Quote Originally Posted by marct View Post
Hi Tequila,
Agreed totally on the Custer scenario. On Tom's Alamo analog, I'm not as sure, and on something such as Leonidas I would totally disagree. All had roughly the same immediate outcome, but fairly different long term effects and (possibly) motivations. It strikes me that in some (by no means all!) instances, the annihilation of an entire unit can have effects totally out of proportion to the combat; Thermopylae being the classic example.

I certainly agree that romanticizing a blunder, and the idiot who made it happen, is a critical mistake, but I have to wonder if it isn't a fairly "normal" reaction to any such type of a loss?
Thermopylae is so far back in history and so shrouded in mythmaking that we have little real data to go on. Certainly it made no difference strategically - the Persians avenged the burning of Sardis when they occupied and burned Athens, saw their supply line sink at Salamis (the critical battle), and then withdrew their main force which could not have remained deployed in Greece proper for long anyway. The rearguard meant to create a Persian-friendly permanent base in the north beat a retreat to friendlier ground that turned into a rout when their native allies turned on them (see Elphinstone) and the local tribes united and caught up to them at Plataea.

Thermopylae ranks as an outstanding information operation in that it held enormous propaganda value, especially for Sparta in maintaining its place at the head of the anti-Persian alliance in the face of a determined Athenian challenge.