The Hidden Treasures of Olympus, the Mountain of the Greek Gods

Olympus, mountain of Greek Gods
The summit of Mount Olympus. Credit: Loris Lote, CC BY-SA 4.0/Wikipedia

Many people come to visit Greece with a mission in mind – to visit Olympus, the mountain of the ancient Greek gods — and tour the nearby town of Litochoro and the sights nearby.

Mount Olympus is one of the great treasures of Greece. It is famous not only because of Greek mythology but because of its great beauty and the challenging climbs it offers to adventurers.

For untold thousands of years, it has inspired hundreds of stories and myths.

The peak of Olympus was reached for the first time on August 2, 1913, by the Swiss climbing team of Frédéric Boissonnas and Daniel Baud-Bovy, who were assisted by a mountain guide called Christos Kakkalos.

Kakkalos remained the official guide for Olympus until his death in 1976.

It is estimated that around 10,000 people climb Olympus every year, with most of them only reaching as far as one of its secondary peaks, called Skolio.

Whether you want to hike the trails of Mount Olympus or experience the untouched nature of the area, let’s take a look at some of the amazing experiences waiting for you.

Tourists often stay in Litochoro, since almost all climbing trails for Mount Olympus begin in the southwest part of that town. One popular hike is between Prionia to Litochoro. It has a number of river crossings and bridges in surroundings of pristine nature.

Olympus waterfalls

There are other activities for you to check out near Litohoro as well, including Orlias Waterfalls. These peaceful, cool waterfalls are the perfect place to cool down amidst the backdrop of the pine, cedar and fir trees of the forests of Mount Olympus.

Olympus, the mountain of Gods
Waterfalls at Olympus. Credit: Kostas1144 , CC BY-SA 4.0/Wikimedia Commons

If going to the beach and swimming in clear, sparkling blue water sounds relaxing to you then check out the coastal area known as Pláka or Pláka Litochoro, which is located just east of the town of Litochoro.

You will find everything you need to enjoy yourself in Pláka Litochoro from seaside resorts from hotels and campsites to restaurants and beach bars.

If you are interested in the history of Litochoro, check out the Old Monastery of St. Dionysius. This Greek Orthodox monastery on the slopes of Mount Olympus comprises ruins of the original monastery, which was first established in 1542.

Olympus
Old Monastery of St. Dionysius. Credit: Juergen-Olymp , CC BY-SA 4.0/Wikipedia

It has been destroyed many times, the last time by the Nazis during WWII in 1943.

Another interesting fact is that the first recorded mention of the town of Litochoro is in an account of a visit by Saint Dionysios to Mount Olympus way back in the 16th century.

You can visit the unique chapel of Saint Dionysios, which is located some 20 minutes from the monastery along the Enipeas River.

Olympus, the mountain of Greek Gods
The unique chapel of Saint Dionysios, is tucked into a mountain cave. Public Domain

Also, be sure to visit two important ancient sites in Litochoro: Dion for its archaeological park and museum, and Leivithra, with its acropolis and Leivithra Park.

Where to stay near Olympus

Litohoro Olympus Resort Villas and Spas
Litohoro Olympus Resort Villas and Spas

The Litohoro Olympus Resort Villas and Spas, located in Pláka Litochoro, is a one-of-a-kind boutique-style hotel.

Located very close to the famous Litochoro Village, with all its attractions, here you will find accommodations ranging from deluxe rooms with sea views to VIP villas with private gardens and pools. It is a great place for couples, weddings or families with children.

While staying at the Litohoro Olympus Resort Villas and Spas, you will enjoy the best of Greek and Mediterranean cuisine at their own restaurant, Elia.

There is also a private spa, Aphrodite, where you will find many different therapies for your relaxation and rejuvenation along with a choice of the best beauty treatments and work-out facilities.

Truman Doctrine: How America Helped Greece Avoid Falling into Soviet Orbit

Truman Doctrine Greece
Harry S. Truman (middle) with British Prime Minister Clement Attlee (left) and Joseph Stalin at the Potsdam Conference (July 17 to August 2, 1945). Public Domain

The 1947 Truman Doctrine was crucial for Greece to be able to avoid falling into the sphere of Soviet influence while the country was ravaged by the Civil War (1946-1949).

With the Truman Doctrine, United States President Harry S. Truman established that the US would provide political, military and economic assistance to all democratic nations under threat from external or internal authoritarian forces.

The decision was announced to Congress by the US President on March 12, 1947 with  its primary goal being to contain Soviet geopolitical expansion during the Cold War.

In his speech, Truman emphasized the broader consequences of a failure to protect democracy in Greece and Turkey.

The U.S. Congress responded to the message by promptly appropriating $400 million to support Greece and Turkey, as the latter was pressured by the Soviets to allow base and transit rights through the Turkish Straits.

The Truman Doctrine further developed on July 4, 1948, when the US President pledged to contain the communist uprisings in Greece and Turkey.

Greece after World War II

The liberation of Greece from German occupation on October 12, 1944 was celebrated wildly by the people. However, the country itself was in terrible shape on many other fronts.

Joy was replaced by the new specter of famine, misery, decay, corruption, public health issues and the disintegration of the economy.

Previous to the liberation, the leader of the government-in-exile, liberal Georgios Papandreou, was jailed by the Axis powers in 1942. He then fled to Egypt, where he became the Prime Minister of the exiled government, and later to Italy, in preparation for its return to Greece.

On September 26, 1944 the leadership of the Greek Resistance forces (EAM/ELAS and EDES,) the government in exile and the British Command in the Middle East met in Italy and signed the Caserta Agreement.

Under the Agreement all resistance forces in Greece were placed under the command of a British officer, General Ronald Scobie.

The Greek resistance forces were the National Liberation Front (EAM) and its military body the Greek People’s Liberation Army (ELAS), which was controlled by the Greek Communist Party (KKE).

The National Republican Greek League (EDES) was the non-communist resistance force against the Nazis.

The fight between the ideologies of the left and right (EAM/ELAS against EDES) had already begun in 1943 with scattered clashes.

The internecine fighting among the Greek people had made foreign mediation necessary. The Truman Doctrine would later prove crucial for post-war Greece in this respect.

The Greek Civil War

In the spring of 1944, the exiled government and resistance forces reached an agreement to form a national unity government that included six EAM-affiliated ministers.

However, on the first of December, 1944, Scobie, along with Papandreou’s government, gave an order to resistance groups to disarm by December 10. This led to a number of members of EAM, many of whom were affiliated with the communist party, to resign from the nascent government before even formally joining it on December 2.

In response, EAM called for a general strike and called for a reorganization of the military wing of the group, ELAS.

On December 3, a pro-EAM rally ended with British forces and Greek gendarmes opening fire against the crowd, killing 28 demonstrators and injuring dozens.

The result was the Dekemvriana insurrection, a precursor to the Civil War, with battles in Athens that lasted 33 days and resulted in the defeat of the EAM. On February 12, 1945 EAM surrendered its guns with the signing of the Treaty of Varkiza.

One year later, the Greek Civil War erupted when former ELAS partisans in hiding organized the Democratic Army of Greece (DSE), controlled by the KKE.

By that time, the neighboring communist states of Albania, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria were providing logistical support and armaments from the Soviet Union, especially to the forces operating in the north of Greece.

The Greek government forces, the National Army — with the crucial aid of the British army — fought against the partisans, with interim defeats from 1946 to 1948.

However, in February 1947, Britain formally requested for the United States to take over its role in supporting the royalist Greek government.

With financial aid provided by the Truman Doctrine, from 1947 and on — after the British withdrew —  the Greek army forces won the war in 1949.

The efforts of the KKE to bring Greece under the sphere of Soviet influence like its neighboring countries, were exactly what the Truman Doctrine aimed to stop.

In his speech to Congress promoting the Truman Doctrine, the US President stressed:

“I believe it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.

I believe that we must assist free peoples to work out their own destinies in their own way.

I believe that our help should be primarily through economic and financial aid which is essential to economic stability and orderly political processes.”

Truman argued that a communist victory in the Greek Civil War would also endanger political stability in Turkey, which would consequently undermine political stability in the Middle East.

The Truman Doctrine After the Civil War

Greece actually emerged from the Civil War in much worse shape than it had at the end of the Nazi Occupation. Restoration was a giant task as the two sides continued to despise each other.

Thousands of leftists were killed, tortured or sent to camps on the barren islands of Gyaros, Makronisos and Leros.

On the winning side, the Truman Doctrine was the beginning of a new era not only in Greek-American relations, but also a turning point in the entire course of post-war life internationally.

Greece further established its place in the West by joining NATO in February 1952.

Nevertheless, political polarization continued in Greece culminating in the July 1965 riots following the resignation of the Georgios Papandreou government and the subsequent appointment of successive prime ministers — unsuccessfully — by King Constantine II.

The political turmoil continued, leading to the military coup d’état of April, 21 1967 and the subsequent rightist regime that lasted seven years.

To this day, Greeks remain polarized as to what consequences a victory of the leftists have meant for the country.

In a 2008 Gallup poll, Greeks were asked “whether it was better that the right wing won the Civil War.” Forty-three percent responded that it was better for Greece that the right wing won, 13 percent responded that it would have been better if the left had won, 20 percent responded “neither” and 24 percent did not respond.

 

New Find May Confirm That Amazons, Ancient Female Warriors, Existed

achilles amazon penthesilea
Achilles and the Amazon Penthesilea (on the ground) as depicted on the Bassae Frieze. Credit: Sarah Murray/Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY 2.0

Excavations of bronze age burial sites have uncovered battle-scarred female archers, leading some archaeologists to posit that Amazons, the famed female warriors of Greek legend who are largely believed to be mythical, may have really existed.

In Greek mythology, the Amazons were warrior women living northeast of ancient Greece during the late Bronze Age, between approximately 1900 and 1200 BC. The source of the Amazonian myths is Classical Greek literature in which they were first mentioned by Homer.

As one of his 12 labors, Hercules has to get hold of the magic girdle of the Amazonian queen Hippolyte, and Achilles killed another Amazonian queen, Penthesilea, only to fall madly in love with her as her gorgeous face emerged from the helmet.

Hercules and the Amazon Queen Hippolyte by Vincenzo de' Rossi, Salone dei Cinquecento, Palazzo Vecchio.
Hercules and the Amazon Queen Hippolyte by Vincenzo de’ Rossi, Salone dei Cinquecento, Palazzo Vecchio. Credit: ER’s Eyes – Our planet is beautiful. CC BY 2.0/flickr

Despite being shrouded by mystery and myth, archaeologists are beginning to find more and more evidence for the existence of these fierce female warriors, the latest piece coming from excavations of graves within a Bronze Age necropolis in Nakhchivan in Azerbaijan. This revealed that women had been buried with weapons such as razor-sharp arrowheads, a bronze dagger, and a mace, as well as jewelry.

Following the discovery, archaeologists have concluded there may have been Amazon women who lived 4,000 years ago, and these ferocious women were known for their male-free society and aptitude on the battlefield, especially with a bow and arrow.

“It shows that there’s truth behind the myths and legends of ancient Greece,” historian Bettany Hughes told The Observer.

Historian Bettany Hughes.
Historian Bettany Hughes. Credit: Sounds Right. CC BY 2.0/flickr

Were the Amazons real?

Hughes went on to say that this recent evidence was all the more significant when linked with earlier discoveries. In 2019, the remains of four female warriors buried with arrowheads and spears were uncovered in Russia, and in 2017, Armenian archaeologists found the remains of a woman who seemed to have died from battle wounds, as an arrowhead was buried in her leg. In the early 1990s, the remains of a woman buried with a dagger were discovered near the Kazakhstan border.

“A [civilization] isn’t made up of a single grave,” Hughes told The Observer. “If we’re talking about a culture that crosses the Caucasus and the Steppe, which is what all the ancients said, obviously you need other remains.”

Some of the skeletons show women had used bows and arrows extensively. Hughes observed that “their fingers are warped because they’re using arrows so much. Changes on the finger joints wouldn’t just happen from hunting. That is some sustained, big practice. What’s very exciting is that a lot of the bone evidence is also showing clear evidence of sustained time in the saddle. Women’s pelvises are basically opened up because they’re riding horses. [Their] bones are just shaped by their lifestyle.”

Moreover, she noted that the jewelry includes carnelian necklaces, saying, “Carnelian is a semi-precious stone. You see it often when people are high priestesses or goddesses. So it’s a mark of women with status—as are mace heads.”

The fruits of the excavation will be revealed in a new Channel 4 series in April, called Bettany Hughes’ Treasures of the World, wherein one of the episodes, “Silk Roads and the Caucasus,” centers on an area of the world that saw the coming and going of cultures and civilizations for hundreds of years and where trade routes linked the continents of Asia and Europe.

In the documentary, Hughes says of the Amazon finds, “Slowly you’re getting these brilliant bits of evidence that are coming out of the earth. That’s often the way, with the really best stories.”

The archaeologist takes a trip to the mountain village of Khinalig in the Greater Caucasus, the highest inhabited place in Europe. There has been a settlement there since the bronze age, and she asked a handful of its inhabitants about the Amazons. “They said, ‘all of our grandmothers fought. The men were all away with the herds. The women always used to cover their faces to fight,’ which is exactly what the ancient sources said, so that people didn’t know whether they were women or men.”

Greek Island’s Only 2 Students Joined by Athens Kids for Parade

0
Agathonisi Greek island , student parade
This year, the only two students from the Greek island of Agathonisi were astonished to see children from a primary school of Athens join them in the Greek Independence Day parade. Credit: Henrik Bach Nielsen licensed under CC BY 2.0

Parents and students from a primary school in the metropolitan area of Athens traveled to Agathonisi, a small island in Greece’s Aegean Sea, to participate in the island’s Greek Independence Day parade alongside the only two students from the local school of Agathonisi.

This commendable initiative showcased solidarity and unity among different student communities. This fosters the creation of new friendships and the exchange of experiences as part of the “Where Angels Exist” initiative.

Greek island Agathonisi’s only two students parade together with children from Athens

The excursion was organized with the kind cooperation of the Municipality of Kos, which had planned an official reception for the young visitors and their families. The itinerary included visits to Agathonisi’s historical landmarks, such as the ancient Asclepieion. The children attained exceptional educational and experiential opportunities.

Initiated in 2019, “Where Angels Exist” aims to enrich children’s experiences by cultivating compassion and community spirit. Through such endeavors, students not only gain practical skills in assisting and supporting one another but also internalize the values of solidarity and humanity.

This emotionally resonant initiative garners support from local businesses as well as media attention. It underscores the potency of community engagement and widespread backing for such endeavors. The excursion to Agathonisi became an unforgettable experience for the children, augmenting their educational journey with hands-on learning and fostering new connections.

As the day unfolded, participants reflected on the poignant backdrop of Agathonisi’s demographic challenges. With only 150 inhabitants and just two students on the island, the Athens students’ presence in the parade was profoundly significant.

Greece’s problem of low birth rates

In recent years, Greece has witnessed a decline in its population, reaching 10,413,982 as of January 1, 2023. This reflects a 0.5 percent decrease from 2022. Notably, only 13.4 percent of the population is composed of individuals aged zero to fourteen years old. This highlights the repercussions of the nation’s low birth rate. Furthermore, those between the ages of fifteen and sixty-four comprise 63.7 percent of the population. People who are sixty-five and older constitute 22.9 percent of the nation’s residents.

Moreover, many island residents have relocated to major cities. This is due to inadequate infrastructure and limited opportunities, exacerbating the demographic strain on areas like Agathonisi.

Agathonisi

Agathonisi is a small island located at the northernmost point of the Dodecanese archipelago in Greece. In ancient times, Agathonisi was known as Psetoussa (Ancient Greek: Ψετούσσα). During the summer season, many people visit the island to explore the secluded beaches and the two quaint villages, Megalo Chorio, or “Big Village,” and Mikro Chorio, meaning “Small Village.” The Municipality of Agathonisi includes an archipelago of uninhabited offshore islets, including Glaros, Kouneli, Nera, and Psathonisio.

Basketball Legend Nick Galis Honored by Consulate of Greece in Chicago

Honoring ceremony of Greek basketball legend Nick Galis for his contribution to sports.
Honoring ceremony of Greek basketball legend Nick Galis for his contribution to sports. Credit: Consulate General of Greece in Chicago.

The Consulate General of Greece in Chicago honored Greek basketball legend Nick Galis for his contribution to Greek sports, with his presence in the US city being the reason he was not able to attend the celebration of his former Greek basketball team, Aris, for the club’s 110 years of history.

Nick Galis attended the event, hosted by the Consulate General of Greece in Chicago, to commemorate Greek Independence Day. The emblematic “Gangster” of Greek basketball was honored for his significant contributions to sports, alongside a large gathering of expatriates.

Nick Galis’ history in basketball

Nick Galis is from Union City, N.J. and Seton Hall. He averaged 27.5 points as a senior in 1978-79 and was third in the nation behind Lawrence Butler of Idaho State and an Indiana State player named Larry Bird.

The Celtics drafted Galis in the fourth round, 68th overall, in 1979, but he sprained an ankle in training camp, missed time, and was cut before the start of the season. The child of Greek immigrants decided to try Europe.

Nick Galis would play for two teams in Greece, Aris Thessaloniki and Panathinaikos, from 1979 to 1994. Eight Greek League championships, five MVPs there, and several prestigious individual accolades would follow. He was the leading scorer in Euroleague for eight seasons.

The shooting guard was named one of the top 50 players in the history of FIBA, basketball’s international governing body, in a 1991 survey and one of the 50 greatest EuroLeague contributors in 2008.

He was inducted to the NBA Hall of Fame in 2017, and in a four-minute-long acceptance speech, the Greek veteran made a short, emotional retrospect of his career. He said that he was not disappointed when he was drafted for the Boston Celtics but couldn’t secure a contract with the NBA legends, because he was happy to play in his native Greece.

His most touching story involved a woman stopping him during a walk in Thessaloniki. He thought she just wanted his autograph, but she wanted to thank him for leading her addict son away from drugs and into basketball.

An eight-time champion in the Greek Basket League, Nick Galis transformed basketball in his adopted city of Thessaloniki while becoming the superstar athlete every young player tried to emulate.

During his senior season at Seton Hall, the New Jersey native ranked third in the nation with a scoring average of 27.5 points per game. Nick Galis, the son of Greek immigrants, signed with ARIS of Thessaloniki in 1979 after being drafted by the Boston Celtics.

Then, in 1983, the five-time All-European selection helped ARIS run off seven straight league titles. The prolific scorer attacked the interior, confounding the opposing team’s defense and defying the limits of his small frame.

Nick Galis led Greece to a gold medal in the European Championships in 1987 and was named MVP, solidifying his status as an icon that contributed mightily to the popularity of the game.

UN Security Council Votes for Gaza Ceasefire-US Abstains

0
UN Security Council votes for ceasefire in Gaza, US abstains
UN Security Council votes for ceasefire in Gaza, US abstains. Credit: UN Women Gallery. CC BY 2.0/flickr

For the first time, the UN Security Council has called for an “immediate ceasefire” in Gaza. The US abstained rather than using its veto. This was in a move away from its previous position.

The resolution also demands the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages. Ten elected members of the council wrote the resolution. Mozambique’s representative presented it for consideration in the chamber.

The Security Council has been unable to reach an agreement since the war began in October. It has failed to align on a ceasefire call. However, now, fourteen members of the council have voted for the resolution, while the US has abstained.

What the US abstaining from UN ceasefire vote means for its relationship with Israel

The move by the US is indicative of increasing divergence between the nation and its ally, Israel, over the Middle Eastern country’s offensive in Gaza. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has canceled plans for his top aides, Ron Dermer and Tzachi Hanegbi, to visit Washington, according to reports.

The Israeli prime minister’s office released a statement. It accused the US of harming Israel’s offensive efforts and attempts to free hostages. This is through the US decision not to use a veto to block the resolution, The Times of Israel reported.

This US decision marks a “clear retreat from the consistent US position in the Security Council since the beginning of the war.” It also “gives Hamas hope that international pressure will allow them to get a ceasefire without releasing…hostages,” the statement reads.

In contrast, the US had previously blocked resolutions calling for a ceasefire. It had claimed this move would be wrong while delicate negotiations for a truce and hostage releases were ongoing between Israel and Hamas.

However, the US has grown increasingly critical of Israel over alleged escalating death tolls in Gaza. It is reported over 32,000 people—mostly women and children—have been killed by Israel’s offensive. This is according to the enclave’s Hamas-run health ministry.

The US has also urged Israel to offer more help in getting vital aid delivered to Gaza. It is reported the entire population is suffering from severe levels of food insecurity. The UN previously accused Israel of blocking aid. Yet Israel has blamed the UN for this. Israel argues the UN has failed to carry out distributions.

The war began on October 7th. This was after Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic terrorist group governing Gaza, carried out an unprecedented attack on Israel. It killed around 1,200 people, according to Israeli tallies, and took 253 hostages into Gaza.

Like the US, Russia and China had also previously vetoed texts. During this most recent vote, Russia attempted to amend the text by restoring it to an earlier draft that included the word “permanent.” Nevertheless, the bid failed.

Archaeological Site of Messene, Greece, to Get Visitor-Friendly Upgrades

Artists' impression of the visitor upgrades to the ancient Messene site in the south west Peloponnese.
Artists’ impression of the visitor upgrades to the ancient Greek archaeological site of Messene, southwest Peloponnese. Credit: Greek Ministry of Culture.

The Central Archaeological Council of Greece has approved visitor-friendly upgrades at the renowned archaeological site of ancient Messene in the southwest Peloponnese, it was announced on Monday.

Ancient Messene was excavated by the late Petros Themelis, a Greek classical archaeologist and professor of the University of Crete, who was keen to make the site available to the public while maintaining it environmentally-friendly. This is a vision the newly approved plans purport to conform to.

Its ancient theater, like that of Epidaurus, is open every summer for shows and musical performances and sees flocks of people every year, greatly contributing to local development and tourism in the Peloponnese in general.

Asklepion, ancient Messene, greece
View of the ancient Asclepeion at Messene archaeological site. Credit: wikimedia commons / Rossignol Benoît CC BY 3.0

Culture Minister Lina Mendoni said in a statement that the government’s priorities center on the continuous upgrading of services to the guests of archaeological sites and museums and in making these readily accessible. In Ancient Messene, she said, “Our goal is that interventions, landscaping, and constructions are as mild as possible—that they do not create an optical, aesthetic, or any other problem for the monuments, but promote their functional nature, and support their recognition and overall, highlight the archaeological site.”

The Antiquities Ephorate of Messenia carried out salvage excavations in 2023, Mendoni explained, to identify remains where the entrances (north and south) will be re-planned. The sections that were discovered may possibly relate to Late Classical-Early Hellenistic eras, and based on the features of the Hippodamian urban layout of the site, may belong to a cluster of private homes.

What are the planned upgrades at the Ancient Messene site?

ancient Messene
The odeon of Ancient Messene in Greece. Credit: wikimedia commons / Herbert Ortner CC BY 2.5

Among the upgrades approved in the northern entrance section are the shutting down of the old ticketing area and the parking spaces, which stretched to the entrance of the ancient site. The ticketing area will be moved elsewhere, facilitating visitors’ movements, while the parking spaces will be reconstructed near the new archaeological museum. The museum design is still in the planning stages.

Access will be improved with ramps, while clusters of trees will be planted to provide more shade. No existing trees will be removed.

The new visitors’ store will afford a view of the site, while the bathroom, health space, and storage area will be partly below ground. A new elevator will make the cafe accessible to visitors who are physically impaired.

At the southern entrance, a 98-square-meter building will be constructed partly below ground and serve personnel of the site, while a semi-open corridor will lead to a staircase which will take people to the site.

The refurbishment projects at the north and south entrances of the site will reportedly be ready for visitors by the end of 2025.

What Positions Did World Powers Take in the Greek War of Independence?

Signing of the London Protocol, fresco of the frieze of the Trophy Hall of the Greek Parliament
Signing of the London Protocol, fresco of the frieze of the Trophy Hall of the Greek Parliament. Credit: Ludwig Michael von Schwanthaler, Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain

The Greek Revolution, also known as the Greek War of Independence, which lasted approximately from 1821 to 1830, was a foundational event in the history of modern Greece. This war, which is also known simply as “the Revolution” amongst Greeks, marked the struggle of this ancient nation for liberation from Ottoman rule.

The conflict, as it was expected, attracted the attention of major European powers of the time, particularly Britain, France and Russia, the stances of which evolved throughout the course of the war.

Initially, these nations maintained positions of neutrality or even direct or indirect opposition, influenced by various geopolitical and strategic considerations. However, as the conflict progressed, their positions shifted towards active support for the Greek cause. This shift was mainly driven by a complex network of reasons, including those of ideological sympathy, diplomatic maneuvering, and international rivalry and interests.

Russia’s stance towards the Greek War of Independence

The stance of Russia during the Greek War of Independence was characterized by a strong sense of ideological and cultural sympathy towards the Greek cause. The shared Orthodox Christian faith as well as traditional bonds between Russia and the Greeks that date back to the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire created a sense of solidarity amongst the Greeks and high-ranking Russian officials.

This sympathy was further reinforced by the widespread influence of philhellenism within Russian society, which boosted the movement of support for the Greek cause in the Russian communities. This sentiment was clearly reflected in the enthusiastic reactions towards the Greek revolution from various sectors of the Russian population, especially clerics and scholars, who viewed the Greek struggle as a noble cause deserving of support.

The portrait of Tsar Alexander I
Alexander I ruled Russia from 1801 until his death on December 1, 1825. Credit: G. Dawe, 1826, Peterhof, Wikimedia Commons Public Domain

The official Russian government, however, remained a reactionary conservative power. It found itself in the middle of a truly complex diplomatic crossroads due to the conflict. Tsar Alexander I refused to openly declare war on the Ottoman Empire following the Greek revolt.

This was not easy, and it came despite the strong public sentiment in favor of the Greeks among Russians. The Tsar had to think about the fact that the Greek War of Independence would have significant implications for the broader region from the northern Balkans to the Eastern Mediterranean. This has historically been a region that Russia was always interested in, and thus, the Tsar had to maneuver through these challenges carefully, trying not to damage his empire’s interests.

Three years after the start of the Greek War of Independence, Tsar Alexander I made a proposal in an attempt to balance Russia’s stance. He asked the other major European powers to consider the option of the establishment of three autonomous Greek principalities in the broader region. These would not obtain independence, but rather remain subservient to the Ottoman Empire. Thus, this showed the world that Russia was ready for some form of Greek autonomy.

After the death of Tsar Alexander I and the subsequent coronation of Tsar Nicholas I in September 1826, the new Russian leader tried to use the Greek revolt to Russia’s advantage and appeared to be on a war footing against the Ottoman Empire in the late 1820s. This is what led to Russia’s participation in the Battle of Navarino. Nonetheless, he never asked for the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire. On the contrary, he was against the total collapse of it.

A portrait of Tsar Nicholas I of Russia
Tsar Nicholas I was coronated in 1826. Credit: Georg von Bothmann, Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain

Despite this apparent ideological sympathy due to historical and religious bonds, the Russian military adopted a very cautious approach throughout this decade. No official Russian unit fought to support the Greeks, as the Russian Empire focused on more strategic considerations, seeing the bigger picture. The Russians also had to take into consideration the potential impact that this revolt could have on the ethnic composition of the Ottoman Empire, which had been an arch-rival for years.

Nevertheless, saying that Russia did not support the Greeks would be a historical mistake. Russia provided assistance to the Greeks both prior to and during the war. Primarily, the Russians provided significant material assistance and relief to Greek refugees who fled to Russian cities like Odessa and Kishinev after the uprising began.

Additionally, specially established committees under Russian officials distributed funds that were being gathered from private donations and public sources across Russia to support the thousands of displaced Greeks. Furthermore, prominent Greeks like the cleric Konstantinos Oikonomos played a crucial role in mediating between Russian officials and the communities of Greek war refugees.

Part of the portrait of Ioannis Kapodistrias
Ioannis Kapodistrias was Russia’s Foreign Minister and Greece’s first ruler. Credit: National Historical Museum of Athens, Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain

Oikonomos, for example, advised the Ober-procurator of the Russian Holy Synod and helped distribute aid to Greeks who were displaced after the Chios massacre in 1822. Another major personality that needs to be mentioned here was Ioannis Kapodistrias, a former Russian foreign minister, who became the first head of state of independent Greece.

The involvement of Russia actually culminated with its participation, alongside Britain and France, in the battle of Navarino, where the Christian forces defeated the Ottomans. This battle was the beginning of the end for the Turks, as it ultimately became the major contributor to the establishment of an independent Greek state a couple of years later.

Britain’s role in the Greek War of Independence

The stance of the British Empire during the Greek War of Independence underwent a significant transformation throughout the various stages of the war. Initially, the British government actually maintained a pro-Ottoman position. This was primarily driven by geopolitical concerns and the desire to protect its mercantile interests in the region. As is understandable, every disruption to the status quo is normally seen by the established world order as a nuance rather than a welcoming event.

Britain primarily feared that due to Russia’s underlying sympathy towards the Greek cause, an eventuality of direct or indirect Russian control over Greece could threaten Britain’s access to India and disrupt lucrative trade routes in the Aegean Sea and Levant. Additionally, the then British-held Ionian Islands were also a factor that played a crucial role in Britain’s cautious approach, as there were concerns about the war spilling over into British territories and dragging Britain into the war.

The portrait of George Canning
George Canning served as Foreign Secretary and briefly as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom during the Greek Revolution. His statue now adorns a central square in Athens. Credit: Thomas Lawrence – Art UK, Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain

Despite the official stance of the British government, however, there was considerable public sympathy for the Greek cause within the United Kingdom. Philhellenism, which is a movement that supported the Greeks, had a strong influence on British society, particularly among the Philosophical Radicals, the Whigs, and the Evangelicals. These influential groups actively supported the Greek revolution and did so through financial assistance and advocacy in favor of the Greek positions within the British elite. The London Greek Committee played also a crucial role in mobilizing valuable support and shaping public opinion even more in favor of the Greeks.

As the years went by and the conflict prolonged, the official position of Britain began to shift. The realization, on behalf of the British political elite, that a protracted war could leave room for greater Russian involvement in the Aegean and the Mediterranean, made Britain change gear. This fundamental aspect of the geopolitical reality of the time, along with a couple of other issues, such as the intervention of Egypt in support of the Turks and the fear of the Morea (Peloponnese) being resettled with Muslims, prompted Britain to reconsider its support for the Ottoman Empire.

Major diplomatic efforts to mediate peace deals were attempted. However, they all proved unsuccessful. This encouraged Britain to consider recognizing an outright Greek independence as a means to pressuring the Ottomans into negotiations. Such a fundamental shift on behalf of the British culminated in the UK forming an alliance with Russia and France, which directly intervened against the Ottomans. This Christian bloc resulted in the decisive Battle of Navarino in 1827 and paved the way for the final recognition of Greek independence through the London Protocol of 1830.

The French and their approach to the Greek War of Independence

The stance of France in the Greek War of Independence evolved from initially being stuck to neutrality to active military and diplomatic support for the Greek cause. Even though there was widespread sympathy among the French public and intellectual circles, the official French government initially maintained a policy of clear neutrality. This stance was also influenced by broader strategic interests that the French had in preserving the established balance of power in Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean. There were also concerns among senior political and military circles in Paris that provoking a conflict with the Ottoman Empire could potentially benefit France’s rivals, such as Britain and Russia.

The portrait of Louis XVIII
Louis XVIII had been restored to the throne in 1814 following Napoleon’s initial abdication and continued to reign in France until his death on September 16, 1824. Credit: Francois Gerard, Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain

Nonetheless, and in a similar way to that of the British, French policy began to shift as the war progressed. French Philhellenes played a significant role, mainly in supporting the Greek struggle, both through direct participation in the fighting and by providing crucial military expertise to Greek fighters, who needed the additional training if they had any hopes of success against the organized Ottoman military.

Charles Nicolas Fabvier, in particular, was instrumental in organizing the modern Greek regular army. French ships took part and fought for the Greeks in the pivotal Battle of Navarino in 1827. It was a decisive moment in securing the coveted Greek independence.

In 1828, in particular, France, along with Britain and Russia, formally decided and committed to mediating the question of full Greek independence through the Treaty of London. This marked a fundamentally significant shift towards active support for the Greek cause on behalf of the French, who only a few years prior were vowing to neutrality.

Subsequently, French authorities decided a French expeditionary corps was to be dispatched to Greece to assist the Greek fighters in clearing the country of remaining Ottoman garrisons. This military intervention, alongside the multiple diplomatic efforts, played a pivotal role in the eventual recognition of Greek independence from the three main European powers. The engagement of France in Greece also reflected the broader strategy of Paris of expanding its influence in the Eastern Mediterranean. In this way, the French hoped to counterbalance British maritime interests in the region.

The role of the big powers of Europe, England, France and Russia

The Greek War of Independence was a conflict that saw a remarkable evolution in the stances of Russia, Britain, and France alike. From primarily initial positions of neutrality or even opposition, these major European powers gradually shifted towards more active support for the Greek cause to an all-in military engagement against the Ottomans. This gradual but fundamental transformation was driven by a complex geopolitical triangle of ideological sympathy, strategic interests, and international diplomacy.

The involvement of these three powers, through military intervention, diplomatic efforts, and, finally, the Treaty of London, was crucial in shaping and finalizing the outcome of the war and the establishment of Greece as a fully sovereign and independent state.

Theodoros Kolokotronis: The Ultimate Symbol of the Greek War of Independence

Kolokotronis
Theodoros Kolokotronis. Credit: Public Domain

Theodoros Kolokotronis, who lived from April 3, 1770 to Feb. 4, 1843, is undoubtedly the ultimate symbol of the Greek War of Independence, which took place from 1821 to 1830. More than any other individual, he is the man who completely embodied the battle cry “Liberty or Death”.

Kolokotronis was born at Ramovouni in Messenia to a family who had rebellion in their blood. He grew up in Arcadia in the central Peloponnese. The Kolokotronis clan was well-known, powerful and respected in the Arcadia region in the eighteenth century.

The family had found itself in a state of constant war with their Ottoman overlords since the sixteenth century. From 1762 to 1806, seventy members of the greater Kolokotronis clan were slain in clashes with the conquerors.

The legendary pride —  and insubordination — of the Kolokotronis family is even commemorated in a well-known folk song written during that time:

“On a horse they go to church,
On a horse they kiss the icons,
On a horse they receive communion
From the priest’s hand.”

Theodoros Kolokotronis led the Greeks to victory

kolokotronis greek war of independence
Kolokotronis. Credit: Public domain

At the dawn of the Greek War of Independence,  Theodoros Kolokotronis found himself in Morea organizing a company of Greek rebels into a more effective army.

He was already 51 years of age, an old man by nineteenth-century standards, and by any standard among fighting men.

Among his comrades, he was known by the nickname “The Elder of Morea.”

Despite his age, the Greek commander claimed victory after victory, in the war and his forces were unstoppable.

The Battle of Dervenakia, in August 1822, inflicted great damage upon the forces of the Ottoman army, and equally important, upon its prestige.

Kolokotronis went on to liberate the town of Nafplio in December of 1822. He is said to have ridden his horse up the steep slopes up to the castle of Palamidi to celebrate his victory.

He was also famously quoted as saying, “Greeks, God has signed our Liberty and will not go back on his promise.”

kolokotronis greek war of independence
Kolokotronis after the battle of Dervenakia. Credit: Public domain

In 1825, Kolokotronis was appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Greek forces of the Peloponnese.

Political turmoil in Greece

After Greece’s winning of the War of Independence over the Ottoman Empire, the indomitable fighter became a supporter of Greece’s first ruler of modern times, Ioannis Kapodistrias.

Kolokotronis was also a proponent of an alliance between Greece and Russia.

When Kapodistrias was assassinated by a clan of Mani landowners on Oct. 8, 1831, Kolokotronis created his own administration in support of Prince Otto of Bavaria as the new king of Greece.

The former freedom fighter later opposed King Otto’s rule, and on June 7, 1834, he was charged with treason and sentenced to death. However, when King Otto became an adult and officially ascended to the throne he pardoned Kolokotronis in the year 1835.

Theodoros Kolokotronis died in 1843 in Athens.

kolokotronis greek war of independence
Kolokotronis’ helmet. Credit: Tilemahos Efthimiadis /Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 2.0

Kolokotronis had learned to write in the twilight of his life, just so that he might be able to complete his autobiography. His memoirs have been a perennial favorite ever since throughout Greece, and they have been translated several times into English and other languages.

Kolokotronis’s famed helmet, preserved in almost perfect condition, may be seen today along with the rest of his arms and armor in the National Historical Museum of Greece in Athens.

Was the Trojan Horse an Actual Wooden Horse?

The Trojan Horse
A modern replica of the Trojan Horse. Credit: Jorge Láscar, CC BY 2.0

The story of the Trojan Horse is one of the most famous stories in Greek mythology. It is part of the climax of the dramatic legend of the Trojan War. However, researchers have differing ideas about what the Trojan Horse actually was and if it even existed at all. What are these theories, and what evidence exists to support them?

What was the Trojan Horse in Greek mythology?

Firstly, let us establish what exactly the Trojan Horse supposedly was in Greek mythology. Contrary to popular belief, it does not appear in Homer’s Iliad. However, Homer does refer to it in his Odyssey. A more detailed account appears in Virgil’s Aeneid from the first century BCE. Ancient Greek artwork also depicts the horse.

According to these accounts, the Greeks constructed the Trojan Horse after deciding that it was the only way to end their long and arduous war against the city of Troy. It was a large statue of a horse, made of wood that was hollow on the inside. It was presented as a gift, but it was really a trap.

Inside the enormous statue, there were hidden Greek soldiers. After the Greek army supposedly left (really just hiding outside the immediate vicinity), the Trojans brought the Trojan Horse inside the city. At night, the Greek soldiers climbed out, opened the gates of the city, and let the Greek army enter so as to finally defeat their enemies.

Was the Trojan Horse a battering ram?

There are a variety of theories that explain the Trojan Horse as something other than what is directly described in the Odyssey and the Aeneid. One theory goes right back to ancient times.

Pausanias, writing in the second century CE, stated: “That the work of Epeius was a contrivance to make a breach in the Trojan wall is known to everybody who does not attribute utter silliness to the Phrygians.”

Here, Pausanias calls the Trojans ‘Phrygians.’ In other words, he is saying that the Trojan Horse was not literally a statue of a horse. To understand the account literally would be to understand the Trojans as naive. Rather, the Trojan Horse is a metaphor for some kind of ‘contrivance to make a breach in the Trojan wall.’

On this basis, some researchers have suggested that it was a metaphor for (or, perhaps, a distorted memory of) a battering ram. There is evidence that Assyrian battering rams were covered in dampened horse hides to protect them from flaming arrows. The use of these horse hides, perhaps in conjunction with the general shape of the siege engine, may have led to its being remembered as a wooden horse.

Problems with the theory

Although this battering ram theory is quite popular, it has some notable problems. For one thing, there is no reason to imagine that Assyrian siege engines would have been involved in the Trojan War. According to most chronologies, the Trojan Horse incident occurred centuries before the Assyrians were active anywhere remotely near Troy.

Even when considering the evidence that the Trojan War occurred as late as the eighth century BCE, this theory is still without support. The only Ancient Greek records that mention the Assyrians in connection with the Trojan War make the Assyrians direct allies of Troy. Therefore, Assyrian battering rams would not have been used against Troy. This would only have happened if the Assyrians had been on the side of the Greeks, but there is no support for that idea.

Regarding the Greeks themselves, there is no evidence that they even used battering rams until the fifth century BCE. This is long after the Trojan War. Therefore, there is no reason to believe the Trojan Horse would have been a battering ram in the first place.

Mykonos Vase
Mykonos Vase: Decorated pithos found on Mykonos in Greece depicting one of the earliest known renditions of the Trojan Horse. Credit: Travelling Runes, CC-BY-SA-2.0 / Wikimedia

Was the Trojan Horse a ship?

Another theory, which is perhaps more popular than the previous one, is that the Trojan Horse was really a ship. This theory is much closer to the actual story of the horse. According to this, the Greeks built a special ship as an offering rather than a statue of a horse. Just like in ancient accounts, the Trojans brought the ship inside, but there were Greek soldiers hiding inside the hull of the ship.

The basis for this is that the Ancient Greeks sometimes called ships ‘horses’ in a figurative way. For example, we find the expression ‘sea-horses’ in the Odyssey. Furthermore, the Phoenicians developed a type of ship called a hippos. The front of the ship was designed to look like a horse’s head. This was common after about 1000 BCE.

Some researchers argue that Homer’s description of the soldiers climbing into the Trojan Horse is very similar to how the Ancient Greeks described people climbing aboard a ship. On this basis, some argue that Homer actually intended to describe a ship, but his words later came to be misunderstood.

One major problem with this theory is the Mykonos Vase. It depicts the Trojan Horse as a literal horse statue with people inside, exactly like the traditional understanding. This dates to c. 675 BCE, which is almost certainly several decades before Homer wrote the Odyssey. Therefore, this evidence takes precedence over Homer’s wording.

A more literal understanding

One final theory is that the Trojan Horse was simply exactly what the story presented it as: a large wooden statue of a horse. This theory accommodates virtually all the evidence from antiquity, including the depiction on the Mykonos Vase. The only evidence against it is the testimony of Pausanias, but that was merely his personal opinion.

Many researchers today feel, similar to Pausanias, that the Trojan Horse cannot have been real because it would have just been too foolish on the part of the Trojans to bring such a thing into their city. However, there is no reason why we should not ‘attribute utter silliness’ to the Trojans.

The reality is that many similar strategies have been used in warfare throughout history. We encounter such examples during both ancient and modern history. One such instance is the Taking of Joppa, which was an event that occurred in the 15th century BCE.

Furthermore, the Mykonos Vase attests to the existence of the Trojan Horse at least as early as c. 675 BCE. In view of this evidence, some modern scholars believe the Trojan War may have occurred in the eighth century BCE. This would make the Mykonos Vase a near-contemporary source.

Of course, in the absence of even earlier evidence, there will continue to be speculation over the Trojan Horse.