Yeah. Also one most remeber, that Sparta had basically lost what little power it had left, by 100BC, whilst Athens was still held as Acedamic strong point in Greece, having Economic and strong social standing under the Romans. Although Sparta did prosper and did countinue thier old laws, they were a "tourist attraction" to Rome, the Romans did not understand thier way of life at all. Both cities had thier place, though. Just looking at the Pelopenessian wars, Athens had a larger "empire", a incredibly strong naval influence, a respectable well standing army, and competent commanders(for the most part). It was financially superior to all other Greek city states, and held hemogeny over it's "allies".Originally Posted by HopliteGlory
Sparta on the other hand is another slice of cake. It had a small "empire", that consisted of "allies", and subjectated Greek cities, in Lacedaemonia. All Spartan ciyizens recived agoge, traiing, which basically made them fully professional soldiers, leaving all other aspects of Spartas managment to dwellers about, and helots. Sparta held an incredibly powerful military pressence on land, been nothing short of unbeatable, had respectable leadership, and an average navy, financially, it was secure(during the course of the wars, did Spartan govenors have certain obsessions with wealth).
During the course of the war, both sides, belt the crap out've each other, to put it bluntly, finally after a sneak attack destroyed Athens navy, did the war tilt into the balance of Sparta. Athens was forced to surrender lost all it's land holdings, etc. However Spartans really lacked the ability to manage a large empire, with such wealth, they had inherrited. Spartans made for poor managers for governing Greek cities, that had different goverment established, which conflicted with thier own, people revotled, soon Thebes came to rise, and Sparta lost it's grip on Hellas. Both Athens and Sparta had thier ultimate strong points, in all regards, they were quite powerful by themselfs. But one thing they both wanted, which neither could attain, which was power. Sparta wanted to be master of Hellas, as did the Atheniens. However in the process of the war, both sides had effectively destroyed each other. The fact remains, Sparta and Athens, would've been far graeter if they worked together, in fact, they couldn't really function without each other, and after Sparta won the Pelopenessian wars, and threw Hellas into a mess. It was the end of Greece's glory, and it wasn't the war that had destroyed them. It was their greed, both wanted something that wasn't theirs to take, and in the process, of trying to attain it, they both destroyed themselfs.
See, if they worked together, who knows how history could've unfolded. They both thier own strong points, if were combined, it would make for an interesting empire.
I agree with Snev. They were both very different, but quite similer in an odd way.