Pages

Showing posts with label Ancient Greece. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ancient Greece. Show all posts

Saturday, May 24, 2014

The Rise and Fall of Sparta Following the Great Peloponnesian War (431-404 B.C.)


"Can someone explain to me how mighty Sparta was finally subdued?
(question posed by roland678, reddit.com; /r/history)

My humble response:

"After her victory in the Great Peloponnesian War (431-404 B.C.) against the Athenians and her allies, Sparta became the regional hegemon. Instead of remaining insular, as was her typical foreign policy orientation up to the war, Sparta exercised a more adventurous and aggressive posture towards the Peloponnese and greater Greece. Two major developments arrested Spartan aggrandizement: (1) Persian resistance and (2) the rise of Thebes.
Following the defeat of Athens in 404 B.C., the Spartans emerged as the leading Greek city-state and, led by Lysander, the Spartan hero-general of the Peloponnesian War, the Spartans acted to subdue the Greek world. In addition to her mainland aspirations, Sparta engaged in an risky foreign endeavor in the heartland of the Persian empire. Along with a host of other soldiers drawn from the Greek world, the Spartans supported the rebellion of the Persian satrap Cyrus who aimed to dethrone the new Persian king, Artaxerxes II, whose recent ascension in 404 B.C. purportedly offered to Cyrus and his Greek mercenaries an opportunity to grab absolute power. Such was not the case. This rebellion ended disastrously for Cyrus: he died. His hired Greek mercenary army faired no better. The Greek army suffered a total defeat in battle and were forced into a hasty retreat from ancient Babylon, the whole while victim to harrassment by Persian cavalry upon its flank and rear. These events were chronicled in detail by a Greek soldier, Xenophon, who was present during the initial campaign and pitiable conclusion (see:Anabasis). 

In spite of her overseas misfortunes, Sparta nonetheless continued to pursue an aggressive domestic policy vis. a v. her immediate Greek city-state neighbors. Accordingly, an anti-Spartan alliance was formed by a resurgent Athens -- supported financially and materially by, yes, the Persians -- Corinth, Argos (Sparta's historical and mortal enemy), and Thebes. These formerly self-interested city-states fought to free themselves from Sparta's hegemonic aspirations. Events culminated in the Corinthian War (395-386 B.C.), the conclusion of which saw the Spartans reaching an accommodation with the Persians who had supported the anti-Spartan alliance with financial and material support during the war. This accommodation, so called the King's Peace, guaranteed Persian control of the Greek city-states in Anatolia, on the one hand, and Spartan hegemony of the Greek mainland, on the other.
Following the Corinthian War, a formerly second-rate Boetian power, Thebes, rose to challenge Spartan aggression. Led by the statesmen and generals Epamanondas and Pelopidas, Thebes engaged in a warring struggle with Sparta. The two powers, and their respective allies, fought intermittently for a decade, but superior Theban generalship subdued the mighty Spartan army, poignantly so in two separately decisive land battles: the Battle of Leuctra (371 B.C.), and the Battle of Mantinea (362 B.C.). Thebes leveraged her victories by freeing the Spartan helots -- a subjugated class of local slaves who were both crucial for, and a threat to, the Spartan way of life --, thereafter establishing them as freemen somewhere on the Corinthian Gulf.
At this point, Spartan prestige and material dominance both depreciated. In hindsight, however, Theban ascendancy proved to be a Pyrrhic development: strong relative to her Greek neighbors, Thebes nonetheless exposed herself to the machinations of her menacing neighbor to the north, Macedon. In an ironic reversal of fortunes, Philip II of Macedon learned valuable lessons from the progressive military tactics pursued by the Thebans under Epamonondas. Philip coupled these tactics with a professional army and a deft foreign policy in order to ultimately subdue the Greek world.
Spartan dominance -- in-and-of-itself a short-lived reality -- stemmed from her overwhelming defeat of the Athenian empire during the Great Peloponnesian War. Instead of consolidating her dominant position in Greece, Sparta reoriented her foreign and domestic policies toward a more uncharacteristically aggressive position. Her example, and many more from historical records, have shown that expansion based upon hubris can have disastrous effects. Outright defeat overseas jolted the Spartan state. Her mainland posture elicited an immediate -- no less damaging -- and determined response from, inter alia, the Athenians, Argives, Thebans, and Persians. Spartan material power eroded after a period of inter-Greek warfare which, incidentally, paved the way for Macedonian hegemony."

Thanks to roland678 for piquing my interest in this intriguing period of antiquity. More to come on this topic, for sure, very soon. So stay tuned!

-Cato

Monday, June 24, 2013

Random Thoughts Upon (Still) Desperate Times

     (cont'd) The American republic - the rule of law more specifically - needs to be reinvigorated. We need a new constitution. Legal integrity needs to be upheld with a degree of vigilance similar to republican Rome: lying in court (perjury) was considered so heinous an act that the guilty person would be thrown to their death from a cliff onto a jagged rock. Marion Jones lied during a Department of Justice inquiry and was given a slap on the wrist. If caught accepting bribes while serving as a public servant, Roman officials would first have their nose cut off before they were stuffed and sewn into a large bag with a wild animal and then finally tossed into a raging river to either drown to death or eaten by the animal. 

     I surely do not recommend we resuscitate these punishments from antiquity to lend more legitimacy to our legal system. However, the modern American legal system is plagued by double-standards, biases, dishonestly, and a faithlessness that is so acute that the entire system is seen by most Americans as a vehicle to be manipulated by actors within society instead of the other way around. 

     We need to end the "Tyranny of the Legislature": implement consecutive term-limits for Senators and Representatives in order to nip the "re-election" effort in the bud. Or we could elect Congressmen for terms to take place in the future instead of soon after ballots are cast. Even better, anonymous elections! Sure, we've have great presidents, but republics are not sustained by the executive branch. Rather, it was the sage legislators such as the Spartan Lycurgus or the Athenians Solon or Draco whose cool-headed, systemic organization of republican institutions gave to posterity an ideal to marvel at and imitate. 

     Today, the solutions to most of the problems that plague our economy, society, and political institutions reveal themselves with little to no effort. In other words, we know how to succeed as a nation - or at the very least how to control the damage - yet Congress is unwilling to act. In effect, Congress can not do its job! And yet we tolerate Congressional incompetence because we either believe no remedy exists or that the status quo works well enough. On both counts we are mistaken. 

     I understand that dramatic changes to, inter alia, our tax code, Electoral College, capital and financial debt markets, etc., should be implemented with care in order to avoid unnecessary shocks to society. But for the love of all that you hold dear: When are we going to control our nation's fucking debt!?!? When, if ever, will Congress reconfigure the nation's social safety nets in order to ensure either their affordability on the one hand, or control the runaway prices of services on the other? It's incredible. Our nation's Constitution is a quaint reminder of what a republican ideal used to be. "Oh, what a nice document! How peculiar!?" or we simultaneously cling to that mythical belief that ours' is the most just and free republic while we see with our own eyes how our institutions have grown hollow and corrupt. The checks, balances, and restrictions placed within and upon our republican form of government are overridden and side-stepped by an elite class of plutocrats to whom corporate bodies owe their allegiance, and vice versa. What our republic once was and what it is today are two wholly different things and, sadly, no effort to revive the former by rebuilding the latter has sprung to life. 

     The Arab spring of recent years and contemporary protests in Turkey and Brazil have shown us how to right these wrongs. What's more, we laud the courageous efforts of the citizens from these states as they demanded honest representation through democratic activism. They bled and often died for the republican ideal. "Good for them! They are taking back their democracy," we say but then turn off the television and think of those lessons no more. Our jobs and the paychecks they deliver dictate how we define our republic. To be certain, work and pay are necessary, but there exists a short list of ideals to which we as a community should strive to realize and maintain; republicanism is at the top of that list. Material things, money, and social status can neither - for the most part - nourish our conscience nor fulfill our desire to find an answer or meaning to life. A smaller paycheck or less affluent lifestyle are paltry trade-offs for the enjoyment of true liberty, active democracy, and healthy republican institutions. When and if we shift our focus to demand these types of priorities, then we will see how far we have strayed from the path of philosophical righteousness. But what will it take for that threshold to be crossed? 

     The body-politic in the U.S. is activated by a fitful and sputtery motor. High voter turnout is no longer driven by the issues of the day, but by the race or gender of the President, or the raging public/private civil wars at the state and local levels. "Politics," to all intents, constructions, and purposes, has leap-frogged the idea of being divisive or a 'touchy' subject; to fish for a political discussion in most social circles is to invite disaster, punish oneself, be ironic, etc. To talk about politics is to talk about a naturally distasteful subject. Could I think of a warning sign, a red-flag more indicative of a dying body-politic? Other than a coup, I think not. 

     Our aspirations and actions look to me like Eisenberg's electron in his elegant "Uncertainty Principle": chaotic in nature, an electron moves around its shell, or the electron cloud, in a purely random fashion. In order for a scientist to observe that electron during its fitful travels, he must observe that electron in a single instant, like a camera snapshot. Viewed in this way, the scientist can observe the electron with remarkable clarity. And yet, because the scientist is viewing the electron frozen in time, he must therefore forfeit his ability to observe the speed at which the electron is moving, or in what direction it is traveling. To observe the electron on the one hand, and to chart its movement on the other, is to confront two mutually exclusive choices. 

     Likewise in America we are incapable of simultaneously articulating goals - or a strategic aim - and acting in accordance with those goals, or at the very least how reality treats our goals. U.S. support for representational government the world over is, in theory, universally accepted. But when one analyzes our recognition (or lack-there-of) of Middle Eastern political parties/movements, one is unable to confirm our republican credentials. It wrinkles our brain to entertain the idea that a strategy can - indeed, should - be pursued in the face of chaos and uncertainty. A state can not articulate a grand strategy and control reality at the same time. Our domestic affairs are no different. "Affordable credit for young, middle-income homebuyers as a goal? Awesome!" "We've found a new way to effectively package a bundle of different mortgages into a single portfolio for optimal cash flow? That's fucking amazing! And it's legal? Sweet Baby Jesus!" BAM! Worst recession since the Great Depression. "What's that? The justice system is popularly thought to be unfair, rigged, and downright broken? Damn, that sucks. We should have the nation's first ever black President promise to make government more transparent, help the middle/lower-income families, hold banks and large corporations responsible for irresponsible actions, punish 'white-collar' crime more vigorously. Yeah, that will breath trust, confidence, and life back into our democratic foundations!" BAM! God damn National Security Agency (NSA) hacked the entire nation and Guantonomo is STILL open!