Persian Invasion of 480 BC - articles

[Magnus]

But what you can't seem to fathom, is that some other person can look at the exact same sources as you, and come up with a completely different conclusion or theory based on the extant information at hand.

And again, you're infering an idea based on pay statements from a later era anyway, to try and find a basis for an empire that existed a thousand years prior.

The problem is you have no solid proof of anything you are saying. Rather, you've an idea, a thesis in your head that you've perceived based on your readings about the size of Xerxes army, and used your own logic to justify your ideas based on these infered pieces of information.

This is not proof. And it's not enough to solidly deduct a fact. Until something more accurate can be found to decide either way, you're going to have to accept the fact that people are going to disagree with you. You may not like it, but those people's ideas are no less or more valid than your own, since they are after all, theories based on corelative information.

You're best bet is to present your information, debate what you can, and leave it at that. Otherwise you're just arguing your own opinion, and that is completely pointless, since everyone thinks they're own opinion is correct anyway.