The Movie 300 from a Military View

Posted by Christopher Eger Mar 21, 2007

I just saw “300”, the super hip stylized retelling of the Battle of Thermopylae.

The Battle of Thermopylae took place during the Greco-Persia war in 480BC. While I thought it was a good movie as far as the war movie genre goes it does contain a number of flaws from a military history standpoint. Most notably in every battle scene, Spartan soldiers are shown nearly naked. Generally in warfare the only place you would fight naked is in a prison shower, and the Spartans were no exception. Unlike it's shown in the movie, the Spartans were very heavily armored, especially for the time period. The Spartan way of fighting was in a phalanx manned by crack Hoplite troops with a minimum of 13 years of the toughest military training in history. They had head-to-toe bronze plated amour. Even their feet were armored. They had large bronze shields. The movie would have you believe that they fought nearly naked. The Persians were generally unarmored and had only wicker shields. only the crack Immortals were partially covered by armor of leather and small bits of bronze, not the chrome masks and black leather shown in the movie. King Xerxes, the Persian warlord, likewise is half naked and shaved bald (which would actually be a violation of the Zoroastrian religion that he practiced). In its defense the movie does show what one tough well trained and motivated force can do in an impossible situation.

I mean we are still talking about it 2500 years later right>?

I don't think people should go see the movie expecting a historical re-enactment but rather a movie based on a comic book (i mean graphic novel) which was in turn based on the most deservedly well known holding action in military history. With that grain of salt held firmly in grasp, it is still a good movie.