final spartan paper final
docx
School
Western University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
3904F
Subject
Arts Humanities
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by UltraThunderJellyfish30
In Plutarch's "Life of Lycurgus," Chapter 28 is a critical juncture that challenges preconceptions of Spartan
discipline. This captivating journey offers an insightful glimpse into Spartan society during the 9th century BCE. The chapter delves into the controversial 'krypteia,' analyzing Plutarch's language, vibrant imagery, and cultural references to unravel the motivations behind this cryptic institution. This essay seeks to unravel the ambiguity shrouding the 'krypteia's origins, while decoding its alignment with Lycurgus's principles. The deliberate ambiguity in Plutarch's narrative takes center stage, urging readers to confront the intricacies of Spartan society. By examining the mistreatment of the helots, especially in the aftermath of the earthquake, we shed light on the crucial role played by the 'krypteia' in unraveling the complex dynamics that define Spartan society and ethos.
Plutarch's depiction of Spartan values, the selection procedure, and the military adaptation of the institution enriches our comprehension of Spartan practices. By analyzing various viewpoints of historians and considering the mistreatment of helots, particularly after the Great Earthquake, the 'krypteia' is revealed as a significant perspective that extends beyond its role as a secret group. The culmination of the aggressive and violent actions of the Spartan training camps resonated in the treatment of the helots, as Spartan warriors beat, and many times, killed this lower class. Just after the graduation from the agôgê, young men, around eighteen years of age, “set out at the dead of night with the minimum of clothing and supplies to ruthlessly hunt down and eliminate helots, particularly the few individuals, we can suppose, who were judged capable of becoming nuclei of discontent” (insert proper citation). This grim reality illuminates the darker dimensions within Spartan governance and emphasizes the power dynamics and maltreatment experienced by the helots. The central issue revolves around the attribution of the 'krypteia' to Lycurgus, a matter that Plutarch approaches with noticeable hesitancy. This reluctance is particularly intriguing, considering the general fairness and impartiality evident in Lycurgus's other legislations. Lycurgus, known for his commitment to justice, appears somewhat incongruent with an institution as clandestine and morally ambiguous as the 'krypteia.' Plutarch's hesitancy serves as a poignant point of analysis, prompting readers to delve into the nature of Spartan institutions and contemplate the extent of Lycurgus's influence.
Plutarch's intentional vagueness creates a historical haze that makes readers wonder about the 'krypteia's' basic premises and if they are consistent with Lycurgus's ideas. Lycurgus is traditionally portrayed as a lawgiver who sought to instill virtues of justice, equality, and military prowess in the Spartan way of life. The
covert and brutal operations of the 'krypteia' seem at odds with these principles, prompting a revaluation of its origins and the extent to which Lycurgus may have endorsed such clandestine practices. When one considers the overall justice displayed in Lycurgus's other laws, Plutarch's reluctance to attribute the 'krypteia' to
Lycurgus becomes more fascinating. Concerning the compatibility of Lycurgus's ideas with the covert "krypteia," Nafissi points out that the Spartan system was
created to "discourage individual Spartiates from developing multifaceted relationships with the helots supporting them".
1
Examining specific instances from Plutarch's narrative further highlights the incongruity between the 'krypteia' and Lycurgus's principles. The 'Krypteia' operated
stealthily, executing Helots under the cover of darkness, a stark contrast to Lycurgus's principles of justice and fairness. Instances where even those deemed brave and emancipated mysteriously disappeared underscore a disconnect between
the proclaimed ideals of Lycurgus and the harsh reality of the 'krypteia.' Plutarch's incorporation of Aristotle's passage in Chapter 28, Section 4, emphasizes this conflict, stating, "And Aristotle specifically states that the ephors declared a formal war on the Helots as soon as they assumed office, so that there would be no impiety
in killing them." This citation accentuates the divergence between Lycurgus's counsel on justice and the courteous demeanor Spartans were expected to exhibit, and the actual implementation of ephors and 'krypteia' in the covert killing of rebellious Helots. The mistreatment of the helots, as described by Plutarch, is intricately linked to the 'krypteia' and broader societal dynamics. The harsh measures imposed on the helots, including arbitrary abuse and the annual declaration of war by the ephors,
2
highlight the power dynamics and maltreatment experienced by the helot population. The helots are a hidden threat, according to historian Michael Whitby, who compares them to a "human volcano." He says that the helots' refusal to submit led to the formation of the powerful Spartan military and forced the Spartiates to unite as a society devoted to self-discipline. Whitby emphasises that the primary cause of fear and possible rebellions in Spartan society is the helots. 3
Thucydides, in his account, supports the grim reality, stating that the helots, despite claiming freedom for their distinguished service, were eventually eradicated by the Spartans, leaving their fate shrouded in
mystery.
4
This perspective from Thucydides underscores the intricate and often brutal dynamics characterizing the relationship between the Spartans and the helots. The views of Plutarch and Thucydides of the Spartans and their policies diverge. While praising the Spartans for their bravery and self-control, Plutarch also criticizes them for their brutality and conceit. While acknowledging the might and reputation of the Spartans, Thucydides nevertheless seemed to sympathise with the rebels and their
fight for independence.
Diodorus Siculus, however, credits the rebellion to the Helots as well as the Messenians, emphasising their combined insurrection and the conquest of Ithome, a fortified hill in Messenia, as well as the pillage of Lacedaemonian land. Additionally, Diodorus Siculus reports that the Athenians dispatched a troop of hoplites led by Cimon, the son of Miltiades, and that the Spartans requested assistance from 1
John David Lewis, “Lykourgos the Spartan ‘Lawgiver’”, The Objective Standard 2, no. 4 (2007): 93-123.
2
Plutarch, Life of Lycurgus, at chap. 28.4
3
G. E. M. De Ste Croix, "The Helot Threat," In Sparta, edited by Whitby Michael, 190-95, (Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press, 2002).
4
Thucydides,
History of the Peloponnesian War
, trans. Rex Warner (London, England: Penguin Classics, 1963), 1.101.2.
their allies.
5
The Spartans, fearing that the Athenians would develop sympathies for the rebels, quickly dismissed them, nevertheless. This episode worsened the situation between Sparta and Athens, which in
turn aided in the Peloponnesian War's start.
The perspectives provided by Thucydides and Diodorus Siculus both supplement and, at times, diverge from Plutarch's portrayal. Thucydides, through his emphasis on the Spartans eradicating the helots despite their claimed freedom, adds a layer of severity to the mistreatment, aligning with Plutarch's narrative of brutality. On the
other hand, Diodorus Siculus contributes by highlighting the joint revolt of Messenians and helots, enriching our understanding of the broader socio-political context surrounding helot uprisings. Plutarch claims that the krypteia was not part of Lycurgus’ laws, but a later invention, while Thucydides implies that it was already
practiced before the earthquake that triggered the revolt of the helots and the Messenians2. Plutarch also portrays Lycurgus as a wise and benevolent lawgiver, while Diodorus Siculus suggests that he was a tyrant who oppressed the Messenians
and the helots. Plutarch's stance in Chapter 28 provides a crucial viewpoint on the timeline and causation of the mistreatment suffered by Spartans. According to Plutarch, the maltreatment by Spartiates became more pronounced at a later period, particularly in the aftermath of the Great Earthquake. During this time, helots reportedly collaborated with the Messenians, inflicting significant damage on the Spartan territory, and posing a serious threat to the city. 6
This suggests a shift in Spartan behavior.
This marker allows for consideration of the cause-and-effect relation between external threats, Spartan reactions, and the exacerbation of mistreatment. Essentially, the integration of these historical events and their ties to the clandestine institution enhances the analysis, offering a more expansive framework for comprehending Spartan society. The interplay among Spartan discipline, the treatment of helots, and
the resulting geopolitical consequences introduces intricacy and depth to the narrative. It creates a mosaic where the covert organization is not separate but intricately integrated into the fabric of Spartan society, influencing its morals, principles, and responses to external trials.
Historians from a variety of backgrounds, most notably Thucydides and Diodorus Siculus, contribute to our understanding of Spartan culture by providing insightful accounts of helot uprisings. According to their tales, helots suffered from maltreatment and even violent episodes, offering an in-depth comprehension of the intricate relationships inside Spartan society. The timing of the Great Earthquake proves to be of utmost importance, providing insight into the origins of the mistreatment of Spartans and establishing a wider framework for understanding the development of the 'krypteia' and its implications for Spartan morality and principles.
5
Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 11.63.4-64.1, ed. C. H. Oldfather (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1935), 365-369.
6
Plutarch, Life of Lycurgus, at chap. 28.4
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
It is traditionally believed that Lycurgus lived around the 9th century BCE, establishing the groundwork for Spartan institutions and societal norms. Plutarch's examination of the influential figure Lycurgus and his practices in "Life of Lycurgus" reveals the contentious aspect of Spartan discipline - the 'krypteia,' discussed in Chapter 28. Plutarch's description of the initiation process reveals a rigorous selection that prizes intelligence and resourcefulness, qualities highly valued in Spartan society. This process, cloaked in
secrecy, embodies the ideals sought by Spartans in their warriors.
Nocturnal raids undertaken by the 'krypteia' underscore ethical deliberations within Spartan society. The furtive character of these maneuvers, along with the savagery inflicted on helots, instigates an investigation of the interrelationship among discipline, control, and the more somber facets of Spartan customs. The yearly declaration of war against helots affixes another stratum to the chronological account. The deaths are presented as acts of war rather than as clear-cut crimes because of this institutionalised brutality, which highlights the multifaceted nature of Spartan ethics and how the marginalised helot population is treated.
The great earthquake's temporal marker emerges as a crucial element in Plutarch's analysis, serving as a turning point that suggests a shift in Spartan behavior and a potential escalation of ill-treatment. Plutarch's incorporation of historical events and
their connections to the 'krypteia' enriches the analysis, thereby providing a broader
context for understanding Spartan society. The interplay between Spartan discipline,
the treatment of Helots, and the geopolitical consequences of these practices adds depth to the narrative.
In conclusion, Plutarch's exploration of the 'krypteia' in Spartan society challenges conventional perceptions, revealing a complex interplay of discipline, morality, and power. The deliberate ambiguity surrounding Lycurgus's affiliation prompts a nuanced understanding of Spartan practices, transcending the 'krypteia' beyond a mere historical artifact. This clandestine institution not only defies traditional views of Spartan discipline but also prompts essential reflections on the ethical foundations of governance. The subjugation of helots, the clandestine activities of the 'krypteia,' and the larger socio-political structures provide important insights into the intricacies of Spartan society. Beyond being a historical curiosity, the 'krypteia' becomes a lens through which we scrutinize the enduring ethical questions surrounding authority, justice, and the consequences of unchecked power.
As we delve into these intricacies, the lessons from Spartan society echo into contemporary discussions, inviting us to reconsider power dynamics, interrogate the
responsibilities of authority, and reflect on the enduring relevance of ethical considerations in our own time.