Question about the Spartan military superiority

[NapoleonMaster]

Were the Spartans nearly as good as the stories seem to represent them or the stories are just spartan propaganda?.

This caught my attention after seeing this video :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMQmU0epVr4

[Pooploop]

They were good but not that good. The truth is always somewhere in between, and the average performance of Spartiates (like any other group of warriors) fluctuated depending on the time period in question(Sparta was in existence for a long time), the terrain, and the caliber of commander they served under (or against). Led by generals like Brasidas or Agesilaus II, the full potential of their skill could be realized, but when faced against the likes of Epaminondas, they were trashed thoroughly. The Lacedaemonians were usually the best example of traditional hoplite soldiery, which meant that as long as they fought a foe who gambled the decisive clash in a head-on melee without any tricks or tactical maneuvering (or were more lightly armed than them) they would win by sheer professionalism and armor. However, because they were very tradition bound, any form of fighting or plan of attack that hinged on the weaknesses of hoplites (e.g. longer spears, hit-and-runs, heavy cavalry charges, attacks from multiple angles, ambushes, projectile weaponry deployed from high fortified positions, etc.) was capable of beating them. For all their vaunted descent from Herakles, the Spartans were still human, albeit very disciplined ones at that. Lastly, Spartan armies were, most of the time, never composed of ONLY Spartiates. In fact, the city preferred that a higher percentage of the forces fielded would be composed of allies, perioikoi (nonprofessional freemen), freed helots, and helots. So as to the "blame" for the defeats and setbacks that occurred, one could assign a large share to those non-Spartan soldiers.

[Hellenikon]

The lacedemonian hoplites were generally superior to other greek hoplites of their time, due to how spartan society functioned. This applied doubly so to the elite of the polis, the spartiates proper, who had to go through grueling training exercises.

However, as soon as the hoplitic way of warfare lost it's hegemony, the spartans became irrelevant. They adapted too little and too late to new military paradigms. Their territorial losses and draconian laws also led to manpower issues, which made them militarily weak.

Everything else is mostly propaganda given by either the spartans themselves or the later romans.

[z3n]

The argos/argives hoplites defeated the spartans during the first battle of Hysiae.
It is known.


edit:
Just watched the video (mostly) and he mentions another battle (Battle of the Champions) where argos sends its best 300 hoplites to fight spartas best 300 hoplites, argos wins of course.

I've read argos (apparently? didn't find the sources) offered a rematch during the Peloponnesian War but Sparta declined. Afraid of losing again, I'm sure.

I'm being slightly sarcastic by the way.

[NapoleonMaster]

Are there any sources that says that the Spartan hoplite were full time professionals instead of a citizen militia or that they trained in the Agoge only for war?.

Also, are there any sources that explains the martial training of the Spartans?.

[QuintusSertorius]

Mostly propaganda based on their zenith, plus ignoring all their allies who went to war with them.

[YourMadDoc]

He mentions in that video that Spartan citizens lived on backs of other noncitizens and slaves, which would mean that if you are Spartan you are rich and you can afford the best quality equipment.

Another thing - he said Spartans divided their unit into smaller communicating units on the field and thus have an advantage over opponents.

Agoge, while not strictly military education had many areas where they trained physically. They were also educated in teams from age of 7.

He said adult Spartans dedicated time to hard exercise, which would mean they were in good physical condition.

It that video he said Argos was famous for their soldiers and Sparta for their women yet in the battle of their best warriors 300 S x 300 A only 1 S x 2 A survived, so I would say they were equally good. It was also meaningless loss of best warriors as both sides declares themselves as victors and continue in conflict between them. Spartans defeated Argos 40 years later in battle and wiped out all males in Argos so Spartans took victory in this "Who has bigger ..." contest by the history books.


From all those pieces of information, he offered you have best equipped, organized Spartan unit in a great physical condition of every soldier used for teamwork from childhood. They weren't unscratchable killing machines as they are decribed, and they didn't have to be, they just had to be better as any other city militia.

[Genghis Skahn]

He mentions in that video that Spartan citizens lived on backs of other noncitizens and slaves, which would mean that if you are Spartan you are rich and you can afford the best quality equipment.

As far as I understand, the Spartans had a form of early military socialistic society. The fact that they lived on the backs of the Helots and non-citizens caused lots of problems from them, from time to time, in the form of Helot revolts. As Thucydides points out in The History of The Peloponnesian War, the Helot turncoats(Messenians, I think?) who joined with the Athenians ended up causing the Spartans great "mischief" . One time they fooled Spartan guards into thinking they were friendlies, due to their Doric accents(it was night time) and ended up ambushing the unfortunate guards who mistook them for fellow Spartans.

It's worth noting as well, that despite the military fame awarded to them by history, they never really controlled a large area outside of Laconia AFAIK. Compare that with the "Athenian Empire" of the pre-Peloponnesian War(and during it), which was far larger and more powerful than Sparta as an individual city-state ever was.

[QuintusSertorius]

Indeed, the Athenians built the Delian League, which lasted longer than a generation and greatly enriched that city as the capital of this de facto empire.

The Spartans sent mercenaries and the odd general around the place (many of whom quickly collapsed into debauchery and corruption), that was the limits of their reach.

[z3n]

Spartans defeated Argos 40 years later in battle and wiped out all males in Argos so Spartans took victory in this "Who has bigger ..." contest by the history books.

Well supposedly the argos males were unarmed and thinking it was a dinner (sort of like the red wedding in GoT), while the spartans were armed and ambushed them (then afterwords pursued them into the sacred grove and ambushed them while they were unarmed again and or burned them alive which apparently was a no-no to greeks).

It seems a) argos has the better hoplites and b) sparta wins through strength of numbers and unmanly tactics. From what our unbiased historians tell us (sort of like the media today! totally unbiased, like any normal human being).



http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...3Achapter%3D78

The Argives heard of this and came to the coast to do battle with him. When they had come near Tiryns and were at the place called Hesipeia, they encamped opposite the Lacedaemonians, leaving only a little space between the armies. There the Argives had no fear of fair fighting, but rather of being captured by a trick. [2] This was the affair referred to by that oracle which the Pythian priestess gave to the Argives and Milesians in common, which ran thus: “When the female defeats the male¹

When Cleomenes saw that the Argives did whatever was signalled by his herald, he commanded that when the herald cried the signal for breakfast, they should then put on their armor and attack the Argives. [2] The Lacedaemonians performed this command, and when they assaulted the Argives they caught them at breakfast in obedience to the herald's signal; they killed many of them, and far more fled for refuge into the grove of Argus, which the Lacedaemonians encamped around and guarded.

[YourMadDoc]

So Argives feared that they will be tricked, they did everything Spartan herald told him to do, they were tricked because of this, run away and hid in the sacred grove where they were killed. Talking about unmanly behavior, serves them well.

I wouldnt say someone had better hoplites, from conflicts between them it seems they both were on the shorter end of a rope for time.

Battle of Hysiae (669 BC) won by Argos. Argos had their hoplites equipped with aspis in early phalanx formation so it seems they were better as Spartan ones in this time. However as they fought in the city instead of conventional field battle for that time, I can only say their formation was better for street fight.
Battle of the 300 Champions 546 BC Argos claimed practical victory, Sparta technical, they both lost almost all hoplites so I say they were equally skilled. After the battle they both marched on that field with whole armies, Argos was defeated and Sparta took over the province.
Battle of Sepeia 494 BC won by Sparta by tricking Argos during snack time. Unconventional victory. Spartans used unmanly tricks and Argives behaved as small kids.
Battle of Mantinea 418 BC won by Sparta but there were too many allies on the scene.

Damm, now I want Argos on the campaign map and hire theri hoplites.

.

[Genava]

Battle of Sepeia, by Herodotus. http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/hh/hh6070.htm

78. So Cleomenes, perceiving that the Argives were doing whatever the herald of the Lacedemonians proclaimed, passed the word to the Lacedemonians that when the herald should proclaim that they were to get breakfast, then they should take up their arms and go to attack the Argives. This was carried out even so by the Lacedemonians; for as the Argives were getting breakfast according to the herald's proclamation, they attacked them; and many of them they slew, but many more yet took refuge in the sacred grove of Argos, and upon these they kept watch, sitting round about the place. Then Cleomenes did this which follows:--

79. He had with him deserters, and getting information by inquiring of these, he sent a herald and summoned forth those of the Argives who were shut up in the sanctuary, mentioning each by name; and he summoned them forth saying that he had received their ransom. Now among the Peloponnesians ransom is two pounds weight of silver appointed to be paid for each prisoner. So Cleomenes summoned forth about fifty of the Argives one by one and slew them; and it chanced that the rest who were in the enclosure did not perceive that this was being done; for since the grove was thick, those within did not see how it fared with those who were without, at least until one of them climbed up a tree and saw from above that which was being done. Accordingly they then no longer came forth when they were called.

[Pooploop]

Reading the previous posts, people now might be getting the idea that the Spartans were just regular joes, but that's slightly wrong. Rather than thinking the standards of the Spartans were as low as the rest of Greece, it will be more accurate to assume that a percentage of soldiery in Greece have standards as HIGH as the Spartans. That percentage, the "eupatridae", or the aristocrats, would have had physical training and an enthusiasm (if not then proficiency) for military prowess that was universal among their type regardless of the city of origin. Remember, there was no real "middle class" among the Hellenes, but a split between those who had property and those who did not. Those who had would have slaves and clients (in an increasing number depending on the size of the property) and an increase in time for athletics and other pursuits. Most notable however, would be the athletics, which was pursued by an almost fanatical devotion by the ENTIRE race of the Hellenes, and not just by the Lacedaemonians. Of the Olympic winners, a large number of them over the centuries came from outside Sparta, you know. To think that the other "middle-class or above" Greeks were peace-loving, "basic", average slobs comparable to modern citizens is just inaccurate. What made Sparta laudable compared to an average Greek polis is that is was able to make its ENTIRE citizen body live the "ideal" life of dedicating their entire free time to excellence and professionalism (not necessarily hand-to-hand skill, but more of readiness, resolve, practicality, and attitude) in war (and in dance, music, and hunting - Spartans appreciated song you know). This they did by enslaving all of Messenia and other surrounding districts and making those helots do all the menial labour. So the Spartans were the elite among the elite, rather than the elite among the average.

On the subject of the Argives, you do know those guys were cousins of the Spartans right? They, and the Cretans, and the Thessalians, were among the most Doric of Greek communities, one who had societies who were somewhat similar in structure (helots and periokoi and all that), with communal, regimental messes (where members had to pay a fee to join and was basically their battle unit), and a zeal for combat among the upper class. The Thessalians kind of had something similar to a "knightly" elite (as their full citizens fought as armored horsemen and had large tracts of land worked on by slaves) and the Cretans constantly loaned their bloody services out to the entire Mediterranean if they were not already fighting with each other. Another example, this time in Southern Italy, would be the Syracusans, whose Doric elite (under Gelon) had the same racist, slave-making, war-loving tendencies as the guys on the Peninsula. I'm not surprised it was the aristocrats of another Doric polis that were able to beat or equal the Spartans in a martial contest.

P.S. I kinda admire Cleomenes. Like Sun Tzu (in a way) he did whatever he had to do to have the least amount of casualties and easiest victories. Also, one must realize that the Spartans of his time had a similar attitude to people in this thread, because they thought his actions disgraceful and kinda forced him to commit suicide (or something). Also, they called him insane.

P.P.S. I have a more negative perception towards the Argives. After the events described in the posts above, they kinda sat out of the Persian wars and stopped meaningfully trying to be politically powerful or involving themselves in any major conflict. There was a time though, being the occasion with the Athenians besieging Syracuse, but they were slaughtered by their own allies in the dead of night...