Athens And Sparta Vs. Sparta

Written Assignment 1 Speaking of ancient Greece and its two most prominent cities, it is truly valuable for the analysis of two sets of opposing government in its conception, which have been taken as models of exercising political, economic and social power, I try to describe them concisely and short on the written assignment with the following questions: How did people in Athens and Sparta obtain the right to participate in public life and make decisions affecting the community? To qualify to be recognized citizen of the city-state of Athens, they had to be Athenian by birth, whose parents were originated from Athens, be eighteen years of age and not be a slave. This right was exclusive for men, women had limited citizenship rights.

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

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.

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

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.

Classical Sparta was a Greek city-state that comprised of complex and multifaceted institutions. Labelled by Xenophon as “most powerful and most celebrated”, contemporary historians have been drawn to question and assess whether these ‘powerful’ institutions were unique to Sparta (Xen. Con. 1.1). Upon evaluating ancient sources in relation to these historical considerations, it became apparent that the focuses and construct of Sparta’s institutions widely differed to institutions demonstrated in other Greek city-states. It was evident however, that among these differences were also institutional similarities. In analysing the distinctive nature of Sparta’s institutions, this paper will specifically compare the establishments of Sparta to those exemplified by Athens and Corinth in order to determine the specific differences in Sparta’s establishments to those found in other Greek city-states. The areas examined and compared include the political, educational, socio-legalistic and religious institutions.

Obtaining the right to participate in a public life in Greece would depend on which city, Sparta or Athens, a male citizen was born. Certainly, being a male free citizens share a common similarity between Athens and Sparta. For public officers, they will have an opportunity to participate in the decision-making to benefit their communities. Perhaps, their history would show that the governing structures, which are based on dictatorship or democracy, will prove that without a system balancing the power of the people and their government will culminate a fall of empires.

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

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.

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

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

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

According to Brand (2010) there were very different political models in ancient Sparta and Athens. Indeed, he advises that Athens was a much more developed powerhouse, where today’s democracy initiated, whereby Sparta was, conversely, a fierce warmongering state where only male warriors participated in politics. However, Brand also acknowledges elements of democracy in both city states.

Athenian democracy focuses on economic advancement, while Sparta oligarchy focuses on military force. Democracy is a system of government where the citizens have the right to vote, whereas the oligarchy is when a group of people is in control of the government and it’s only their opinion and decision that are taken to consideration. Implicating the thesis that people are better served by Athenian democracy than the Spartan oligarchy, which is supported by three evidence points. Firstly, the Athenian citizen's participation in government, by voting and taking part in the government position.Secondly, the Athenian men are provided with better education by being taught how to read and write, not only focused on military training. Lastly, the Athens advancement in military protection for the safety of its citizens.

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