From Plato to Aristotle: The construction of Sparta in the Athenian intellectual mind

In the Life of Lycurgus, Plutarch states that a number of ancient Greek scholars, including Plato, Diogenes and Zeno, embraced the Spartan form of governance as a socio-political ideal (31.2). In particular, Plutarch argues that Plato’s construction of the best polity in the Republic very much resembles that of the Spartan city-state, and that his “just city” is merely an “improved Sparta,” with its vices corrected while its virtues are preserved (Futter, 2012). This view can be radically opposed to Aristotle’s perspective in his Politics, in which the Spartan form of governance is heavily criticized (II. IX. 1). Through an examination of Plato’s and Aristotle’s assessments of the Spartan regime, I seek to compare and contrast the views expressed in the Republic and the Politics respectively. In doing so, I argue that despite their significant differences, both scholars fundamentally agree on the merits of Sparta’s inclusive schooling system and the disadvantages of Spartan militarism. These observations, in turn, emphasize a general consensus between Aristotle and Plato with regards to the necessity of publicly-provided universal education, as well as the moderation of military institutions in the ideal polis.

Upon reading the Republic and the Politics, important differences can be distinguished between the Platonic and Aristotelian approaches to the Spartan regime. This is firstly the case in relation to the Spartan political sphere. While Plato seems supportive of the Spartan administrative structure and female participation in politics, Aristotle is highly critical of the city-state’s electoral system and Spartan women’s influence in government.

Although Plato does not explicitly use Sparta as an example in the Republic, it is evident that he is admirative of Spartan institutions, and that he has sought to replicate — either consciously or unconsciously — many aspects of Spartan governance in his own ideal state, the kallipolis (Sihler, 1893). This is firstly the case in relation to the division of the city into a socio-political hierarchy. Indeed, Plato’s description of the three social classes within the just city — the rulers, the soldiers, and the producers — is suggestive of the Spartan magistracies, the Spartiats, and the helots and perioikoi (the free and subjugated populations under Spartan rule) (Sihler, 1893). In both systems, we witness the concentration of political power in a single block; in Sparta the full citizens take part in governance without the the helots and perioikoi, while the philosopher kings govern the soldiers and producers in the Republic (Futter, 2012). In addition, the influence of Plato’s guardians echoes that of the Spartan ruling class. For instance, Plato rejects the idea of concentrating power into the hands of a single political figure and prefers to distribute equal decision-making authority amongst the city’s rulers (402d). This is also the case in the Spartan oligarchy, whereby the state is ruled by two hereditary kings from the Agiad and Eurypontid families in conjunction with a group of officials known as the ephors and a council of elders called the gerousia (Cartledge & Spawforth, 2002). Although the majority of citizens do not participate directly in governance in both systems, becoming part of the ruling class is not closed to the public and can be achieved if one is sufficiently dedicated. In the kallipolis, eligibility for office depends solely on personal merit, meanwhile in Sparta, members of the gerousia are elected amongst the people (Plato, 412a-d; Whibley, 1931). Once this has been achieved, however, one’s position as leader is permanent and no member of the ruling class can be removed from office by popular vote (Plato, 412c; De Souza et al., 2004). Finally, women’s political participation in politics is strongly emphasized in Plato’s kallipolis, as was the case in Sparta. In Book V of the Republic, Plato admits female guardians into the executive and argues in favor of equal education and responsibilities for men and women (454b-464b). Similarly, Spartan women had the right to occupy administrative positions within the state, participate in political decision-making and own large estates (Futter, 2012). According to Futter (2012), Spartan girls were given greater opportunities than those available to Greek women at the time, and in fact “to women of any nations until very recently” (p.42).

Meanwhile, Aristotle’s work is directly critical of the Spartan form of government. In the Politics, his first objection to the Spartan form of governance is evident in relation to the city-state’s electoral system. Indeed, Aristotle disagrees with the fact that the city’s ephors are elected from the general populace, or demos (II. IX. 20). As a consequence, he argues, the ephors may be more susceptible to bribery and corruption because of their relative poverty compared to other members of the ruling class (II. IX. 19). This is particularly problematic because he judges power to be disproportionately allocated to the ephors, forcing other branches of the ruling elite to make significant concessions (II. IX. 20). According to Aristotle, this transforms the Spartan aristocracy into a democracy, whereby political decision-making represents the interests of the uneducated many rather than those of the wiser few (II. IX. 20). However, Aristotle notes that it is also dangerous to leave the governance of a city entirely to the hands of one class of citizens, as this may become the source of “factional conflict,” and therefore suggests that a political system combining democracy and aristocracy is most desirable (II. V. 25). Aristotle then opposes the undue freedom granted to Spartan women, their ability to participate in politics and their appointment to certain administrative posts when the majority of Spartan men is off to war (II. IX. 6). In particular he mentions that, having initially failed to understand the complexities of the Spartan Constitution, women are unsuited to political office (II. IX. 11). He further disapproves of the Spartan dowry system, which has allowed women to possess large parts of territory (II. IX. 14). Finally, he argues that Spartan tolerance of women’s freedoms and their resulting “licenciousness” has generally undermined the city’s social fabric (II. IX. 6).

Another distinction between the two scholars’ viewpoints lies in their perceptions of Spartan communal ties and social stability. While Plato seems convinced that the institutionalisation of civic relationships and family ties similar to those seen in the Spartan city-state has the potential of strengthening and uniting society, Aristotle sees such social arrangements as highly defective.

In the Republic, Plato designs his kallipolis in a rather authoritarian way which, he believes, will maximize social order and coherence. In Book III, he starts off by reforming traditional relationships between ruling men and women through the regulation of marriage (459e). This is done so as to allow the reproduction of the city’s fittest individuals and thus the birth of the healthiest children possible (Plato, 459e). Plato then sets the conditions for an absence of nuclear families within the ruling class as women and children are “held in common” (423e-424a, 449c). This arrangement is intended as a way for the city’s guardians to be bound together by a general sense of attachment and belonging. The kallipolis’ ruling class is further united when we learn that the guardians are to live communally without private rooms, share common meals, and are prohibited from owning property or personal wealth (Plato, 464–464c). Some of these aspects, in turn, are reminiscent of Spartan customs. In the Greek city-state, a couple’s ability to produce strong children was also emphasized, and Spartan children’s broader loyalty to the city-state rather than their family members would be encouraged. In addition, Spartan men would live communally well into adulthood, sharing military barracks with other fellow soldiers even after their marriage (Van Wees, 2017). More generally, every Spartan man and woman would be required to be part of a dining society or syssitia composed of about a dozen members each, in order to learn how to rely on and bond with other citizens (Van Wees, 2017).

In contrast, Aristotle believes that the construction of such social ties in general — whether in the kallipolis, Sparta, or elsewhere — will lead to social dislocation rather than cohesion. Firstly, he directly objects to Plato’s approval of the sharing of women and children. By this proposal, he argues, no child would receive proper parental care, and the lack of a family structure would render citizens less capable of showing empathy, love and affection (II. IV. 6–10). Later on, he attacks Plato’s remarks on the nationalization of all property, stating that individual ownership of certain belongings is important because people tend to take greater care of their own possessions (II. V. 8–13). For him, individual ownership is also important for a city’s inhabitants to practice sharing their belongings with others, and thus become more generous (II. V. 8–13). He therefore argues that the city should allow its citizens to maintain their own property and wealth, but that legislation should encourage the sharing of privatized goods and commodities between citizens (II. V. 5–8). Ultimately, Aristotle concludes that the city should aim to be united not through the nationalization of property and wealth, as Plato has argued, but rather “be made one and common through education” and the creation of civic associations (II. IV. 15).

Overall, these distinct approaches to Spartan governance and society outline Plato and Aristotle’s differing perspectives when it comes to politics and the construction of national unity. In the Republic, Plato justifies the concentration and exercise of power of a single ruling class of citizens, whose legitimacy in decision-making stems solely from their rigorous education, whether they be men or women. Meanwhile, Aristotle considers a form of “mixed” or constitutional government merging democratic and oligarchic elements as a better basis for political rule, and excludes women from the political sphere. As for the creation of a broader national identity and loyalty to the state through socio-economic arrangements, Plato argues that the abolition of private belongings is the best way to create consensus and harmonious relationships amongst the ruling class. Conversely, Aristotle believes that private wealth and property should be permitted, as this encourages citizens to share their belongings and build greater social ties.

Aside from these important differences, however, Plato and Aristotle make similar observations when it comes to the Spartan education system and the city-state’s militaristic approach. In the first place, both scholars show great appreciation for the way children are reared in Sparta, praising the state’s provision of common education to all, and the curriculum’s emphasis on gymnastiké (physical skill), and mousiké (music, poetry, and general philosophical knowledge). According to Futter (2012), Spartan children were regarded as common property of the government, and boys would not be raised by their parents but by military leaders. Their education would involve enrollment in military untis and strict training until adulthood (Futter, 2012). Meanwhile Spartan girls would undergo a different type of instruction; less focused on physical skill, but just as complete and formal (Futter, 2012). For both genders, however, some part of the curriculum would also be dedicated to intellectual and spiritual education, such as music and poetry (Futter, 2012). Plato’s adherence to these principles is echoed when we see that children are raised together by the city’s guardians, and benefit from state-provided education as well (423e-424a). Like the Spartan regime, Plato places particular importance on the gearing of physical activities towards military skill rather than leisure sports and emphasizes the kallipolis’ children need to be taught about music and poetry (410a-412a, 376e-377a). As we have seen, Plato also dedicates a large portion of Book V to defending the need for women’s education, and argues that women should be free to join the guardian class, if they display the required capacities and motivations (453c-456b). Similarly, Aristotle believes that it is a government’s duty to deliver equal schooling opportunities to all, and he here praises Spartans for their approach, as they “all pay serious attention to their children, and do so in common” (VIII. I. 4). Although the education of girls is not touched upon as much in the Politics, and despite his belief that women are inferior to men, Aristotle here suggests that all children should be cared for equally. In addition, Aristotle widely explores the benefits of gymnastiké and mousiké in Book VIII of the Politics, (VIII.III.1–13). In particular, he discusses the advantages of music for character development and good judgment, and therefore supports the Spartan curriculum when it comes to music and philosophy (VIII.III.1–13).

The two scholars then turn their assessment towards the Spartan approach to military training, and there they criticize the city-state’s disproportionate focus on military campaigns and skill. According to Futter (2012), “the Spartan was a soldier by occupation” and was either “educated for war,” “educating others for war,” “or engaged in war.” Indeed, the importance of military dominance to the Spartan city-state in Ancient Greece meant that its educational system was rigorously formatted under the form of a military boot camp, or agoge (Powell, 1995). As a result, both Plato and Aristotle believe that this has led the Spartan population to neglect the study of other important subject areas such as philosophy and mathematics (Plato, 498b). While they agree that advanced physical education and training is important, they also believe that youths should “take very good care of their bodies at the time when they are growing and blooming into manhood” in order to be able to learn other things as well, something which, according to Plato, may lack from the Spartan lifestyle (Plato, 498b; Aristotle, VIII.IV.1). Similarly, Aristotle argues that the hardships imposed on Spartan boys to build their character and physical abilities have a tendency to brutalize them, and has led young Spartan children to “resemble beasts” (VIII.IV.1). Finally, he also deplores the fact that Spartan institutions are exclusively directed towards military excellence, and argues that the city’s constant war-waging ultimately weakens the government’s resources and abilities, as state funds are depleted by an everlasting need to fund and support Spartan war efforts (II.IX.36).

Despite their earlier differences, Plato and Aristotle therefore share a very similar perspective on the importance of easily accessible education to all citizens in any political system. In addition, both seem wary of a state’s disproportionate focus on military skill and believe that this can only need to a broader neglect of other important aspects — such as citizens’ knowledge in other subjects, or even children’s mental and physical health — and, in time, may undermine a government’s ability to rule over its citizens.

In sum, Plato’s and Aristotle’s differing assessments of the Spartan regime outline their disagreements regarding political governance in the ideal state and the best ways in which a population may be unified, but also emphasize their consensus on the importance of publicly-provided education and the moderation of state militarization. These two aspects are therefore key to the formation of each scholar’s best regime. For Plato and Aristotle alike, education forms the basis of a stable political community, and allows the healthy development of the body and the mind. The Republic and the Politics’ respective support for the Spartan system reflects a conviction that societies, regardless of their political systems and culture, have a fundamental duty to allow the development of all children into virtuous and just citizens through the provision of free education. In addition, while they stress the importance of gymnastike, physical skill, and reasonable military capacity, Plato and Aristotle also believe that the military character of Spartan society and lifestyle is disproportionate. As such, they seem to advise against the waging of continuous military campaigns, and advocate for the moderation of military institutions and training in all societies.

2579 words

Bibliography

1. Aristotle. (1984). Politics (C. Lord, Trans.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
2. Cartledge, P. & Spawforth, A. (2002). Hellenistic and Roman Sparta. London: Psychology Press.
3. De Souza, P., Heckel, W., & Llewellyn Jones, L. (2004). The Greeks at War. Oxford: Osprey Publishing.
4. Futter, D. (2012). Plutarch, Plato and Sparta. Akroterion 57(1), 35–51. Retrieved on October 20, 2020, from https://akroterion.journals.ac.za/pub/article/viewFile/130/199
5. Plato. (1968). The Republic (A. Bloom, Trans.). New York: Basic Books.
6. Plutarch (1914). Lives, Volume I: Theseus and Romulus. Lycurgus and Numa. Solon and Publicola. (B. Perrin, Trans.) Loeb Classical Library 46. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7. Powell, A. (1995). The Greek World. London: Routledge.
8. Sihler, E. (1893). Aristotle’s Criticisms of the Spartan Government. The Classical Review, 7(10), 439–443. Retrieved November 28, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/693700
9. Von Wees, H. (2017). “The Common Messes.” In A Companion to Sparta. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9781119072379.ch9