Xerxes I and the Greeks: Thermopylae to Eurymedon
The largest invasion the Greek world had seen, and why it did not work. Thermopylae, the burning of Athens, the narrows at Salamis, and the awkward fact that almost everything we know comes from the winners.
Use it, the way the marks are given
Free interactive practice at using the material, which is what the marks are for.
Start revising freeWhat you'll cover
Finishing his father's business
Darius died in **486 BC** with Greece unfinished. His son **Xerxes** inherited both the empire and the grievance, and in 480 BC he came back with something far larger than the expedition that had ended at Marathon. The scale is the point everyone remembers: an army and fleet drawn from across the empire, boat bridges thrown across the Hellespont, a canal cut through a peninsula so the fleet need not round it. And it failed. Working out why is what this part of the period study is for, and it is a better question than it first looks.
Five names for 480 BC
Enough to write about the campaign without getting lost.
The invasion of 480 BC
Put the campaign into the order it happened.
- Xerxes crosses into Europe over bridges of boats at the Hellespont
- A small Greek force under Leonidas holds the pass at Thermopylae, then is outflanked
- Athens is evacuated, and the Persians take and burn the city
- The Greek fleet defeats the Persian fleet in the narrows at Salamis
- Xerxes withdraws to Asia, leaving Mardonius with an army in Greece
What did Thermopylae actually achieve?
The Greeks lost the battle and the pass. Militarily, what did holding it accomplish?
- A delay of a few days and a demonstration that Persian numbers counted for less in a narrow place, which shaped how the Greeks fought afterwards
- It stopped the invasion, since the Persians turned back at the pass
- Nothing at all, since the position was lost
- It destroyed the Persian fleet
A city given up on purpose
With the pass lost, Athens could not be defended. Rather than fight for it, the Athenians **evacuated the city** and moved the population out. The Persians took Athens and burned it, including the buildings on the Acropolis. In the narrowest sense the invasion had succeeded: the leading Greek city was in Persian hands and on fire. But the Athenians had removed the thing that mattered. Their **fleet and their people were intact**, and a city is harder to defeat than a place. That decision is why there was still a Greek force to fight at Salamis, and it is worth arguing in an answer rather than just recording.
What made Salamis decisive?
Select the TWO statements that best explain why the battle mattered.
- Fighting in narrow water stopped the larger Persian fleet from using its numbers, so the advantage that had carried the invasion was removed
- Losing control of the sea threatened the supply of a very large army operating far from home, which is why Xerxes withdrew
- Xerxes was killed in the battle
- It ended the war immediately, with no further fighting
Why did the larger side lose?
The usual answer is "the Greeks were braver". The better answer is that size brought problems of its own.
Match each event to why it mattered
- Thermopylae
- The sack of Athens
- Salamis
- Eurymedon
- Showed that terrain could cancel the advantage of numbers, at the cost of the position
- The city was lost but the people and fleet were not, which is why the war could continue
- Control of the sea was lost, and with it the ability to supply the army, so the king withdrew
- An allied victory in Asia Minor about 466 BC that ended the Persian threat in the Aegean
The year of the invasion
In which year BC did Xerxes invade Greece, fighting at Thermopylae and Salamis? Give the number only.
Written by the winners
The three earlier parts of this period study each asked something different of a source. This part asks the hardest question: **whose account survives?** Almost everything you will read about these wars comes from **Herodotus** and the Greek tradition after him. There is no Persian narrative of the invasion to set beside it. The story was written by the people who won, for an audience that had won. That does not make it false. It does mean the account is built to answer **\"why did we win?\"** rather than \"what happened?\", and the two questions produce different stories. Persian numbers grow, Greek unity is emphasised, and defeat is explained by pride as much as by supply lines.
Which claims come from one side only?
A student's notes on the invasion. Tap the TWO statements that rest entirely on the Greek tradition and should be attributed rather than asserted.
- Xerxes invaded Greece in 480 BC and
- Athens was taken and burned
- .
- His army numbered in the millions
- , and
- he was defeated because his arrogance offended the gods
- .
- After Salamis he withdrew to Asia
Write it with the source attached
Build a sentence that uses the Greek tradition properly.
Why the invasion failed
**"Explain why Xerxes' invasion of Greece was unsuccessful. (10 marks)"** "The size of the force was both its strength and its problem. Supplying an army that large so far from home depended on the fleet, so when the fleet was beaten at Salamis the land position became untenable and Xerxes withdrew, leaving Mardonius behind. The Greeks also chose ground that removed the Persian advantage. At Thermopylae a narrow pass meant numbers could not be brought to bear, and Herodotus credits Themistocles with repeating that logic at sea by drawing the Persian fleet into the narrows at Salamis. It should be said that our account of all this is Greek. Herodotus is writing about a victory for an audience that had won it, so the Persian numbers and the moral explanation of the defeat need handling with care, even where the military reasoning holds." Two causes with mechanisms attached, then a sentence on the evidence itself. The last paragraph is what separates a good answer from a full one.
The campaign in a paragraph
Xerxes invaded Greece in _____ BC. A small force under _____ held the pass at Thermopylae before being outflanked, and Athens was evacuated and _____. The Greek fleet then won in the narrows at _____, after which the king withdrew to Asia. The Persian threat in the Aegean was finally ended at the river _____, about 466 BC.
Was it a Persian disaster?
The invasion failed. Work out how big a failure it actually was, which is a more interesting question than it sounds.
- Xerxes withdrew after Salamis and the empire lost no territory it had held before 480 BC. What does that suggest?
- Why then does the invasion loom so large in the tradition we have?
- Eurymedon, about 466 BC, is where the spec's period ends. What is its significance?
Your turn: assess the invasion
Explain why Xerxes' invasion failed, and how confident a historian can be about the reasons.
- Outline the campaign of 480 BC, naming Thermopylae, Athens and Salamis
- Give two military reasons the invasion failed, with the mechanism for each
- Explain why the evacuation of Athens mattered more than the loss of the city
- Explain what problem it creates that our account survives only from the Greek side