Thermopylae: The Battle for the West

by Ernle Bradford

An impressively accessible narrative depicting the three-day battle for the pass at Thermopylae (the Hot Gates)--a critical contest in Xerxes's massive invasion of Greece. The bloody stand made there by Leonidas and his small Spartan army in 480 B.C. has been hailed ever since as an outstanding example of patriotism, courage, and sacrifice.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Ancient History, Military History, Greece, Military Fiction, War

256 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1980

About the author

Ernle Dusgate Selby Bradford was a noted British historian specializing in the Mediterranean world and naval topics. Bradford was an enthusiastic sailor himself and spent almost thirty years sailing the Mediterranean, where many of his books are set. He served in the Royal Navy during World War II, finishing as the first Lieutenant of a destroyer. He did occasional broadcast work for the BBC, was a magazine editor, and wrote many books.

Reviews

[Debbie Zapata · Rating 5 out of 5]

Oct 11 ~~ Review asap.

Oct 13 ~~ 2024 has mostly been a year of mental vacation when it comes to my reading, but my little pea brain is coming out of its need for pure story so I decided I would test deeper waters with this book. I thought Bradford might be hard to read, but he was definitely not. He has an approach that makes the time period come to vivid life. I was impressed and grateful to have such a guide.

Thermopylae. Salamis. Plataea.

Three key battles from ancient times. Bradford recreates them for the reader with the aid of historians Herodotus, Plutarch, and Aeschylus. I appreciated his many quotes of these men, especially Herodotus. I have had his Histories in my bookcase for a couple of years now but was too intimidated by the idea of it to start reading.

But now, with Bradford's blending of ancient sources and his own insights, I am so fired up that I have already created a project that will begin in 2025. I call it Way Way Back and I have rounded up all the unread titles in my bookcase that deal with the ancient world. I should be busy with that list for a few years, and I will most likely reread Thermopylae at some point along the way, or at the very least use it as a reference when I get to familiar sounding quotes by Herodotus.

Naturally it is almost impossible to read this book without comparing the past with the present. The author does it himself more than once. This book was originally published in 1980, and a person might be forgiven for thinking that the world has changed since 480 B.C. when these battles took place. The world actually did change but Man has not.

There are still people who want to control as much of the planet as they can. There are still greedy politicians who only care about lining their own pockets no matter what. There are still people who ignore basic concepts like dignity, respect, and honor.

Maybe this is the way the world is supposed to be, but I very greatly doubt it.

Anyway, getting back to the book, if you have ever thought that ancient history would be a dull topic, give Bradford a try. You might be inspired to create your own Way Way Back list.

[Myke Cole · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fun and well-written, but horribly dated book on the entire Second Persian Invasion of Greece, and *not* just on Thermopylae. Those looking for in-depth analysis of that specific battle are bound to be disappointed.

This book was written toward the end of the author's life, and his age is showing, with a lot of nostalgia and cultural-conservatism (the Greeks have a "superior" culture to the Persians) on display, as well as an old man's fondness for the smell of his own farts. Bradford waxes eloquent on all kinds of obtuse (and irrelevant) nautical terms - at pains to show you that he has spent his life at sea (so have I, partially, and even I don't need to punish the reader with "abaft" and "amidships" every other word). Unless the book is titled "Naval History of the Greeks," it's safe to assume your reader doesn't are about the details of the oarlocks, especially when your title and jacket copy advertises a *land* battle.

The book covers everything in the Second Invasion, including Artemisium, the sack of Athens and Salamis, and Bradford has a great command of the sources and writes with grace and eloquence. His narrative is gripping, and super exciting even with the pauses to roll your eyes at his ethnocentrism and nautical grandstanding.

This book is worth your time, provided that you approach it as obsolete, which is clearly is.

[Richard Tullberg · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read this book right after I finished Peter Green's The Greco Persian Wars and I must say that I had several déjà vu experiences. The book starts at Cyrus and ends at Platea and the amount of Thermopylae content is not so much emphasized on as I thought due to the title. You can say that they do the same thing, they start with backstory and they end with the defeat at Plataea give or take. It is written a little more approachable than Peter Green's book but they do the same, they argue about Herodotus, different views among historians etc. So as of now I am pretty sure that the book I will read soon, The Battle of Salamis by Barry Strauss, might not be that much different even though the title makes me believe so, only time will tell.

The problem that I understand now as well is that the ancient sources and the added scientific data such as dating and archaeology are quite limited. If an author wants to be accurate they have only so much to write about and distinguish themselves from other authors on the same topic.

Good book overall, i read it quite fast, entertaining, hit all the marks. Only problem I have with it is that the Title suggest that it is centered around Thermopylae and not the Greco Persian War in general.

[Doug · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a very well written book on the events leading up to Thermopylae, and also the events immediately following it (mainly Salamis and Plataea). And of course, it spends a good deal of time on the famous last stand of the 300 Spartans itself.

For a history book, this was highly engaging and accessible. I recommend for the best reading experience to refer back to the maps at the beginning of the book often - it gives one a much better idea of the overall scale of the conflict and the various stages of the period of the Greco-Persian wars where Xerxes embarked on his famous and doomed expedition to conquer the Greek mainland.

On thing I found very refreshing in this book is the favorable and equal light that Bradford paints both the Spartans and the Athenians in. He points out weaknesses on both sides (perhaps focusing a little more on the Athenians than the Spartans). I find very often today that both regular readers and history academics have a knee-jerk reaction of negativity and even disdain towards the Spartans. Sure, they weren't perfect, but Athens often gets painted in a very positive light in modern times while Sparta gets a more neutral or negative portrayal. Modern readers and enthusiasts are quick to laugh off the Spartans as hilariously hypocritical boy-lovers and fascists (the homosexual aspect of Spartan military training so often referenced in modern times has actually never been 100% proven, and Xenophon, one of the best sources on Spartan culture, actually explicitly denies it!)

Of course the Spartans weren't perfect. Of course they weren't gigantic superhuman warriors (their greatest advantage in their times was the fact that they were basically the only ones who actually trained their entire lives for combat as professional soldiers). Of course this gave them far more discipline and a distinct edge over the other Greek city states such as Athens, Corinth, Thebes, and Argos.

Another fact that Bradford focuses on that I hear little about today is the fact that the Spartans almost completely eschewed riches such as gold and silver. He points out numerous times that this gave them a distinct advantage over the other Greek states, who always seemed to have some of their members fall prey to the promise of wealth and riches that the Persian messengers brought with them. Indeed, Bradford points out that before the battle of Plataea, a number of mega-rich Athenian nobles were exposed as traitors to the Greek cause, and they had been secretly conspiring to betray their comrades to the Persians, in the hopes of obtaining even more wealth and holding onto their vast plots of land.

There were no Spartans among the traitors. Only Athenians.

Bradford also points out that after the battle of Plataea, the division of riches and wealth was even-handed and calm. He points out that had the commander been a non-Spartan (the battle commander was Pausanias, a Spartan) it probably would have looked a lot different.

This isn't to bash the Athenians. Their incredible navy easily saved the day for the Greeks on multiple occasions. Also, Themosticles, the famed Athenian general and politician, was without a doubt one of the most important figures in the entire war.

Also, boy did the Spartans almost screw their Athenian allies over several times by arriving late or barely in the nick of time because they were celebrating their latest religious festival.

Overall this was a great read and one of the best military history books I've ever read.

[J.D. · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoy Ernle Bradford's histories. His style is crisp, direct, and compulsively readable, and this retelling of the Persian/Greek war that goes on beyond Thermopylae all the way to the final Persian defeat at Platea is a great example. The way he leans on the conflict as "Europe vs. The East" may seem a bit problematic in the era of travel bans, but Bradford gives a good bit of respect to the Persian Empire and its multicultural, multiracial composition. Recommended.

[JoséMaría BlancoWhite · Rating 4 out of 5]

"It was the natural human tendency to elevate the battle at the hot Gates to an almost superhuman dimension and, having done so, to let the purpose of it be forgotten."

"Even the self-perpetuating bureaucracy of our modern Western, self-styled 'democratic', world would have seemed to the Spartans who died at Thermopylae an unacceptable thing."

There lies the moral of the whole story. It is not just a military history, it is a story of peoples choosing sides. Pushed to the brink were you have to choose what is really worth dying -and living- for. Here are the options that people (yesterday and today) consider before committing themselves to a country/party/policy/, etc. What would we fight for today? How much would you be willing to give up in the face of threats? Today we don't consider the real issues because wee don't see our lives threatened.

This book shows us what the people considered worth fighting for. Today things haven't changed, and that's what makes this book so relevant (besides well-written): we have today so much "noise" coming from the media and our elite classes (academia/bureaucratic establishment) that prevents us from listening to our own hearts when it comes to making sound and fundamental decisions.

Put yourself in the sandals of a Spartan or an Athenian in 5th century BC. and where would you stand? What would you live/die for?

The book covers Thermopylae, Salamis and Plataea.

['Aussie Rick' · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book offers the reader an enjoyable and interesting narrative of that most famous battle at Thermopylae. The author makes it clear that its not going to be a in-depth account but more of an overview of the battle and the Persian campaign against the Greek City States. If you are looking for a more detailed and scholarly book I would suggest Peter Green's book titled 'The Greco-Persian Wars'.

Overall, bearing in mind that this book was published in 1980, this is a decent book covering Thermopylae and how the Spartan's fought and why. It made me want to go and hire the old classic video of the 300! Well worth the time to sit down and read.

[Historygirl · Rating 3 out of 5]

Excellent description of the battle of Thermopylae and the other military actions that resulted in the Persians giving up their goal of conquering all the cities of Ancient Greece. Some of his underlying themes are outdated. He avoids the characterization of the Great King Xerxes and his Empire as a corrupt, oriental state, an opinion that shows up in the earliest historiography written by Greek and Roman authors. However, he believes that the foundation of Western Civilization can be attributed to the survival of Athens. Currently, the achievements of Athens are viewed more critically and in a broader context of global intellectual developments. Highly recommended for those interested in ancient history who want to have a “you are there” experience of military actions at this key campaign.

[Tim Weakley · Rating 3 out of 5]

No surprises. A good general retelling of the war from Thermopylae up to the end at Plataea. It's a little dry in points but you can certainly tell the author has experience in the modern waters arounds the events. good read.

[Ryan Cross · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fun read, but definitely outdated and the author loves comparing Greece to the UK in World War II. Helped me get a general understanding of the history, but I’m not going to take many of his historical takes too seriously.

[Rafeeq O. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ernle Bradford's 1980 The Battle for the West: Thermopylae, which in later printings has Thermopylae as the first word of the title instead, covers not solely the famous last stand of Leonidas and his 300 Spartans against the overwhelming might of Persia in 480 BCE, but also the political, geographical, and even religious context leading up to the invasion of Xerxes, along with the machinations and the land and sea battles afterward, which due both to skill and to weather as well, saved Greece and, indeed, the rest of Europe.

According to Bradford, most of those "great many distinguished scholars [who] have devoted intensive research into all and every aspect of the Greco-Persian wars" actually "seem to have been writing for other scholars, or only for those fortunate enough to have enjoyed a classical education." Yet even close to 50 years ago now he observes that "the memory of the classical world is fading" and that "we have forgotten the roots of our culture." This author, however, in addition to the ancient Herodotus and Plutarch and Aeschylus he quotes so casually, also brings in the hands-on perspective of one whose "first acquaintance with Greece, the Aegean, and the Near East was over a period of three and a half years during the Second World War" and who afterward "was able to return at leisure several times at the helm of small boats, and come to know intimately these seas and lands once fought over by the warring armies and fleets of the Greeks and the Persians" (1980 McGraw Hill hardcover, page 13).

"It may not help to have sailed around Salamis, to have circumnavigated Euboea, or to have felt the lash of an Aegean storm," shrugs Bradford, "but it did serve to shed a new light upon the classics, and to make the struggle between Greece and Persia comprehensible in geographical and nautical terms" (page 13). Yes, I'm sure it did, and this personal understanding shows through the whole text to make events that easily could seem abstract and remote feel near and vibrant instead.

The author's very style, too, makes the book come alive. Bradford is a storyteller, one who tries to make us not only understand but, when appropriate, feel. He is the type of fellow, for example, who starts his first chapter with "The whole of the East was on the move. So indeed it must have seemed to some peasant, looking up bewildered from his patch of land, as the army surged past like a river in spate" (page 21). And of course even in the Preface, when Bradford reports sadly that although "[t]he last stand of King Leonidas and the Spartans was told as a golden story in [his] youth," in more recent years "it would seem to have been downgraded, perhaps because their military outlook and stubborn courage have made them unattractive in a hedonistic society," the old man--for so he seems, perhaps bearded, stubborn himself, maybe gesturing with a pipe beside some stone hearth--then retorts,

"Without courage, man is nothing. Without the Battle of Thermopylae, that pass held against all odds, there would never would have followed [the Greek victories of] Artemisium, Salamis[,] and Platea. Distasteful though it may have been to later historians, preoccupied with Athens, it was very largely the generalship of the Spartan Pausanias that made the victory of Plataea possible." (page 14)

Ah, now, that is writing.

Bradford is no mere Spartan-loving tough-guy, though. While explaining that state's social and political structure, and also giving praise where praise is due, he nevertheless refers to it many times throughout as "strange," for it was, not only to us but also to its contemporaries. He covers Athenian politics as well, and the jockeying of the various city-states of disunited Greece, along with the history of the Persian Empire and its current ambition, after the defeat of King Darius at Marathon in 490 BCE, to move again into Europe and conquer.

Regarding the Persians, by the way, Bradford notes that while the 38-year-old Xerxes "was...drawn by Greek historians and dramatists" as a rather stereotypical "traditional Oriental tyrant, it is noticeable that Herodotus himself concedes a number of virtues to this arch-enemy of his people. Xerxes, as he depicts him, is capable of compassion as well as regal munificence" (page 21). Moreover, in contrast to "the amoral Gods of the Homeric world," what Xerxes believed in was much more familiar to those of us in the modern West, "the inspired message that Zoroaster, the prophet, had left behind many centuries before," a religion not of childlike supernatural squabblers but of a monotheistic God of goodness (page 22).

Still, it "was in no sense a religious war" on either side, Bradford reminds us, for "what the Greeks resented above all--though almost every city-state was at variance with the other--was the assumption that any man could call himself the God-appointed ruler of all other men. What, on the surface, almost united Greece in the struggle...was the simple survival instinct" (pages 22-23).

And although it naturally is common to think of the Persian campaign as a battle for Greece, since that is where it was stopped and that is where the histories were written, the aim in fact was far, far greater. This attack that was "four years in preparation" (page 25) was

"no reprisal raid on Athens and Sparta for their refusal to offer the tokens of submission (or for Sparta's treatment of the Persian ambassadors); no simple vengeance on the mainland Greeks who had assisted the Ionians in their revolt; nor was it merely to the desire to lay low these proud, warlike people and add them and their rocky land to [Xerxes's] empire." (page 155)

No, the "aim, with the aid of the Carthaginians, was the conquest of all the Mediterranean lands" (page 155). All of 'em. This is why the word West is in the book's title rather than simply Greece. As Bradford notes, "Had [the plan] succeeded, the Zoroastrian creed might have been imposed upon the pagan Greeks. There would have been no fifth-century Athens, and all European history would have been very different" (page 40).

Yet it was not to be. Instead, Bradford's wide-ranging text takes us to what was to be a fateful chokepoint, where Dieneces of Sparta threw back the Persian warning that their arrows would darken the sun with the laugh that the defenders then could fight in the shade (page 142), through the butchery and the glory of that last stand, and beyond, to the ensuing politicking and the strategizing and the soldiering and the chance occurrences that helped preserve the "anarchic individualism" of those ancient city-states whose "brilliance...still funds the whole of what is left of Western civilisation" (page 245).

In short, Ernle Bradford's The Battle for the West: Thermopylae, written evenhandedly, evocatively, and with wit, is a delightful 5-star read that, to borrow the author's description of the bronze pillar "dedicated to Apollo at Delphi" shortly thereafter the victory, remains "a memorial to those ancient Greeks who, so many centuries ago, ensured that the patterns of freedom and individual liberty should survive in the West" (page 245).

[Randhir · Rating 4 out of 5]

The stand of Leonidas, King of Sparta and his 300 men at the pass of Thermopylae in 480 BC, against the might of the greatest empire of ancient world is the stuff of legends and inspired the people of Greece to stand up to Xerxes, King of Kings as he progressed his invasion of Greece. The value of this book lies in the fact that the Author with his naval background, covers the entire Campaign exhaustively and fairly. As is obvious, Persia was no pushover. They had conquered an empire which touched the boundary of India and included Egypt and Asia Minor. His army consisted of warriors from Ethiopia to Scythians and included his bodyguards, the Immortals. The engineering skills of his army were awesome, which included the building of a bridge over the Hellespont and construction of a canal for his ships across the Isthmus of Athos. Xerxes himself was not incompetent and the logistic planning for his invasion elicits admiration even now. He methodically obtained the subservience of Macedon and Thessaly and was well into Greece before he encountered the indomitable city state of Athens and the warriors of Sparta. Athens under Themistocles, well knowing the consequences allowed his city to be occupied and destroyed; but the Athenian Navy assisted by contingents from other states, stood up to Persia and inflicted a defeat against an overwhelming force at the Battle of Artemisium. The weather was not kind and further decimated the Persian Navy. But it still remained a powerful force and continued to coordinate its movement with the Army. And then Xerxes faced Leonidas and his allies at Thermopylae. The Battle itself is covered very lucidly in a few pages, but the casualties make Xerxes pause before he continues his inexorable advance, devastates Athens and positions himself to view the destruction of the Greek fleet in the Bay of Salamis. It was not to be. The Greeks fight a masterful battle, lure the Persian fleet and destroy it. Xerxes returns to Persia and leaves a large part of his Army to Mardonius to subdue Greece. It was not to be. Athens refuses to surrender though its capital is sacked a second time. Sparta after prevaricating finally mobilises. A severe battle is fought at Platae, Mardonius is killed and the Persians withdraw. The book is very valuable as it shows various facets of the ancient world including a coordinated attack on Sicily. Very good history and very good reading

[Terence Kong · Rating 5 out of 5]

The battle of Thermopylae stood out as the world's first and perhaps most famous last stand in the history of mankind. I first heard about it many years ago and was further intrigued after seeing the film and documentaries that are associated with the events that happened at the pass of Thermopylae in the autumn of 480BC.

This is my first book on the battle of Thermopylae and I have to say, the author display strong authorship from the beginning till the end. Before I grabbed the book, I was initially expecting the author to talk about the events that occurred during the battle. I never thought the author would go through such great lengths to travel back in time, prior to 480BC to describe the sequence of events that led to the famous last stands. Not only that, the author goes one step further to elaborate the effects the battle had on the Persian's tactical conquest against the Greek city-states. The author signed off with a brief but not too detailed description of the Battle of Plataea, the final land battle between the Persians and Greeks. The actions of both sides before and after as well as the reason each leader made important decisions are explained clearly.

I'm not a qualified historian but if there's one thing I truly admired about this book, that would be the accuracy of the content based on historical sources such as Herodotus and Thucydides themselves. That being said, the book comes across with a ring of authenticity, and is well sourced, or as well sourced as can be expected from that era. To say that the author is a good storyteller is an understatement for he has a way of making myths and legends interesting in the eyes of his fellow readers.

Speaking of historians, I am uncertain of what the history professors will make of this content but from the perspective of an average reader such as myself, I am deeply impressed with the way the author demonstrated his authorship. Never slow or boring and more importantly, it was written so well that readers could easily picture the situations that unfold before, during and after the battle of Thermopylae. Would I read it for a second time? Absolutely, if I have the time that is. For those who like to know more about the second Persian invasion of Greece, this book is it!

[Joshua · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ernle Bradford has written a fantastic history of the battle of Thermopylae...and the battle of Salamis and Platea. I wish I had known that going into the book. Bradford's approach in writing this text is fascinating largely because he's dealing with a topic that even he seems to recognize is mythologized by the culture he's writing for. And so often in the text one gets the sense that Bradford is trying to clean up while narrating and dispensing the necessary information.

What's fascinating is how Bradford balances the text by observing Xerxes, not a maniacal despot, but instead as an intelligent emperor attempting to expand his kingdom while balancing the necessities of civil government. Bradford's account is as much about exploring the honesty of humanity which can at times paint even the Greeks themselves in a poor light, and in fact it can often reveal the Greeks as being xenophobic zealots, but that's for its own exploration. Reading this book was a chance for more nuance in a battle that I had often been taught about but rarely in such detail.

I wasn't prepared for the subsequent information about the Battle of Salamis and Platea and so when I observed another 100 pages to read I was a bit struck. Bradford's book is not just an analysis of one battle;e, it's of the larger war and so some issue must be taken up concerning the title of his book, but then again I'm willing to argue that the subtitle provides him an out in that capacity.

Thermopylae is a wonderful, that has probably been aged by new research, but that in fact only makes me happier because it means there's more books to read. Whatever the case this was a great starting point into the myth, the legend, and the actual facts of the battle of Thermopylae, and the war between Persia and Ancient Greece and so it was well worth the read.

[Jeff Clay · Rating 4 out of 5]

First, let's talk about what this book is not. Strictly speaking, it is not a book about Thermopylae. Yes, the famous battle is at the literal center of the book, but it occupies 4 short chapters, less than 25 pages. It is also not a scholarly work with no footnotes and a slim bibliography. But nor does it pretend to be, the author being an adventurer and writer rather than a classically trained university don. The book is also not "obsolete" as another reviewer stated, implying an abundance of cultural basis and old-man-waxing-nostalgic noodlings. Yes, Bradford’s writing smells of the mid-20th century with nary a BCE to be found but then most would not condemn Dashiell Hammett for writing in his vernacular. Finally, this book should not be the go-to narrative for someone wanting to deep-dive into the Greco-Persian Wars. Instead, turn to Peter Green or A.R. Burn.

What this book is — and why it rates a 4 (because I cannot give a 3.5) from me — is a well-told, engaging, even exciting narrative of the battles fought in 480 BCE. Bradford lays the groundwork with three short chapters entitled The Persians, The Athenians, and The Spartans. The radically different cultures of the three protagonists are well-sketched (if even his claim that the Spartans did not know homosexuality is dubious in the least) and then off we go to Thermopylae, Artemisium, Salamis and Plataea. I also appreciated the chapter on the Sicilian battle of Himera, which put the war itself in a larger context. The maneuvering and sparring — both political and operational — are described in straight-forward fashion as are the battles themselves. The maps are well-drawn, though one for Artemisium would have been good.

Bradford’s sober Thermopylae lies somewhere between Strauss’ (slightly) over-written Battle of Salamis and Green’s incisive, detailed account in The Greco-Persian Wars. Therefore, it does deserve a readership.

[Kenneth · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of those book s where by page ten, you are looking up the author on Wikipedia, or re-reading the inside book cover for the biography of the author. At page 20, I was checking to see here on Goodreads -what else the author has written.
By page 50 I was on Amazon ordering another one of his books. Ernle Bradford “Stays between the lines” of reality, and what is really is known and documented about Xerxes great campaign in invading the West. He does not speculate, and does not wonder.
He keeps it simple and takes out the “mystery” of ancient Greek history. I know that he is an experienced sailor and I am going to read his books on the Mediterranean Sea and of sailing the Greek Islands before I take my cruise there.

[Cheryl · Rating 3 out of 5]

It seems a little incongruous to title a book 'Thermopylae' that only spends one chapter, less than 20 pages talking about the battle itself. The book does a good job giving a lot of background on Persian and Greek culture, but readers looking for information about the actual battle should look elsewhere. The other thing I found odd was that the author made several references to this event as being key to understanding, as he describes it, current East/West tensions and suicide bombers. However, he never really explains why he thinks that it the case, and after reading the book I don't see the connection. Bumped up from 2 stars because the historical/cultural information on the Persians and Spartans was interesting and well done.

[Michael Joosten · Rating 4 out of 5]

Engagingly written and a good introduction to the course of Xerxes's invasion of Greece. I am not qualified to determine how much historians would agree with Bradford's conclusions in 2021, but he does a fairly effective job of writing in a manner that informs the reader where he is coming to conclusions rather than conveying something from the ancient sources (helped, among other things, by copious reference to and quotation from them). Seasoned with that salt, it's still a good primer on the timeline of the war and the names of the major players.

[John Deardurff · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is more than just the infamous battle of Leonidas and the mighty 300 Spartans who battled King Xerxes and the Persians. This book goes further and tells the beginning of the Persian Empire, through the ascension of Darius, until the final epic Battle of Plataea. The author takes the histories of Herodotus and Plutarch, removes the anti-Persian biases, and presents a very well written and easily digestible account of the Greco-Persian Wars.

[Bill · Rating 5 out of 5]

I had imagined that I knew about Thermopylae, Salamis, and Plataea, but Mr Bradford's excellent narrative was a detailed narrative of the political and military events that began with Xerxes' decision to subjugate mainland Greece and ended with his army's retreat ack into Asia in defeat. A skilled writer, he tells the story with interesting details while not sacrificing the epic drama of the conflict. Highly recommended for classical history buffs!

[Avery · Rating 4 out of 5]

On the plus side: it is an engaging history book that really gives you a sense of not just the battles but the culture, people, technologies and politics that influenced the events.

On the negatives side: the author is incredibly opinionated and some of those opinions come across as dated. He relies heavily on Herodotus. While the battle of Thermopylae is rich and detailed, Salamis is thinly sketched and Plataea is rushed and disjointed.

[Robert · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this. I didn't know anything about the Persian invasion of Greece, but I didn't want to slog through hundreds of pages of details. I chose this book because it's relatively short and engaging, and I wasn't disappointed. It's a fun read and covers the "big picture" of the second invasion, giving enough context and detail so you walk away smarter than you started.

[James S. · Rating 1 out of 5]

A history of the Greco-Persian wars from a fascist perspective. The author believes that modern society is decadent and that we would all do well to emulate the Spartans' military fanaticism. Considering that I could see Hitler making the same argument, I will be keeping away from Ernle Bradford in the future.

[Gage Redmon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great read.

Gives a good window into the history and events that surround thermopylae. If you want to seem well versed in history but not spend years reading every text on it this is a good read for you.

[Dale Sabo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent concise and readable. A nice overview of the Persians v. the Greeks from Marathon to Plataea. Examines the leadership, tactics, strategy, technology and the interplay of Armies and Navies. An excellent book whether you’re familiar with this part of history or new to it.

[Elizabeth Rogers · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very informative!

[Nechet Hudelson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great history, great facts, but not exactly spellbinding.

[George Polansky · Rating 5 out of 5]

Bradford adds an informative and interesting history to the annals of western civilization.

[Wyatt Wells · Rating 5 out of 5]

Title is a bit misleading, but I think it's a good summary of Herodotus' accounts of the greco-persian war.

[Godfrey Boyd · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s an enjoyable read and worth a look despite being very dated and occasionally giving a poor view of the character of ‘Greeks’ as a people.