CHAPTER II

ATHENS AS A SEA POWER

1. THE PERSIAN WAR

In determining to crush the independence of the Greek cities of

the west, Darius was influenced not only by the desire to destroy a

dangerous rival on the sea and an obstacle to further advances by the

Persian empire, but also to tighten his hold on the Greek colonies of

Asia Minor. Helped by the Phœnician fleet and the treachery of the

Lesbians and Samians, he had succeeded in putting down a formidable

rebellion in 500 B.C. In this rebellion the Asiatic Greeks had

received help from their Athenian brethren on the other side of

the Ægean; indeed just so long as Greek independence flourished

anywhere there would always be the threat of revolt in the Greek

colonies of Persia. Darius perceived rightly that the prestige and

the future power of his empire depended on his conquering Greece.

In 492 he dispatched Mardonius with an army of invasion to subdue

Attica and Eretria, and at the same time sent forth a great fleet to

conquer the independent island communities of the Ægean. Mardonius

succeeded in overcoming the tribes of Thrace and Macedonia, but the

fleet, after taking the island of Thasus, was struck by a storm

that wrecked three hundred triremes with a loss of 20,000 lives. As

the broken remnants of the fleet returned to Asia, leaving Mardonius

with no sea communications, and harassed by increasing opposition,

he was compelled to retreat also. In 490 Darius sent out another

army under Mardonius, this time embarking it on a fleet of 600

triremes which succeeded in arriving safely at the coast of Attica

in the bay of Marathon. While the army was disembarking it was

attacked by Miltiades and utterly defeated. The second expedition,

therefore, came to nothing. But Marathon can hardly be called a

decisive battle because it merely postponed the invasion; it affected

in no way the communications of the Persians and it did not weaken

seriously their military resources.

The great savior of Greece at this crisis was the Athenian,

Themistocles. He foresaw the renewed efforts of the Persian king

to destroy Greece, and realized also that the most vital point in

the coming conflict would be the control of the sea. Accordingly

he urged upon the Athenians the necessity of building a powerful

fleet. In this policy he was aided by one of those futile wars

so characteristic of Greek history, a war between Athens and the

island of Ægina. In order to overcome the Æginetans, who had a

large fleet, the Athenians were compelled to build a larger one,

and by the time this purpose was accomplished rumors came that

the Persian king was getting ready another invasion of Greece.

_Campaign of Salamis_

The third attempt was undertaken ten years after the second, in

the year 480, under Xerxes, the successor to Darius. This time the

very immensity of the forces employed was to overcome all opposition

and all misfortunes. An army, variously estimated at from one to

five million men, crossed the Hellespont on a bridge of boats to

invade the peninsula from the north, while a fleet of 1200 triremes

was assembled to insure the command of the sea.

Against the unlimited resources of the Persian empire and the unity

of plan represented by Xerxes and his generals, the Greeks had

little to offer. They possessed the two advantages of the defensive,

knowledge of the terrain and interior lines,[1] but their resources

were small and their spirit divided. Greece in those days was, as

was later said of Italy, "merely a geographical expression." The

various cities were mutually jealous and hostile, and it took a great

common danger to bring them even into a semblance of coöperation.

Even during this desperate crisis the cities of western Greece,

counting themselves reasonably safe from invasion, declined to

send a ship or a man for the common cause.

[Footnote 1: "'Interior Lines' conveys the meaning that from a

central position one can assemble more rapidly on either of two

opposite fronts than the enemy can, and therefore utilize force

more effectively." NAVAL STRATEGY, A. T. Mahan, p. 32.]

[Illustration: ROUTE OF XERXES' FLEET TO BATTLE OF SALAMIS]

The Persian army advanced without opposition as far as the pass of

Thermopylæ, which guarded the only road into the rest of Greece.

Twelve days after the army had started on its march the great fleet

crossed the Ægean to establish contact with the army and bring

supplies. The army was checked by the valor of Leonidas, and the

Persian fleet was intercepted by a Greek fleet which stood guard

over the channel leading to the Gulf of Lamia, thus protecting the

sea flank of Leonidas. The Persian fleet, after crossing the open

sea safely, made its base at Sepias preparatory to the attack on

the Greek fleet. The latter numbered only about 380 vessels to some

1200 of their enemy and the prospects for the Persian cause looked

bright indeed. But as the very number of the Persian ships made it

impossible to beach all of them for the night a large proportion

of them were anchored, lying in eight lines, prows toward the sea.

At dawn a northeast gale fell upon them, and, according to the

Greek accounts, wrecked 400 triremes, together with an uncounted

number of transports. Meanwhile the Greek ships had taken refuge

under the lee of the island of Eubœa, and the news of the Persian

disaster was signaled to them by the watchers on the heights.

[Illustration: SCENE OF PRELIMINARY NAVAL OPERATIONS, CAMPAIGN OF

SALAMIS]

As soon as the weather moderated the Greeks returned to their position

in the straits near Artemisium, and during the next three days the

two fleets fought stubbornly but without advantage to either side.

During the second day a southerly gale caught a flying squadron

of some 200 triremes, that had been dispatched round the island of

Eubœa to catch the Greeks in the rear, and not one of the Persian

ships survived. The Greek rear guard squadron of fifty brought

the welcome news to the main fleet and served as a much needed

reënforcement. Although the Persian armada had lost about half

its force in three days by storms, the odds were still so heavily

against the Greeks that they found themselves in constant peril

of having their flanks turned in this open sea fighting.

On the afternoon of the third day the pass of Thermopyæ was forced,

thanks to the treachery of a Greek and the contemptible policy of

the Spartan government which steadily refused the plea of Leonidas

for reënforcements. With Thermopyæ taken there was no further reason

for the Greek fleet to try to hold the straits north of Eubœa,

and during the night it retired unobserved. The following day the

Persian fleet advanced and brought to the army the supplies which

it sorely needed.

With the fall of Thermopyæ and the contact established between his

army and his fleet, Xerxes found his route open for the invasion

of Attica. Since there was no possibility of opposing him on land,

the population of the province was removed and Athens left to its

fate. Themistocles, who was in command of the Athenian division of

the Greek fleet, now urged the assembling of the fleet at Salamis,

partly to cover the withdrawal of the Athenians and partly to assist

in the defense of the Isthmus of Corinth, which was to be the next

stand of the Greeks. The advice was adopted and the fleet assembled

off the town of Salamis. Athenian refugees had crowded into the town

and from the heights above they watched the smoke of their burning

city. Their own future and the future of Athenian civilization hung

on the long lines of triremes drawn up on the shore.

A glance at the map of the region of Salamis shows the advantages

offered by the position for the defensive. The fighting off Artemisium

had shown the peril of attacking a greatly superior force in the open

because of the danger of being outflanked. In the narrow straits

between Salamis and the mainland the Greek line of battle would

rest its flanks on the opposite shores. But it is one thing to

choose a position and another to get the enemy to accept battle in

that position. If the Persians ignored the Greek fleet and moved to

the Isthmus, the Greeks would be caught in an awkward predicament. To

regain touch with the Greek army, the fleet would be then compelled

to come out of the straits and fight at a disadvantage in the open.

There was only one chance of defeating the Persian fleet and that

was to make it fight in the narrow waters of the strait where numbers

would not count so heavily. Everything depended on bringing this

to pass.

Nor could the Greeks wait indefinitely for the Persians. Already

the incorrigible jealousies of rival cities had almost reached the

point of disintegrating the fleet. Although the commander in chief

was the Spartan general Eurybiades, the whole Spartan contingent

was on the point of deserting in a body to its own coasts. The

situation was saved by Themistocles. Having wrung from his allies

a reluctant consent to stop at Salamis temporarily to cover the

withdrawal of the Athenian populace, the story is that he secretly

dispatched a messenger to Xerxes to say that if he would attack

at once he could crush the entire naval forces of the Greeks at a

blow, but if he delayed the Greeks would scatter. Acting on this

advice, Xerxes landed troops on the island of Psyttaleia, dispatched

a squadron to block the western outlet of Salamis Straits, and

proceeded to move the main body of his fleet to attack the Greeks

by way of the eastern channel. The preparations were made during

the night and were not completed till dawn of the day of battle,

September 20, 480 B.C.

The debates in the allied fleet came to an end with the appearance

of the Persians. The shrewd plan of Themistocles had succeeded.

The Greeks would have to fight with their backs to the wall, but

they would fight with better chance of success than under any other

circumstances.

The Greek force consisted of about 380 vessels. Of these, Athens

contributed 180, Sparta and the rest of the Peloponnesus were

represented by 89 and the remainder were made up of squadrons from

the island states. Some of these island contingents contained a

type of ship different from the triremes, the penteconter. This was

a galley with only one bank of oars, but these were long sweeps,

each manned by five oarsmen. The penteconter was an early prototype

of the galley of the Christian era.

The Persians had been reduced by this time to about 600 ships,

although there had been numerous reënforcements since the disaster

at Cape Sepias. The fleet was "Persian" only in name, for, except

for bands of Persian archers on some of the ships, it was composed

of elements levied from each of the subject nations that followed

the sea. Indeed Persia is a curious example in history of a nation

with a purely artificial sea power, for its navy was composed of

aliens entirely. Thus the squadron that was sent to blockade the

western end of the straits was Egyptian, the right wing of the fleet

as it advanced to the attack was composed of Phœnicians, and the

center and left was made up of Cyprians, Cilicians, Samothracians,

and Ionians, the latter only recently in rebellion against Persia

and at that time welcoming help from Athens in a cause in which

Athens herself was now involved. Apparently there was no compunction

felt on this account, for the Ionians distinguished themselves by

gallant fighting against their Greek brethren. Nevertheless, it

is not hard to imagine difficulties involved in the task of making

a unit of such an assortment of peoples. The fleet was commanded

by a Persian, Prince Ariabignes, brother of Xerxes.

At daybreak the Persian triremes drew up in three lines on each

side of the island of Psyttaleia and advanced into the straits.

But the narrowing waters of the channel made it necessary to reduce

the front and bear to the left. Consequently all formation was

lost, and the Persian triremes poured into the narrows "in a

stream,"--to quote the phrase of the tragedian Æschylus, who fought

on an Athenian trireme in this battle and describes it in one of

his plays.

Facing the invader was a smaller array of ships but a better ordered

line of battle. On the Greek left was the Athenian division opposing

the advancing triremes of Phœnicia; on the right was the Spartan

division facing the Greeks of Asia Minor. The two fleets rushed toward

each other, but just before contact the Persians found themselves

embarrassed by their very number of ships. As may be seen by the

map, they had an awkward turn to make in entering the narrows. At

this point, just opposite the peninsula of Salamis, the straits

are only about 2000 yards wide, making it impossible for more than

80 or 90 triremes to advance abreast. As a result the Phœnician

wing of the line was extended considerably in advance of the rest,

forced ahead by the pressure of ships behind. Although, as a matter

of fact, the Spartan wing also was somewhat in advance of the rest of

the Greek line, the first shock of battle came between the Phœnicians

and the Athenians.

[Illustration: After Grundy, _The Great Persian War._

THE BATTLE OF SALAMIS, 480 B. C.

1 The Original Position

2 The Advance

3 The Contact]

This initial advantage offered by an exposed wing was immediately

seized upon. While the Athenians bore the frontal attack, the Æginetans

on their right fell upon the Phœnicians' flank. This double attack

on the Persian right wing eventually proved the turning point of

the battle. The Phœnicians, however, had the reputation of being

the foremost sea fighters in the world, and they bore themselves

well. Similarly the Asiatic Greeks proved themselves foemen worthy

of their brethren from the Peloponnesus, and the fight was maintained

with great ferocity all along the line. The inhabitants of Athens

who had been removed to Salamis blackened the shores on one side of

the Strait, as anxious watchers of the tremendous spectacle. Opposite

them on the slope of Mt. Ægaleos sat Xerxes himself, surrounded by

his staff, a less anxious spectator but no less interested in the

outcome.

About seven o'clock a fresh westerly wind arose, as it does at

this day in that region, and as it did some years later during a

battle won by an Athenian admiral in the Gulf of Corinth.[1] This

wind blows every morning with considerable violence for about two

hours; and in this battle it must have tended to make the bows of

the Persian ships pay off--thus exposing their sides to the Greek

rams--and drift back upon the galleys that were crowding forward

from the rear in the attempt to get into the battle.

[Footnote 1: The Battle of the Corinthian Gulf: v. p. 43]

The Greeks pressed their advantage, using their rams to sink an

adversary or disable her by cutting away her oars. Where the mêlée

was too close for such tactics they tried to take their enemy by

boarding. On every Greek trireme was a specially organized boarding

party consisting of 36 men--18 marines, 14 heavily armed soldiers,

and four bowmen; and the Greeks seem to have been superior to their

enemy at close quarters. On the Persian side the superiority lay in

their archers and javelin throwers. Toward the end of the battle,

for instance, a Samothracian trireme performed a remarkable feat.

Having been disabled by an Æginetan ship, the Samothracian cleared the

decks of her assailant with arrows and javelins and took possession.

Although the invaders seem to have fought with the greatest courage

and determination, the disadvantage of confusion at the outset of

the battle, augmented by the head wind, told decisively against

them. They were unable to take advantage of their superiority in ships

on account of the narrowness of the channel, and indeed found that

the very multitude of their ships only added to their difficulties.

The retreat began with the flower of the Persian fleet, the Phœnician

division. Caught at the opening of the battle with the Athenians in

front and the Æginetans on the left flank, they were never able to

extricate themselves, although they fought stubbornly. The foremost

ships, many in a disabled condition, began to retreat; others backed

water to make way for them; the rearmost finding it impossible to

reach the battle at all, withdrew out of the straits; and soon the

retreat became general. As the Phœnicians withdrew, the Athenians

and the Æginetans fell upon the center of the Persian line, and the

rout became general with the Greeks in full pursuit. The latter

pressed their enemy as far as the island of Psyttaleia, thus cutting

off the Persian force on the island from their communications.

Whereupon Aristides, the Athenian, led a force in boats from Salamis

to the island and put to death every man of the Persian garrison.

The Persian ships fled to their base at Phaleron, while the Greeks

returned to their base at Salamis.

The battle of Salamis was won, but at the moment neither side realized

its decisive character. The Greeks had lost 40 ships; the Persians

had lost over 200 sunk, and an indeterminate number captured.

Nevertheless, the latter could probably have mustered a considerable

force for another attack--which the Greeks expected--if their morale

had not been so badly shaken. Their commander, Ariabignes, was

among the killed, and there was no one else capable of reorganizing

the shattered forces. Xerxes, fearing for the safety of his bridge

over the Hellespont, gave orders for his ships to retire thither to

protect it, and the very night after the battle found the remains

of the Persian fleet in full flight across the Ægean.

The news reached the Greeks at noon of the following day and they

set out in pursuit, but having gone as far as Andros without coming

up with the enemy, they paused for a council of war. The Athenians

urged the policy of going on and destroying the bridge over the

Hellespont, but they were voted down by their allies, who preferred

to leave well enough alone.

It is customary to speak of the victory of the Greeks at Salamis

as due to their superior physique and fighting qualities. This

superiority may be claimed for the Greek soldiers at Marathon and

Platæ, where the Persian army was actually Persian. The Asiatic

soldier, forced into service and flogged into battle, was indeed

no match for the virile and warlike Greek. But at Salamis it was

literally a case of Greek meeting Greek, except in the case of the

Phœnicians--who had the reputation of being the finest seafighters

in the world--and it is not easy to see how the battle was won by

sheer physical prowess. There is no evidence to show any lack of

either courage or fighting ability on the Persian side. The decisive

feature of the battle was the fatal exposure of the Phœnician wing

at the very outset. However, it is worth noting that the invaders

had been maneuvering all night and were tired--especially the

oarsmen--when called upon to enter battle against an enemy that

was fresh. In that respect there was undoubtedly some advantage

to the Greeks, but it can hardly have been of prime importance.

The immediate results of the victory at Salamis were soon apparent.

The all-conquering Persian army suddenly found itself in a critical

situation. Cut off from its supplies by sea, it had to retreat or

starve, for the country which it occupied was incapable of furnishing

supplies for a host so enormous. Xerxes left an army of occupation in

Thessaly consisting of 300,000 men under Mardonius, but the rest were

ordered to get back to Persia as best they could. A panic-stricken

rout to the Hellespont began, and for the next forty-five days

a great host, that had never been even opposed in battle, went

to pieces under famine, disease, and the guerilla warfare of the

inhabitants of the country it traversed, and it was only a broken

and demoralized remnant of the great army that survived to see the

Hellespont. This great military disaster was due entirely to the

fact that Salamis had deprived Xerxes of the command of the sea.

Indeed, if the advice of Themistodes had been taken and the Greek

fleet had proceeded to the Hellespont and held the position, not even

a remnant of the retreating army would have survived. It happened

that the bridge had been carried away by storms and the army had to

be ferried over by the ships of the beaten and demoralized Persian

fleet, an operation which would have been impossible in the face

of the victorious Greeks.

Xerxes still held to the idea of conquering Greece; but the chance

was gone. Mardonius, it is true, remained in Thessaly with an army,

but it was no longer an army of millions. The Greeks assembled an

army of about 100,000 men and in the battle of Platæa the following

year utterly defeated it. On the same day the Greeks destroyed

what was left of the Persian fleet in the battle of Mycale, on

the coast of Asia Minor. This, strictly speaking, was not a naval

battle at all, for the Persians had drawn their ships up on shore

and built a stockade around them. The Greeks landed their crews,

took the stockade by storm and burnt the ships. These later victories

were the direct consequences of the earlier victory of Salamis.

Another phase of the Persian plan of conquering the Greeks must not

be overlooked. Xerxes had stirred up Carthage to undertake a naval

and military expedition against the Greeks of Sicily, in order that

all the independent Greek states might be crushed simultaneously.

Again the weather came to the rescue, for the greater part of the

Carthaginian fleet was wrecked by storms. The survivors of the

expedition laid siege to the city of Himera, but were eventually

driven back to their ships in rout with the loss of their general.

Thus the Greek civilization of Sicily was saved at the same time

as that of Athens.

East and west, therefore, the grandiose plan of the Persian despot

fell in ruin, and with it fell the prestige and the power of the

empire. The Ionians revolted and joined Athens as allies, and the

control of the Ægean passed from Persia to Athens. With this loss

of sea power began the decline of Persia as a world power.

The significance of this astounding defeat of the greatest military

and naval power of the time lies in the fact that European, or

more particularly Greek, civilization was spared to develop its

own individuality. Had Xerxes succeeded, the paralyzing régime of

an Asiatic despotism would have stifled the genius of the Greek

people. Self-government would never have had its beginnings in

Greece, and a subjugated Athens would never have produced the "Age

of Pericles." In the two generations following Salamis, Athens

made a greater original contribution to literature, philosophy,

science, and art than any other nation in any two centuries of

its existence.

For the fact that this priceless heritage was left to later ages

the world is indebted chiefly to the Greeks who fought at Salamis.

The night before that battle the cause of Greece seemed doomed

beyond hope. The day after, the invaders began a retreat that ended

forever their hopes of conquest. This amazing change of fortune was

due to the fact that the success of the Persian invasion depended

on the control of the sea. Hence the Greeks, though unable to muster

an army large enough to meet the Persian host on land, defeated

it disastrously by winning a victory on the sea.

2. THE PELOPONNESIAN WAR

After Salamis, Athens rose to a commanding position among the Greek

states. Her period of supremacy was brief, lasting less than 75

years, but while it endured it rested on her triremes. In the middle

of the fifth century she had 100,000 men in her navy, practically

as many as Great Britain in her fleet before 1914. Although the

period of Athenian supremacy was short-lived, it is interesting

because it produced a great naval genius, Phormio, and because

it wrecked itself as Persian sea power had done, in an attempt at

foreign conquest.

Scarcely had the Persian invasion come to an end when bickering broke

out among the various Greek states, much of it directed against Athens.

She had small difficulty, however, in maintaining her ascendancy in

northern Greece on account of her superiority on the sea, and it

was during the half century after Salamis that Athens arose to

her splendid climax as the intellectual and artistic center of

the world.

[Illustration: After Shepherd's _Historical Atlas._

THE ATHENIAN EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT--ABOUT 450 B.C.]

In 431 began the Peloponnesian War. Its immediate cause was the

help given by Athens to Corcyra (Corfu) in a war against Corinth.

Corinth called on Sparta for help, and in consequence northern and

southern Greece were locked in a mortal struggle. The Athenians

had a naval base at Naupaktis on the Gulf of Corinth, and in 429,

two years after war broke out, the Athenian Phormio found himself

supplied with only twenty triremes with which to maintain control

of that important waterway. At the same time Sparta was setting in

motion a large land and water expedition with the object of sweeping

Athenian influence from all of western Greece and of obtaining

control of the Gulf of Corinth. A fleet from Corinth was to join

another at Leukas, one of the Ionian Islands, and then proceed to

operate on the northern coast of the gulf while an army invaded

the province.

[Illustration: SCENE OF PHORMIO'S CAMPAIGNS]

As it happened, the army moved off without waiting for the coöperation

of the fleet and eventually went to pieces in an ineffectual siege of

an inland city. When the fleet started out from Corinth it numbered

47 triremes. As this was more than twice the number possessed by

Phormio, the Corinthian admiral evidently counted on being secure

from attack. Accordingly he used some of his triremes as transports

and started on his journey without taking the precaution to train

his oarsmen or practice maneuvers. But as he skirted along the

southern coast he was surprised to see the Athenian ships moving in

a parallel course as if on the alert for an opportunity to attack.

When the Corinthian ships bore up from Patræ to cross to the Ætolian

shore, the Athenian column steered directly toward them. At this

threat the Corinthian fleet turned away and put in at Rhium, a

point near the narrowest part of the strait, in order to make the

crossing under cover of night. The Corinthian admiral made the same

fatal mistake committed by the commander of the Spanish Armada

2000 years later in a similar undertaking, that of trying to avoid

an enemy on the sea rather than fight him before carrying out an

invasion of the enemy's coast. This ignominious conduct on the

part of the Corinthian admiral was partly due to the fact that he

was encumbered with his transports, but chiefly to the fact that

he knew that in fighting qualities his men were no match for the

Athenians. The latter had no peers on the sea at that time. Since

Salamis they had progressed far in naval science and efficiency

and were filled with the confidence that comes from knowledge and

experience.

[Illustration: BATTLE OF THE CORINTHIAN GULF, 429 B. C.

Corinthian Formation and Circling Tactics of Phormio.]

All night Phormio watched his enemy and at dawn surprised him in

mid-crossing. On seeing Phormio advance to the attack, the Corinthian

drew up his squadron in a defensive position, ranging his vessels

in concentric circles, bows outward, like the spokes of a wheel.

In the center of this formation he placed his transports, together

with five of his largest triremes to assist at any threatened spot.

The formation suggests a leader of infantry rather than an admiral;

moreover, it revealed a fatal readiness to give up the offensive

to an enemy force less than half his own.

At any rate there was no lack of decision on the part of Phormio.

He advanced rapidly in line ahead formation, closed in near the

enemy's prows as if he intended to strike at any moment and circled

round the line. The Corinthian triremes, having no headway and

manned by inexperienced rowers, began crowding back on one another

as they tried to keep in position for the expected attack. Then the

same early morning wind that had embarrassed the Persian ships at

Salamis sprang up and added to the confusion of fouling ships and

clashing oar blades. Choosing his opening, Phormio flew the signal

for attack and rammed one of the flagships of the Corinthian fleet.

The Athenians fell upon their enemy and almost at the first blow

routed the entire Corinthian force. In addition to those triremes

that were sunk outright, twelve remained as prizes with their full

complement of crews, and the rest scattered in flight. Phormio

returned in triumph to Naupaktis with the loss of scarcely a man.

So humiliating a defeat had to be avenged, and Sparta organized

a new expedition. This time a fleet of 77 triremes was collected.

Meanwhile Phormio had sent to Athens the news of his victory together

with an urgent plea for reënforcements. Unfortunately the great

Pericles was dying and the government had fallen into weak and

unscrupulous hands. Consequently while 20 triremes were ordered to

the support of Phormio, political intrigue succeeded in diverting

this squadron to carry out a futile expedition to Crete, and Phormio

was left to contest the control of the gulf against a fleet of 77

with nothing more than his original twenty.

It is interesting to observe what strategy Phormio adopted in this

difficult situation. In the campaign of Salamis, Themistocles chose

the narrow waters of the strait as the safest position for a fleet

outnumbered by the enemy, because of the protection offered to the

flanks by the opposite shores. But Phormio, commanding a fleet about

one-fourth that of his adversary, chose the open sea. Apparently

his decision was based on the fact that the superiority of the

Athenian ship lay in its greater speed and skill in maneuvering.

Unable to cope with his adversary in full force, he might by his

superior mobility beat him in detail. Accordingly, he boldly took

the open sea.

For about a week the two fleets lay within sight of each other,

with Phormio trying to draw his enemy out of the narrows into open

water and his adversary attempting to crowd him into a corner against

the share. Finally the Peloponnesian, realizing that Phormio would

have to defend his base, and hoping to force him to fight at a

disadvantage, moved upon Naupaktis. As this port was undefended,

Phormio was compelled to return thither.

The Peloponnesian fleet advanced in line of four abreast with the

Spartan admiral and the twenty Spartan triremes--the best in the

fleet--in the lead. At the signal from the admiral the column swung

"left into line" and bore down in line abreast upon the Athenians

who were ranging along the shore in line ahead. The object of the

maneuver was to cut the Athenians off from the port and crowd them

upon the shore. The latter, however, developed such a burst of

speed that eleven of the twenty succeeded in reaching Naupaktis;

the remaining nine drove ashore and their crews escaped. Apparently

the victory of the Spartan was as complete as it was easy. But while

the rest of the fleet busied itself with the deserted Athenian

triremes on the share, the Spartan squadron continued in the pursuit

of the eleven Athenian ships that were heading for Naupaktis. Ten

of the eleven reached port and drew up in a position of defense.

The eleventh, less speedy than the rest, was being overhauled by

the Spartan flagship which was pushing the pursuit far in advance

of the rest of the squadron. The captain of the Athenian ship,

seeing this situation, determined on a bold stroke. Instead of

pushing on into the harbor he pulled round a merchant ship that lay

anchored at the mouth, and rammed his pursuer amidships, disabling

her at a blow. The Spartan admiral promptly killed himself and the

rest of the ship's company were too panic stricken to resist.

At this disaster the rest of the Spartan squadron hesitated, dropped

oars or ran into shallow water. Seeing his opportunity, Phormio

dashed out of the harbor with his ten triremes and fell upon the

Spartans. In spite of the ridiculous disparity of forces, this

handful of Athenian ships pressed their attack so gallantly that

they destroyed the Spartan advance wing and then, catching the

rest of the fleet in disorder, routed the main body as well. By

nightfall Phormio had rescued eight of the nine Athenian triremes

that had fallen into the hands of the enemy and sent the scattered

remnants of the Peloponnesian fleet in full flight towards Corinth.

This battle of Naupaktis remains one of the most brilliant naval

victories in history, a victory won against overwhelming odds by

quick decision and superb audacity.

Only a half century separates Salamis from the battle of the Corinthian

Gulf and the battle of Naupaktis, but during that period there had

been a great advance in naval science.

As far as naval tactics are concerned, Salamis was merely a fight

between two mobs of ships, except that when opportunity offered,

a vessel used her ram. Otherwise the only difference from land

fighting was the fact that the combatants stood on floating platforms.

But in the Peloponnesian war we see not only the birth of naval

tactics but a very high development, especially as revealed in

these two victories of Phormio.

With the development of a naval science rose also a naval profession.

At Salamis Themistocles was a politician and Eurybiades was a soldier;

it happened that they were made fleet commanders for the emergency.

Phormio was a naval officer by profession, and he won by genius

combined with superior efficiency in the personnel under his command.

In his courage, resourcefulness, in the spirit he inspired, and

the high pitch of skill he developed among his officers and men,

he is an ideal type for every later age. Little is known of his

life and character beyond the story of these two exploits, but

they are sufficient to give him the name of the first great admiral

of history.

His exploits illustrate, too, at the very outset of naval history,

the vital truth that the man counts more than the machine. In these

later days, when the tendency is to measure naval power merely by

counting dreadnoughts, and to settle all hypothetical combats by

the proportion of strength at a given point on the game board, it

is well to remember that the most overwhelming victories have been

won by the skill and audacity of a great leader, which overcame

odds that would be reckoned by the experts as insuperable.

The Peloponnesian war dragged on with varying fortunes for ten

years. The Athenians were regularly successful on the sea and

unsuccessful on land. They seem to have laid an unwise dependence

on their navy for a state situated on the mainland with land

communications open to the enemy. They attempted to make an island

of their state by withdrawing into the city of Athens the entire

population of Attica, leaving open to the invader the rest of the

province. The repeated ravaging of Attica by Peloponnesian armies

weakened both the resources and the morale of the Athenians, and

the crowding of the inhabitants into the city resulted in frightful

mortality from the plague. At the same time the naval expeditions

sent out to harry the coast of the Peloponnesus accomplished nothing

of real advantage.

In 421 a truce was agreed upon between Athens and Sparta, which

was to last fifty years. Both sides were sorely weakened by the

protracted struggle and neither had gained any real advantage over

the other. Without waiting to recuperate from the losses of the

war, Athens embarked in 415 on an ambitious plan of conquering

Syracuse, and gaining all of Sicily as an Athenian colony. In the

event of success Athens would have a western outpost for the eventual

control of the Mediterranean, as she already had an eastern outpost

in Ionia, which gave her control of the Ægean.

In the light of the event it is customary to refer to this expedition

as the climax of folly, and yet it is clear that if the commander

in chief had not wasted time in interminable delays the Athenians

might easily have won their objective. At first the Syracusans felt

hopeless because of the large army and fleet dispatched against

them, and the great naval prestige of their enemy, but as delay

succeeded delay, assistance arrived from Corinth and Sparta, and

the besieged citizens took heart. The siege dragged on for the

greater part of two years, with the offensive gradually slipping

from the Athenians to the Syracusans, till finally the invaders

found their troops besieged on shore and their ships bottled up

in the harbor by a line of galleys anchored across the entrance.

The Syracusans knew that they were no match for the Athenians on

the open sea, but with a fleet crowded into a harbor with no room

for maneuvering, the problem was not essentially different from

that of fighting on land. They built a fleet of ships with specially

strengthened bows for ramming and erected catapults for throwing

heavy stones on the decks of the enemy. Meanwhile, the Athenian

ships had deteriorated from lack of opportunity to refit and their

crews had been heavily reduced by disease. In a pitched battle

between the two fleets in the harbor, the Athenians were worsted.

Shortly after as the Athenians were attempting to break through

the barrier and escape, they were again attacked by the Syracusans.

There was no room for maneuvering; the Athenian ships were jammed

together in a mass in which all advantage of numbers was lost.

Moreover, against the deadly rain of huge stones the Athenians had

no defense whatever.

The result was an overwhelming victory for the Syracusans. Out

of 110 triremes the Athenians lost fifty. The besieging army went

to pieces in attempting a retreat across the island, and the whole

expedition came to a tragic end. This defeat of the Athenian fleet

in the harbor of Syracuse was the ruin of Athens. When the news

reached Greece, many of her dependencies revolted, the Peloponnesian

war had broken out anew, and she had no strength left to hold her

own. The deathblow was given when a Spartan admiral destroyed all

that was left of the Athenian navy at Ægospotami in the year 405.

Thereafter Athens was merely a conquered province, permitted to

keep a fleet of only twelve ships, and watched by a garrison of

Spartan soldiers in the citadel.

The downfall of Athenian sea power at Syracuse may be compared

with the downfall of Persian sea power at Salamis. Just as the

latter prevented the spread of an Asiatic form of civilization

in Europe and gave Greek civilization a chance to develop, so the

former put an end to the extension of a strong Hellenic power in

Italy and left opportunity for the rise of the civilization of

Rome.

REFERENCES

HISTORY OF GREECE, Ernst Curtius, 1874.

HISTORY OF GREECE, George Grote, 1856.

THE GREAT PERSIAN WAR, G. B. Grundy, 1901.

HISTORY OF THE PERSIAN WARS, Herodotus, ed. and transl. by Geo.

Rawlinson, 1862.

HISTORY OF THE PELOPONNESIAN WAR, Thucydides, ed. and transl.

by Jowett.

A History of Sea Power · 第 2 / 19 章