Ancient Athens and Sparta: Freedom Compared
(originally written Aug 30, 2015, hence the ibids)
At the end of the Archaic Era in Greece, Athens and Sparta were distinguished by the role played by people in government. Each city-state emerged from the Dark Age of Greece facing the familiar challenges of over population and resource scarcity. The methodologies in dealing with these issues reflected in the Spartan and Athenian governing styles. Sparta sought to dominate its neighbors and consolidate power in the hands of a few elites. Athens saw opportunity in inclusion and found a way to enfranchise its male citizenry. Each defined itself as the freest amongst the Greeks. When comparing their systems of governance and personal liberties, it is clear that the citizens of Athens possessed the broadest level of freedom and the citizens of Sparta possessed the most absolute freedom.
Ancient Spartans exercised their freedom under the leadership of an oligarchy. Derived from fourteenth century French and ancient Greek, meaning government by the few, power was concentrated in Sparta.[1] In fact, only thirty-five individuals ruled the city-state and its territory with an iron fist. In ancient times, Sparta had two kings who shared power. During times of crisis and war, especially to avoid confusion on the battlefield, Sparta appointed one king to command the Spartan army. Behind the kings sat a group of twenty-eight elders or gerousia. This group made proposals to the assembly of free adult males — the Spartan soldiery — who possessed limited power. A pseudo-judiciary of five annually elected overseers or ephors represented the checks and balances to the power of the dual kingship and gerousia in Sparta. In Ancient Greece: From Prehistoric to Hellenistic Times, Thomas Martin explains the Ephors role as “exercise[ing] considerable judicial powers of judgment… even against the king… [and] ensur[ing] the supremacy of the law.”[2] Xenophon notes in Constitution of the Lacedaemonians “all rise from their seats when the King appears; only the Ephors do not rise from their official chairs.”[3] This concentration of power allowed Spartan citizens the freedom to pursue the masculine arts, to murder their slaves on a whim, and to train as full time soldiers.
Unlike the dual-kingship oligarchic system of Sparta, Athens’ government was a more open, inclusive proto-democracy. In Ancient Greece, Martin cites the population explosion of “free peasants” in Attica during the 8th century as contributing to the enfranchisement of the poor.[4] He goes on to suggest these poorer members of society exchanged their willing participation in the Athenian military for the right to take part in the political process.[5] He further provides evidence there was a gradual transition in the late 600s from a “broad oligarchy”, wherein fewer gradually accumulated farmland and power, to a more inclusive form of government after the reforms of Solon.[6] Although Solon’s efforts failed in the immediate term, the changes he introduced and the idea of including the poor in the political process of Athens laid the groundwork for future democratization. For instance, Solon divided the free male citizens of Athenian society into distinct social classes and assigned eligibility for certain offices based on wealth. Unlike Sparta, where you could only elevate your status on the battlefield — assuming you were a free citizen to begin with — a person in the lowest class in Athens could accumulate wealth through their own personal effort and enterprise and advance upwards through the ranks. This singular reform provided the foundation upon which Athenian democracy developed.
The relationship between Spartan citizenry and their neighbors was one characterized by total dominance of others for the benefit of the Spartan state. In Spartan territories, there were three distinct categories of people. Free Spartan citizens, in the distinct form of Spartan soldiery, the Perioikoi or local non-slave inhabitants of Laconia, and the state owned surfs/slaves of the Spartan state, the Helots. Unlike its counterpart Athens, Sparta made no attempts to include their others in the political process. Spartan women were meant to have children and provide Sparta with soldiers. The Perioikoi were not citizens of Sparta and possessed no role other than supporting the Spartan state as auxiliary soldiers and taxpayers. The Helots were conquered peoples, distinct from the Perioikoi, who were the property of the Spartan state living under the constant threat of violence by Spartan citizens. While describing Spartan wealth in Alcibiades, Plato draws a distinction between slaves and the Helot class.[7] This term described those residing in the Peloponnese conquered and subjugated by Sparta. Life as a helot was a metaphor for Spartan freedom. Each year, the ephors declared war on the helots, allowing the Spartan secret service to “come down into the highways and kill every helot whom they caught… and [traverse] the fields… and [slay] the sturdiest and best of them.”[8] Like their government, the Spartans held absolute power over their subjects and so long as it was for the benefit of the Spartan state, were free to do as they pleased.
In contrast to Sparta, Athens was able to expand and support a growing population without requiring the total subjugation of their neighbors. Whereas the Spartans prevented the Perioikoi from acquiring citizenship and participating in larger governance, Athens enfranchised the local inhabitants of Attica by organizing them by demes or village. Over time, these organizations evolved to replace a strictly village based polity with one organized outside of kinship group. This had effect of limiting the ability of the few to dominate the poor, as Martin argues, “by exercising influence on the poorer people in their immediate area.”[9] Athens trusted in the judgment of the majority and saw wisdom in negotiation and compromise, as opposed to the Spartan method of compulsion.[10] Its system relied on the ability to ostracize an individual who threatened democracy. To protect against, as Martin puts it, “the eccentricity and irresponsibility of the few”, a dangerous-overly popular citizen faced banishment and exile for 10 years, though without losing their property or citizen rights. In Athens, as least, the individual was only limited by the collective will of the people. You were free to do as you please, until it was a threat to the group. All together, it is worth arguing these changes fostered the growth of what we consider Athens, a unified polity with a greater sense of community and esprit de corps.
Athens and Sparta faced similar challenges in their transition out of the Archaic Age. Their populations, and the populations of their immediate neighbors, were expanding. The Spartans saw rivals in need of subjugation; The Athenians saw strength in inclusion. Attica became the bastion of negotiation and compromise as Laconia became an armed camp surrounded by helot surfs desperate for their own freedom. In facing these challenges, each created a system reflective of their individual societies. Voltaire may have been discussing both ancient Athens and Sparta in Le Dîner du comte de Boulainvilliers when he wrote, “It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.”[11] The zealotry at which Athens and Sparta pursued their own versions of governance blinded them to any alternative or to the contradictions inherent to their systems; consider, each limited the role of women in society and owned slaves. In the end, each approached the problems of the day in a different manner, but arrived in the same place. Both city-states demanded their citizens glorify their individual polis and support its goals. As a citizen of Sparta and Athens, one was free to exercise their personal liberties, so long as they were congruent with the ideals of the specific city-state.
[1] Online Etymology Dictionary “Oligarchy,” (2015), accessed August 20, 2015, http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=oligarchy.
[2] Thomas R Martin, “Oligarchy, Tyranny, and Democracy,” in Ancient Greece: From Prehistoric to Hellenistic Times (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013), 96.
[3] “Xenophon, Constitution of the Lacedaimonians,chapter 15, Section 6,” Perseus Digital Library, accessed August 20, 2015, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0210%3Atext%3DConst.+Lac.%3Achapter%3D15%3Asection%3D6.
[4] Martin, “Oligarchy…”, 107.
[5] Ibid., 107.
[6] Ibid., 110.
[7] “Plato, Alcibiades 1,section 122d,” Perseus Digital Library, accessed August 20, 2015, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0176:text=Alc.%201:section=122d&highlight=helot.
[8] “Plutarch, Lycurgus,chapter 28,” Perseus Digital Library, accessed August 30, 2015, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:2008.01.0047:chapter=28&highlight=helot#note2.
[9] Martin, “Oligarchy…”, 113.
[10] Martin, “Oligarchy…”, 114.
[11] Voltaire, Le Dîner Du Comte De Boulainvilliers. Par Mr. St. Hiacinte [I.E. Voltaire] (1768), 46. Il est bien malaisé (puisqu’il faut enfin m’expliquer) d’ôter à des insensés des chaînes qu’ils révèrent.
Bibliography
“Ancient Greek Palace Unearthed Near Sparta Dates Back to 17th Century BC | World News | The Guardian.” The Guardian. Last modified August 25, 2015. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/26/ancient-greek-palace-unearthed-near-sparta-dates-back-to-17th-century-bc#comment-58201215.
“Aristotle, Politics,Book 1, Section 1255a.” Perseus Digital Library. Accessed August 30, 2015. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0058:book=1:section=1255a&highlight=freedom.
Beer, Josh. Sophocles and the Tragedy of Athenian Democracy. Westport, Conn: Praeger, 2004.
Blackwell, Christopher W. “The Development of Athenian Democracy.” The Stoa Consortium. Last modified January 24, 2003. http://www.stoa.org/projects/demos/article_democracy_development?page=2.
Grant, David. “The Athenians Wanted Democracy, And They Got It Good And Hard.” Social Matter. Last modified June 1, 2015. http://www.socialmatter.net/2015/06/01/athens-wanted-democracy-and-they-got-it-good-and-hard/.
Martin, Thomas R. “Oligarchy, Tyranny, and Democracy.” In Ancient Greece: From Prehistoric to Hellenistic Times. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013.
Online Etymology Dictionary. “Oligarchy.” 2015. Accessed August 20, 2015. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=oligarchy.
“Plato, Alcibiades 1,section 122d.” Perseus Digital Library. Accessed August 20, 2015. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0176:text=Alc.%201:section=122d&highlight=helot.
“Plutarch, Lycurgus,chapter 28.” Perseus Digital Library. Accessed August 30, 2015. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:2008.01.0047:chapter=28&highlight=helot#note2.
“Pseudo-Xenophon (Old Oligarch), Constitution of the Athenians,chapter 1.” Perseus Digital Library. Accessed August 30, 2015. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Ps.+Xen.+Const.+Ath.&redirect=true.
“Thucydides (c.460/455-c.399 BCE): Pericles’ Funeral Oration from the Peloponnesian War (Book 2.34–46).” FORDHAM.EDU. Accessed August 23, 2015. http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/pericles-funeralspeech.asp.
Voltaire. Le Dîner Du Comte De Boulainvilliers. Par Mr. St. Hiacinte [I.E. Voltaire], 46. 1768.
Il est bien malaisé (puisqu’il faut enfin m’expliquer) d’ôter à des insensés des chaînes qu’ils révèrent.
“Xenophon, Constitution of the Lacedaimonians,chapter 15, Section 6.” Perseus Digital Library. Accessed August 20, 2015. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0210%3Atext%3DConst.+Lac.%3Achapter%3D15%3Asection%3D6.