The development of Spartan society.

Authors Avatar
Despite the general modern historical misconception of Sparta as a reflection of an 'ostia' society, Spartan society was 'culturally very much like the average Greek city-state of the day.'1 Indeed, a culmination of factors and aspects were the significant contributors to the development of Spartan society.

Sparta's unique and 'balanced' political structure combining democracy, oligarchy and monarchical elements provided the foundations for political strength and stability. Features of the Spartan government such as the ephorate, the gerousia and ekklesia demonstrated the refined stratification of Spartan politics, while revealing the extent of power each respective authority exercised. The 'militaristic' educational system of the 'agoge' portrayed the development of a 'war-driven' society, whilst implying it as a possible aspect for the perception of an 'ostia' Sparta. The significant economic roles of the helots and the perioikoi reveal the importance of these minor social classes in the functioning of the Spartan economy. The implication arises that such dependence on 'lesser' social classes by the Spartiates, was potentially detrimental in the fear of revolt or uproar. Meanwhile, militarism is portrayed as the sole driving force of Spartan society, and again could be responsible for Sparta's inevitable decline following the Battle of Leuctra 371 BC. Religious aspects such as public sacrificial worship, the close link between Sparta and the Delphic oracle and the importance of proper burial rites furthermore reveal the broad dynamics of Classical Sparta.

The Spartan political stratification and structures are rather diverse and unique, despite Sparta's associated general historical stigma as an 'ostia' society. 'The stability which characterized Sparta...is seen in retrospect to have been political petrification.2 Within the Spartan structure of Government, the primary features of significance were the gerousia, the ekklesia (assembly) and the Ephorate. However, the 'unique balance' of the Spartan structure of government as Plato identifies, is reflected through its combining of democratic, oligarchic and monarchical forms of government to establish 'Eunomia'3. Indeed, this mixture of political ideologies produced 'one of the best-governed states known to the Greeks,'4 and 'great (Spartan) internal strength.'5 Only the Cretans and remote Carthage could rival its well-esteemed governance.6 In essence, the formation of the Spartan structure of government permitted significant political strength and unity within the Spartan society.

The oligarchic gerousia was a council of elders (aged over sixty), consisting of twenty eight elected members (Gerantes) from the 'homoioi.' The gerousia functioned as a method of control over resolutions introduced before the assembly, and heard important criminal cases. Perhaps most significantly to the contributions of the gerousia to Spartan society was its supervision of laws and customs. However, their role was limited within making political decisions, for 'the fact seems to be that the major decisions of Spartan policy were taken in fully assembly (ekklesia), and that the council played a relatively inconspicuous part.'7

The democratic assembly or 'ekklesia' as Plutarch alludes to, was the 'major organ of the Spartan state (for) every full citizen over the age of thirty had the right to its membership.'8 Such allowances possibly broadened the scope and dynamics of political involvement within the Spartiate community. Therefore, the public direction of policies 'independently controls much important business.'9 The ekklesia voted on the laws proposed by the 'gerousia,' elected magistrates for membership to the 'ephorate', passed laws and public policies, and most significantly was responsible for the appointment of military leadership.

In contrast, the politically 'superior' and oligarchic ephorate '(were responsible) for most of what happened in Sparta.'10, and occupied the general powers of civil jurisdiction. Primarily, the annually elected ephorates by the spartiates demonstrated judicial and executive powers within Spartan society. Further, they administered laws, were custodians to the kings and presided over the ekklesia and gerousia. Yet, Aristotle criticises the Ephorate for merely five men elected 'lays them open to bribery... (and) they have far too much license'11 as in Source A. He argues in Source A, 'the power of the ephorate is excessive and dictatorial.' Indeed, the ephorate maintained a significant role in the administration of Spartan politics.

Furthermore, the unique occurrence of 'Dual Kingship' was present within Spartan society. Despite the clear evidence of a monarchical political force, both kings were 'subject to orders and the directions of the Ephorate, in the fear of being liquidated.'12 It was therefore rather detrimental for the kings to maintain favour with the Ephorate. The notion of a 'unique' Xenophon further attests 'when (the ephors) are poor, they were easily and successfully bribed.'13 Perhaps, Xenophon best succinctly summarizes the role of the king within Spartan society, he is a 'priest in the divine sphere and a general in the human one.'14 Spartan political structure is further reflected here as the kings lack their conventional 'complete' power.
Join now!


The educational system of Sparta was significant and central to the development of the 'paidiskoi' (youths) within Spartan society. However, there remained a prejudiced attitude towards the academic education of women. 'Sparta is the only state which had a strict routine of athletic education for their girls.'15 In essence, the physical training of women was executed to 'give birth to men, (for) children in the embryo would make a strong start in strong bodies and would develop better.'16 It is rather evident that female education was geared toward the continual reproduction and replacement of males within the Spartan ...

This is a preview of the whole essay