- Apr 14, 2007
- 28,136
- 19,585
- Country
- Germany
- Faith
- Other Religion
- Marital Status
- Single
The main reason was the difference in tactics. Rome relied on small units that could be moved indibidually and seize the initiative, while the greeks depended on the phalanx, which took ages to set up and could get broken easily. Also, the greeks attacked rome on it's home turf, and rome had reserves. There were of course other factors outside of the battlefield.They relied in large part on reputation. Once a crack was shown others were more willing to engage them and they were unable to replace their numbers. They also feared corruption by outside influences so they failed to grow by trade or assimilation.
Sparta merely slowed down Persia at Thermopylae. The other famous battle, Marathon, where there was an actual Greek victory over Persia was Athens, not Sparta.
Nothing in Greece even came close to matching Rome. A wise man would ask why. Come to think of it some have already answered that.
Upvote
0