Pharsalus, Thermopylae, and History

The study of history is fascinating because it covers the rise and fall of civilizations, but when examined closely the fate of nations and civilizations is in reality the study of a handful of people and some pivotal battles.  Consider that Rome had a million men under arms for most of its history and the city of Rome itself had about a million residents, but if you were to write down the names of every person who is mentioned in the histories of Rome you would not come anywhere near a million names.  In fact the list of names would span several centuries and even then the list would be relatively short with only a few being instantly recognizable.  So the reality is that history – all history is actually based on the writings and actions of a few men and a handful of battles, many of which didn’t involve more than a few thousand soldiers fighting over a small area for a period of hours or at best days.  The result of these battles frequently determined the fate of nations or even empires.  Sometimes even battles that were lost were turning points so the victors may have won the battle but lost the war. 

The common complaint is why do we study history at all?  Who cares what a bunch of old white guys did a zillion years ago?  Of course the younger the person is the shorter the time frame encompassed in a zillion.  World War Two involved millions of people both military and civilian with literally millions of people being killed, yet the number of people still living who experienced that decline daily and virtually no person in high school or college has any real knowledge of this event.  Still even this world shaking event is defined by a few battles, such as : El Alamein, Stalingrad, Battle of the Bulge, Dunkirk, and Midway.  Likewise the number of individuals who define WW II is equally short and includes people like Hitler, Churchill, Stalin, Rommel, Patton, MacArthur, Roosevelt, Hirohito, and Mussolini.  There were others of course but the point is that out of the millions of people and the hundreds of battles the actual pivotal events and people is relatively small. 

Perhaps the most famous of these lost battles that resulted in ultimate triumph is the battle of

Thermopylae.  The Battle of Thermopylae was actually a rear guard action and technically a defeat since the entire Greek force was annihilated.  But this heroic battle allowed the Greek Army to escape and regroup while the Greek Navy was able to move into a much more advantageous position.  The result was the defeat of the Persian Army and Navy both of which greatly outnumbered the Greeks.  Had the Spartans not held Thermopylae there is little doubt but that the Persians would have crushed the Greek city states which would have nipped the concept of democratic and representative government in the bud.  Thus a handful of Spartans and their allies fought a heroic battle that changed the course of history and resulted in the concept of representative government.

Another such battle was Pharsalus which sealed the fate of the Roman Republic and set the stage for Imperial Rome.  In hindsight it is unlikely that the Roman Republic could have endured much longer.  Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus, formed the first triumvirate because they could see that the Roman Republic had ceased to exist in any meaningful way.  Even Cicero a strong and dedicated supporter of the Republic had his doubts.  He was a lawyer and could not bring himself to break the law and join Caesar in his bid for total power.  Caesar felt his position was being threatened by Senatorial machinations but Cicero felt he had to support Pompey because Pompey was the leader the Senate had appointed to lead the Army.

At the time Pompey was the power center for the last remaining vestiges of the Roman Republic, although he too had his eyes on absolute power.  Pompey was a successful general and a powerful man and the Senate gave him control of the fleet in order to rid the Mediterranean of pirates and then control of the Army as well.  The Senate had given control of the Armies in Gaul to Caesar but the Senate was very corrupt and under the influence of Pompey.  But votes could be purchased and Caesar was very adept at using his plunder to buy votes which allowed him to rival Pompey in power.  Pompey was the power in Rome and in effect the ruler but Caesar also had his eye on absolute power and was building a power base with the common people.  But as Caesar’s power grew the Pompey felt threatened and schemed to have Caesar recalled by the Senate.  Of course this prompted Caesar to make his fateful decision to cross the Rubicon’

Moving fast with only one legion Caesar was able to arrive at the gates of Rome in a matter of a few days.  This early version of the Blitzkrieg forced Pompey to abandon Rome and move south as he gathered his legions and prepared for battle.  Caesar had carefully wooed the commons in Rome and was immensely popular while the Senate and Pompey were viewed as corrupt and self serving so Caesar was welcomed.  Ironically Caesar did everything he could to avoid a civil war and made several efforts to appease and forgive those who opposed him, but of course he would retain absolute power.  After several preliminary battles Pompey and Caesar met at Pharsalus where there was little doubt but that Pompey’s larger force would crush Caesar’s but Caesar was the better strategist while the Senatorial contingent spent their time dividing up the spoils.  Pharsalus was a pivotal battle that effectively ended the Roman Republic and set the stage for Imperial Rome

The pages of history are filled with similar battles, battles conducted by a few thousand men that changed the course of history and the fate of nations.  The Battle of Hastings ended the rule of the Saxons and introduced the Normans, shifting the focus of England to Europe and of course laying the groundwork for wars that raged over the next 500 years as various Kings fought over their rights. 

Blame America

Why do so many Americans seem so embarrassed about being American that they are compelled to apologize and hang their heads over the actions of the freest, most generous, and kindest nation ever to trod the earth? The French go into orgasmic elation over Napoleon and the “Glory” of France. Ignoring the pre-emptive wars initiated by Napoleon, the thousands of deaths, and the failure of France to ever recover its power after his fall. The Spanish reflect with pride on the reign of Phillip II, without regard to the rape of the New World or the Armada, which marked the beginning of the decline of Spain as a world power Even the Mongolians, leap to their feet and cheer at any mention of the “Great Khan (Genghis)”, who is noted for his barbarism as much as his generalship. But to mention George Washington or the founding fathers and we are immediately reminded that they owned slaves, they were hypocrites, and just a bunch of old white guys protecting themselves – hail academia!!

The fact is that since its founding, America has consistently been the freest and most welcoming nation in the world. While it took a while to free the slaves and even longer to accord the Negro the equal rights promised to all men, it was done and today everyone is assured of equal protection under the law. The United States has attempted to remain free of the entanglements of foreign treaties advised by George Washington, but modern technology has rendered this impossible. America has consistently been labeled a colonial power while systematically eliminating colonialism. It was America that wrested the Spanish Colonies of Cuba, Philippines, and the Caribbean Islands from Spain. These have all been freed but not necessarily for the better.

The real tests came with World War I, where the Germans were intent on dominating Europe and were ably supported by the Ottoman Empire and were well on their way when the United States entered the war on the side of the British. Had the United States maintained its isolationist policies Europe would be a far different place today. But this was the first taste Europe had of the awesome power of the United States. Not necessarily military power but industrial might. However, once the war was over, Europe returned to its old colonial ways and merrily began creating arbitrary countries and re-establishing their empires, while the US returned to its internal affairs, rendering the League of Nations totally impotent.

Following WW I Lenin overthrew the Czar and founded the USSR, a communist nation based on Marxism and glorified by the western intelligentsia. It is this same intelligentsia that is still attempting to establish the moral equivalence between the Soviet style Communism and the American Style Capitalism. The University of California Press in 2004 published titled “The American Gulag and then in 2005 published another book titled “The British Gulag”. The latter was written by a Harvard (no surprise there) Historian named Caroline Elkins. To equate these to Soviet Gulags is outrageous because the people in these prisons are there after being convicted in a court while those in the Soviet Prisons were commonly sent there without any trial or even informed of their crime.

During the 30’s and 40’s the Western Intellectuals couldn’t get enough of communism and George Bernard Shaw visited Russia in 1931 and wrote a panegyric upon his return – denying rumors at the time of mass starvation. In fact there was a systematic suppression of the growing evidence of mass starvation in Russia by the Western Press. The New York Times between 1921 and 1934 actively suppressed the truth about the Ukrainian famines and in 1932 won the Pulitzer Prize for a report that stated “any report of famine in the Ukraine was exaggerated or malignant propaganda, even thought the author (William Duranty) had been there and personally knew of the millions dying of starvation. These are the same people, the same intellectuals, and the same media that are still attempting to demonstrate the bankruptcy of capitalism and the evil empire of America.

Then came WW II which was the direct result of the failure of France and England to grasp their aspirations for territorial expansion and their crippling punishment of Germany. When it became obvious that the neither the French nor the British could withstand the onslaught of Germany, they turned to the United States of help. This actually marked the turning point in world history where the New World – the United States – became the world power – the hegemonic power – and Europe started its ongoing decline into irrelevance. But it was the awesome power of America – both military and industrial power – that ultimately defeated the Axis Powers of Japan, Germany, Italy, and the turncoat French.

The great tragedy in the aftermath of WW II turned out to be the creation of the United Nations. The League of Nations was thought to have failed because America failed to join so the belief was that if America joined the United Nations it was sure to succeed. It has been an unmitigated disaster for America. It has failed in every endeavor it has undertaken. It has not prevented any war, has not prevented or even alleviated poverty; it has become a highly corrupt and ineffectual organization whose only purpose seems to be to thwart America, while expecting America to pay for everything. Worse, the American Left as well as the leftists the world over seem to think that the UN has the moral authority over America so America should not act in its best interest without UN approval. The real irony is that the UN ignores every other country that acts unilaterally but castigates the US.

Another irony is that the political left continues to wail about the poverty in the US without actually understanding the realities. The reality is that being poor in America is a far cry from being poor anywhere else. In America 46% of the “poor” own their own homes, 72% have washing machines, 60% own microwave ovens, 92% have color TV’s, 76% have air conditioning, and 66% own one or more cars. Two thirds of poor households in America have two or more rooms per person and the average poor person in America has more living space than the average person in Paris. In spite of all of these advantages and contributions to the world, the American Intellectuals still view America as oppressive. However, I note they don’t move to Cuba, Russia, or even to North Korea so I guess America isn’t as oppressive as they maintain. Can you spell hypocrite?