Athens And Sparta Vs. Sparta

The city-states Athens and Sparta were rivals in ancient Greece. Geographically the two were very close to each other, but they had a very different economy, cultural values, and way of governing. Both city-states had two very different ways of doing things. I will be highlighting the major differences.

If you had the choice to live in Athens or Sparta, which one would you choose and why?

During 750-500 B.C.E, Ancient Greece is a place that is known for some city-states, called poleis. Each polis differ particular on economically, politically, and military, When in doubt, however, the city-states did not get along. Two of the most well known and powerful city-states were Sparta and Athens. Sparta is far better than Athens on the grounds that their armed force was strong and defensive.

During the times of Ancient Greece, two major forms of government existed, democracy and oligarchy. The city-states of Athens and Sparta are the best representatives of democracy and oligarchy, respectively. The focus of the times was directed towards military capabilities, while the Athenians were more interested in comfort and culture. It was the oligarchy in Sparta that put a war-like attitude as its first priority and best met the needs of Ancient Greece. These factors empowered Sparta and led to the development of an authoritative and potent state. Other contrasting issues included women’s rights, social classes, and value of human life.

Athens and Sparta are two powerful city-states, different from each other in such way that

The two dominating Greek city states, Sparta and Athens, have there own strengths that make them the strongest throughout Greece. Sparta is "located in the southeastern Peloponnesus, in an area known as Laconia" (Spielvogel 53). Athens is on the peninsula of Attica (Geography). Sparta is know for their immense military might (Spartan Military). Athens is known better for their "leading naval force in Greece" (Women of the Ancient World). Their government systems were very different but very effective. Each Greek state was able to conquer a lot of land using different tactics. This brings up the thought that every country or state could be effective if all the people supported the cause. Political correctness however tends to breed idiots. With this being said, unenforced laws leads people to start thinking that they can get away with whatever they want or better yet, defy the lawful order of an officer. This can than become deadly and spread, until it cripples the system and a new one takes over. What does this new system believe in? Are they idea 's that are realistic? Or are they the idea 's of tree-hugging hippies who thinks everyone is going to "play ball." Well little does the tree-hugging hippie know, is that "The Man" who was "keeping him down" actually did know what he was talking about. Maybe the thirty plus years of military experience wasn 't complete garbage. Maybe it was keeping him and his family safe from the psychopaths and terrorists that

In the period known as classical Greece in the years 800-323 BCE, Greece comprised of small city states (poleis) which were considered and operated as independent small countries. Amongst those city states Athens and Sparta were two of the most powerful and considered in Greek history as the most influential states to western civilisation. These two city states shared some common characteristics whilst in some instances they were very different from each other. Sparta and Athens had differences and similarities in the way they governed their city states, in how they established their military forces, how they treated women, their marriage customs and social gatherings

One major difference between the two cities was the way in which their king or leaders were chosen. The process in which Athens elected their leader is referred to as limited democracy. It was limited democracy because not all the people in the city state were allowed to participate in the

During the late Archaic Greek and Classical periods, two particular city-states were in existence with significant similarities as well as differences. These two city-states, Sparta and Athens have unique formations of government, histories, goals, as well as societies.

Envision a world where the people are ravenous and yearning for any remnant of food they could obtain, where the society is overrun and no one has a free say. This is the type of society the ancient Spartans would have lived like unlike the ancient Athenians. The Athenians lived a far more diverse life if compared to Sparta. Ancient Athens was better to live in than ancient Sparta due to its efficient and honorable government and flourishing economy.

Introduction Athens and Sparta were two of the largest, most powerful, and most influential cities of Ancient Greece. They may have both been big and historically well revered, but their societies were structured and ruled very differently. This difference is especially true politically speaking. (Athens & Sparta: Democracy vs. Dictatorship, 2016) Sparta was very focused on growing and maintaining a strong army, in efforts to ward off any uprising from their rule over the Helots.

If we put both Athens and Sparta onto one political spectrum, the two would be on the two extreme

The purpose of a society is to provide a place where certain views and values can be pursued. I think that neither Athens or Sparta were "right" in terms of what they valued because neither of them had a well-rounded society. They each had certain values, but left out some important ones. Athens, while being successful in learning and the arts, needed a stronger military aspect so that their polis would be protected well. However, when looking at Sparta, the opposite is true. Their citizens need the choice of learning about arts and philosophy, not only military strategies and discipline. I think that society should value military/ physical activities, learning and history, and the arts. Their citizens should have choices so that they will

Like 18th century Italy, classical Greece (5th and 4th century BC) was divided in rival city-states that were frequent at war with each other. To the modern people this situation might look both foolish and inefficient; yet, one has to understand the times. First of all, the European population is estimated to have been only 30 million people (Livi-Bacci, 2012)—and this means that vast tracts of wilderness separated the various cities. Then, geographical isolation was exacerbated by the infant state of transportation and communication technologies; for example, there were no state-maintained roads. One can get an idea how long and perilous trips were back then by reading the myth of Theseus; in his travel from Corinth to Athens—a distance of only fifty-miles—Theseus almost lost his life six times to bandits and beasts. This semi-hermitic state of existence allowed the city-states to experiment and develop their own political and social structures; by the fifth century BC, the Greek cities have tried every political arrangement imaginable, with two main systems competing for Greek-world dominion: democracy represented by Athens, and militocracy represented by Sparta.

During ancient times, the people that lived in Athens and Sparta led completely different lives. Although Athens and Sparta are located within the same nation, they were worlds apart when it came to their traditions. The article Ancient Olympia History, which was published in 2009, discusses the variances between Athens and Sparta when it came to marriage in the two powerful cities. “The father of the bride always arranged Athenian marriages, when the daughter reached the age of 15, the groom would receive a dowry, in the event of the grooms death the daughter and the dowry would be returned the father of the bride, divorce was not an option and the chances to remarry for a women were not high”(Ancient Olympia History 2009). Marriage in Sparta