Casting Through Ancient Greece
Casting Through Ancient Greece
Teaser: Pausanias at Plataea (Patreon)
The complicated legacy of Pausanias, Spartan regent and commander at Plataea, reveals the razor-thin line between military glory and personal disgrace. When Persian forces under Mardonius threatened Greek freedom in 479 BC, it was Pausanias who stood at the forefront of the Hellenic coalition—a complex alliance of city-states with competing interests and traditions. His story offers a fascinating glimpse into the burdens of command during ancient warfare's most decisive moments.
Standing as guardian of Sparta's royal legacy after Leonidas' heroic fall at Thermopylae, Pausanias embodied the Spartan military ethos: disciplined, patient, and tactically conservative. These qualities proved crucial during the tense weeks before battle, as he resisted pressure from more aggressive allies, particularly the Athenians, who pushed for immediate engagement. His calculated restraint preserved the coalition's strength until conditions favored decisive action.
The battle itself began with chaos—a nighttime repositioning gone wrong left Greek forces scattered across the plain. When Mardonius seized this opportunity to attack, Pausanias demonstrated remarkable composure under intense Persian assault. Holding firm as arrows darkened the sky, he waited for the perfect moment to order the charge that would ultimately break the Persian line and claim Mardonius' life. This victory marked the definitive end of Persian ambitions on Greek soil.
Yet Pausanias' triumph contained the seeds of his undoing. Leading subsequent campaigns in the Aegean, he began adopting Persian customs and displaying an arrogance that alarmed both allies and fellow Spartans. His trajectory from disciplined commander to suspected traitor raises profound questions about how success affects character. Can the same qualities that bring victory in war—decisiveness, authority, self-confidence—become dangerous liabilities in peace? The paradox of Pausanias continues to fascinate: how could the savior of Greece transform so quickly into a figure his own people came to distrust?
Whether you're fascinated by ancient military tactics, the psychology of leadership, or the cultural tensions of the Greek world, Pausanias' story offers remarkable insights into how even history's greatest victories can cast long, complicated shadows over those who achieve them. Subscribe now to explore more untold stories from antiquity's most pivotal moments.
💬 Stay Connected with Casting Through Ancient Greece
Follow us for updates, discussions, and more ancient Greek content:
🌐 Website
📸 Instagram
🐦 Twitter
📘 Facebook
🎙️ Love the show? Don’t forget to subscribe, leave a review, and share it with fellow history enthusiasts. Your support helps keep the stories of ancient Greece alive!
Hello everyone and welcome to this month's bonus episode here on Patreon, and I'd like to thank you all for the continued support. We're going to stick with the theme around Plataea, where we'll focus on Pausanias and the Spartan leadership at Plataea. The Battle of Plataea in 479 BC is often remembered as the decisive land engagement that broke Persian ambitions on Greek soil. Yet behind the clash of arms and the sweeping movements of armies, the question of leadership loomed large. Who directed the Greek coalition at this critical hour? How did their choices, both wise and flawed, shape the outcome? At the centre of this inquiry stands Pausanias, the Spartan regent who, by virtue of his position, commanded the allied host in the final confrontation against Mardonius. Pausanias is a figure of contrast. To some, he is the saviour of Greece, the man under whose leadership the Persians were driven from the mainland once and for all. To others, he is remembered as arrogant, even reckless, a man whose later career was marred by accusations of hubris and treachery. The paradox is striking how could the same individual be both a hero of Plataea and, within a few years, a figure distrusted by his own people? To understand this tension, we must look closely at Plataea itself, not only as a battlefield, but as a stage upon which Sparta's traditions of leadership and the broader dynamics of coalition warfare were tested.
Speaker 1:The campaign of 479 was not a simple Spartan affair. It was a collective enterprise involving Athenians, corinthians, megarians and dozens of other polys, each with their own interests, fears and rivalries. For all the prestige Sparta enjoyed as a preeminent military power of Greece, commanding such a coalition was no easy matter. It required tact as much as discipline, patience as much as resolve. Our task, then, is to assess the role of Pausanias in this crucible of leadership. What were his decisions in the tense weeks leading to the battle? How did his style embody, or perhaps strain, spartan traditions of command, and how was he perceived by the Allies, who were not accustomed to Spartan ways? These are not abstract questions, for the battle's outcome and the fragile unity of the Hellenic alliance both hung in the balance.
Speaker 1:The sources offer us glimpses rather than complete portraits. Herodotus provides the most detailed narrative of Plataea, though his eye is as much on the ground movements of armies as on the personality of their commander. Later, writers from Thucydides to Plutarch offer retrospective judgments coloured by their own concerns the fate of the Dylian League, the decline of Spartan prestige, or the perennial question of leadership and virtue. By weaving these accounts together, we can attempt to reconstruct not only what Plasanius did, but how his actions were understood, both in his own time and the centuries that followed. In this episode, we will therefore move step by step. We will first set out the background of Plasenius' life and position at Sparta before turning to the immediate challenges of Coalition Commander Plataea. From there we will examine his conduct during the battle itself, his leadership in the chaos of combat and the perception of his actions among his allies and enemies. Finally, we will look beyond Plataea to consider his legacy. The hero. Hero became suspect, the general whose movement of triumph cast a long, complicated shadow. Plataea, then, is more than a clash of spears. It is a lens through which to examine the burdens of command, the strains of alliance and the fragile balance between glory and disgrace. At its heart stands Pausanias, a man both lauded and doubted, whose story reflects the enduring complexities of leadership at war. To understand Pausanias at Plataea, it is first necessary to place him within the framework of Spartan society and its particular traditions of command.
Speaker 1:Unlike Athens, where military leadership was often bound up with democratic politics and subject to annual election, sparta's commanders were drawn almost exclusively from the royal houses. Pulsanius himself belonged to the Agiid line, one of the two royal families that had shaped Spartan political life for centuries. Though not a king in his own right, he had been thrust into pre-eminence by circumstance. His cousin, king Leonidas, had fallen heroically at Thermopylae two years earlier, leaving the young Plastarchus, leonidas' son, as a nominal ruler. But Plastarchus was a child, and so the guardianship of the royal line, along with the supreme military command, fell into Pisanus' hands. This was not unusual for Sparta, where regency was a recurring feature to its dual kingship, yet it immediately framed Plusanius as a leader under scrutiny. He was not acting entirely in his own right, but as the steward of another's throne. Every decision he made could be judged both as a reflection of his personal capacity and as an indication of how faithfully he protected the legacy of Leonidas. In this sense, plataea was not merely a test of Spartan arms, but a crucible for Pausanias' reputation as a guardian of Sparta's royal dignity.
Speaker 1:Spartan command culture provided both advantages and constraints for a man in Pausanias' position. Spartan society was built upon discipline, hierarchy and the rigorous training of the Ogogae, which produced warriors conditioned for obedience and endurance. This fostered unity in battle and ensured that commanders like Pausanias could expect his orders to be followed without hesitation. Yet it also created inflexibility. Initiative was discouraged and innovation could be regarded with suspicion. A Spartan leader thus had to tread carefully between boldness and conformity, particularly when commanding not just Spartans but a coalition of allies at Plataea.
Speaker 1:The Hellenic League was not a Spartan army alone. It contained contingents from Athens, corinth, megara and a host of smaller states, each with its own traditions, rivalries and ambitions. The Athenians in particular were far from willing subordinates. Having carried much of the burden at Salamis, they believed their naval supremacy gave them an equal voice in strategy. Their generals were elected figures with popular mandates, custom to debate and persuasion rather than the quiet obedience expected in Sparta. For Bassanius, steeped in Spartan norms, this meant that his natural instincts as commander were constantly tested. He had to present himself as both a stern Spartan regent and a patient coalition leader, a delicate balancing act that would define his conduct at Plataea. Even Horolitus, whose narrative remains our fullest account, makes clear that tensions over leadership were never far below the surface.
Speaker 1:The question of who should command the allied forces Sparta or Athens had been raised repeatedly since the formation of the Hellenic League. That Pausanias was accepted as overall commander reflected Sparta's enduring prestige at the foremost land power of Greece. Yet this prestige was fragile. A single failure could undermine Sparta's authority or any hint of arrogance could provoke resentment among the allies. Thus, as Pausanias took command in the summer of 479, he bore the weight of multiple expectations. He was the guardian of the royal line, the representative of Sparta's martial tradition and the leader of a factious coalition. To succeed, he would need to navigate not only the battlefield but also the complex web of interpolis politics. It is against this background that his actions at Plataea must be understood, for they reveal both the strength of Spartan leadership and its inherent limitations.
Speaker 1:By the summer of 479, the weight of responsibility on Pausanias' shoulders was immense. The Persian commander Mardonius had entrenched himself in Boeotia with a sizable force, estimated by Herodotus at over 300,000 men, though modern estimates suggest far fewer. Whatever the true numbers, the Greeks knew that they faced a formidable and disciplined opponent, one who had already devastated Athens and stood ready to strike again. The allied host, numbering around 100,000 hoplites and lightly armed troops, represented the largest Greek army yet assembled. But with size came fragility. Commanding such a force required more than tactical skill. It required the ability to hold a coalition together under strain.
Speaker 1:Pausanias' conduct in the days before the battle reflects both the strengths and weaknesses of Spartan leadership. The army advanced cautiously into Boeotia, aware that rash movements might invite disaster. This restraint was consistent with the Spartan tradition. Their kings and generals were trained to favour patience, discipline and decisive engagement on favourable ground, rather than risky manoeuvres. Plasenius sought to anchor his army near Plataea, where access to water and provisions could be maintained and where the hoplite phalanx would fight on terrain suitable to its strengths.
Speaker 1:Yet this careful posture created tension among the allies. The Athenians in particular were keen to take more aggressive stance. They had already endured the destruction of their city twice and were determined to see Pausanias expelled by bold action. In this, he followed the Spartan habit of waiting for the enemy to make a misstep. A policy that could frustrate allies eager for revenge, but one that also increased the odds of success when battle was finally joined.
Speaker 1:Herodotus tells us of a striking episode in which Mardonius attempted to exploit these divisions. He sent envoys to the Athenians offering favourable terms Autonomy, the rebuilding of their city, even territorial expansion if they would abandon the alliance. The Athenians, to their eternal credit, refused outright. But the very fact of the offer underscores the precariousness of Pausanias' position. He had to command not only an army but also the fragile unity of Greek resolve. His instance on maintaining cohesion, even at the cost of delaying battle, was a hallmark of his leadership in this phase.
Speaker 1:Still, pausanias was not immune to miscalculation. As the armies faced each other across the Aesopus River, the Greeks were forced to shift positions repeatedly, in search of water and better supply lines. These movements created confusion and sometimes the appearance of retreat, leaving the coalition vulnerable to disruption. Critics have argued that Pausanias' hesitancy during this period came close to undermining the army's morale. The Persians, observing the Greek manoeuvres, pressed harder, harassing supply lines and testing the patience of both soldiers and the commanders.
Speaker 1:In the midst of these manoeuvres, pausanias' leadership style became clear Cautious, deliberate, often reactive rather than proactive. This approach was entirely Spartan, shaped by a military system that prized discipline and collective action over individual daring. Yet when translated on the broader stage of coalition warfare, such caution could appear as weakness To the Allies. Like the Athenians, who prided themselves on bold initiative, pausanias' reluctance to seize the moment may have seemed like dithering To his own Spartans. However, it was simply the correct way to fight Wait, hold firm and strike only when conditions were ripe.
Speaker 1:What stands out in this prelude to Plataea is not a single moment of brilliance, but rather the steady, sometimes strained hand of command. Pausanias may not have inspired through charisma or dramatic speeches, but his refusal to be drawn into premature battle preserved the coalition until the decisive clash could occur. Whether judged as prudence or timidity, this phase of his leadership set the stage for the confrontation that would follow. If the days before Plataea had shown Pausanias' capacity for patience, restraint and calculated manoeuvre, the day of battle itself would reveal his ability to translate those qualities into decisive action under the moral, intense pressure trail. Yet the outlines of events are clear enough to demonstrate that Pousanis' presence at the critical moment was pivotal in transforming the vicarious situation into one of the most celebrated Greek victories of the Persian Wars.
Speaker 1:The battle began not with a grand clash of armies, but with disorder. The night before, the Greek army had attempted a complicated withdrawal, intending to reposition to ground with more reliable water sources. Miscommunication, exhaustion and the varied levels of discipline among the contingents meant that movement was anything but orderly. Some units marched off too early, others lagged behind, and by morning the Greek line had been scattered across the plain. It was at this moment of disarray that Mardonius seized his opportunity. The Persian commander, recognising the vulnerability before him, ordered his forces forward in pursuit. By chance or by fate, the brunt of this charge fell directly upon the Spartan contingent and their allies from Tagau, who had not yet fully moved from their position, their allies from Tagau, who had not yet fully moved from their position.
Speaker 1:Herodotus paints a vivid picture of a Persian assault, cavalry and infantry pressing hard arrows, darkening the sky and the full weight of an empire bearing down upon a single point. In the middle of it all stood Pausanias, confronted with the chaos of his allies' withdrawal and the immediate threat of annihilation by the Persian elite. This was the moment in which leadership mattered most, for the survival of the Spartan force meant the survival of the Greek cause. Initially, pousanias' men suffered heavily. The Persian archers loosed volleys at close range, cutting down hoplites before they could close the distance. Pousanias himself is said to have sought divine aid, turning to Hera with prayers for deliverance. Whether one interprets this as a pious desperation or as a calculated attempt to steady his troops by invoking the gods, symbolism is powerful. Even as his men wavered under the storm of Ares, their commander was visibly shaken, refusing to break ranks or order a retreat, at least the omens, or at least the resolve of the Spartans turned. Plasenius ordered the charge and the hoplite phalanx advanced with grim determination.
Speaker 1:The Persians, lacking the heavy armour and discipline of the Spartans, found themselves outmatched once the fighting became hand-to-hand. Herodotus describes the ferocity of the clash, with the Spartans cutting through the Persian ranks despite their early losses. Mardonius himself fought at the head of his guard but was struck down amidst the struggle, his death causing panic to ripple through the Persian army. Here Pousanis' leadership proved decisive. The temptation in such a moment might have been to pursue rashly, to allow discipline to dissolve in the euphoria of turning the tide. Yet under his command, the Spartans pressed forward with grim efficiency, exploiting the shock of Mardonius' fall but maintaining cohesion. The Persian forces, deprived of their commander, faltered and broke, retreating in disarray across the river.
Speaker 1:It's worth noting that Parsonis' role was not merely tactical but psychological. He had held firm when the situation appeared most desperate, steadying the line and ensuring that the Spartans did not succumb to panic as some other contingents had done. His willingness to stand exposed under fire, praying to the gods while waiting for the decisive moment to commit his men, projected an image of Spartans dead fast that carried immense weight both during and after the battle. Later sources, sometimes embellished or reinterpret these actions after the fact, emphasise the discipline and courage of the Spartans under Pausanias, contrasting them with the wavering of the Athenians, who arrive too late to join the decisive phase of the battle. Diodorus presents the engagement in more general terms, portraying Pausanias as the embodiment of Spartan tactical superiority. What unites these accounts is a recognition of the battle's turning point, hinged on the actions of the Spartan commander and his ability to harness the discipline of his own men at the very moment of its greatest peril.
Speaker 1:The immediate aftermath of Plataea confirmed the magnitude of the achievement. The Persians, once seemingly unstoppable, had been shattered in open battle by a disciplined Greek force under Spartan command, had been shattered in open battle by a disciplined Greek force under Spartan command. The contrast with Thermopylae, where Leonidas had fallen in a doomed but a heroic stand, could not have been more striking. Here, another Spartan commander had not only withstood the Empire's assault, but had emerged victorious. For Pausanias, this triumph marked the pinnacle of his career. Yet it also laid the seeds of later controversy, for the glory heaped upon him after Plataea would stir both admiration and resentment. In the moment itself. However, his leadership was beyond question calm in crisis, no-transcript. When the battle finally came, it was Pausanias who stood at the centre of the Greek cause. In the days leading up to the clash, the Spartan commander had been tested repeatedly by supply shortages, persian cavalry, harassment and the restlessness of his allies. Yet when the moment of decision arrived, pausanias' leadership was pivotal in transforming a fragile, frailing coalition into a disciplined force capable of defeating the most formidable army yet fielded against the Greeks.
Speaker 1:The victory at Plataea secured Pausanias a place at the centre of Greek renown. In the immediate aftermath, he was celebrated as the liberator of Hellas, the general who had destroyed Mardonius' army and ended the Persian threat to the Greek mainland. General who had destroyed Mardonius' army and ended the Persian threat to the Greek mainland. The spoils of war reflected this triumph, most notably the dedication of a bronze tripod at Delphi. Yet the inscription Pausanias placed upon it, which credited himself and Sparta above all others, proved contentious. Though later altered to acknowledge the collective effort of the Greeks, the original dedication reveals his desire for individual glory, an impulse at odds with the communal ethos of Sparta.
Speaker 1:For a time, his reputation seemed unassailable. He commanded the allied forces in campaigns into Asia Minor, where several cities were freed from Persian rule. But these very successes sowed unease. Pausanias' conduct began to trouble both the allies and fellow Spartans. Reports describe him donning Persian attire, receiving envoys in the manner of the great king and adopting a haughtiness that offended the sensibilities of his commanders. To those who had just fought to repel the Persian influence, his apparent admiration for their ways struck an alarming note. This tension lies at the heart of Pausanias' legacy.
Speaker 1:At Plataea he embodied Spartan virtues discipline, patience under strain and an ability to balance tactical caution with decisive action. Yet in the aftermath, he seems to have drifted towards qualities more often associated with tyranny and autocracy. Thucydides portrays him as ambitious and ultimately treasonous, allegedly conspiring with Persia against his own people. Whether this account reflects fact or later political propaganda remains debated, but it underscores the unease that his conduct provoked in his own lifetime. The dual images of Pisanus, the steady commander who saved Greece, and the arrogant noble who courted dishonour, shaped how history remembered him. To Herodotus, he was a figure of immense capability, worthy of praise for his leadership in the darkest moments of the Persian Wars. To Thucydides, he represented the dangers of unrestrained ambition, a cautionary tale of how success can corrupt.
Speaker 1:Modern scholarship, too, remains divided. Some stress his indispensability at Plataea, arguing that a steady hand was crucial to victory. Others see his later downfall as emblematic of the instability within Sparta's system. We struggled to manage individual prominence within its rigid collective framework. In the end, pausanias' legacy is inseparable from the battle that made his name.
Speaker 1:Plataea stands as one of the defining moments of the Persian Wars, a triumph of allied Greek arms under Spartan leadership. Yet the very qualities that secured the victory also carried within them the seeds of his later decline. His pursuit of glory, his fascination with power and his uneasy place within Spartan society combined to cast him as both a hero and cautionary figure. To study Plasanius, then, is to confront the complexities of leadership in the ancient world, where the line between saviour and danger was often perilously thin. Thank you all for your continued support, and I truly do appreciate you following the show and supporting it. Next month we'll be moving away from Plataea, but we'll divert our attention across the Aegean and look at some topics around the Battle of Makale happening around the same time as Plataea. Once again, everyone thanks for the support and I'll see you next month.