Consider this or that historical event with an eye to the time at which it took place. However, there are some events or phenomena that lie “out of time”, because they tell about eternal values that have not changed in human civilization for thousands of years.
Patriotism, valor, courage - these are the qualities to which not only every military man aspires to one degree or another, but also any person for whom the word "homeland" is not just 6 letters. And in such an important matter as education in a patriotic vein, all kinds of examples from life play a colossal role. It is not surprising that the people responsible for the "promotion" of these important ideas, to put it mildly, were too openly redrawing history, trying to give these very examples from life more brilliance and beauty.
One of these classic cases of fanning a feat from an unpleasant event is the story of the Battle of Thermopylae, better known as the Battle of the 300 Spartans. In this battle, which was a stage of the Greco-Persian wars, a small Greek detachment led by the king of Sparta Leonidas held the many times superior forces of the Persians for several days. In total, the detachment consisted of about 5,000 people from different regions of Greece; Spartans of them were about 300. It was the latter who received all the laurels and honors of military glory. In general, the battle went down in history as an example of strategic and tactical skill, which showed that a patriot is capable of stopping whole hordes of enemies with his bare hands …
However, the realities were slightly different than those that were sung by poets or described by historians. The most interesting point in the descriptions is the place of the battle itself. All sources indicate that the Greek army occupied the beginning of the gorge and it was there that it lined up in a phalanx. Taking advantage of the terrain (a narrow passage into the gorge and the flat surface of the land around it), the Greeks stood in this "narrow throat" repelling one attack after another.
Anyone familiar with the history of ancient wars can only be amused by such a story. Even if it would have been impossible to bypass the Thermopylae Gorge, why drive your army to the slaughter, if it was banal to shoot daring Greeks with siege weapons?
Indeed, in front of the gorge itself there were several hundred meters of plain, and in the Persian army of King Xerxes there were definitely engineering troops with siege machines, for example, catapults. This tool was invented by the ancient Egyptians; it could throw stones weighing up to 120 kg at distances up to 400 meters! From Egypt, this weapon fell into Assyria, and from there it reached Persia by a "natural way": Assyria was captured by Media, and Media by Ancient Persia. Building their state, the ancient Persians conquered many cities and peoples. Naturally, they had experience in using siege weapons.
Another moment causing inconsistencies is the impossibility of bypassing the gorge using other routes. Almost all authors are cunning here. There were at least two roads to bypass and several paths to get out to the rear of the Greeks. Perhaps the Persians did not use the roads, because they were relatively narrow, and the army would have moved along them a little longer. But as for the fairy tale about the fact that only the locals knew the trails in the gorge, this version is generally ridiculous. Were there no scouts in Xerxes' army?
The next interesting point: the national composition of the defenders. Yes, yes, exactly national, because they were all representatives of different states. Ethnically, they were all, of course, Greeks, but they were citizens of different policies. So, in Leonid's detachment there were representatives of as many as 14 city-states. How was Leonidas able to put together such a detachment, if it is known for certain that many Greek cities, if not in alliance with the Persians, were at least neutral to them?
Promotional video:
However, the last two moments had their own interesting continuation. Moreover, it is very unpleasant. Indeed, in any "reference" epic of this type, there is necessarily a place not only for good, but also for bad characters. Oddly enough, the Persians, in general, are not particularly negative in almost all narratives. Enemies are enemies.
But the "forces of absolute evil" are not only specifically indicated, but also clearly shown the attitude towards them after their deeds. We are talking about traitors, moreover, both of an individual character, that is, pursuing personal interests, and of treason who put the interests of their group above the interests of the state. The first is Ephialtes, who allegedly showed the Persians a secret path to the rear of the Greeks. The second are the Thebans, who did not want to die for the ambitions of the Athenian-Spartan alliance.
The reasons for such behavior of "traitors" were never considered anywhere, however, they were, and to call the actions of these people a betrayal was, to put it mildly, incorrect.
And of course, like any heroic story, stories about the Battle of Thermopylae were immediately overgrown with myths, such as the Come and Get Meme, which was Leonidas 'response to Xerxes' ultimatum to lay down their arms, or the story of how the marathon began.
What actually happened? But in reality, a tragedy occurred: the Greek city-states did not give Leonid the necessary number of people to defend the gorge and the Greeks suffered not only tactical, but also strategic defeat. After all, after this battle, the way to Greece was open for the army of the Persians. If Leonidas had 5, but at least 10 thousand people, the Greeks would have occupied the dominant heights and held the army of the Persians for as long as they like. And so they had to die, albeit with honor, but absolutely useless for the overall outcome of the war.
Trying to somehow "whitewash" the actions of the aristocracy of that time, the propagandists of that time made a slightly different emphasis in the events and created a myth about the heroic death of the great commander and his small detachment. Now no one will even remember the true reasons for the defeat, because all this pales before the feat of the heroes who fell in that battle …
And there will be many more such cases in world history. Even if we recall the events of the last big war, there are many cases in which the artistic and propaganda component clearly prevailed over the historical one. The feat of 28 Panfilov's men, "saving Private Ryan", Luftwaffe aces pilots - this is not a complete list of successfully promoted propaganda projects. If you delve into the sources properly, you can find out, for example, that Frederick Nyland (the prototype of James Ryan) was not saved - he was simply sent from France to the United States on a ship under the Panamanian flag. That Erich Hartmann, the best fighter pilot of the Second World War, shot down not 350, but only about 60 planes, since on the eastern front, for propaganda purposes, one victory was recorded for 5 or 7. And the legendary Panfilovites did not exist at all - it was just a collective image of many defenders of Moscow …
However, be that as it may, people like to believe. Believe in something light and correct. On the one hand, this is good, but on the other … After all, when the truth about this or that event emerges, the effect of such an artistic “coloring” can become completely different.