemy. Thucydides is sole lone voice in all ancient Greek historiography to so opine.

http://rogueclassicism.com/2013/11/21/l ... f-plataea/

Here is a link of a second (?) lecture by Paul Cartledge