ŷ������

2.7��
Originally posted August 8, 2020.
Edited for clarity January 23, 2024.
I don't know how accurate Steve Pressfield's vision of ancient Greece and the Battle of Thermopolye is. But it has enough of the feel of accuracy, of verisimilitude, to make his setting and characters believable, if not exactly likeable. Not all online critics agree. One claims that the battle tactics Pressfield uses come from a later period in Greek history (since the story takes place about 2500 years ago, I'm willing to cut him the 70 years slack, in this case). Another says the author's description of war wounds is unrealistic as it doesn't include the effects of gangrene and similar infections. For that I thank Mr. Pressfield, as his battles are quite gory enough.

My issues are with the story telling. I think he does a decent job creating a credible if brutal, society. I just have trouble with his frequent, long winded expositions extolling the supposed virtues of that society (and with the disjointed manner in which he tells his tale). The Greek city state we call Sparta was a militaristic oligarcy of slave holders, who extolled war over all other endeavors. The reason for that was mainly so it could keep its captive population under control. It banned most art, poetry and philosopy as effeminate. Pressfield hides none of that, to his credit, but he tries to excuse it with verbose, almost mystical ramblings about soldierly life and the brotherhood of warriors. He's not the first, the imperialist powers of 18th and 19th century Europe did the same. It just seems odd that a modern American would do it. And it takes away from what otherwise is a not bad adventure story. I doubt I'll read Pressfield's other novels as I simply don't appreciate his style (took a very long time to finish). You might want to look at it simply to see what the fuss is about.