Pelopenesian Wars

[Celtic_Punk]

Who won? Sparte? Athenai? or were they both the losers? I believe it was the latter, Sparte may have won the war, but in doing so they became so weak that both Sparta's and Athen's fate was sealed to be slaves to the world's empires thereafter? your opinions? /discuss

[||Lz3||]

that war costed greece it's power and was a cause of it's fall IMO... heheh but I might be just an ignorant idiot though

[Celtic_Punk]

It gave Makedonia a chance to seize power in the Aegean, so maybe there would never have been a huge invasion of Persia's empire and her defeat would either never have happened or happened much later.

[Celtic_Punk]

/BUMP

im surprised you lot being historically driven are not very eager to discuss such a turning point in western AND eastern history.

[Callicles]

Don't forget the Corinthian War and the rise of the Second Athenian Empire in the 4th Century. True, the Peloponnesian War did kill off a generation within the Hellenic world. But I sometimes think that arguments like "the Peloponnesian War left an opening for Phillip II and Macedon" are over stated (accurate, but overstated). In my view, the military revolution that occurred during the 27 year long war between Athens and Sparta resulted in faster, lighter troops, and a more unified force of heavy infantry, skirmishers, and cavalry. I think we can see a shadow of the lessons learned during the Peloponnessian War in the army Phillip used to defeat the Greek Cities decades later.

To answer the initial question: Sparta won the war but lost the peace. Safe bets are on Thebes and Corinth (in that their position relative the other cities had increased the most).

[machinor]

Well yeah, Sparta won and became the dominant power in Greece for a short while, only to be then succeded by Thebes (battle of Leuktra). I think the cause for Makedonian dominance of Greece has its roots more in Philipp's reforms and unification of Makedonia plus the vast cash flow through his newly conquered gold mines in southern Thrace than in the Peloponnesian War.

[oudysseos]

The big winner was, in fact, Persia, who (in the person of some satraps) funded or considered funding both sides at one time or another, though Sparta got the most support. By playing off the two Greek coalitions against each other, Persia kept their hold on the Greek cities of Asia Minor (now Turkey) and otherwise ensured their influence in a region on the periphery of their empire. It's a mistake to view the Peloponnesian War as a Greek-only affair, out of a larger context.

PS Celtic Punk- This isn't really an EB topic (ca. 150 years too early, and not about the game anyway) so that may explain why there hasn't been a rush to join the debate- not that I care, I'm happy to discuss it. But I'm skeptical about the whole notion of historical 'turning points'- these are usually recognized only long afterwards, and their importance depends on your point of view. Was the Battle of Thermopylae a 'turning point' for Xerxes? I think not- he wiped out some obdurate Spartans (with a little trouble), and went on to burn Athens. He went home after the battle of Salamis and reigned for another 15 years in unimaginable splendour and glory. Doesn't sound like Thermopylae massively changed his life.