Lycurgus, Fact or fiction

Herodotus like most ancient historians wrote about Lycurgus as if he was a real historical figure and claimed that he belonged to the Agiad house that held dual kingship of Sparta with the Eurypontid house. Herodotus does not go into any amount of detail as to Lycurgus’ family or claim to the throne and in his writing mentions Lycurgus’ death briefly. In Herodotus’ writing outlines  the various alleged reforms made by Lycurgus and does infer that Herodotus was real but never states it as a fact and constantly treats the issue with caution. Herodotus is sceptimistic about Lycurgus’ legend, in which Lycurgus is advised by the Oracle of Delphi  and  argued that the Spartans of the 5th Century BC believed that Lycurgus was not inspired to create the Rhetra by the Oracle but rather the Cretan Government and constitution in his travels. Herodotus infers that the Oracle was not the inspiration of the Rhetra but instead that Lycurgus used it as a means of getting the Spartan civilisation who were deeply spiritual to accept his law reforms.

Xenophon lived in the 4th Century BC, 300 years after Lycurgus was said to have lived. Xenophon’s writing style has many limitations as a historian and his writings must be carefully examined before fully accepting his version of the truth as his presentation of historical material especially in the case of Lycurgus , is selective and biased. He is also found wanting as a philosopher: critics brand his dialogues, such as the Oeconomicus and the Symposium, plagiaristic, “weak on comprehension and original insight, and unsuccessful in the attempt to capture socratic thought”. 

 Xenophon expressed a certain amount of admiration for Lycurgus in saying “ I do admire Lycurgus, the man who established the laws under which ( the Spartans) flourished, I consider him to be a remarkably wise men” in his book Hero and the Tyrant. Xenophon is one of the few historians who felt extremely strongly that Lycurgus was real and never admitted that there was little evidence to support his view. He continually talks about Lycurgus as if he was a real men and personifies the legendary figure giving him human qualities through his philosophical style of writing.  

Xenophon goes into detail regarding Lycurgus’ brief experience as king and how he became guardian of his death brother’s son Charilaus and soon after fled Sparta to calm rumours of his alleged treason. Xenophon draws attention to Lycurgus establishment of the agoge, role of women in Spartan society, the great Rhetra and the austerity of Spartan life.

Plutarch was an ancient historian who wrote in the second half of the first century AD.  Plutarch hence lived much later then the events and personalities such as Lycurgus that he wrote about in his biography known as: Life of Lykourgus but due to the immense detail Plutarch sustains throughout this biography it is clear that he must have had access to ancient sources that no longer exist in present day. Plutarch like Herodotus was not a true historian in his writing style and preferred to concentrate on ethics, behaviors and the characters of his subjects. In this sense Plutarch was a philosopher rather than an historian. Plutarch accuracy on historical matters is a matter of dispute among historians, but it is generally concluded that for the most part his writings are reasonably reliable despite his subjective tones like when he refers to Lycurgus’ legacy as “ the perfection of the science of government. .  

Plutarch gives Lycurgus full recognition for the reformation of Sparta and describes the philosophy behind Lycurgus decision to make Spartan a place of austerity as it removes greed, lowered crime and theft and created equality. He also spends a great deal of time discussing the social as well as political changes Lycurgus made; especially the education and family situation and role of women in society.

Plutarch  uses information from the first ‘constitutional’ texts and used  the Hellistic scholars to piece together Lycurgus and his life. Yet there are discrepancies between his account of Lycurgus and Herodotus’. Plutarch placed Lycurgus in the 9th Century BC, some 200 years later than Herodotus and general consensus of the time had and Plutarch felt that Lycurgus had been part of the Eurypontid family. Plutarch goes into far more detail than Herodotus or Xenophon to explain why Lycurgus fled Sparta and outlines Lycurgus’ travels to Crete, Ionia and to Egypt and suggests that it was in Egypt that Lycurgus was introduced to Homers poems and brought such poems back to Sparta upon his return.

Plutarch obviously believed Lycurgus to be a real man, yet even Plutarch admits that there is not enough evidence to conclusively state that Lycurgus existed in his open book parallel lives:

“ There is so much uncertainty in the accounts which historians have left us of Lycurgus, the lawgiver of Sparta, that scarcely anything is asserted by one of them which is not called into question or contradicted by the rest.  Their sentiments are quite different as to the family he came of, the voyages he undertook, the place and manner of his death, but most of all when they speak of the laws he made and the commonwealth which he founded.”.

This quote from Plutarch’s book is extremely true whilst even the exact date of Lycurgus existence is debatable. Perhaps a reason for all the confusion is that Lycurgus was the name given to two great Spartans. The historian Timaeuos suggests that during the Spartan era there were tow men known as Lycurgus and although one was far more famous than the other, historians over the centuries have at time gotten the two confused. This seems a plausible explanation of the confusion but only makes it even more complicated to sift through the information and discover if Lycurgus existed and what feats should be attributed to Lycurgus the Lawgiver.

In light of the conflicting perspectives surrounding Lycurgus and the disparities in ancient historians writings many modern historians have concluded that Lycurgus was not a real person but was perhaps a myth created to describe the collective law reformers in Sparta and hence the name Lycurgus was a symbol for Sparta and belief in such a figure helped the Spartan people follow the Rhetra for such a long period of time.

In conclusion I feel that it is not my place to decide weather Lycurgus was fact or fiction. If historians who have dedicated their lives to the research of Lycurgus can not come up with a conclusive answer, than it is certainly not my place to do so. I will however go as far as saying that it is possible that their was a historical figure known as Lycurgus but perhaps the legend of this man has morphed into someone that he wasn’t. It is hard to trust some of the historian whom wrote about Lycurgus. Herodotus was indeed a great historian but often accepted myths without question, disregarded and omitted facts, as he was mainly concerned with presenting an entertaining rhetoric rather than the truth.

Xenophon wrote detailed accounts of Lycurgus’ live, origins and legacy but was deeply biased. His writing are extremely subjective and he shows a great amount of admiration for Lycurgus and perhaps has overlooked some of the most fundamentally important questions like is there enough historical evidence to suggest that Lycurgus even existed.

Plutarch was also a great historian but was mainly interested in philosophy and he lived a significant time after Lycurgus. We hence have to doubt the quality and quantity of the sources that Plutarch used when writing about Lycurgus.

can we truly  trust his writings to decide if Lycurgus if fact or fiction??.

 

The historians mainly outline Lycurgus’ achievements rather than conducting any major investigations into Lycurgus’ existence and really there is little evidence to suggest he existed due to the fact that the Spartans did not keep historical documentation

I feel that the issue of Lycurgus existence and weather is a myth or not is irrelevant. Regardless of his existence it is blatantly obvious that the legendary Lycurgus played a key role in influencing Spartan society and in the Spartan perception he was a true symbol of their society.

That brings us to the end of the program and It seems that for now at least the mystery of Lycurgus’ existence remains, until more conclusive evidence is found no one can give a definite answer as to weather Lycurgus existed or not.

I hope everyone listening has enjoyed the program, join us again next week as we continue to delve into the world that was ancient Sparta.

 (Music Fill A Current Affair Theme from )

Bibliography

Adams, John Paul, (2008) , xenophon on the Spartans, (Electronic Version)

Brennan Brian. ( 2007) Spartan Society- Interpreting the Evidence,Southwood Press, Australia

Clough ,Arthur Hugh (1999) Lycurgus Clough viewed 27 November 2008

Dryer John, ( 1996) Plutarch (electronic version) University of Calgary

Unknown Arthur (n/d) Lycurgus  viewed 28 November 20008,

Duhaime Lyoyd (2007) Lycurgus;Lawgiver of Sparta  Viewed 27 November 2008.

Jones, Jim (2002) Spartan Rule by Xenophon Viewed 28 November 2008,

Unknown Author New World Encyclopedia (electronic Version) Plutarch  viewed 25 Noveber 2008,

Unknown author (2008), Sparta In History: Who is Lycurgus . Retrieved November 28,2008, from

Warren,J (1999) History and the Historian , Hodder & Stoughton , London p 5-13

 

Acknowledgments

Dubbo School of Distance Education Title pages on Sparta

(Background music, Mysterious Walk from )

(Music Fill A Current Affair Theme from )

---