We are told that -

"It is very unlikely that world civilization would
be the same today if the Persians had defeated the
Athenians at Marathon. The mighty army of Darius I
would have conquered Athens and established Persian
rule there, putting an end to the newborn Athenian
democracy of Pericles."

"In effect, this would certainly have destroyed the
idea of democracy as it had developed in Athens at
the time."

There's more at the following link:

http://greekreporter.com/2021/-3/11/battle-of-marathon-saved-western-civilization-2500-years-ago/

cont'd ...

There's much more on the web.

Here's another link worth reading:

http://historycollection.com/greeks-defeat-persians-save-greek-civilization-epic-battle/

Though the Greek language was universal in the Roman Empire, its intellectual culture had been overtaken by the ruthlessness of Rome by the turn if the millinia. It was ultimately the violence and decisions made by Rome that put to death independant thinkers.

Just look at the history of Rome and the Jewish State as recorded in the New Testament. Herod appointed by Rome took the head of John the Baptizer, and Rome later crucified 300 Jews for rejecting Roman taxes on their offerings including Jesus Christ, putting to death the apostle Paul in Rome following his defence before a Roman Court.

Foxy,

" if the Persians had defeated the Athenians at Marathon"

Its very true that the victory at Marathon saved Greece and ushered in the 5th century golden age. The difference with Salamis and to a lesser extent Plataea is that it ended, for all time, the Median threat to Hellas whereas Marathon blunted the threat for a short while only and encouraged the Mede to redouble their efforts.

I consider myself a bit of an expert on Marathon. I think there are very few books or academic articles on the battle that I haven't read. I once spent 3 glorious days wandering the plain of Marathon and paying my respects to the 192 Athenians and 11 Plataeans interred there.

Had the Athenians lost that battle, the city would have been erased. The Persians had vowed to carry the entire population into slavery back in Asia. The people of Eretria which was conquered a few days before Marathon, were indeed returned in chains to Asia.

While Marathon gave Athens and the new democracy confideceto forge forward, the threat continued. One of the events which I find most revealing about the quality of the Athenians at that time was the story of the silver mines at Laurium. Not long after Marathon, silver was discovered near Athens. The windfall was owned by the whole state. Initially it was decided that the proceeds would be distributed among the people. But Themistocles persuaded them to instead, forego the money and instead invest it in building a fleet. It was that fleet that won the victory at Salamis.

Aidan,

"Greek states rose, fought and fell before and after that."

But that's the point. They wouldn't have risen after that. They would have been incorporated into the Persian empire and any non-conforming processes suppressed. In the previous half-century that same thing had happened to the city of Miletus on what is now the Turkish west coast. Miletus had been a centre for philosophy and science. But all that was squashed after it fell under the Persian yoke. The same fate would have befallen Athens.

" Sparta was a totalitarian dystopia much worse than anything it was fighting against."

Well that's probably a little harsh. But the Greek legacy that was saved at Salamis and passed onto western civilisation wasn't from Sparta, it was from Athens.

"The Greek culture and ideas of freedom had already started to spread to Rome, which had by then developed a form of democracy that would be recognisable today "

Well that's not true, at least not true in 480BC. Frankly we know little with any certainty about Rome from that period since much of the information was lost during Brennus's sacking of Rome c390BC. It's true the Romans claimed that they were already developing their democracy alongside Athens but that cannot be ascertained. Much of that was later Roman myth-making. For example they claimed their democracy started in 509BC which just happened to beat the reforms of Cleisthenes which occurred in 508BC. But the Roman claim has no basis in fact.

While it is true that the eventual Roman democracy was closer to us than the Athenian one, it was much more like the British democracy of say 1800 than our current version.

" Despite the myths of movie makers..."

I'm not sure which movies you refer to. But the notion that Greek civilisation was the foundation of western civilisation is very much based on a thorough understanding of the basics of each and a long view of the flow of history.

Josephus,

"Though the Greek language was universal in the Roman Empire..."

Well no. Latin was universal. Greek was however ubiquitous in the eastern empire. Most (all?) educated Romans spoke both.

Remember that Alexander had carried the Greek language and Greek culture to all what we today call the Middle East. By the time of Jesus, Greek culture had been in Israel for over 300 years. The teaching of Jesus and especially Paul was an amalgam of Jewish tradition with Greek philosophy and thinking.

The Romans certainly suppressed much individual thinking, especially in the later empire. But they had already imbued much from Greece. Notions of philosophy, historic research, science, empiricism, rule of law, and individualism remained in the Roman polity and were ultimately passed onto its conquers and, eventually, us.