Introduction
During the Early 4th Century B.C Sparta was a powerhouse society in Ancient Greece. The Spartiates had gained control of the Greek Empire after withholding against the Athenians and defeating them in the Peloponnesian War. This presented them with their greatest victory in battle in their military history. It gave the Spartiates their greatest results gaining power, money and land. Due to their greatest results came their greatest repercussions that eventually caused their own downfall ending the existence of the Spartiates. There are many opinions on the main reason of how and why the Spartiates declined, but in this essay it will discuss a select few immediate and systemic causes that could of led to the decline and existance of Spartiates. Through the unpreventable immediate effects after the Peloponnesian war, to the systemic causes, which could have been prevented, the Spartiates were their own enemy when it came down to controlling their own existence.
Peloponnesian War Casualties
One of the very first signs of an immediate cause to the decline of the Spartiates was the casualty numbers that had hit the society during the Peloponnesian War. This war consisted of the two empire states of the Spartans and Athenians, and during a long campaign the Athenians eventually surrendered to the Spartans in 404 B.C.* This resulted in the wholesome power of the Spartans to control the whole of Greece and it’s states due to this victory. It is believed that the decline of the number of Spartiates was due to this battle that lasted from 431- 404 BC. The casualties on both sides were enormous, the sheer amount of soldier that Sparta had provided for the war were smaller compared to the Athenians at the time*. The Athenians rea...
... middle of paper ...
...emselves and move forward. They were just a society of Military thirsty men that only knew how to defend themselves in battle and when it came to ruling an Empire they had no idea what to do and how to do it. The population of the Spartiates was not enough to grow and they were their own worst enemy. Their own people mostly slaves were against everything that the Spartiates were doing, and the government weren’t helping in that they were just greedy and the same system adopted was to restrictive to growing as a society and empire, it didn’t help that the Spartiates themselves were scarce and couldn’t bring enough blood to progress. The Spartiates had themselves to blame and even though they had the power and would go down in history for their military triumphs, their whole system of government and policy were there own faults for gradual downfall of Sparta itself.
Prior, Plutarch accounts for the unequal social framework within Sparta, where tribal leaders owned vast domains of land, in great contrast to the average Spartiate. Furthermore, Hodgkinson suggests the success of social reform in Sparta stems from the redistribution of Messenian land and the Agoge; reinforcing the belief that dissent from this social order would threaten the established hierarchical status of the Spartiates.
“No man ever proves himself a good man in war unless he can endure to face the blood and the slaughter, go against the enemy and fight with his hands.” The preceding was quoted from “The Spartan creed” by the poet Tyrtaeus. There are two authors in this primary resource reading which include Tyrtaeus as well as Xenophon, whom authored “The laws and customs of the Spartans”. These two works give great detail to the Spartan society. As history has presented it, Sparta was a smaller polis and yet was one of the most, if not most, influential societies in history. What we know of this culture comes to us from excavation of its heritage as well as literary works such as these. But are these “eyes” into history factual and creditable enough to base our own interpretations of such a masterful race? These writings are great resources for Spartan’s war enhanced values and societal customs, but lack in evidence of governmental affairs and religion. This lacking may have been due to both writer’s motives for their work.
The socioeconomic structure of ancient Sparta was unbalanced and disproportioned, and because of the social unrest between the citizens of Sparta economic reforms were desperately needed. Plutarch highlights this issue when he says:
Hellenic culture in the Spartan community was that of a humble elite. True Spartan culture is well captured in Xenophon’s work, Spartan Society, as he wrote of how this elitist society viewed not only themselves, but the other countries around them. This work shines light into the three-part worldview of the ancient, Hellenic Spartans of: humanism, idealism, and rationalism. As Xenophon begins to write over the whole of the Spartan society it can be seen how the Spartans lived out the worldview of this Hellenistic society. This living out of the worldview recorded in Xenophon’s, Spartan Society, illustrates their worldview through the noting of Lycurgus’ accomplishments and the contrast of the “other.”
Spartan culture is a great example of how a society’s infrastructure will directly affect both, its social structure and superstructure. It also serves as a warning that any society that becomes too rigid in its structure and too static in its values will not last long when confronted with more agile and adaptable cultures. This paper will explore why Sparta became the Hellenic army par excellence, how this worked to create a very specific social structure founded on martial values, and, finally, how that social structure would ultimately be the undoing of the culture.
The Spartans did not heed Archidamus’ warning that “unless we can either beat them at sea, or deprive them of the revenues which feed their navy, we shall meet with little but disaster.”8 From the beginning, Sparta should have developed an alternative course of action, a branch plan in modern American military terms, to execute if the invasion of Attica did not quickly end the war. There was little time for Sparta to build or develop a naval force to match Athenian naval power, but an alternative plan to erode away the Athenian empire, similar to the one employed by Brasidas in 424 BC, was possible much earlier in the war and could have eroded Athenian financial support from their empire. For as Thucydides tells us, “the strength of Athens being derived from the money brought in by their [allies] payments.”9 Conditions were present for Sparta to reduce the Athenian empire as many Greeks wanted or feared losing their independence from the Athenian empire.10 While not excusing Sparta’s initial failure as described above, it is understandable, based on the conservative Spartan culture, why they did not develop an alternative course of action for defeating
Of all the history of the Ancient Greece, there were two events that showed really well how disunity among the Greeks highly contributed to its downfall, which were the Peloponnesian War and Successors’ War. Interestingly, both wars occurred after a unity and followed by a unity that was carried out by “outsiders”. This may have actually shown that the Greeks had never learned from their past
Sparta's polis was the most extensive military land forces during the classical Greek. It is during the classical period that Sparta administered, dominated and even influenced the whole of Peloponnese. Also, the defeat of Athenians
Sparta was known for being strong, but was it really? In case you don’t know, Sparta was a Greek city-state. Sparta only focused on war. Spartans were only taught the basics of other topics. Spartans were trained for 13 years just to fight. Reading and writing were only taught in Sparta for practical reasons. The strengths didn’t outweigh the weaknesses. There were more weaknesses to Sparta than there were strengths. The strengths of Sparta didn’t outweigh the weaknesses for three reasons. The first reason is that the babies were killed just if they looked weak. The second reason is that the Spartans barely new anything about other topics (math, reading, writing, etc). The third and final reason is that the helots outnumbered the Spartans 50 to 1.
When examining the causes for the Peloponnesian War, which was between 431-404 B.C., there are a number of causes that factored into the cause of this war. However, one of the most important causes to this war was largely due to the fact that the Spartans feared the growing power and success of Athens. The Spartans were “particularly alarmed at the growing power of Athens” (Cartwright, “Peloponnesian War”). During the Persian war in 479 BC, Athens grew fiercely strong with power with help of its many allies and continued with their no mercy attacks on Persian territories. When the Persians left Greece, Athens further enraged Sparta when they built large and tall walls around its empire in the event of an attack, which was mostly thought to be from Sparta if it happened.
The book The Spartacus War by Barry Strauss is an in depth look at one of Roman history’s most legendary events, the gladiator revolt led by Spartacus. Spartacus has become a legend, creating a storyline that has inspired many movies and television shows, such as Stanley Kubrick’s epic Spartacus in 1960, starring the legendary Kirk Douglas. Spartacus has inspired a perfect mix of men over time with various backgrounds and beliefs, from Stalin and Marx, to Voltaire, and even to Ronald Reagan. How though, did Spartacus create a massive revolt of slaves that would create a massive problem for the mighty Rome? Strauss attempts to create a chronology of the Spartacus War using his vast knowledge of the Italian landscape, ancient documents, and archaeological evidence, as well as provide the reader with the historical reasons that might have created a perfect combination of causes to create the Spartacus legend.
The Peloponnesian War is the conflict between the pelopoponesians league led by Sparta and the Delian league, led by Athens. Much of our knowledge on the causes and events of the Peloponnesian War, depends on the Athenian Thucydides 460-400 BC, writer of the History of the Peloponessian War. He servd as an Athenian commander in Northern Greece during the early years of the war until the assembly exiled him as he lost an outpost to the enemy. During this exile, he was able to interview witnesses on both sides of the conflicted. Unlike Heredotus he concentrated on contemporary history and presented his account of the war in an annalistic framework that only occasionally diverts from chronological order. In his account, he discuses the precursors to the war, including the 30 years truce and revolutions, such as the stasis in Corcyra. When looking at wars, the primary focus is normally the fighting itself, such as what we see for World War II. However, it is important to look at the anatomy of war, meaning what effect the war has on the people who are experiencing it first hand, and the consquences that the conflict has on the rest of the world. Therefore in this essay I shall discuss, drawing directly from Thucydides, The History of the Peloponnesian War, how the civilians reacted to the war, their involvement and socio economic factors. Furthermore, the first section of my essay shall focus on the direct effect of war on the people, regarding the plague, and violence and hopelessness that was experienced. Then I shall go on to discuss more general effects of the war and how it affected the Greek world, discussing the social and economic losses that occurred such as the cost of the war in attica, the coup d’etat that occurred in gove...
Dating back to 449 B.C., Sparta and Athens always had an alliance, but as time grew that balance slowly began to fall as one felt threatened by another. Before any sight of unsteadiness the Spartans and Athenians had a bound partnership. Beginning after their domination of the Persian war, the two states slowly became aware of one another’s growing power. More time went by, and the Spartans began to grow conscious of the other states, feeling wary and paranoid around them (Fox, 170). No state was particularly to blame for the strain on their peace treaty, nor for the war, it came as the two states developed. Eventually the two states had clashed enough and declared war. Although the Spartans gave the Athenians a chance to back down and temporarily stall war, the two states would never be equal, their allies resented one another far too much. The growing urge for power was bound to take over sooner or later. Finally, after 7 years of uneasy tension, Sparta could wait no longer and declared war against Athens (Fox, 167). Although the Athenians and Spartans lived together in peace for so long, they existed in a fragile balance that was bound to eventually lead to war.
5. POWELL, Anton, Athens & Sparta: Constructing Greek Political & Social History From 478 B.C, Routledge, London, 1993
Because of the tranquil times, the civilization’s society had more time to focus on writing, math, astronomy, and artistic fields, as well as trade and metallurgy. Out of all the city-states of Greece, two excelled over all the rest, Sparta and Athens. Even though they were the most advanced and strong civilizations, they were bitter enemies. While Athens focused mainly on the people’s democracy and citizen rights, Sparta were ferocious and enslaved its original inhabitants, making them unable to leave and kept under a close eye to prevent insurgence (History of Greece:The Golden Age of Greece). Additionally, Sparta had strict and trained soldiers that underwent intense physical exercising and instruction.