Emerging from the Dark Ages (1100-776 BCE) in Greece, the polis was a city that created a complex and sophisticated civilization based on the political institution and philosophical resolution (Mathisen 2012, 167). Two of the most powerful city states in Greece during the time of the Classical Age (500-387 BCE) were Spartans and Athenians, conflicting with one another during their highest point in their own civilizations. Neither Sparta nor Athens were considered the ideal polis because both city states had their own characteristics that made their political structures completely different from each other. While Spartans valued its soldiers (basing its civilization specifically on its army), the Athenians were the opposite with their primary
…show more content…
By keeping these helots in check, each year the Spartans would declare war on the helots since that more than half of Sparta’s population consisted of this class, as well as to prevent any uprising from occurring. This lead to the Spartans to create the krypteia, which was when they set out young men to spy on the helots and to kill any of them who seemed untrustworthy or who had the power to rise to dictatorship. This was the basis that formed Sparta’s social infrastructure. In a time where war was common for dominating other lands and trying to form its own civilization, it may be safe to say that there was a reason for Spartans to strengthen an army to be prepared if foreigner domination were to occur, but compared to my criteria of a polis with our political structure today, making the primary focus on assembling a powerful army would not be ideal because I do not think it is a main concern.
Continuing on, this leads to Sparta creating a constitutional government called oligarchy, meaning “the rule of the few”; a form of government that was controlled by the rich and influential people (Mathisen 2012, 186-188). This meant that Sparta’s government system was mainly open to the elite …show more content…
Athens structure of government was a democracy, meaning it was “ruled by the people.” This concept came from Cleisthenes where he sought out a new form of government, which he called isonomia (“equal rights”) (Mathisen 2012, 207), allowing males of all social classes to have the right to vote. Cleisthenes broke down the Athenian classes into three regions, and provided a basis for political organization for himself. Athenian democracy could also be known as a radical democracy because all citizens were equally responsible for participating in government (Mathisen 2012, 209). In Athenian Democracy written by Peter John Rhodes, he notes “the classical Athenian democracy was based as far as possible on active involvement of citizens,” making the radical democracy more participatory than North American democracy today where one individual is elected to represent the government of their country (Mathisen 2012, 209). This is on the opposite spectrum compared to the Spartans where Spartan’s oligarchy government “ruled by few” was in mandate. The ideal of a democracy by the Athenian population allows the people to participate, as well as be engaged in political matters. By being politically engaging, Athenians had the advantage on my ideal polis than the Spartans because of how inclusive it was of all social classes, allowing each social class to have
By keeping these helots in check, each year the Spartans would declare war on the helots since that more than half of Sparta’s population consisted of this class, as well as to prevent any uprising from occurring. This lead to the Spartans to create the krypteia, which was when they set out young men to spy on the helots and to kill any of them who seemed untrustworthy or who had the power to rise to dictatorship. This was the basis that formed Sparta’s social infrastructure. In a time where war was common for dominating other lands and trying to form its own civilization, it may be safe to say that there was a reason for Spartans to strengthen an army to be prepared if foreigner domination were to occur, but compared to my criteria of a polis with our political structure today, making the primary focus on assembling a powerful army would not be ideal because I do not think it is a main concern.
Continuing on, this leads to Sparta creating a constitutional government called oligarchy, meaning “the rule of the few”; a form of government that was controlled by the rich and influential people (Mathisen 2012, 186-188). This meant that Sparta’s government system was mainly open to the elite …show more content…
Athens structure of government was a democracy, meaning it was “ruled by the people.” This concept came from Cleisthenes where he sought out a new form of government, which he called isonomia (“equal rights”) (Mathisen 2012, 207), allowing males of all social classes to have the right to vote. Cleisthenes broke down the Athenian classes into three regions, and provided a basis for political organization for himself. Athenian democracy could also be known as a radical democracy because all citizens were equally responsible for participating in government (Mathisen 2012, 209). In Athenian Democracy written by Peter John Rhodes, he notes “the classical Athenian democracy was based as far as possible on active involvement of citizens,” making the radical democracy more participatory than North American democracy today where one individual is elected to represent the government of their country (Mathisen 2012, 209). This is on the opposite spectrum compared to the Spartans where Spartan’s oligarchy government “ruled by few” was in mandate. The ideal of a democracy by the Athenian population allows the people to participate, as well as be engaged in political matters. By being politically engaging, Athenians had the advantage on my ideal polis than the Spartans because of how inclusive it was of all social classes, allowing each social class to have