- This topic has 3 voices and 3 replies.
-
Posts
-
To me, the political structure of Sparta seems to have been one that is reminiscent of particular democratic ideals that are admirable even today – the use of a dual-kingship as a check on authority, the system of council, ephors and equals in the rule-making body, and the notion of the equals (homoioi) as part of an egalitarian system all seem to be somewhat “enlightened”. But the uber-militaristic society is rather puzzling in that it removed marriage as we know it from the equation. Was there room for love in such a society? Perhaps not as it would get in the way of the work of the males, and loving one's children would be downright depressing if they were removed from the family at age seven to train in the military. At the same time I would compare Spartan life to that of the futuristic societies as written about in 1984 and Brave New World, both because of the treatment of producing offspring for utilitarian purposes and because of the secret police (krypteia) who would likely have been rather pervasive in the city. What are your thoughts on the political/social life in Sparta? Do you admire it or despise it?
I admire Sparta because it was a vibrant leading polis of the Achaian world, but I despise it because it suppressed individuality and cultural freedom. But without Sparta, the Persians would have overrun the Greek world.
And in suppressing cultural freedom it suppressed its own reputation later on. It may have been mighty, but when we think of Greek ideals we more often think of Athens than of Sparta. And when we think of Greek architecture, we think of the great structures on the Acropolis in Athens or the hearth temple at Delphi or the theater at Epidaurus. We don't think of Spartan architecture because they didn't really build anything that was memorable. Perhaps this is where we get the word “spartan” from. The only real ideal they seemed to take – and take it to the extreme they did – was that of a militaristic society.
But without Sparta, the Persians would have overrun the Greek world.
I'm fairly certain the Athenian navy would disagree with that. 😀I went into this with a negative opinion about Sparta, but I feel differently about them now. Considering how militaristic it was, I was surprised how much authority the women had, moreso than other states. I guess that makes sense seeing that the males were not around. The women had to manage their households and family finances. As far as family and parental love, it was just such a way of life that I don't hink it caused any depression or feelings of loss. It was just accepted as the way it was. I think the women wanted their sons to be successful warriors...they would have been disappointed otherwise. Perhaps they were thinking it is better to send your kid off to military training if that meant keeping those nasty little helots from revolting and ruining everyone's life.
Do you agree with Aristotle's views on Sparta? He pretty much slams them here.On the Lacedaemonian Constitution, c. 340 BCE
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
