In their quest to create the perfect soldier, the perfect citizen and the perfect State the Spartans created a culture which would inspire many, and appall others. Hitler was one admirer of their ruthless practice of eugenics, weeding out and killing the weak. I have come to the conclusion that they, in turn, would have understood his philosophy all too well. But they would have thought him base, and a bit soft.

A couple of weeks ago, prompted by no more than a fancy, I wrote a piece about the hunt for the real location of ancient Troy. Anna, our learned editor, cautioned me that it was a bit long, but people seemed surprisingly interested. This week, in much the same vein, your armchair Indiana Jones set out in pursuit of knowledge of another classic topic of the Ancient world, Sparta and the Spartans.

I thought I had a rudimentary knowledge; I had after all, watched “The 300”, the hugely stylised movie in homage to the Spartans’ most celebrated battle. At Thermopylae (the Gates of the Hot Springs) in 480BC, 300 Spartans spearheaded a combined Greek force of about 5-7,000 and held back hundreds of thousands of troops of the invading the Persian tyrant Xerxes in a narrow pass between the mountains and the sea for days, giving the Greeks time to organise, and more importantly inspiring them to resist.

Ultimately, when the forces of Xerxes bribed a hill man to lead them though a mountain path and the Greeks were being surrounded, the Spartans sent the other Greeks home, and faced the Persians alone, fighting to (almost) the last man. One escaped because he had been sent away sick. He recovered from the shame by recklessly plunging into the Persian ranks in a later, extraordinary battle, and dying there instead.

I knew a bit more than the myth of blokes with computer enhanced six packs leaping around in “Speedos” in highly homo erotic manner, all to the strap line of Gerard Butler bellowing THIS IS SPARTA!

But I was a bit hazy. I decided to investigate further.

What I discovered when I plunged into it was astonishing, sometimes crazy, often awe inspiring and at times quite shocking and disturbing. Noting my editor’s admonition to be brief, the story takes some telling. So I will do it in parts.

The time of Troy and the wars that went with it marked a kind of “Golden Age” of ancient pre – history. It was a time of enormous wealth, spectacular civilization and heroes, around 2,000 – 1300 years BC. But then, something happened. Whether by climate change, natural disaster, meteor strike (as some suggest), the appearance of the invading, mysterious “sea peoples” or a combination of all those, the grand civilisations of the High Bronze Age collapsed in some fiery catastrophe. The signs of fire and disaster are an archeological constant. The cause or causes are unclear.  The first Dark Age had begun.

By 1,000 years BC, Greece had begun to emerge from this. Out of the shadows began to emerge large numbers of City States, all vying for land and power. Peoples called “Dorians” repopulated land in the valley of the Eurotas River in Southern Greece on a plateau to the east of the Taygetos mountain range, which provided a huge natural defence, but also a barrier to expansion.  This was the land of Laconia, and amongst its tribes and clans was a particularly aggressive group whose home city was to become Sparta. Soon these Spartans, as we shall call them, established dominion over other clans and tribes in the region, who they treated as second class citizens “Perioeci”, or “out dwellers”. From the start, Sparta was a type of apartheid regime.

A digression! In order to explain something very, very important about Greek society as a whole at this period, but the Spartans in particular, it is necessary to relate something about how the Greek City States fought and waged war. The Greek City States evolved a system of infantry fighting based on the Hoplite warrior, advancing in the phalanx formation. A Hoplite was a heavily armoured infantry man who was armed with amongst other weapons a long (8 foot) spear, and protected but a large round shield a yard of so wide, made of hardwood but with an additional bronze layer. The shield was called a Hoplon, from which doubtless the soldiers took their name. It weighed between 15 and 20 pounds and was a formidable weapon in itself. The phalanx was a dense formation, perhaps 6 or perhaps 20 deep, and formed in effect a human, rolling tank. It was a hugely effective tactic, but it was not used elsewhere in the Ancient World. When the massively numerical forces of Xerxes invaded Greece, they did not deploy Hoplites.

Historians suggest there is something very significant about this. In a truly effective Hoplite formation (should you be lucky or unlucky enough to find yourself in one) the shields interlock, but your shield does not protect you as much as it protects the man to your left. He must trust you to cover his body. Just as you, in turn, must trust your life to the man on your right. This indicates a very high level of cohesion, and above all a sense of common cause on a personal and indeed political level. In short, it is possible because of the sense of citizenship which was emerging in the city states of Greece, the concept of the State, or Polis, to which you owed allegiance.

This is crucial to understanding the Spartan mentality, because they took this idea of “citizenship” and elevated it beyond anything ever seen before or after in history. Spartans set about creating the perfect Hoplites, the perfect citizen and the perfect state.

But first, a little more history. Across the mighty Taygetos mountain range lay the richer and more pleasant land of Messenia.

The Spartans eyes it greedily. In a 20 year campaign beginning in about 740 BC the Spartans finally overwhelmed the Messenians and achieved victory. Messenia was depopulated by emigration of its natives. Those who did not emigrate were reduced socially to “Helots”, slaves or serfs by any other name. They were reduced to total subjugation for centuries.

This was hugely unusual, not because the Spartans had slaves. All Greek states recognised slavery over foreigners. But this was one Greek ruling over another as his slave. This was deeply menacing and sinister for the other Greek states…

And the enslaved Helots did not ever forget that they had been free men ruling their own country. They rose up in revolt, and the Second Messenian War raged.

The Second Messenian War was in many ways much worse in its ruthlessness and bloodshed than the First. The Messenians were desperate to brake through their fate as Helots and regain their freedom and Sparta had to transform itself into a permanently militarised society, to try desperately to keep the Messenians in check, realising that if Messenia was to be allowed to break away, the threat of impending invasion would be other City States. Think Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Viet Nam, all rolled together.

After another 25 years of ruthless warfare the Spartans were again victorious. The helots were to remain slaves for centuries to come, even when Sparta was forced to allow them to fight in its defence. They had finally gained complete control over the land now called Lacedaemon, or Greater Laconia. A big and rich state. A slave state.

But this had been done at a cost. It had been done by force of arms, but the Spartans now ruled a resentful population of Helot slaves who outnumbered them 7 to 1. The Spartan regime was ruthlessly apartheid. That meant that meant that there was no inter marriage between Spartans and Messenians, and no slow melding of the two societies together – as happened in post Conquest England, for example. At any moment, there could be another rebellion. This had been achieved by force of martial excellence. Now, it would have to be preserved by it.

I have thus set out the basic history in shorthand. Perhaps it is rather dry. If so I apologise. In another post I will try to make up for this by explaining the extraordinary nature of Spartan society. The ruthless eugenics, which was to inspire Hitler and others. The abrogation of family life. The slavery. The system of education which trained a child aged 7 and above as if he was a Special Forces soldier today. The beatings, the institutional cruelty, turning them into trained killers by the age of 19, trained to kill or be killed if they survived the cold, the training and the brutal coming of age ceremony as children aged 12 repeatedly ran a gauntlet of whips. The skills in armed and unarmed combat. The use the Hoplon shield, the Kopis sword, and even more chilling, the brutal Laconian short sword with its serrated edges. The blood soup. The compulsory homosexuality and common place lesbianism. The Special Forces Death Squads, roaming amongst the Helots, killing at will. The strange marriage ceremonies with women dressed as boys, their heads shaved and waiting in locked in darkened rooms. The wife lending.

Sparta was insane!

On a closing note, two final points to ponder about “The 300” The film makers were wrong on so many details. For example, a Spartan (to be precise a “Spartiate”) went into battle in full bronze armour, not dressed in Speedos! And a Spartiate was always clean shaved; it was their strict rule. But yet, in one sense they were true to one feature of Spartiate life. Spartans, what is your profession!?

Gildas the Monk

Ancient + Tattered
Airman October 1, 2012 at 20:11

To avoid harping on about numbers too much (‘onest Guv) I would just like
to mention that the “40 days” mentioned in the bible actually meant ‘a long
time’ as it was a common term among the Hebrews. Once that point sank into my
conscious I began to doubt the numbers quoted in ancient history.

dearieme October 1, 2012 at 01:10

Contrast the Dark Ages. 6 men or fewer- robbers. On up to 30 – a band. Over
30 – an army.

How could an army of 500,000 (plus camp followers) be fed in those days?
Watered? The horses fed? I don’t believe it.

Backwoodsman
October 1, 2012 at 08:36

Xerxes logistics , pah boring. See the campaigns of Genghis and the other
Great Khans for serious logistics.
‘ When Merv fell in 1221, the Persian
chroniclers claim that Tolui slaughtered 700,000 sparing just 80
craftsmen.’
Also, Mongol tactics, paralel armies covering vast distances
and yet maintaining communications for co-ordinated strikes, are just so
much more sexy than those boring hopolites, clumping round a few sqaure
miles of plain.
Great post though Gildas !

Ancient + Tattered
Airman September 30, 2012 at 19:37

I too am enjoying this Gildas but the numbers of the combatants involved in
these tales are most unlikely ever to have reached the quoted numbers.
“At
Thermopylae (the Gates of the Hot Springs) in 480BC, 300 Spartans spearheaded
a combined Greek force of about 5-7,000 and held back hundreds of thousands of
troops of the invading the Persian tyrant Xerxes”

GildasTheMonk
September 30, 2012 at 20:40

Well an interesting point A+TA. But all I can say is that all the modern
day sources and analysis that I have undertaken agrees on those numbers
being both recorded at the time, and quite possible. Indeed Herodotus says
at the later battle of Plataea the Spartans sent a total of 45,000 men, of
whom about 5,000 were full Spartan hoplites, and the total Greek army was
just over 100,000 strong. More dispute surrounds the army of Xerxes, with
claims of up to 1,000,000 men under arms. Modern historians think it may
have been more likely to have been between 300 -500,000.

Ed
Butt September 30, 2012 at 19:11

Good post Gildas, we need to make a stand wherever we can against the
Hollywoodisation of history.

Mudplugger
September 30, 2012 at 20:20

You mean “The Tudors” wasn’t a documentary ?

GildasTheMonk
September 30, 2012 at 20:41

What is the worst “historical” film ever made? Please discuss.

Robert
Edwards September 30, 2012 at
22:01

‘Braveheart’ No contest. It did, however, serve to allow me to admire
Edward I all the more…

dearieme September 30, 2012 at 17:15

Would you please give us a link to your Troy piece, Gildas?

GildasTheMonk
September 30, 2012 at 17:40

Done!
https://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/troy-of-the-rovers/

Jeremy
Poynton September 30, 2012 at 13:57

I’ve been to Troy. It’s very boring, and you would not know it were Troy
were you not told so. I did however. buy an alabaster egg to take home for my
mum, as I were just a little lad of 17 when I went there. Ephesus (not that
far away) was, on the other hand, quite fantastic.

Brass Monkey
September 30, 2012 at 13:01

Roll on part 2 Gildas! Ancient Greece and its legends were an interest of
mine some 50 years ago but then life and work got in the way. This piece has
aroused my interest again. Interesting expansion by Owain. I hope he has not
stolen all your thunder. Oh what it is to read well constructed historical
pieces that arouse one’s interest!

GildasTheMonk
September 30, 2012 at 13:42

Not at all. In fact, I will write about the Krypteia or Crypteai in due
course. It seems that mys sources may differ from the learned Owain’s in the
detail, but not in the fact that it was a highly sinsister organisation.
Historian Paul Cartledge (see above) translates the phrase roughly as
“Special Ops Brigade”, and some writers suggest that only the best and most
hardened youths were assigned to it. In any event, its purpose was to
identify and murder potential trouble makers and leaders amongs the Helots.
In short, a Spartan Death Squad.

JuliaM September
30, 2012 at 13:00

“I knew a bit more than the myth of blokes with computer enhanced six
packs leaping around in “Speedos” in highly homo erotic manner…”

Ahhh, no need! You had me at ‘blokes with computer enhanced six packs
leaping around in “Speedos” in highly homo erotic manner’..

Excellent post!

David
Duff September 30, 2012 at 12:55

“Spartans were laconic. Not so Hitler.”

Hitler was haranguic – and frequently hoarse!

Owain September 30, 2012 at 12:37

Just a couple of – hopefully – interesting associated points:
The Hoplon
I believe was not specifically the shield but the overall equipment of a
warrior so armed. Thus he was an “equipped” soldier unlike a “psilos” who was
a light infantry skirmisher. The point about each man being covered by the
shield of his right hand neighbour is absolutely correct and led to advancing
formation of hoplites to veer steadily to the right as each individual sought
the shelter of his comrades shield. Therefore when two hoplite armies engaged
the right flank of each would almost invariably outflank and overwhelm the
left flank of the enemy. This is well attested in ancient sources but I’m
afraid a failing memory prevents me from referring you to which ones! The
Theban general Epaminondas overcame the problem and roundly thrashed a Spartan
army by “refusing” his left flank at Leuctra (379 BC?) and advancing in an
echelon formation.
The Spartan secret police – the Kryptiea – was
thoroughly sinister. All Spartan males had to serve in it for two years I
think between the ages of 15 and 17 or thereabouts and they would dress as
Messenian helots and live amongst them, informing on their behaviour.
Therefore an independently minded helot never knew whether the young man he
was talking to was “one of them”.
Spartan women may have been influenced in
their attitude to men by the fact that they were allowed two husbands because
it was assumed that one would always be away on military service and might be
killed. Sparta had two kings for the same reason eg Leonidas commanded at
Thermopylae while someone less well known remained in charge at home. It was
for this reason that the Spartan king Agis could take no action against his
wife when she had a long running affair with the Athenian renegade Alcibiades.
She was merely exercising her ancient right – even though the actual practice
of biandry was by that time regarded as archaic. Alcibiades was later murdered
somewhere in Asia Minor in a plot that had Spartan paw prints all over it. So
they got him in the end!

JuliaM September
30, 2012 at 13:02

“…Spartan women may have been influenced in their attitude to men by
the fact that they were allowed two husbands…”

Thus guaranteeing the Spartan woman had absolutely no chance of getting
her hands on the TV remote!

GildasTheMonk
September 30, 2012 at 13:51

Well informed Owain. The formation tended to slide to the right for the
reasons you describe. As I understood it this led to the Spartans placling
the most senior and battle hardened soldiers on the right hand side of the
line, so they could keep the line in check and prevent it sliding.
As a
small detail of the impact of Spartan thinking and practice, I understand
that when if and when officers form up on the parade ground today, they
always line up with the most senior officers on the right. How history
echoes….
If you wish to refresh you learning, I was immensely helped in
my researches by the superb lectures of Professor Donald Kagan of Harvard
University, which can be found here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wP1POpsqin4&list=FLm0KGiV8R4WI7W44dupzkkw&index=8&feature=plpp_video

Brian September 30, 2012 at 23:03

And don’t forget the dominant right leg.
Digressing slightly, is the dancer
turning clockwise or anti-clockwise? Look closer at the screen
and she will turn direction.

minktulip September 30, 2012 at 11:53

The origins of the Spartan system are interesting in that they were the
product of rational reflection. According to the history, Lycurgus the law
giver was the founder of of their ways of social organisation. A pagan
counterpart to Moses.
According to their lights, the Spartans were
successful over several hundred years. The Athenians were, it seems,
contemptuous of the single mindedness of the Spartans. Nevertheless, Plato’s
Republic offers very little more than what the Spartans achieved: freedom from
foreign conquest and sufficient food supplies.
That such a modest
achievement should be so highly prized shows what incredible good fortune we
have inherited. A modern, transported back to those times, would likely faint
at the sheer horror of what he saw.

JuliaM September
30, 2012 at 13:04

“That such a modest achievement should be so highly prized shows what
incredible good fortune we have inherited. “

How all too sadly true…

GildasTheMonk
September 30, 2012 at 13:34

The Spartans claimed their code of lliving was handed down by a founding
father “Lycurgus” which roughly translates as “Wolf Worker”. Whether real or
mythical, or a representation of several figures rolled into one is a matter
of debate.
In his excellent book on Spartans, Paul Cartledge describes
him – if he did exists – as a “mixture of George Washington and Pol
Pot”.
I completely agree that we would be shocked if we went back to
those days. I was pretty shocked by what I found out, I have to say

dearieme September 30, 2012 at 11:21

Spartans were laconic. Not so Hitler.

GildasTheMonk
September 30, 2012 at 13:23

An important point. Such was the detail of the Spartan social program it
extended to food, clothing – and even style of speech. Although a Spartan
poet (why am I suddenly thinking Vogons?) records and chronicles the
Messinian Wars, poetry dies out in Sparta. Speech in Laconia is short, curt
to the point – ideal for the battle field.
Giving us the modern word –
laconic.

David
Duff September 30, 2012 at 10:34

Thank you. I am hooked already and I will give your tale a punt over at my
place – which might increase your readership by one!

amfortas September 30, 2012 at 09:55

Thank you erudite Monk. That was a sound introduction and I am looking
forwarded eagerly to your next instalment.

Perhaps you might clear up or expand upon the role of women in that
society. We have poetic descriptions of the Queen sending her son off to war
with the exhortation to die rather than come back in defeat. I have read
accounts of women running the markets and trade and owning vast estates. It
seems that whilst ‘Sparta’ was indeed a warlike state it was more a matriarchy
than a patriarchy. Certainly it would be hard to call it ‘man-ruled’ for the
benefit of men from your description. Men seemed to be more than just tacitly
expendable.

I look at the histories of nations and civilisations and see ‘madness’ of
one sort or another, pathological in imposition, as affecting most. Whilst all
may have had their ‘heros’ and ‘philosophers’ (albeit some more ‘excusers’
than thinkers), most seemed to murder themselves and others on a quite
astonishing scale right up to the present century. Most of human existence has
been marked by pathologies of mental disease. Julian Jaynes was aslo of the
view that prior to around 4000 BC, humanity was almost totally schitzophrenic
( ‘The Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind’).
Single-mindedness does not seem to have improved matters. The medaeval ‘witch
burnings’ can be put down to mass hysteria, and the slaughters of the 20C
cannot be explained in soley political terms.

Are we getting ‘better’, I wonder.

GildasTheMonk
September 30, 2012 at 10:26

I shall do my best. It is difficult because for simple practical reasons
the available evidence focusses on the men. In all ancient societies women
were “second class” citizens in most respects, even though they may have
unoffially been the power behind the throne. The same might be said of
Sparta, but from what I can discern, women were given many more rights than
in other City States. They may not have been full citizens like the men, but
they had property holding and other legal rights, and unlike other States
where the rule was “seen and not heard”, it is clear that a Spartiate
Matriarch was a formidable presence; Plutarch has a whole book devoted to
the “Sayings of Spartan Women”.
Of course, on a purely prurient note, it
was well known that Spartan women were the most beautiful in Ancient Greece,
and indeed Helen of Troy was originally Helen of Sparta. Unlike other
places, Spartan women recieved an athletic education parallel to the boys,
and often it seems along side them. Since the athletics were carried out
naked, this rather shocked other Greeks! Indeed there are even rumours that
Spartan girls may have from time to time joined in the sports and wrestling
training with their male peers, which must have made for some interesting
social and sexual dynamics. Indeed the sexual repression or possibly
liberation of Spartans seems part and parcel of their society.
On that
note, Spartan women were also regarded by other Greeks as notoriously “up
for it” or at least very flirtacious -”thigh flashers” was one phrase i came
acress!
There is another account of some invaders trying to capture a
town only to find the Spartan women on the roof tops lobbing slates and
rocks at them.
A sparky lot, them, by all accounts.

Mudplugger
September 30, 2012 at 11:25

We have a problem when looking at the gender-roles in such civilisations
through our 21st century goggles – we have far more baggage than they
had.

It’s interesting to observe many current African societies. Traditionally
the menfolk spent their time hunting and defending the settlement from
inter-tribal conflict, the womenfolk did all the rest, farming, home-making,
trading etc. That balance worked. As development arrived, it took away the
male role – shops and trading-posts meant that hunting was no longer
necessary and national governments progressively suppressed tribal conflict
– the men had nothing to do. And when you look around many developing
African states now, they still have nothing to do. The menfolk hang around
all day, chewing the fat or worse, while the women still continue with their
onerous 18-hour days of making it all happen for the family/village. It may
take many generations for something we might consider ‘fairness’ to
emerge.

As our wise Monk observes, the major problem with the ancient world is
the absence of evidence on the role of the undocumented classes, be that
women or the dirt-poor. In as much as history is usually ‘written by the
winners’, it is also written by the powerful (whoever the powerful may be at
that time and place), so we only ever get to see their version of events.
Looking at today’s still-underdeveloped societies at least gives us a
flavour of how roles can become established and how difficult they can be to
change.

Manu September 30, 2012 at 09:41

Nice post – look forward to Part 2!

MTG September 30, 2012 at 09:33

“….they took this idea of “citizenship” and elevated it beyond anything
ever seen before or after in history. ”
From what I recall of Mein Kampf,
Hitler’s ideas of citizenship and genetic purity covet this style of National
cohesion. A decent read; can’t wait to see it back on the shelves as a
best-seller and Parliament stormed – again.