Spartan Empire- why not?

[hoplite07]

Did Sparta just choose not to expand their city any further because they didnt want to like Rome, or was it because they couldnt? I know they were very selective with their choosing soldiers to fight, so that may have limited them, but this guy on another site said that Rome didnt have resources like Persia and were as small as Sparta to begin with, yet they still obviously expanded to become one of the greatest empires ever.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I think Sparta was just as capable, if they were of the right mentality! Once away from the strictures of their city, they were as open to the 'luxuries' of life as any other city-state! But I think perhaps the ethos of Sparta perhaps prevented them of doing the same as Rome!
The wrong mindset perhaps!?

[Paullus Scipio]

How big do you have to get to call yourself an 'Empire' ? Sparta came to dominate the entire Peloponnese, which is about as far as their geographical boundaries let them. Beyond that, they would have needed to be a dominant naval power, and we all know how they felt about that.....
Unlike Rome whose 'Imperial' days outside their natural geographical boundaries date from them enthusiastically challenging and beating Carthage's naval domination of the Western Mediterranean...

[Jona Lendering]

I agree with all above. One other factor, not mentioned before: They needed an army to suppress the helots; that means, they could not send the same army abroad. The Spartans sort of fought with one hand on their back.

[geala]

The Greeks and the Romans had quite different concepts of citizenship. The Spartans (and Athenians too) were very restrictive to expand the number of citizens or give some lesser rights to other Greeks or foreigners. Maybe it was a habit in the other Greek poleis also.

The most powerful weapon of the Romans was the expansion of citizenship or at least some minor forms of it. That made the emotional ties very strong and was the only way to expansion. I don't think that allies of a Greek state would have behaved like the Roman allies in the second Punic war. In the end the Roman allies fought against Rome to be more loved by Rome and get more rights, not to be independend.

[Mythos_Ruler]

If Sparta or Athens had been as liberal with their citizenship as Rome had been, then things might have been different. But as it was, Sparta was extremely xenophobic and only expanded citizenship to worthy helots and peroikoi when in dire dire need, not as a political move like how the Romans used it.

So, for example, how could Sparta had done this? Firstly, many in Greece, especially in the Peloponnese, admired the Spartan way of life. So, first, grant peroikoi-like rights to all those in their sway. Secondly, allow all these new citizens to send their children to the Agoge. Any child that makes it through the Agoge and survives then becomes a full fledged Homoioi, with full rights to their children. This would expand their army base considerably. Greater care of allies and their needs would also have expanded their reach. In the end, the lack of a nationalistic feeling throughout Greece would prevent any kind of real empire to form, unless those drastic changes to Spartan exclusivity as I have outlined had been implemented.

[Idomeneas]

the basic difference is that Romans had a national mentality while Greeks had a slight ethnic one only in times of need. In my mind i think they acted alike with Scots or the Irish. The clan was stronger than the nation concept.

Another thing is that Spartans were who they were exactly because of the way they lived. If they didnt supress an enormous population there would be no need for them to turn into a military state. Corinthians and Argives were Dorian too but they were not a military state. Spartans would not have to be the best warriors of Greece without the helots. Agoge would not exist.

[hoplite14gr]

Yes but Agoge could have evolved.
Yet it seems that Kleomenes I and Pausanias were too easily disposed off and their reputation smeared for daring to make things evolve.
The EFOROI (magistrates) clang to their power tooth and nail even at the expence of the state's best interest.

Kind regards

[Mythos_Ruler]

I agree. As I outlined above, the Agoge could have evolved to encompass a new "Spartan Citizenship" paradigm. The conquered could become Spartan citizens through the Agoge.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

They changed towards the end, but too late, and too little!

[Paullus Scipio]

You guys are under-estimating a fundamental of human nature - an Exclusive "club" has to stay exclusive, or there is no point in belonging.
In the Spartan case this factor was exacerbated by being an Aristocratic exclusive club! :roll:
And if you doubt this fundamental fact of human nature, when 'club membership' was in severe decline, the members fiercely resisted the 'reforms' of the late spartan Kings to expand club membership, even at the cost of extinction ! hock:
Roman citizenship, from the very beginning, was not like this at all.
A better comparison would be between the Spartan 'Homioi' and Roman aristocratic 'Nobiles' - who also arguably drove themselves to extinction, (in the civil wars and the pogroms of the early principate) thereby making way for the Great days of the Roman Empire !! D

[hoplite14gr]

Usually "exclusive clubs" were taken out of the game the hard way by determined leaders example: Peter the great and the boyars.

The Spartan "exclusive club" had to face unlucky or "not up to the task" leaders.

Kind regards

[Petra Rocks]

Pardon my ignorance, but didn't one Epaminondas rather badly munch the Spartan's fairly shortly after the war with Athens? And could that not have stopped Spartan expansion?

[Paullus Scipio]

...good point, David ! Epaminondas and Pelopidas certainly put an end to Sparta's predominance in Greece "the hard way", as Stefanos says.

Which makes this debate over more esoteric factors redundant....... D lol: :wink:

[M. Demetrius]

Which makes this debate over more esoteric factors redundant

More than one of our debates would fit that description, IMHO. Heh.