Among the Ancient Greece polices there are two which mostly deserve the research of their history, namely Athens and Sparta. These city-states applies different approaches to the political organization, social structure and adoption of different cultural priorities. The abovementioned differences presuppose the unequal influence of these states on the development of ancient Greece and modern world in general. Within the sphere of political organization, the Athens are regarded to be the homeland of democracy, while Spartan society demonstrates the features of oligarchy. The post-Cleisthenes Athens had a special system of government, which is often thought to be the most democratic one of all times. The leading power was an assembly of all free citizens called ecclesia. This body was responsible for the declaration of war and peace, electing the officials and applying laws. All the citizens had the equal amount of rights during the …show more content…
Athenian society consisted of citizens; foreigners, also called metics, and slaves. The division into these groups presupposed the different levels of personal freedom and civil rights. For instance, only Athenian citizens were allowed to vote, serve as officials and own land. Among other restrictions, metics had to pay an additional tax and were not allowed to apply to any state bodies without the mediation of citizens. The slaves were in a possession of their owner; however, the law limited owner’s power. The Spartan society included three main groups, the most privileged Spartiates, the middle class of Perioeci (foreigners) and state-owned slaves called helots. The main task of the citizens was a perpetual preparedness to the belligerence, therefore they spent their lives in the training camps. To sustain the agriculture, the state officials appointed helots to work on the Spartiates’ land, therefore slaves were not included to the private
Camille Sicat #26 3/16/16 Writing/Social Studies Power of the People: Athens vs. Rome Essential Question: Citizenship in Athens and Rome: Which Was the Better System? Prior to the idea of people being “citizens” of a nation, people were subjects, with no rights and forced to serve under the iron fist of their ruler. The idea of people having rights and responsibilities to their country originated in Athens, Greece circa 500 B.C. (Background Essay). Rome, however, far surpassed the Greeks in their social contract theory of citizenship (Background Essay) for the following reasons: 1) More people were considered citizens i.e. females and sons of freed slaves; 2)
Government Structure - The Assembly The Assembly was a group of warrior citizens. They were only allowed to vote to accept or reject motions put before it. They had the power to declare war and choose the king to lead the army. Moreover, Ecclesia was recognised as the principle assembly of the democracy of Ancient Athens. Its role was to let all the male citizens of Athens speak their opinions and practise their votes regarding the government of the city.
These classes were characterised by specific factors that: dictated the social standing of an individual; were based on several factors including the nationality of the individual and their birth circumstances; and dictated the individual’s profession. The three social classes were: the Spartiates; the Periocei; the Hypomeiones; and the Helots. The Spartiates were full spartan citizens, aged over 30 and were functioning members of the Ekklesia. The Periocei were non-spartan citizens which resided in the areas in and around Lakonia. The hypomeiones, or ‘inferiors’, was a disgraced class that was filled with mostly spartiates who failed to fulfil their obligations or the Parthenai, the children of unmarried spartan mothers.
In this essay, I would like to answer and discuss the following questions: How did the people in Athens and Sparta obtain the right to participate in public life and make decisions affecting the community? Who held public office? What rules governed the selection of public office holders? How were two city-states similar in their governmental structures and how did they differ with each other? For the Spartans the right to participate and made important decisions from the entire community were only exercised by the adult and legitimate male citizens of Sparta.
There were many cases of bribery in the government that wasn't taken seriously by the court. In Sparta power was given to citizens through the assembly which consisted of all male citizens in Sparta, but in theory anyone could participate. The government had an elaborate system of checks and balances to make sure that no branch had more power than another. Also contrary to popular belief the Spartans treated there slaves bette than the Athenians. The slaves in Sparta were actually known as helots who were lower class citizens.
The Athenians had a direct democracy which allowed the citizens to directly decide and vote for who they wanted to rule their country. In Athens there were three bodies of the government. The Assembly is the first branch which included all citizens that showed up to cast their vote. The Assembly decided what new laws would be and they made important decisions regarding war, laws, etc.
The only way you could become a citizen was if you were a free-born male, and your parents were free-born. “Free-born adult males: Yes, if parents were free-born Athenians.” Any children born from a slave or freed slave would never be eligible to become a citizen. According to document A, Athens’ downfall was due to them being so cold towards the people they had conquered and treated them as “aliens,”. “What was the ruin of Sparta and Athens, but this, that mighty as they were in war, they spurned from them as aliens foreigners those whom they
Introduction Athens and Sparta were two of the most significant city-states in ancient Greece, each with unique systems of government. Athenians and Spartans were both known for their dedication to their city-state and their participation in public life. However, the methods of participation and the nature of the governance were distinct. This paper will discuss how people in Athens and Sparta obtained the right to participate in public life and make decisions affecting the community, who held public office, the rules governing the selection of public office holders, and the similarities and differences between the two city-states' governmental structures. Participation in Public Life
Shown by documents written in the 5th century BCE, both Athens and Sparta had rights for their citizens. However, Classical Athens believed that their laws set the pattern
Today, many of the world’s government structures were based on the principle of one of Greece’s city-states. Greece became a country advancing well before its time, strong in both military and brain power. This country was able to produce two city-states that became foundations to advancing the rest of the world. The first city-state, Athens, is thought to be the first to implement a democratic government while Sparta became known for their military power. While Athens and Sparta provide the world with advancements they differ in the ways of government structures, social motivations, and cultural differences.
These were all older men who had great wealth. In his Republic, Plato also criticizes oligarchy, saying of Sparta’s government, “A government resting on a valuation of property, in which the rich have power and the poor man is deprived of it… And then one, seeing another grow rich, seeks to rival him, and thus the great mass of the citizens become lovers of money.” In order to keep control of their economy while maintaining a strong military, the Spartans relied heavily on slaves. These slaves had no rights, and even the poor had very little say in their lives.
This group of people only included white male citizens, meaning that slaves, foreign born residents, women and some men who hadn’t obtained citizenship couldn’t vote (Doc D). This completely contradicts the all-inclusive concept of direct democracy that the Athenian government preached so frequently. To have a powerful and lasting empire with great prosperity you must have a series of strong leaders. The period of prosperity in Athens was so short lived because they only had one strong leader, Pericles. After Pericles died Athens could not defeat Sparta in the Peloponnesian War and also couldn’t hold the truce that was signed in 421 BC which allowed Sparta to gain overall victory in the
The Polis and Ancient Greek Life To the Ancient Greeks, the Polis was the center of their way of life. From socializing to conducting business to even deciding whether to go to war, the Polis was a very important aspect of the Greek’s lives. In the essay, the functions of the Polis will be discussed along with how the Polis managed to bring about the formation of Democracy, with the Polis of the city of Athens being the main example. The importance of the Polis will be explored through this essay because without the Polis, Democracy as we know it may not have ever formed. In ancient Greece, the Polis was the center of everything, consisting of the main town, but also farms and villages surrounding the polis.
The Spartan Empire Spartan Government: An oligarchy system was adopted in Sparta. In the oligarchy system, few people has the power to rule. Sparta also had an assembly just like Athens, but the main decisions were taken by the “Council of Elders” with two kings and twenty-eight other men as its members. The two kings where born within the royal family while the twenty-eight man where elected by the assembly. For men to be elected to the Council of Elders, they had to be at least 60 years old and approaching from a noble family.
If you were a slave, you were not reasonable enough. The last limitation was that you needed to be born in Athens because the Athenians were the best of the best, and many people were xenophobic, meaning fear of