10 Would-Be Assassins Who Tried To Kill Hitler

Posted by Nick Efstathiadis

Mark Mancini

Adolf Hitler© AP Photo, File Adolf Hitler More than 30 attempts were made on Adolf Hitler's life before he finally took it himself—and some of them came very close to doing the dictator in.

1. JOHANN GEORG ELSER

A woodworker by trade, Elser was convinced that Hitler was going to lead Germany to war, and was unhappy with Hitler’s aggressive anti-union policies. So to make Germany better, Elser decided to kill the Führer and devised what seemed like the perfect murder.

On November 8, 1939, Hitler would be delivering a speech at Munich’s Bürgerbräukeller beer hall. So, several months in advance, Elser dropped by, looked around, and spotted a thick, supporting column. Under the cover of darkness, he spent 35 meticulous nights digging out a hole inside it—which he concealed beneath some tiles. Meanwhile, the mastermind used 110 pounds of smuggled explosives to build a time bomb with Adolf Hitler’s name on it. The Nazis would never know what hit them.

When the day finally came, though, Hitler’s speech wrapped up earlier than expected—and by the time Elser’s bomb went off, his intended target was en route to Berlin for a military meeting. Back in Munich, eight patrons were killed at Bürgerbräukeller while dozens more sustained serious injuries. That same day, Elser was arrested near the Swiss border with incriminating detonator sketches in his pockets. He died in Nazi custody six years later.

2. HEINRICH GRUNOW

This SS soldier lay in wait near Berchtesgaden, where Hitler often entertained his most important visitors. Armed with a rifle, Grunow pumped several shots into the back of the chancellor’s passing car. He then immediately committed suicide, failing to realize that Hitler had moved to the driver’s seat and missed every bullet.

3. MAURICE BAVAUD

© AP Photo/KEYSTONE, FILMKOLLEKTIV ZUERICH

Disguised as a foreign reporter, Swiss theology student Maurice Bavaud arrived in Munich in 1938 with the intention of slaying Hitler before several hundred witnesses. His quarry would be marching by in a parade and Bavaud planned to shoot him from the sidelines—but when the moment came, innocent bystanders unwittingly blocked his view, staying this gunman’s hand. He was later captured and executed.

4. HELMUT HIRSCH

Few self-described Nazis opposed Hitler more than Otto Strasser, who’d been exiled for his views in 1930. Six years later, Strasser—then residing in Prague—handed off a bomb to Helmut Hirsch. If all went well, a co-conspirator would meet this young Jewish man in Stuttgart, discreetly take the device, and plant it inside Nuremberg’s Nazi Party Headquarters. Sadly, things didn’t work out that way. German authorities somehow caught wind of Hirsch’s intentions and had him executed.

5. JOSEF THOMAS

Little is known about Thomas, though he’s consistently described as having been “mentally-ill.” Arrested by the Gestapo in 1937, he confessed that he’d travelled from Elberfeld to Berlin for the explicit purpose of shooting Hitler and air force commander Hermann Göring.

6. HENNING VON TRESCKOW

© Provided by Mental Floss

This general came up with several ingenious plots to kill Hitler, but, try as he might, he simply couldn't bring down the Führer. Altitude ruined what was arguably his best chance.

Before Hitler’s plane took off one fateful day, von Tresckow and his accomplices discreetly had two bombs sent aboard. Masquerading as Cointreau bottles, these things should have blown the dictator to kingdom come. But when the plane's pilots made a sudden climb to avoid storm clouds on the horizon, the deadly chemicals froze, rendering them useless. Later, Tresckow’s team retrieved their gadgets and managed to walk away scot-free.

7. RUDOLF CHRISTOPH FREIHERR VON GERSDORFF

© Provided by Mental Floss

Mere days after failing to assassinate Hitler in mid-air, Tresckow was back at the drawing board. He learned that Hitler would be touring Berlin’s Zeughas Museum on March 21, 1944. For the occasion, like-minded Colonel Gersdorff loaded his jacket with explosives and became Tresckow’s designated suicide bomber. Seconds before the blast, Gersdorff was to wrap his arms around their victim in a fatal embrace.

There was just one problem: Tresckow had given Gersdorff 10 minutes’ worth of fuse, which he delicately set off—but Hitler left the museum after only eight minutes. The colonel had to race to the men’s room and defuse the live bomb that was still draped over his body.

8. HELMUTH STIEFF

© Provided by Mental Floss

Stationed at the German military’s eastern headquarters in Ratsenberg, Steiff was supposed to plant a bomb near Hitler’s favourite dog-walking trail. But the bomb was placed in a nearby water tower, either because Steiff second guessed himself or the tower was being used for storage. Either way, the water tower blew up. The SS never identified Steiff as a culprit, but he was later executed for another plot against Hitler.

9. AXEL VON DEM BUSSCHE

© Provided by Mental Floss

The blond-haired, blue-eyed Axel von Dem Bussche (another ally of Tresckow’s) had the Nazi party’s “master race” look down pat—and so was chosen to model some new uniforms for the Führer during the winter of 1943. Seizing this opportunity, Bussche prepared a modified, pocket-sized grenade that he hoped Hitler’s guards wouldn’t detect. But Allied forces foiled his plan when they destroyed the train that was transporting his outfits.

10. CLAUS VON STAUFFENBERG

In 1943, Tresckow recruited Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg, a career army man who’d lost multiple body parts (including his right hand) while fighting Hitler’s war. Shortly thereafter, Stauffenberg became Chief of Staff for Germany’s replacement army, which served as the centrepiece in an elaborate coup d’état. On July 20, 1944, a routine strategy meeting took place at “The Wolf’s Lair,” a notorious bunker. Stauffenberg arrived with explosives nestled inside his unassuming messenger bag, which he placed beneath the conference room table, getting as close to Hitler as he possibly could before quietly excusing himself. Ten minutes later, an explosion rang out, which the Berlin-bound Stauffenberg observed from a distance. Four people were killed. None of them was Hitler.

Wasting no time, the Colonel and his colleagues began mobilizing an anti-Nazi rebellion throughout Berlin. However, once news of Hitler’s survival spread, the effort unravelled. Tresckow committed suicide and Stauffenberg found himself shouting “Long live our sacred Germany!” before a firing squad.

10 Would-Be Assassins Who Tried To Kill Hitler

Elizabeth: Oliver Cromwell's 'queen'

Posted by Nick Efstathiadis in ,

5 December 2014

Elizabeth Cromwell (1598-1665), Her Highness the Protectoress by Robert Walker

Oliver Cromwell remains an intensely controversial figure - the subject of ongoing debate. But what was it like to be a woman at that time, and especially to be the Lady Protectress - wife of the Lord Protector himself, asks Samira Ahmed.

There's a special mystery around the life of Elizabeth Cromwell.

She was a genuine commoner and very few documents survive other than records of her marriage and death. Born in 1598 to an Essex merchant family, Elizabeth might well have been named after Elizabeth I. But she would live to become a consort like no other in British history - a queen who was not a queen.

The England of the mid-17th Century was "a country in which patriarchy was absolute in the original sense", says Laura Gowing, professor of early modern history at King's College, London. "The father is comparable to the king of the country. An orderly household should be a replica of an orderly nation. And a nation is made up of such households."

Historians think it likely that Elizabeth would have modelled her home on that ideal. She and Oliver married in St Giles Cripplegate in London in 1620 and had nine children together. Details of her £1,500 dowry survive, but we don't know if it was a love match or arranged. Still the three letters that survive between them, written 30 years later, speak of their love. "Truly my life is but half a life in your absence," she wrote to him while he was on military campaign.

464 gray line

Love letters

From Oliver Cromwell to Elizabeth, September 1650: "Thou art dearer to me than any creature; let that suffice."

From Elizabeth to Oliver, December 1650: "Truly my life is but half a life in your absence, did not the Lord make up in Himself, which I must acknowledge to the praise of His grace."

From Oliver to Elizabeth, May 1651: "My Dearest, I could not satisfy myself to omit this post, although I have not much to write; yet indeed I love to write to my dear, who is very much in my heart.

Sources: The Cromwell Association, Cromwell Museum Huntingdon

464 gray line

From a young MP's wife in Huntingdon and Ely to the wife of a general in the New Model Army, it wasn't until their 40s that she was to find herself elevated to the wife of the most powerful man in the country and soon housed in apartments at both Whitehall and Hampton Court.

It was a time when "whore" was an easy and dangerous label hurled at women who were deemed to be acting above their place. Avoiding comparison with her predecessor Henrietta Maria, Charles I's queen, might have been an important thing for Cromwell's Lady Protectress.

464 gray line

Elizabeth Cromwell 1598-1665

Elizabeth Bourchier Cromwell

  • Eldest child of Sir James Bourchier and his wife Frances
  • Very little is known of Elizabeth's childhood, but her father was a prosperous businessman and landowner
  • After her marriage to Oliver Cromwell, the couple lived in Huntingdon, St Ives and Ely, by the early 1650s they had moved to lodgings adjoining Whitehall Palace and in 1654 they moved into apartments in Whitehall Palace
  • Hostile accounts published during her lifetime criticised her for her simple ways, and for being and feeling out of place in her elevated role

Sources: The Cromwell Association, Cromwell Museum Huntingdon

464 gray line

Elizabeth seems to have stayed out of state affairs. There's no evidence her relatives benefited in privileges from her connections, though, interestingly, her sole surviving letter to Oliver from December 1650, diplomatically reminds him to write to key political figures, the lord chief justice and Speaker of the House of Commons. "You cannot think the wrong you do yourself in the want of a letter, though it were but seldom."

The Cromwell Museum in Huntingdon holds a court portrait of Elizabeth from about 1653 by Robert Walker. It's not very flattering. She looks uncomfortable in a formal pose and plain dark dress, large pearl earrings and a necklace, and it's hard to read it as an anti-Royalist statement.

Italian marquetry boxAs Curator John Goldsmith observes: "Jewellery was terribly fashionable. The bling in the middle of the 17th Century was just incredible. The thing about Puritans having a plain style is hard to sustain. Black was actually a fashionable colour."

An exquisite box of Italian marquetry (inlaid work) is almost the only verifiable court possession of Elizabeth's that survives, passed down unused through her family until today. The collection of rich, perfumed soaps was a gift from the Grand Duke of Tuscany, Ferdinand II, who wanted to align himself with the Protectorate. It's tempting to imagine Elizabeth being too devout to indulge in such vanity, but unable to resist keeping it.

Our image of the Protectorate - enshrined in popular culture - is of religious fundamentalism and witch-hunting. It was arguably the last period in which religion was manifestly the centre of public life.

Adultery - defined as illicit sex with a married woman - became a capital offence, although there were very few prosecutions. But because there was no censorship during the Civil War and Protectorate, Gowing says, women's voices were more prominent than ever in pamphlets and petitions on Parliament.

"They were involved in starting religious movements such as the Quakers and later the Levellers. They were often quite poor women which actually gives their religious voice more authority." It was only in the Restoration, when rights were being formalised by the centralised state, that women were formally excluded from the public arena.

Elizabeth BourchierElizabeth's status was to change dramatically too, after the death of Oliver in 1658 and the end of the Protectorate under her son, Richard, months later.

In the Restoration, with the aristocracy firmly back in power, Elizabeth was crudely mocked in a satirical pamphlet cookbook The Court and Kitchen of Elizabeth, Commonly called Joan Cromwell, the Wife of the Late Usurper. She was drawn with a monkey on her shoulder to show her a crude upstart, "a hundred times fitter for a barn than a palace".

"The whole point of the curious pamphlet," says John Goldsmith, "is that she's this ordinary Fen housewife and how ridiculous [it is] that she's elevated to this position."

Elizabeth lost her home and her pension. Her husband's body was dug up and mutilated. Other men who had signed Charles I's death warrant were hanged, drawn and quartered. It must have been a terrifying time. Elizabeth had to petition Charles II to be allowed to leave London, denying rumours that she had stolen any royal jewels. Her low profile in the Protectorate court may have saved her life.

She was to live out her widowhood with her married daughter's family at Northborough Manor in Northamptonshire, dying in painful illness in 1665, seven years after Oliver.

464 gray line

Oliver Cromwell 1599-1658

Oliver Cromwell bust

  • Married Elizabeth Bourchier in 1620, with whom he had nine children
  • Raised an army in 1642 in support of parliament against Charles I during English Civil War and was instrumental in trial and execution of Charles I
  • Became Lord Protector of England in 1653, later refused to be king
  • Died at home in Whitehall in 1658 and was exhumed and posthumously "executed" in 1661

Find out more

464 gray line

Over the centuries books, paintings and later films have either ignored Elizabeth (she barely appears in the 1970 Richard Harris film Cromwell) or imposed their own contemporary fantasies - notably the sentimental 19th Century painting by William Fisk which portrays her kneeling with her children begging Oliver to spare the life of Charles I.

What would Elizabeth tell us? Her kitchen in Ely where she lived her early married life is now a museum.

Her modest grave in Northborough's village church has no inscription, possibly because it was desecrated. The church warden wonders if Oliver's decapitated body might have been quietly brought and buried with her.

We may never know. But it adds to the haunting mystery about a loyal wife and a witness to extraordinary times.

BBC News - Elizabeth: Oliver Cromwell's 'queen'

Was 1610 the beginning of a new human epoch?

Posted by Nick Efstathiadis

Hannah Devlin science correspondent Thursday 12 March 2015

A new study finds the year to be a key point for the Anthropocene – marking the irreversible transfer of crops and species between the old and new worlds

Italian astronomer and physicist, Galileo Galilei

Italian astronomer and physicist, Galileo Galilei, who discovered the four moons of Jupiter in 1610

King James was on the throne, Shakespeare’s Cymbeline was playing in the theatre and Galileo discovered four moons of Jupiter. In future, though, 1610 could be chiefly remembered as the geological time-point at which humans came to dominate Earth.

Scientists have argued that it is time to draw a line under the current geological epoch and usher in the start of a new one, defined by mankind’s impact on the planet.

The year 1610 is a contender for marking the transition, they claim, because this is when the irreversible transfer of crops and species between the new and old worlds was starting to be acutely felt.

Simon Lewis, an ecologist at University College London and author of the paper, said: “In a hundred thousand years, scientists will look at the environmental record and know something remarkable happened in the second half of the second millennium. They will be in no doubt that these global changes to Earth were caused by their own species.”

When Europeans started arriving in the Americas, he added, a cascade of events was triggered that was “as Earth-changing as a meteorite strike”.

The concept of the “anthropocene” is already widely used on an informal basis by writers and environmentalists, but scientists remain divided on whether the designation of a new time period is justified.

Critics argue that the desire to redraw geological boundaries is politically motivated by those wanting to highlight the extent of human destruction on the planet. Others say that it is about 1,000 years too soon to identify the most enduring geological markers of human activity on Earth.

The International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), the world body that decides on geological time boundaries, is actively considering the question and a working group is due to report on the issue next year.

The central problem is identifying a permanent and global change that has been captured in natural material, such as rocks, ice or marine sediment – a so-called “golden spike”.

“Global long-term changes to Earth’s system … are required to have one marker that can be precisely dated that is captured in some ancient geological material,” said Lewis.

Lewis and his UCL co-author, Mark Maslin, considered and rejected the earliest use of fire, the dawn of agriculture and the industrial revolution as possible candidates.

Eventually they identified two events – the joining of the two hemispheres and nuclear testing in the 20th century – that met the golden spike criteria.

The year 1610 marks the low-point of a dip in global carbon dioxide levels caused by a drastic reduction in farming in the Americas. This was a knock-on effect of the 50 million or so indigenous deaths that resulted from the introduction of small pox to the continent by European colonialists. A secondary marker of the colliding of worlds is the sudden appearance, in 1600, of fossil pollen maize, a Latin American species, in the European marine record.

The paper, published today in Nature, also considered the year 1964, which saw a peak in radioactive fallout following nuclear weapons testing before the test ban treaty came into force.

The authors conclude that 1610 has a stronger claim because so far the testing of nuclear weapons has not been an Earth-changing event. “I tend to go with 1610 because … the evolutionary consequences of that are pushing Earth onto a new evolutionary trajectory,” said Lewis.

Jan Zalasiewicz, chair of the ICS’s Anthropocene working group, said his committee would consider the authors arguments. However, the working group is converging on nuclear testing as a more universal marker - the CO2 dip and pollen records are patchy and have fuzzier boundaries, he contends.

A potential downside of the nuclear signal is that it will have decayed away within 100,000 years – a blink of the eye in geological time. “Geologists are very pragmatic creatures though,” said Zalasiewicz. “We’re looking for the best signal for dividing strata now, not for geologists a million years in the future.”

The arrival of the Anthropocene would mark the end of the Holocene, the epoch that we currently live in, which itself was only defined in 2008. It is marked by a signal in the Greenland ice cores indicating the end of the last ice age, 11,700 years ago.

Since epochs typically last tens of millions of years, some suggest that the Holocene should not only end, but be scrapped or downgraded. “The Holocene is supposed to last tens of millions of years and it’s several orders of magnitude to short,” said Lewis. “I think we’d have to call that a stage rather than an epoch.”

Was 1610 the beginning of a new human epoch? | Science | The Guardian

Ionia and the Ionian Revolt (499-494 BCE)

Posted by Nick Efstathiadis in

by Cristian Violatti published on 27 May 2014

Definition

Ionia is the name given during ancient times to the central region of Anatolia’s Aegean shore in Asia Minor, present-day Turkey, one of the most important centres of the Greek world. Here the Greeks founded a dozen mini-states, two of them on the offshore islands of Chios and Samos, the rest of them stretching along the strip of mountainous coastland. During the 6th century BCE, Ionia became the focus of the intellectual life of Greece, a period known as the “Ionian awakening”, a name for the initial phase of classical Greek civilization.

Using the sea as a highway, which was much cheaper, faster, and more efficient than transport by land, the Greeks expanded and developed in a such a way that conflict with a major power became inevitable. The Greco-Italian-Sicilian trading route that the Greeks controlled competed more and more with the Oriental Indo-Persian-Phoenician and this commercial rivalry set the stage for war. Ionia was the initial setting of the Greco-Persian wars.

Origin of Ionia

Ionia was colonized by Greeks from the Athens region around 1000 BCE. The commercial activity in Ionia was in competition with the Phoenicians, who were the leaders of sea-trade at that time. However, some important changes took place on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean during the 8th century BCE: Assyria renewed their strength like never before, and the Phoenician city-states were conquered. The Phoenician sea-trade withered, and the Greek city-states took advantage of the Phoenician subjection to Assyria and gradually turned into the leading sea-traders and navigators. Some Phoenician colonies in the west remained independent, and the only serious competition the Greeks came across was from the expanding power of Carthage.

Ionian intellectuals were not heavily influenced by religion nor limited by ancient books claiming truth or divine revelation.

During the following centuries, Ionian cities underwent important changes. Political and economic power, which used to be concentrated in the hands of the landowning aristocracy, gradually moved to the merchant class. Ionian merchants established colonies as trading posts in Egypt, Italy, and along the Black Sea. Miletus alone, the southernmost Ionian city, had about 80 colonies and became the richest city in the Greek world. The wealth and luxury of the city was proverbial throughout Greece. Milesian merchants had such levels of profits that they lent money to a number of enterprises and even to the municipality itself.

IONIAN Intellectual Life

To the east of the Ionian city-states lay the Kingdom of Lydia. Ionians and Lydians remained on peaceful terms, with very tight cultural and commercial relations. The city of Sardis, Lydia’s capital, was an important centre for the traffic of goods and ideas between Mesopotamia and the Greek Ionian settlements. Beliefs, customs, and knowledge, in addition to commercial goods, were constantly circulating in Sardis.

Thales of Miletus
Thales of Miletus

By the time when Ionian cities became the intellectual leaders of Greece in the 6th century BCE, the city of Miletus became the focus of an intellectual revolution. In this city the power was in the hands of merchants and the priesthood had no significant social impact. Ionian intellectuals were not heavily influenced by religion nor limited by ancient books claiming truth or divine revelation. Even Homeric poems had hardly taken any definite form yet. Milesians were used to travelling to distant regions and received the input of the civilizations of Lydia, Babylon, Phoenicia, and Egypt. Mathematical knowledge, foreign commerce and geography, astronomy, navigational techniques, all these notions helped to enrich Miletus. Meanwhile, wealth had created leisure, and freedom of thought was widely accepted. All these factors can help to understand how a number of Ionian minds developed the idea that the world could be understood in terms of physical phenomena, without reference to myths or superstitions. The revolutionary idea of replacing supernatural explanations with the concept of a universe that is governed by laws of nature began in Miletus, with a man named Thales.

Thales of Miletus is credited as the author of a revolutionary hypothesis concerning the fundamental structure of the universe by claiming that water was the original substance of the universe. He is famous for his astronomical knowledge that allowed him to predict a total eclipse of the sun and also for his knowledge on geometry, which he brought from his visit in Egypt. This new rational insight influenced other Ionians thinkers such as Anaximander and Anaximenes, who also continued this rationalistic tradition. In many cases their ideas led to conclusions surprisingly similar to what our more sophisticated methods have led us to believe today. In Ionia we find the roots of the Western scientific tradition.

Miletos Electrum Stater

Miletos Electrum Stater

Persian Control & Revolt

The political map of this region started to change around 612 BCE. The Assyrian Empire came to an end as a result of the destruction of Nineveh, its capital, the most powerful city in the world at that time. An allied army of Persians, Medes, Chaldeans, and Babylonians besieged and sacked the centre of Assyrian power. This left Babylon as the imperial centre of Mesopotamia and Lydia was now free to turn its attention to the West. The Ionian cities were now dominated by Lydia, but Lydian rulers admired the Greeks and treated the Ionian cities leniently. Croesus, the last Lydian king, even paid for the construction of the Temple of Artemis, which became one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. Soon after, Persia became the dominant power of Mesopotamia, putting an end to the Babylonian supremacy. In 546 BCE, the Persian king Cyrus II defeated Croesus and Lydia, which along with the Ionian cities, became controlled by the Persians.

About 500 BCE, the Ionian cities under Persian control dismissed the Persian authorities and declared their independence, triggering the Ionian revolt, the first of the many military conflicts between Greeks and Persians. Miletus was the leading state and Athens sent a fleet of 20 ships to support the revolt. Each Ionian rebel state raised its own troops but kept them under separate command. The army of Miletus marched upon Sardis and burned it to the ground.

In 494 BCE, the Ionian cities organized a united fleet that engaged the Persian navy at Lade in one of the most important sea battles of history. Just before the battle began, about 50 ships belonging to the navy of the Ionian city of Samos sailed away due to a secret arrangement they had with the Persians. Many other contingents following their disloyal example. The Ionian defeat was complete and Ionian civilization never managed to fully recover from this disaster.

The Persians captured Miletus, all the males were killed, the women and children enslaved, and from that day the city became a minor town. Persian control was re-established throughout Ionia until the decisive Greek victory at the Battle of Salamis (480 BCE), when the Ionian cities regained their independence and helped to form the Delian League with Athens.

Celsus Library, Ephesos

Celsus Library, Ephesos

Hellenistic Period, Seleucid Control, & Roman Control

Around 334 BCE, Alexander the Great marched down into Ionia, offering the Greek cities democratic self-governance under his protectorate. Most cities opened their gates without resistance and enjoyed a new era of prosperity during the Hellenistic period, but none of them restored their previous splendour.  Miletus refused Alexander’s offer and was finally levelled after a long siege and was never restored to its previous status as a leading city. The region then became part of the Seleucid, and later of the Attalid, Kingdom.

About 130 BCE Ionia came under Roman control and became part of the Roman province of Asia. This new period allowed many of the Ionian cities to recover some of their lost success. The archaeological record in Miletus suggests that the population reached a new peak, which is hard to estimate, although some scholars suggest a figure of 7000 or 8000. Smyrna and Chios were also considered important cities. Major monuments were expensively refurbished in the city of Ephesus during the 4th century CE, including the stadium, the theatre and the harbour baths. Today, the site of Ephesus is considered a very valuable example of  classical urbanism.

Ionia - Ancient History Encyclopaedia

The Persian Campaign of Emperor Heraclius

Posted by Nick Efstathiadis in ,

Roberto Naranjo

untitledBetween the years 621 and 626 A.D., the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius waged a bloody, ravaging, and exhausting war on the Persian Empire. In retrospect, three compelling reasons for such an enterprise stand out. First, to end the Persian conquests of Byzantine territory. Second, to stop Christian setbacks at their hands. And third, to satisfy the spiritual hunger of a young Emperor thirsty for honour and adventure. It was not an easy war; however, it re-established Byzantium as the major power in Asia Minor until the rise of Islam. Of the three reasons for a Roman campaign against a powerful Persian state, the first was the most important, to put an end to the territorial bleeding of the empire. Beginning in 603(1), the Persian king Khosroes started a series of invasions and occupation of Roman lands that went on for over fifteen years. In that first year (603) he defeated the Byzantines at the battle of Arxamoun using elephants in his assault of the fortress. (2) Dara, Mesopotamia, and Syria fell the following year. Emperor Phocas hardly opposed these conquests. In taking Armenia, Kappadocia, Galatia, and Paphlagonia in 607, the barbarians routed the Byzantines every time. (3) The Persians crossed the Euphrates unopposed and ravaged Syria, Palestine, and Phoenicia advancing all the way to Chalcedon. In Heraclius' first year as Emperor (4), the Persians campaigned against Syria, taking Apamea and Edessa and proceeding as far as Antioch. According to the chronicler Theophanes the Romans "met them, fought, and were beaten... the whole Roman army was destroyed, so that very few men got away."(5) For Heraclius and Byzantium, the situation did not improve in 611, his second on the throne. The Persians captured Kappadocian Caesarea, taking thousands of prisoners.

Worse still, in Byzantine Europe the Avars were devastating the Balkans as the Roman army slowly withered. Heraclius commissioned an inquiry into the state of the armed forces and discovered that of the divisions which campaigned with Phocas against Maurice, only two remained.(6) The Emperor's first diplomatic attempt to slow the Persian tide came in 613 after the barbarians had captured Damascus. He sent ambassadors to Khosroes seeking a peace settlement, but the Persian turned them away. The following year Khosroes took Jordan, Palestine, and the holy city of Jerusalem after a three-week siege. Taken to Persia were fragments of the Holy Cross, on which Christ's crucifixion took place, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, and many other prisoners. (7) These conquests reached their zenith between the years 615 and 619 when all Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya and Carthage were taken. In 615, segments of the Persian army got as far as the Bosphorus. The loss of Egypt in the spring of 619 was crucial since it disrupted the corn supply to Constantinople. Egypt had been the richest province of Byzantium. (8) Khosroes stood poised, ready to revive the Persian Empire of antiquity. Another reason for undertaking this campaign can be categorized as a religious crusade. A powerful concept at the time, religion dominated daily life more so than in the modern era. Most actions taken by individuals, and their rulers, had the underlying tone of either satisfying God, or because He commanded. When challenged by a different ideology, the Roman state moved to oppose it. Since the lands taken by the Persians (9) were predominately Christian and conquered by a force hostile to this belief, the obvious reaction would be to undertake a major religious reconquest. In the occupied lands Christians were persecuted, harassed, and often killed. Even the remains of the cross where Christ died, considered one of the most venerated artefacts of Christianity, was stolen and taken to Persia. (10) The city of Jerusalem experienced fire and massacre for several days. Included in the destruction was the church of the Holy Sepulcher. Prior to the start of the war, in a show of complete support, the Byzantine church contributed immensely toward the enterprise. It donated her wealth to the state which in turn melted the silver and gold icons for use as currency. The war began in what Ostrogorsky claims was "an atmosphere of religious fervour unknown in the earlier period."(11) Even the actions taken by the Emperor and his men after the war began exhibited highly accentuated religious overtones. Campaigning in 621, Heraclius began by taking an image of Christ and, putting his faith in it, proceeded to address his dispirited and undisciplined army. A year later, the Emperor invaded Persia and again addressed his troops with holy undertones. He reminded them of their duty to avenge the insults to God. They were also to retaliate for the ravishing of their maidens, the terrible things done to Christians, and to pledge murder for their murders. After this speech, Heraclius considered his army ready. (12)

Another target of the crusade was the recovery of the Holy Cross (or fragments of the Cross) taken in 614 from Jerusalem and sent to Persia. This ideal served as a goal to rally the troops around. After the conflict began, the Byzantine army behaved like a real crusading army. Before the winter of 622 arrived, Heraclius ordered the troops purified. He then opened the bible and found where he should winter, in this case Albania. (13) Upon arriving, he freed all prisoners and cared for them, most of them joining his expedition as a gesture of gratitude. Finally, as further evidence of this religious undertaking, in the spring of 630 Heraclius again set up the Holy Cross in Jerusalem amid great rejoicing. This act symbolized the successful conclusion to Christianity's first holy war. The final reason for launching such an encompassing enterprise can be attributed to the youthful, adventurous ego of Heraclius. Destined to become one of the greatest rulers in Byzantine history, he took field command in such a large scale never before seen by any emperor. (14) He showed unbelievable courage and self risk as seen in the year 624 when in the Taurus Mountains, he met the Persian general Sarbaros across from the river Saros. Many Byzantine troops charged across the bridge, but the Persian defence stopped them. The enemy broke ranks in pursuit and Heraclius marched after them. As he advanced to the Persian side, he met a big man. (15) The Emperor struck him and hurled him into the river. When he fell the barbarians turned in flight. Fighting in superhuman fashion, Heraclius nobly crossed and attacked the barbarians with only a few companions, amazing even Sarbaros. He received many blows though none were serious.

Two years later on his victorious final campaign against Khosroes, the Emperor reached the Greater Zab River. There he drew battle lines in a nearby plain against a new Persian general named Rhazates. The battle commenced when the Emperor sprang forth ahead of everyone to meet a Persian officer whom he then overthrew. He met and overthrew another. A third Persian struck him with a spear and wounded his lip but the Emperor was able to overcome this attack and kill him. Once the fight was underway his horse was wounded. By the end of the struggle Heraclius had many sword-strokes at his face but remained unharmed thanks to his leather armour and fighting skills. (16) He returned to Constantinople after a six years' absence, a hero who had just defeated a growing and powerful empire. He spent the following year in celebration. A combination of faith and leadership united to overcome a powerful and seemingly unstoppable force is a situation encountered few times in history. One of those times occurred between 621 and 626 A.D., when the faith of the Byzantines and the leadership of their Emperor Heraclius coalesced to end the Persian conquests of Roman territory and ultimately destroy their military might.

Notes: 1- the second ruling year of the Byzantine Emperor Phocas. 2- Theophanes- 292 3- Theophanes- 296 4- 610296 4- 610 A.D. 5- Theophanes- 299 6- Theophanes- 300 7- Theophanes- 301 8- Ostrogorsky- pg. 95 9- Persians believed in two gods, one good and one evil. This faith goes back to the great Persian philosopher Zoroaster. 10- it was carried of to the Persian capital, Ctesiphon. 11- Ostrogorsky- pg. 100. Ostrogorsky believed that this was the first characteristically medieval war and the forerunner of the later crusades. 12- Theophanes- 307 13- Theophanes- 308. This is known as the sortes biblicae, a method of divination where a question was asked and the bible then opened at random to find the answer. The Albania in question is in the Caucasus, not the Balkans. 14- Heraclius appointed the Patriarch Sergius and the Patrician Bonus as regents for his young son to rule in his absence. Ostrogorsky- pg. 100 15- Theophanes describes him as a "giant of a man." 314 16- Theophanes- 319 Sources: Turtledove, Harry. The Chronicle of Theophanes. University of Pennsylvania Press. Philadelphia 1982. Ostrogorsky, George. History of the Byzantine state. Rutgers University Press. New Jersey 1969.

The Persian Campaign of Emperor Heraclius | eHISTORY

Christmas with Sam and Elizabeth | History Today

Posted by Nick Efstathiadis

By Ron White Published in History Today Volume 47 Issue 12 December 1997

Early Modern (16th-18thC) Christmas

Ron White draws on the diaries of Samuel Pepys to paint a picture of the festive season in the 1660s.

Portrait of Samuel Pepys by J. Hayls.

Portrait of Samuel Pepys by J. Hayls.

December 25th was chosen by the Church as Christmas Day as early as the fifth century, when it adopted and adapted the pagan celebrations of the winter solstice. But it was not until the seventeenth century that Christmas began to take the shape we know today. The most evocative chronicles of that era come through the diaries of Samuel Pepys, perhaps the greatest English diarist, whose detailed observations bring to life the events of his day and let us share them. Not just the major happenings; the Plague, The Great Fire or the King's Coronation, but everyday matters too which he faithfully records; quarrels with his wife, going to concerts, boat trips to Greenwich, visits to mistresses, theatre going, all meticulously set down.

He left particularly vivid accounts of how he and his wife Elizabeth spent Christmas. Pepys was a civil servant. By 1660 he was secretary to a governmental official, and part of his job entailed travelling to Holland to escort home the restored Charles II. Promotion soon followed and he was able to enhance his lifestyle. He became a senior administrator in the Navy Office and he and his wife moved into their new home in Seething Lane. By the end of that year the decoration of the new house was complete and Pepys was able to note in his diary that he was 'much pleased to see my house once more clear of workmen'.

Their first Christmas in the new home was spent modestly. Samuel went to church in the morning and then dined at home with his wife and brother Tom on a shoulder of mutton and a chicken. Samuel always went to church on Christmas morning, usually to the one nearest his home, St Olave's, which still stands in Hart Street. The pews would be decorated with rosemary and ivy and sermons would be long; on that Christmas afternoon Samuel again went to church, this time with Elizabeth, where he fell asleep during a dull sermon.

Elizabeth did not always go with him. She was very much involved in the running of the house and would often stay at home to watch over the maids preparing meals. Pepys left her in bed one Christmas after she had been up until four o'clock in the morning supervising the making of the mince pies.

He was earning a good salary by now and food was plentiful. Mutton and beef appeared on the table often and venison was frequently served to guests. Oysters were abundant and not at all the expensive luxury of today. Pepys would often bring home a barrel for the two of them and their friends. One New Year's morning the young couple invited relations to join them for what must have been a memorable breakfast of oysters, neats (ox) tongue and anchovies, all washed down with Margate ale.

Game was also to be had. Turkeys from Norfolk were being herded to London and Elizabeth knew how to make one last; she burned her hand one January 1st, whilst cooking the remains of a turkey. They drew the line at eating a swan, however. They were given one as a present one year and obviously did not fancy eating it, giving it to Samuel's uncle. On that New Year's Day, when visiting the same uncle, they were offered swan pie and, still not relishing the idea, made an excuse to leave for the theatre.

Vegetables were occasionally eaten. Pepys was fond of a dish of asparagus in butter. Root vegetables tended to be the fare of the poor and fruit was always eaten cooked in the Pepys household, fresh fruit being suspect from a health point of view.

One thing Pepys could not abide was meat cooked rare. When John Andrews, a timber merchant, and his wife came to dinner Samuel found it very odd that Mr Andrews liked his meat so raw that the 'blood runs about his chops'.

For dinner parties Elizabeth would be out in the streets early, since the markets opened at sunrise and the first few hours were reserved for shopping housewives. Meat, game and fish were mostly bought at markets, shops confining themselves to groceries and bread.

One year Elizabeth was too ill to make the mince pies; Samuel left her in bed and went to the chapel in Whitehall to take communion. He arrived too late, but was in time to hear the bishop attack the irreligious celebration that Christmas was becoming! He returned home and, like the good husband he sometimes was, sat at Elizabeth's bedside having plum porridge (a thick broth of beef and plums) and a roasted pullet. A maid was sent to buy a mince pie, so obviously sellers were doing business on Christmas day.

So were theatres. Pepys was a great theatre-goer and in 1666, after a good meal of rib of beef 'and plenty of good wine of my own', he set off to see a performance but, finding no playbills, came home to supper. On December 27th, that year, however, he was successful and took Elizabeth to the King's Playhouse to see a comedy by the fashionable playwrights Beaumont and Fletcher. In fact a lot of that Christmas was spent at the theatre; on the 28th, they went to the Duke's Theatre in Lincoln's Inn Fields and saw Macbeth 'most excellently acted'. On one theatre visit he wondered how it was that apprentices and other working people were able to watch from the pit at 2s 6d a head, when in his younger days he could afford only the upper gallery at 1s 6d.

Samuel was a music lover and even took lessons in composition. He began writing songs and after one Yuletide meal rehearsed Elizabeth and her friends in the performance of one. He does not mention what they thought of it, His own voice was good enough for him to sing with the gentlemen of the Chapel Royal.

Elizabeth was a lively lady. She loved merrymaking and, though Samuel was hardly a spoilsport, he did on occasions disapprove. She gave a party for the maids one Twelfth Night which went on until morning and Pepys went to bed and left them to it.

Another year she obviously did not want the party to end, and again he went to bed, leaving her downstairs with her family and friends at games and dancing. He awoke at 6am, peeved that Elizabeth had still not come to bed, so peeved in fact that, lacking a chamber pot, he refused to go downstairs, and it being 'bitter cold, was forced to rise and piss in the chimney'.

The couple were in bed one Christmas morning when Elizabeth mentioned her fears as to what might happen to her financially in the event of Samuel's death. He passed it off but did determine to make a will and provide for her.

The highlight of the festivities for the Pepyses was Twelfth Night. There was singing and dancing and, always, the cutting and eating of the Twelfth Night cake. In it was hidden a bean and a pea. The cake was so served that a man got the bean and the pea went to a woman. These two were then king and queen of the revels until midnight. Elizabeth was chosen queen in 1661.

Probably the biggest Twelfth Night party the Pepyses gave was in 1668, when they went with friends to see the Duke's company in The Tempest. The house was full and Samuel was forced to pay for a box. It costs 20s 'besides oranges, which troubled me'. He soon recovered, however, and revelled in the evening and after meeting more friends, took a gathering of twenty or so back to Seething Lane for a meal and a party. The music they danced to was the most stylish in town, with professional musicians often employed by the Duke of Buckingham. Gate crashers turned up and since they were 'young men that could dance' were welcomed. The party broke up at 2 am and Pepys, after paying the musicians £3 between them, went to bed with Elizabeth tired and happy.

Ron White was the Membership Records Manager, Institute of Physics, now retired, and has contributed articles to the Listener and the Observer.

Christmas with Sam and Elizabeth | History Today

Athens 1944: Britain’s dirty secret

Posted by Nick Efstathiadis

Ed Vulliamy and Helena Smith Sunday 30 November 2014

When 28 civilians were killed in Athens, it wasn’t the Nazis who were to blame, it was the British. Ed Vulliamy and Helena Smith reveal how Churchill’s shameful decision to turn on the partisans who had fought on our side in the war sowed the seeds for the rise of the far right in Greece today

demonstrators in Athens with three bodies, shot dead, in the middle of the crowd

A day that changed history: the bodies of unarmed protestors shot by the police and the British army in Athens on 3 December 1944. Photograph: Dmitri Kessel/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Images

I can still see it very clearly, I have not forgotten,” says Títos Patríkios. “The Athens police firing on the crowd from the roof of the parliament in Syntagma Square. The young men and women lying in pools of blood, everyone rushing down the stairs in total shock, total panic.”

And then came the defining moment: the recklessness of youth, the passion of belief in a justice burning bright: “I jumped up on the fountain in the middle of the square, the one that is still there, and I began to shout: “Comrades, don’t disperse! Victory will be ours! Don’t leave. The time has come. We will win!”

“I was,” he says now, “profoundly sure, that we would win.” But there was no winning that day; just as there was no pretending that what had happened would not change the history of a country that, liberated from Adolf Hitler’s Reich barely six weeks earlier, was now surging headlong towards bloody civil war.

Even now, at 86, when Patríkios “laughs at and with myself that I have reached such an age”, the poet can remember, scene-for-scene, shot for shot, what happened in the central square of Greek political life on the morning of 3 December 1944.

This was the day, those 70 years ago this week, when the British army, still at war with Germany, opened fire upon – and gave locals who had collaborated with the Nazis the guns to fire upon – a civilian crowd demonstrating in support of the partisans with whom Britain had been allied for three years.

The crowd carried Greek, American, British and Soviet flags, and chanted: “Viva Churchill, Viva Roosevelt, Viva Stalin’” in endorsement of the wartime alliance.

Twenty-eight civilians, mostly young boys and girls, were killed and hundreds injured. “We had all thought it would be a demonstration like any other,” Patríkios recalls. “Business as usual. Nobody expected a bloodbath.”

Britain’s logic was brutal and perfidious: Prime minister Winston Churchill considered the influence of the Communist Party within the resistance movement he had backed throughout the war – the National Liberation Front, EAM – to have grown stronger than he had calculated, sufficient to jeopardise his plan to return the Greek king to power and keep Communism at bay. So he switched allegiances to back the supporters of Hitler against his own erstwhile allies.

There were others in the square that day who, like the 16-year-old Patríkios, would go on to become prominent members of the left. Míkis Theodorakis, renowned composer and iconic figure in modern Greek history, daubed a Greek flag in the blood of those who fell. Like Patríkios, he was a member of the resistance youth movement. And, like Patríkios, he knew his country had changed. Within days, RAF Spitfires and Beaufighters were strafing leftist strongholds as the Battle of Athens – known in Greece as the Dekemvriana – began, fought not between the British and the Nazis, but the British alongside supporters of the Nazis against the partisans. “I can still smell the destruction,” Patríkios laments. “The mortars were raining down and planes were targeting everything. Even now, after all these years, I flinch at the sound of planes in war movies.”

And thereafter Greece’s descent into catastrophic civil war: a cruel and bloody episode in British as well as Greek history which every Greek knows to their core – differently, depending on which side they were on – but which remains curiously untold in Britain, perhaps out of shame, maybe the arrogance of a lack of interest. It is a narrative of which the millions of Britons who go to savour the glories of Greek antiquity or disco-dance around the islands Mamma Mia-style, are unaware.

The legacy of this betrayal has haunted Greece ever since, its shadow hanging over the turbulence and violence that erupted in 2008 after the killing of a schoolboy by police – also called the Dekemvriana – and created an abyss between the left and right thereafter.

“The 1944 December uprising and 1946-49 civil war period infuses the present,” says the leading historian of these events, André Gerolymatos, “because there has never been a reconciliation. In France or Italy, if you fought the Nazis, you were respected in society after the war, regardless of ideology. In Greece, you found yourself fighting – or imprisoned and tortured by – the people who had collaborated with the Nazis, on British orders. There has never been a reckoning with that crime, and much of what is happening in Greece now is the result of not coming to terms with the past.”

Before the war, Greece was ruled by a royalist dictatorship whose emblem of a fascist axe and crown well expressed its dichotomy once war began: the dictator, General Ioannis Metaxas, had been trained as an army officer in Imperial Germany, while Greek King George II – an uncle of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh – was attached to Britain. The Greek left, meanwhile, had been reinforced by a huge influx of politicised refugees and liberal intellectuals from Asia Minor, who crammed into the slums of Pireaus and working-class Athens.

Both dictator and king were fervently anti-communist, and Metaxas banned the Communist Party, KKE, interning and torturing its members, supporters and anyone who did not accept “the national ideology” in camps and prisons, or sending them into internal exile. Once war started, Metaxas refused to accept Mussolini’s ultimatum to surrender and pledged his loyalty to the Anglo-Greek alliance. The Greeks fought valiantly and defeated the Italians, but could not resist the Wehrmacht. By the end of April 1941, the Axis forces imposed a harsh occupation of the country. The Greeks – at first spontaneously, later in organised groups – resisted.

But, noted the British Special Operations Executive (SOE): “The right wing and monarchists were slower than their opponents in deciding to resist the occupation, and were therefore of little use.”

Britain’s natural allies were therefore EAM – an alliance of left wing and agrarian parties of which the KKE was dominant, but by no means the entirety – and its partisan military arm, ELAS.

There is no overstating the horror of occupation. Professor Mark Mazower’s book Inside Hitler’s Greece describes hideous bloccos or “round-ups” – whereby crowds would be corralled into the streets so that masked informers could point out ELAS supporters to the Gestapo and Security Battalions – which had been established by the collaborationist government to assist the Nazis – for execution. Stripping and violation of women was a common means to secure “confessions”. Mass executions took place “on the German model”: in public, for purposes of intimidation; bodies would be left hanging from trees, guarded by Security Battalion collaborators to prevent their removal. In response, ELAS mounted daily counterattacks on the Germans and their quislings. The partisan movement was born in Athens but based in the villages, so that Greece was progressively liberated from the countryside. The SOE played its part, famous in military annals for the role of Brigadier Eddie Myers and “Monty” Woodhouse in blowing up the Gorgopotamos viaduct in 1942 and other operations with the partisans – andartes in Greek.

By autumn 1944, Greece had been devastated by occupation and famine. Half a million people had died – 7% of the population. ELAS had, however, liberated dozens of villages and become a proto-government, administering parts of the country while the official state withered away. But after German withdrawal, ELAS kept its 50,000 armed partisans outside the capital, and in May 1944 agreed to the arrival of British troops, and to place its men under the officer commanding, Lt Gen Ronald Scobie.

On 12 October the Germans evacuated Athens. Some ELAS fighters, however, had been in the capital all along, and welcomed the fresh air of freedom during a six-day window between liberation and the arrival of the British. One partisan in particular is still alive, aged 92, and is a legend of modern Greece.

Commanding presence: Churchill leaving HMS Ajax to attend a conference ashore. Athens can be seen in the background.

Commanding presence: Churchill leaving HMS Ajax to attend a conference ashore. Athens can be seen in the background. Photograph: Crown Copyright. IWM/Imperial War Museum

In and around the European parliament in Brussels, the man in a Greek fisherman’s cap, with his mane of white hair and moustache, stands out. He is Manolis Glezos, senior MEP for the leftist Syriza party of Greece.

Glezos is a man of humbling greatness. On 30 May 1941, he climbed the Acropolis with another partisan and tore down the swastika flag that had been hung there a month before. He was arrested by the Gestapo in 1942, was tortured and as a result suffered from tuberculosis. He escaped and was re-arrested twice – the second time by collaborators. He recalls being sentenced to death in May 1944, before the Germans left Athens – “They told me my grave had already been dug”. Somehow he avoided execution and was then saved from a Greek court-martials' firing squad during the civil war period by international outcry led by General de Gaulle, Jean-Paul Sartre and the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Rev Geoffrey Fisher.”

Seventy years later, he is an icon of the Greek left who is also hailed as the greatest living authority on the resistance. “The English, to this day, argue that they liberated Greece and saved it from communism,” he says. “But that is the basic problem. They never liberated Greece. Greece had been liberated by the resistance, groups across the spectrum, not just EAM, on 12 October. I was there, on the streets – people were everywhere shouting: ‘Freedom!’ we cried, Laokratia! – ‘Power to the People!’”

The British duly arrived on 18 October, installed a provisional government under Georgios Papandreou and prepared to restore the king. “From the moment they came,” recalls Glezos, “the people and the resistance greeted them as allies. There was nothing but respect and friendship towards the British. We had no idea that we were already giving up our country and our rights.” It was only a matter of time before EAM walked out of the provisional government in frustration over demands that the partisans demobilise. The negotiations broke down on 2 December.

Official British thinking is reflected in War Cabinet papers and other documents kept in the Public Record Office at Kew. As far back as 17 August 1944, Churchill had written a “Personal and Top Secret” memo to US president Franklin Roosevelt to say that: “The War Cabinet and Foreign Secretary are much concerned about what will happen in Athens, and indeed Greece, when the Germans crack or when their divisions try to evacuate the country. If there is a long hiatus after German authorities have gone from the city before organised government can be set up, it seems very likely that EAM and the Communist extremists will attempt to seize the city.”

But what the freedom fighters wanted, insists Glezos “was what we had achieved during the war: a state ruled by the people for the people. There was no plot to take over Athens as Churchill always maintained. If we had wanted to do that, we could have done so before the British arrived.” During November, the British set about building the new National Guard, tasked to police Greece and disarm the wartime militias. In reality, disarmament applied to ELAS only, explains Gerolymatos, not to those who had collaborated with the Nazis. Gerolymatos writes in his forthcoming book, The International Civil War, about how “in the middle of November, the British started releasing Security Battalion officers… and soon some of them were freely walking the streets of Athens wearing new uniforms... The British army continued to provide protection to assist the gradual rehabilitation of the former quisling units in the Greek army and police forces.” An SOE memo urged that “HMG must not appear to be connected with this scheme.”

In conversation, Gerolymatos says: “So far as ELAS could see, the British had arrived, and now some senior officers of the Security Battalions and Special Security Branch [collaborationist units which had been integrated into the SS] were seen walking freely in the streets. Athens in 1944 was a small place, and you could not miss these people. Senior British officers knew exactly what they were doing, despite the fact that the ordinary soldiers of the former Security Battalions were the scum of Greece”. Gerolymatos estimates that 12,000 Security Battalionists were released from Goudi prison during the uprising to join the National Guard, and 228 had been reinstated in the army.

Any British notion that the Communists were poised for revolution fell within the context of the so-called Percentages Agreement, forged between Churchill and Soviet Commissar Josef Stalin at the code-named “Tolstoy Conference” in Moscow on 9 October 1944. Under the terms agreed in what Churchill called “a naughty document”, southeast Europe was carved up into “spheres of influence”, whereby – broadly – Stalin took Romania and Bulgaria, while Britain, in order to keep Russia out of the Mediterranean, took Greece. The obvious thing to have done, argues Gerolymatos, “would have been to incorporate ELAS into the Greek army. The officers in ELAS, many holding commissions in the pre-war Greek army, presumed this would happen – like De Gaulle did with French communists fighting in the resistance: ‘France is liberated, now let’s go and fight Germany!’

“But the British and the Greek government in exile decided from the outset that ELAS officers and men would not be admitted into the new army. Churchill wanted a showdown with the KKE so as to be able to restore the king. Churchill believed that a restoration would result in the return of legitimacy and bring back the old order. EAM-ELAS, regardless of its relationship to the KKE, represented a revolutionary force, and change.”

Meanwhile, continues Gerolymatos: “The Greek communists had decided not to try to take over the country, as least not until late November/early December 1944. The KKE wanted to push for a left-of-centre government and be part of it, that’s all.” Echoing Glezos, he says: “If they had wanted a revolution, they would not have left 50,000 armed men outside the capital after liberation – they’d have brought them in.”

“By recruiting the collaborators, the British changed the paradigm, signalling that the old order was back. Churchill wanted the conflict,” says Gerolymatos. “We must remember: there was no Battle for Greece. A large number of the British troops that arrived were administrative, not line units. When the fighting broke out in December, the British and the provisional government let the Security Battalions out of Goudi; they knew how to fight street-to-street because they’d done it with the Nazis. They’d been fighting ELAS already during the occupation and resumed the battle with gusto.”

The morning of Sunday 3 December was a sunny one, as several processions of Greek republicans, anti-monarchists, socialists and communists wound their way towards Syntagma Square. Police cordons blocked their way, but several thousand broke through; as they approached the square, a man in military uniform shouted: “Shoot the bastards!” The lethal fusillade – from Greek police positions atop the parliament building and British headquarters in the Grande Bretagne hotel – lasted half an hour. By noon, a second crowd of demonstrators entered the square, until it was jammed with 60,000 people. After several hours, a column of British Para troops cleared the square; but the Battle of Athens had begun, and Churchill had his war.

Manolis Glezos was sick that morning, suffering from tuberculosis. “But when I heard what had happened, I got off my sick bed,” he recalls. The following day, Glezos was roaming the streets, angry and determined, disarming police stations. By the time the British sent in an armoured division he and his comrades were waiting.

“I note the fact,” he says, “that they would rather use those troops to fight our population than German Nazis!” By the time British tanks rolled in from the port of Pireaus, he was lying in wait: “I remember them coming up the Sacred Way. We were dug in a trench. I took out three tanks,” he says. “There was much bloodshed, a lot of fighting, I lost many very good friends. It was difficult to strike at an Englishman, difficult to kill a British soldier – they had been our allies. But now they were trying to destroy the popular will, and had declared war on our people”.

At battle’s peak, Glezos says, the British even set up sniper nests on the Acropolis. “Not even the Germans did that. They were firing down on EAM targets, but we didn’t fire back, so as not [to harm] the monument.”

On 5 December, Lt Gen Scobie imposed martial law and the following day ordered the aerial bombing of the working-class Metz quarter. “British and government forces,” writes anthropologist Neni Panourgia in her study of families in that time, “having at their disposal heavy armament, tanks, aircraft and a disciplined army, were able to make forays into the city, burning and bombing houses and streets and carving out segments of the city… The German tanks had been replaced by British ones, the SS and Gestapo officers by British soldiers.” The house belonging to actor Mimis Fotopoulos, she writes, was burned out with a portrait of Churchill above the fireplace.

“I recall shouting slogans in English, during one battle in Koumoundourou Square because I had a strong voice and it was felt I could be heard,” says poet Títos Patríkios as we talk in his apartment. “‘We are brothers, there’s nothing to divide us, come with us!’ That’s what I was shouting in the hope that they [British troops] would withdraw. And right at that moment, with my head poked above the wall, a bullet brushed over my helmet. Had I not been yanked down by Evangelos Goufas[another poet], who was there next to me, I would have been dead.”

three women kneel in a road holding a banner protesting against the shootings

On their knees: women protest against the shootings, which led to more than a month of street fighting in Athens. Photograph: Dmitri Kessel/The LIFE Picture Collection/Getty

He can now smile at the thought that only months after the killing in the square he was back at school, studying English on a British Council summer course. “We were enemies, but at the same time friends. In one battle I came across an injured English soldier and I took him to a field hospital. I gave him my copy of Robert Louis Stevenson’s Kidnapped which I remember he kept.”

It is illuminating to read the dispatches by British soldiers themselves, as extracted by the head censor, Capt. JB Gibson, now stored at the Public Record Office. They give no indication that the enemy they fight was once a partisan ally, indeed many troops think they are fighting a German-backed force. A warrant officer writes: “Mr Churchill and his speech bucked us no end, we know now what we are fighting for and against, it is obviously a Hun element behind all this trouble.” From “An Officer”: “You may ask: why should our boys give their lives to settle Greek political differences, but they are only Greek political differences? I say: no, it is all part of the war against the Hun, and we must go on and exterminate this rebellious element.”

Cabinet papers at Kew trace the reactions in London: a minute of 12 December records Harold Macmillan, political advisor to Field Marshal Alexander, returning from Athens to recommend “a proclamation of all civilians against us as rebels, and a declaration those found in civilian clothes opposing us with weapons were liable to be shot, and that 24 hours notice should be given that certain areas were to be wholly evacuated by the civilian population” – ergo, the British Army was to depopulate and occupy Athens. Soon, reinforced British troops had the upper hand and on Christmas Eve Churchill arrived in the Greek capital in a failed bid to make peace on Christmas Day.

“I will now tell you something I have never told anyone,” says Manolis Glezos mischievously. On the evening of 25 December Glezos would take part in his most daring escapade, laying more than a ton of dynamite under the hotel Grande Bretagne, where Lt Gen Scobie had headquartered himself. “There were about 30 of us involved. We worked through the tunnels of the sewerage system; we had people to cover the grid-lines in the streets, so scared we were that we’d be heard. We crawled through all the shit and water and laid the dynamite right under the hotel, enough to blow it sky high.

“I carried the fuse wire myself, wire wound all around me, and I had to unravel it. We were absolutely filthy, covered [in excrement] and when we got out of the sewerage system I remember the boys washing us down. I went over to the boy with the detonator; and we waited, waited for the signal, but it never came. Nothing. There was no explosion. Then I found out: at the last minute EAM found out that Churchill was in the building, and put out an order to call off the attack. They’d wanted to blow up the British command, but didn’t want to be responsible for assassinating one of the big three.”

At the end of the Dekemvriana, thousands had been killed; 12,000 leftists rounded up and sent to camps in the Middle East. A truce was signed on 12 February, the only clause of which that was even partially honoured was the demobilisation of ELAS. And so began a chapter known in Greek history as the “White Terror”, as anyone suspected of helping ELAS during the Dekemvriana or even Nazi occupation was rounded up and sent to a gulag of camps established for their internment, torture, often murder – or else repentance, as under the Metaxas dictatorship.

Títos Patríkios is not the kind of man who wants the past to impinge on the present. But he does not deny the degree to which this history has done just that – affecting his poetry, his movement, his quest to find “le mot juste”. This most measured and mild-mannered of men would spend years in concentration camps, set up with the help of the British as civil war beckoned. With imprisonment came hard labour, and with hard labour came torture, and with exile came censorship. “The first night on Makronissos [the most infamous camp] we were all beaten very badly.

“I spent six months there, mostly breaking stones, picking brambles and carrying sand. Once, I was made to stand for 24 hours after it had been discovered that a newspaper had published a letter describing the appalling conditions in the camp. But though I had written it, and had managed to pass it on to my mother, I never admitted to doing so and throughout my time there I never signed a statement of repentance.”

Patríkios was among the relatively fortunate; thousands of others were executed, usually in public, their severed heads or hanging bodies routinely displayed in public squares. His Majesty’s embassy in Athens commented by saying the exhibition of severed heads “is a regular custom in this country which cannot be judged by western European standards”.

The name of the man in command of the “British Police Mission” to Greece is little known. Sir Charles Wickham had been assigned by Churchill to oversee the new Greek security forces – in effect, to recruit the collaborators. Anthropologist Neni Panourgia describes Wickham as “one of the persons who traversed the empire establishing the infrastructure needed for its survival,” and credits him with the establishment of one of the most vicious camps in which prisoners were tortured and murdered, at Giaros.

From Yorkshire, Wickham was a military man who served in the Boer War, during which concentration camps in the modern sense were invented by the British. He then fought in Russia, as part of the allied Expeditionary Force sent in 1918 to aid White Russian Czarist forces in opposition to the Bolshevik revolution. After Greece, he moved on in 1948 to Palestine. But his qualification for Greece was this: Sir Charles was the first Inspector General of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, from 1922 to 1945.

The RUC was founded in 1922, following what became known as the Belfast pogroms of 1920-22, when Catholic streets were attacked and burned. It was, writes the historian Tim Pat Coogan, “conceived not as a regular police body, but as a counter-insurgency one… The new force contained many recruits who joined up wishing to be ordinary policemen, but it also contained murder gangs headed by men like a head constable who used bayonets on his victims because it prolonged their agonies.”

As the writer Michael Farrell found out when researching his book Arming the Protestants, much material pertaining to Sir Charles’s incorporation of these UVF and Special Constabulary militiamen into the RUC has been destroyed, but enough remains to give a clear indication of what was happening. In a memo written by Wickham in November 1921, before the formation of the RUC, and while the partition treaty of December that year was being negotiated, he had addressed “All County Commanders” as follows: “Owing to the number of reports which has been received as to the growth of unauthorised loyalist defence forces, the government have under consideration the desirability of obtaining the services of the best elements of these organisations.”

Coogan, Ireland’s greatest and veteran historian, stakes no claim to neutrality over matters concerning the Republic and Union, but historical facts are objective and he has a command of those that none can match. We talk at his home outside Dublin over a glass of whiskey appositely called “Writer’s Tears”.

“It’s the narrative of empire,” says Coogan, “and, of course, they applied it to Greece. That same combination of concentration camps, putting the murder gangs in uniform, and calling it the police. That’s colonialism, that’s how it works. You use whatever means are necessary, one of which is terror and collusion with terrorists. It works.

“Wickham organised the RUC as the armed wing of Unionism, which is something it remained thereafter,” he says. “How long was it in the history of this country before the Chris Patten report of 1999, and Wickham’s hands were finally prised off the police? That’s a hell of a long piece of history – and how much suffering, meanwhile?”

The head of MI5 reported in 1940 that “in the personality and experience of Sir Charles Wickham, the fighting services have at their elbow a most valuable friend and counsellor”. When the intelligence services needed to integrate the Greek Security Battalions – the Third Reich’s “Special Constabulary” – into a new police force, they had found their man.

Manolis Glezos sitting at a desk

‘I carried the fuse wire myself: Manolis Glezos, senior MEP and ‘a man of humbling greatness’ in Brussels. Helena Smith Photograph: Helena Smith/Observer

Greek academics vary in their views on how directly responsible Wickham was in establishing the camps and staffing them with the torturers. Panourgia finds the camp on Giaros – an island which even the Roman Emperor Tiberius decreed unfit for prisoners – to have been Wickham’s own direct initiative. Gerolymatos, meanwhile, says: “The Greeks didn’t need the British to help them set up camps. It had been done before, under Metaxas.” Papers at Kew show British police serving under Wickham to be regularly present in the camps.

Gerolymatos adds: “The British – and that means Wickham – knew who these people were. And that’s what makes it so frightening. They were the people who had been in the torture chambers during occupation, pulling out the fingernails and applying thumbscrews.” By September 1947, the year the Communist Party was outlawed, 19,620 leftists were held in Greek camps and prisons, 12,000 of them in Makronissos, with a further 39,948 exiled internally or in British camps across the Middle East. There exist many terrifying accounts of torture, murder and sadism in the Greek concentration camps – one of the outrageous atrocities in post-war Europe. Polymeris Voglis of New York University describes how a system of repentance was introduced as though by a “latter-day secular Inquisition”, with confessions extracted through “endless and violent degradation”.

Women detainees would have their children taken away until they confessed to being “Bulgarians” and “whores”. The repentance system led Makronissos to be seen as a “school” and “National University” for those now convinced that “Our life belongs to Mother Greece,’ in which converts were visited by the king and queen, ministers and foreign officials. “The idea”, says Patríkios, who never repented, “was to reform and create patriots who would serve the homeland.”

Minors in the Kifissia prison were beaten with wires and socks filled with concrete. “On the boys’ chests, they sewed name tags”, writes Voglis, “with Slavic endings added to the names; many boys were raped”. A female prisoner was forced, after a severe beating, to stand in the square of Kastoria holding the severed heads of her uncle and brother-in-law. One detainee at Patras prison in May 1945 writes simply this: “They beat me furiously on the soles of my feet until I lost my sight. I lost the world.”

Manolis Glezos has a story of his own. He produces a book about the occupation, and shows a reproduction of the last message left by his brother Nikos, scrawled on the inside of a beret. Nikos was executed by collaborators barely a month before the Germans evacuated Greece. As he was being driven to the firing squad, the 19-year-old managed to throw the cap he was wearing from the window of the car. Subsequently found by a friend and restored to the family, the cap is among Glezos’s most treasured possessions.

Scribbled inside, Nikos had written: “Beloved mother. I kiss you. Greetings. Today I am going to be executed, falling for the Greek People. 10-5-44.”

Nowhere else in newly liberated Europe were Nazi sympathisers enabled to penetrate the state structure – the army, security forces, judiciary – so effectively. The resurgence of neo-fascism in the form of present-day far-right party Golden Dawn has direct links to the failure to purge the state of right-wing extremists; many of Golden Dawn’s supporters are descendants of Battalionists, as were the “The Colonels” who seized power in 1967.

Glezos says: “I know exactly who executed my brother and I guarantee they all got off scot-free. I know that the people who did it are in government, and no one was ever punished.” Glezos has dedicated years to creating a library in his brother’s honour. In Brussels, he unabashedly asks interlocutors to contribute to the fund by popping a “frango” (a euro) into a silk purse. It is, along with the issue of war reparations, his other great campaign, his last wish: to erect a building worthy of the library that will honour Nikos. “The story of my brother is the story of Greece,” he says.

There is no claim that ELAS, or the Democratic Army of Greece which replaced it, were hapless victims. There was indeed a “Red Terror” in response to the onslaught, and on the retreat from Athens, ELAS took some 15,000 prisoners with them. “We did some killing,” concedes Glezos, “and some people acted out of revenge. But the line was not to kill civilians.”

In December 1946, Greek prime minister Konstantinos Tsaldaris, faced with the probability of British withdrawal, visited Washington to seek American assistance. In response, the US State Department formulated a plan for military intervention which, in March 1947, formed the basis for an announcement by President Truman of what became known as the Truman Doctrine, to intervene with force wherever communism was considered a threat. All that had passed in Greece on Britain’s initiative was the first salvo of the Cold War.

Glezos still calls himself a communist. But like Patríkios, who rejected Stalinism, he believes that communism, as applied to Greece’s neighbours to the north, would have been a catastrophe. He recalls how he even gave Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet leader who would de-Stalinise the Soviet Union “an earful about it all”. The occasion arose when Khrushchev invited Glezos – who at the height of the Cold War was a hero in the Soviet Union, honoured with a postage stamp bearing his image – to the Kremlin. It was 1963 and Khrushchev was in talkative mood. Glezos wanted to know why the Red Army, having marched through Bulgaria and Romania, stopped at the Greek border. Perhaps the Russian leader could explain.

“He looked at me and said, ‘Why?’

“I said: ‘Because Stalin didn’t behave like a communist. He divided up the world with others and gave Greece to the English.’ Then I told him what I really thought, that Stalin had been the cause of our downfall, the root of all evil. All we had wanted was a state where the people ruled, just like our [then] government in the mountains, where you can still see the words ‘all powers spring from the people and are executed by the people’ inscribed into the hills. What they wanted, and created, was rule by the party.”

Khrushchev, says Glezos, did not openly concur. “He sat and listened. But then after our meeting he invited me to dinner, which was also attended by Leonid Brezhnev [who succeeded Khrushchev in 1964] and he listened for another four and a half hours. I have always taken that for tacit agreement.”

Lt Gen Ronald Scobie with two other military men at a desk. On 5 December 1944, imposed martial law and ordered the aerial bombing of the working-class Metz quarter of Athens.

Taking charge: Lt Gen Ronald Scobie (centre) who, on 5 December 1944, imposed martial law and ordered the aerial bombing of the working-class Metz quarter of Athens. Photograph: Dmitri Kessel/The LIFE Picture Collection/Getty

For Patríkios, it was not until the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956, that the penny dropped: a line had been drawn across the map, agreed by Churchill and Stalin. “When I saw the west was not going to intervene [during the Budapest uprising] I realised what had happened – the agreed ‘spheres of influence’. And later, I understood that the Dekemvriana was not a local conflict, but the beginning of the Cold War that had started as a warm war here in Greece.”

Patríkios returned to Athens as a detainee “on leave” and was eventually granted a passport in 1959. Upon procuring it, he immediately got on a ship to Paris where he would spend the next five years studying sociology and philosophy at the Sorbonne. “In politics there are no ethics,” he says, “especially imperial politics.”

It’s the afternoon of 25 January 2009. The tear gas that has drenched Athens – a new variety, imported from Israel – clears. A march in support of a Bulgarian cleaner, whose face has been disfigured in an acid attack by neo-fascists, has been broken up by riot police after hours of street-fighting.

Back in the rebel-held quarter of Exarcheia, a young woman called Marina pulls off her balaclava and draws air. Over coffee, she answers the question: why Greece? Why is it so different from the rest of Europe in this regard – the especially bitter war between left and right? “Because,” she replies, “of what was done to us in 1944. The persecution of the partisans who fought the Nazis, for which they were honoured in France, Italy, Belgium or the Netherlands – but for which, here, they were tortured and killed on orders from your government.”

She continues: “I come from a family that has been detained and tortured for two generations before me: my grandfather after the Second World War, my father under the Junta of the colonels – and now it could be me, any day now. We are the grandchildren of the andartes, and our enemies are Churchill’s Greek grandchildren.”

“The whole thing”, spits Dr Gerolymatos, “was for nothing. None of this need have happened, and the British crime was to legitimise people whose record under occupation by the Third Reich put them beyond legitimacy. It happened because Churchill believed he had to bring back the Greek king. And the last thing the Greek people wanted or needed was the return of a de-frocked monarchy backed by Nazi collaborators. But that is what the British imposed, and it has scarred Greece ever since.”

“All those collaborators went into the system,” says Manolis Glezos. “Into the government mechanism – during and after the civil war, and their sons went into the military junta. The deposits remain, like malignant cells in the system. Although we liberated Greece, the Nazi collaborators won the war, thanks to the British. And the deposits remain, like bacilli in the system.”

But there is one last thing Glezos would like to make clear. “You haven’t asked: ‘Why do I go on? Why I am doing this when I am 92 years and two months old?’ he says, fixing us with his eyes. “I could, after all, be sitting on a sofa in slippers with my feet up,” he jests. “So why do I do this?”

He answers himself: “You think the man sitting opposite you is Manolis but you are wrong. I am not him. And I am not him because I have not forgotten that every time someone was about to be executed, they said: ‘Don’t forget me. When you say good morning, think of me. When you raise a glass, say my name.’ And that is what I am doing talking to you, or doing any of this. The man you see before you is all those people. And all this is about not forgetting them.”

Timeline: the battle between left and right

Late summer 1944 German forces withdraw from most of Greece, which is taken over by local partisans. Most of them are members of ELAS, the armed wing of the National Liberation Front, EAM, which included the Communist KKE party

October 1944 Allied forces, led by General Ronald Scobie, enter Athens, the last German-occupied area, on 13 October. Georgios Papandreou returns from exile with the Greek government

2 December 1944 Rather than integrate ELAS into the new army, Papandreou and Scobie demand the disarmament of all guerrilla forces. Six members of the new cabinet resign in protest

3 December 1944 Violence in Athens after 200,000 march against the demands. More than 28 are killed and hundreds are injured. The 37-day Dekemvrianá begins. Martial law is declared on 5 December

January/February 1945 Gen Scobie agrees to a ceasefire in exchange for ELAS withdrawal. In February the Treaty of Varkiza is signed by all parties. ELAS troops leave Athens with 15,000 prisoners

1945/46 Right-wing gangs kill more than 1,100 civilians, triggering civil war when government forces start battling the new Democratic Army of Greece (DSE), mainly former ELAS soldiers

1948-49 DSE suffers a catastrophic defeat in the summer of 1948, with nearly 20,000 killed. In July 1949 Tito closes the Yugoslav border, denying DSE shelter. Ceasefire signed on 16 October 1949

21 April 1967 Right-wing forces seize power in a coup d’état. The junta lasts until 1974. Only in 1982 are communist veterans who had fled overseas allowed to return to Greece

Athens 1944: Britain’s dirty secret | World news | The Guardian