The Middle East, in what is now Iran. That is where the Persians lived.
At different times they were more and also less civilised than the Greeks.
There is no one or two or a few 'fathers of trigonometry.' Ancient Sumarians, Babalonians started using ratios of sides of triangles. The Greeks continued the study, but emphasized geometric methods instead of algebraic methods that used in trig. Egyptians, Persians, Arabic, and Indians all contributed to the development of trig. This whole process took about 2000 years, maybe more.
the ancient greeks, the system was probably designed by more than one person
less is < and more is > 1<2 2>1
The answer is less.
No..less then means that you have less then one thing..equal means you have the same and no more thenEASY ANSWER:Yes
Persia was taking over, but then the Spartans came to help and soon surrounded the Persians. The Persians lost war by losing more than 6000 troops, but then the Greeks lost less then 200 troops.
Act more like civilized people and less like animals.
Yes the Persians did defeat the 300 Spartans and Greeks, but after, a double spy led the Persians to the wrong straight after destroying Athens. The Greek fleet overwhelemed the Persians, so the Persians retrieted. The Persian bridge that was biult was destroyed and the the Greeks kept part of the bridge as a trophy. With Persia now out of their homeland, the Spartans and Athenians teamed up once more and went to battle with the Persians. The battle of Persia and Sparta/Athens lasted 3 years. The Spartan/Athenian army defeted the Persians!Persia lost against the Spartans/Athenians!
Besides the greeks, the romans(who just had different names), the turks, the persians, and surely many more smaller countries
Makes people more connected and civilized and makes things go more smoothly. When you deal with polite , civilized people, you are less stressed as well. And take it home with you too, please.
The Macedonians were Greeks . Every tribe of the Greeks back then, was different. Athens was more intellectual, less fighting-wise. Spartans were more fighting oriented on the other hand.
In the early stages from 499 BCE when Persia dominated, they were able to use Greek inter-city rivalries and disunity, ease of bribing their leaders, and in the field, the superiority of their cavalry and the fleets, which latter they levied from Phoenecia, Egypt and the Ionian Greeks as well. As the Greeks gained more cohesion and the will to combine for their common defence, they were able to consistently defeat the Persians on sea and land, until Persia agreed to peace in 449 BCE.
No. The Spartans defeated about 500,000 Persians along with about 1,700 Greeks. Later on in the war, they withdrew to defend Sparta and lost the war. The Spartans alone did not fight or defeat Persians and Persian allies. Many Greek city states allied and defeated Persians in land and sea battles in two separate wars. The only Greek defeat from the most famous battles in the two separate Persian invasions was in Thermopylae. And even then, few thousand Greeks died, including plus or minus 300 Spartans, while it is believed more than 20,000 Persians and their allies that included many Greeks, died in Thermopylae. So it was an honorable defeat.
The Romans were more practical, although this does not amount to saying the the Greeks were not; they certainly were. The Romans were less interested in science and theoretical thinking than the Greeks. They were great engineers and focused on the infrastructural development of their empire.
The Persian ships were larger and relied on closing to enemy ships to board. The Greek ships were lighter and more manoeuverable, and relied on ramming and sinking the opposition.
Many reasons include;- Greeks had good strong communication lines- Greeks had knowledge of tactics thanks to Themistocles- Greeks received help from Sparta- Gks have defensive position on the hills- Charge at a run - you march into war, not run - surprised the Persians- Phalanx encircles and surrounds Persians- Persians were cut down in the marshes- Miltiades strength and strategy give Gks sense of capability -"Callimachus was the leader of the campaign, but the success must be attributed to Miltiades." Bury and Meiggs- Absence of the Persian cavalry (had expected to bypass the army and sail straight to Athens)- Gk hoplites far more disciplined and with better fighting methods and armour- Persians lightly clad with wicker shields, little armour- Motivation of democracy a driving force
Many reasons include;- Greeks had good strong communication lines- Greeks had knowledge of tactics thanks to Themistocles- Greeks received help from Sparta- Gks have defensive position on the hills- Charge at a run - you march into war, not run - surprised the Persians- Phalanx encircles and surrounds Persians- Persians were cut down in the marshes- Miltiades strength and strategy give Gks sense of capability -"Callimachus was the leader of the campaign, but the success must be attributed to Miltiades." Bury and Meiggs- Absence of the Persian cavalry (had expected to bypass the army and sail straight to Athens)- Gk hoplites far more disciplined and with better fighting methods and armour- Persians lightly clad with wicker shields, little armour- Motivation of democracy a driving force