¹ Cp. the situation of Phaistòs in Crete, which dominates the Mesará, and controls the road thence to the rich coast-plain west of it.

² Cp. the Lower City at Mykenai.

³ 239, 244, 387, 443.

⁴ α, 93, 285; β, 214, 327, 359; λ, 460.

⁵ δ, 702; ϵ, 20.

⁶ γ, 326; δ, 1, 313. ν, 440; ο, 1; ρ, 121.

⁷ Like the ‘Duchy of Athens’ and ‘Kingdom of Saloniki’ in the thirteenth century A.D. Messene was not even part of the immediate territory of the lord of Lakedaimon, , but a group of seven ‘fiefs’ (Il. i. 149)Google Scholar, of which Ortilochos' Pharai was one.

⁸ Incidentally an example of (᾿Αχαῖκὸν) ᾿Αργοσ = Peloponnesos.

⁹ Homeric Sparta is known from literature only. The archaeology of Sparta begins with ‘Geometric’ sherds.

¹⁰ For the perioikoi, cp. Isokr., Panath. 177—181Google Scholar: e.g. ἔξεστι τοῖς ἐφόροις ἀποκτεῖναι τοσούτους ὀπόσους ἀν βουληθῶσιν

¹¹ Cp. the new name ‘Great Britain,’ after the union of England and Scotland; and ‘Britons never shall be slaves.’

¹² Cp. ‘Westminster,’ ‘the Court of St. James'.’

¹³ Paus. ix. 13, 11.

¹⁴ Cp. ‘Britisher.’

¹⁵ For instance, in the two places where it is used in Thucydides (iii. 5, 2; viii. 55, 2), neither the envoy to Mytilene nor the envoy to Rhodes are likely to have been Spartiatai. Instead of troubling to give their actual status (e.g. μόθαξ περίοικοσ), the historian employs the non-political, racial name.

¹⁶ In the fifth century B.C. the same dialect was spoken by everyone within the frontiers of the state, whether Spartiates, helot, or perioikos (Th. iv. 3, 3; 41, 2). The question as to what elements in the Lacedaemonian state were ‘Dorian’ is idle. In the fifth century Δωριεὺσ means anyone who speaks the S. E. dialect of the Greek language, a dialect named after the district on the Asiatic coast, where it differentiated itself earliest and most clearly (cp. ‘Ionic,’ ‘Aeolic’). This dialect has no connexion with the bands of invaders from Dryopis (the oaklands of N.W. Greece), who may have spoken Illyrian for all we know and certainly did not call themselves Δωριεῖσ but performed the merely negative function of destroying the Achaean civilisation and political system, breaking communications, and so isolating the areas within which the great dialects of historical Greece articulated themselves during the succeeding centuries of darkness; while they themselves were absorbed linguistically, racially, and (with the growth of the city-state) to a large extent politically also, in the native population of the country. The identification in the eighth century of the linguistic Δωριεῖσ of Peloponnesos, with the Μακεδνοι (Her. i. 56) who occupied the Doris at the Kephisos-sources, and the fabrication of the ‘return of the Herakleidai,’ belong to the history of the Delphic Amphictyony.

¹⁷ This is by far the commonest of the Λάκων forms in Greek historians, e.g. Thucydides.

¹⁸ Nestor's kingdom must have included the N. Messenian plain.

¹⁹ Why were the Agiadai and Eurypontidai welded on to the Herakleid line through the counterfeit links, Eurysthenes and Prokles, forged for the purpose? By the eighth century all who spoke the S.E. dialect were known collectively to the other Greeks as Δωριεῖσ from the district Αωρὶσ in Asia Minor, the ‘distributing centre’ of the dialect. From community of name was inferred community of origin for the populations, and, a fortiori, a common genealogy for the royal houses. Now in Homer's Catalogue the greatest lord in that Asiatic district, which gave the Αωρὶεῖσ their name, was Tlepolemos, son of Herakles. Therefore Agiadai and Eurypontidai at Sparta, Aipytidai at Messene (by a complicated tale of murder, exile and restoration, Paus. iv. 3, 3–8), Temenidai at Argos, Bacchiadai at Corinth, were all grafted on to the Herakleid stem.

But Tlepolemos went straight from Argos to Rhodes: why were the Peloponnesian Hera-kleids diverted to central Greece, and thence to their Peloponnesian heritage? In the eighth century the Delphoi-Pylai Amphiktyony, a politico-religious federation of the districts of central Greece, had grown to such power and authority and offered such advantages to its members, that there was a general desire among neighbouring states to gain admission into it. The adhesion of such powerful States, as Argos, Sparta, and Messene had then become, would be as advantageous to the Amphiktyony as to the applicants themselves. But how admit them? for religious federations are closed bodies. The religious experts had recourse to that fruitful principle, the identification of similar names. The great Peloponneso n states were Αωρὶεῖσ but so were an Amphiktyonic tribe, the Μακεδνοι for the territory at the sources of Kephisos, into which they had been driven from the Dotian plain, when the Thessaloi broke up the Achaean states of Πελασγικον Αργοσ was called Δωρὶσ The ruling elements among ihe Peloponnesian Δωριεῖς were known to be incomers from across the Corinthian gulf: sequitur, that Amphiktyonic Δωρὶς is the μητρόπολισ of the Peloponnesian Δωριεῖσ The results were that one of the Amphiktyohic votes of the Makednoi was henceforth exercised by the three Peloponnesian states alternately; and that the legend of the expulsion and return of the Herakleidai was invented. But the adoption of Hyllos by the childless Aigimios (the native hero of the Μακεδνοι), is a very clumsy suture.

²⁰ For the early history of the two royal elans we depend entirely on Pausanias. We do not know what were his sources, nor have we any second authority to check him. The only chionology we can get is by reckoning generations (thirty years to a king) backwards from the first kings whose actual dates we know. Before the alliance of Charilaos and Archelaos against Aigys, both the names of kings and their feats of arms are fictitious.

²¹ Cp. the deleterious effect of Byzantine epitomes and chrestomathies on the preservation of Classical texts.

²² The proportions and standpoint of the Homeric narrative being, of course, poetical and not historical: while even in the episodes which he treats in detail, the historical fact is only a basis for the poetical imagination.

²³ As the duchy of Athens passed from its French founders into the hands of Catalans and Florentines.

²⁴ ‘Who were the Achaeans?’ is an unimportant question, for their civilisation was Minoan, while the race and language of the indigenous portion of their subjects (that is, of the vast majority) was native Greek.

²⁵ The Pelasgians who inhabited Lemnos till Miltiades' time, so far from having driven out the Minyai, are identical with them. The lordship of the Minyan Iolkos was eaived out of Πελασγικὸν Αργοσ and the subjects of Pelias were mostly Pelasgoi, a sub-group of the Greek stock.

²⁶ Rose., Aristot. Fragin. 532Google Scholar.

²⁷ They drew their title to the name from Nestor's kingdom, of which they were the sole remnant that survived the invasions.

²⁸ No Greek found it difficult φῦσαι πάππουσ

²⁹ Kadmos came to Thebes from Thera (Her. iii. 147); that is, Thebes received its first culture and political life from the ‘Island civilisation’ of the Aegean.

³⁰ If Kadmos came from Thera, Theras ought to be the ancestor of Kadmos, not Kadmos of Theras. But Theras has to become the ninth descendant of Kadmos to bring him down to the generation of the Dorian conquest; and thus the eponym of the island becomes a returned emigrant, and a new name, Kalliste, must be given it, to clothe its nakedness withal, before Theras arrives, and calls it after himself.

The Aigeidai, Theras' descendants, who conquered Amyklai, are therefore Thebans, , and Pindar, (Isthm. 6 (7), 18Google Scholar) already knows them as such. It remained for Aristotle (Schol. ad. loc.) to locate the family itself in Thebes and bring them bodily thence to Sparta, during the Amyclaean war, by the advice of the Oracle—bodily, because there was no trace of such a family actually living in Thebes.

Of course the notion that Sparta could send out an overseas colony several centuries before she had even conquered Amyklai, much less reached the coast of the Marathonisi gulf, is an absurdity.

³¹ Misleadingly represented in English by ‘Tribes’.

³² For the φρατρ´αι of the original communities, unlike the γένη of each φρατρια were probably not descended from a common ancestor.

³³ E.g. the four pre-Kleisthenic tribes of Attika.

³⁴ Cp. the elan constitution of Athens (Αθπ Blass, fragmenta, 5, 6).

³⁵ That the clan of Menelaos were incorporated in Sparta is proved by the subsequent adoption of their name as the official title of the Spartan state. They were probably compelled to leave their hill-town and settle on the Spartan side of Eurotas, at Kynosoura, the north-and south ridge which bounds modern Sparta on the E. side and shuts it off from the river. Old Lakedaimon, thenceforth known as Therapne, was left desert, save for the shrine of Menelaos.

That Amyklai was one of the Spartiate κῶμαι is proved by several considerations. Firstly, the local Apollo-festival of the Hyakin-thia became a public cult of the Spartan state, and almost rivalled the κάρνεια in importance. Apollo's throne was the greatest public monument of the Spartan state, and thank-offerings for Spartan successes were dedicated by the state in the god's sanctuary (Pans. iii. 18, 7, 8). Secondly, it remained, unlike Therapne, an inhabited place down to Pausanias' time (iii. 19, 6), and the chief conduct of the festival continued in the hands of the Αμικλαιοι for οἰ Αμυκλαιοι ἀεἰ ποτε ἀπέρχονται εἰς τὰ Γακινθαι ἐπὶ τὸν Παιᾶνα ἐάν τε στρατοπεδευόμενοι τυγχα νωσιν ἐαν τε ἄλλως α0ποδημοῦντεσ (Xen., Hell. iv. 5, 11)Google Scholar. But it is most unlikely that any townships, except the Spartiate κῶμαι existed on the Spartiate territory: the helots, who cultivated certain portions of it, were scattered over the country in isolated home steads, so many to each κλῆροσ It might be contended that Amyklai was a perioikic πόλισ and not on Spartiate territory at all: but in that case about two-thirds of the Spartan plain would be perioikic, not Spartan, land; and, what is more conclusive, Agesilaos (Xen. loc. cit.) τούς ἐκ πάσης στρατιᾶς Αμυκλαίους κατέ λιπε I shall show later that only Spartiatai were distributed indiscriminately through all the μόραι while hoplites from any given perioikic πόλισ would be found grouped in a single ἐνωμοτὶα or πεντηκοστύσ I assume, then, that Αμύκλαι was a Spartiate κώμη

As for the people of Pharis and Geranthrai, Pausanias (iii. 2, 6) says ἀπελθεῖν ἐκ Πελα ποννήσου συγχωροῦνται ὐπόσπονδο This is no more than an inference from the fact that there was no Helot population resident in those two districts: it is more likely that the Φαρῖται and Γερανθρᾶται became clients of the three clans, and either remained at first on their lands as small free tenants (like the ἐκτημόριοι of Attika), or were transferred to Sparta itself, as the ancestors of the plebs were to Rome. This is at the bottom of Aristotle's statement (Pol. 1270 d) λέγουσι δ᾿ ὠς ἐοὶ μὲν τῶν προτέρων βασιλε.ων μετεδιδοσαν τῆς πολιτείας ὤστ᾿ οι γίνεσθαι τότε ὀλιγανθρωπίαν πολεμούντων πολὺν χρόνον

³⁶ Pausanias (iii. 16, 9) gives the names of the four which shared in the cult of Artemis Orthia: Limnai, Kynosoura, Mesoa, Pitane.

³⁷ There must also already have been perioikic communities, e.g. Sellasia and Pellana, at least, must have accepted this status before the conquest of Aigys. But the great increase in numbers of the perioikic communities followed the conquest of the Helos plain and the first Messenian war, when Tzakonía, Vátika, Mani, and the cities of the Homeric Messene, were reduced to this condition.

^37a Theopompos the Eurypontid covers two generations of Agiads, Alkamenes and Polydoros, 730–670.

³⁸ Cp. the struggle between plebs and patres at Rome on the question of conubium. The fathers were, according to Antiochos (Strabo, 278), οἰ μὴ μετασχόντες Λακεδαιμονίων τῆς στρα τείασ that is, unprivileged clients, for at least at the beginning of this war only clansmen were warriors: ἐκρίθησαν δοῦλοι κὰι ὠνομάσθησαν Εἴλωτεσ is a most unlikely piece of aetiology. Southern women did not marry negroes to recruit the population of the Confederate States during the American Civil War.

³⁹ Unless he was Apollon Delphinios.

⁴⁰ Cp. the ‘constitution of Servius Tullius’ at Rome.

⁴¹ Lykourgos was a god, or at least the epithet of one. We are surely bound to follow the opinion of the Pythia, even though cautiously expressed (Her. i. 65). The fact that in Sparta he had a ναόσ not a ἤρωον clinches the matter: Λακεδαιμόνιοι δὲ καὶ Λυκούργῳ τῷ θεμένῳ τοὺς νόμους οἶα δὴ θεῳ πεποιήκασι καὶ τούτῳ ἰερόν (Pans. iii. 16, 6).

⁴² Four πεντηκοστύεσ = one λόχοσ (Thuc. v. 68,3).

⁴³ Rose, Arist, fragm. 541. It was a common Greek practice to re-baptise a political group when it changed its status within a larger grouping (cp. Francotte: ‘La Polis grecque,’ passim). Εδώλιοσ (‘Native’) probably=the Menelaos-kome Kynosoura: Ploas is obviously a nickname for the Limnatai. ᾿Αριμας ἄρι μάω and Σινισ are the λόχοι of Pitane and Amyklai, but the names give no hint as to how we are to assign them. This system of naming explains, and also condemns, Thucydides' criticism of the authors (i.e. Herodotos) who said that the Lakedaimonioi had a Πιτανάτης λόχος ὀσ οὐδἐγένετο πώποτε In writing for a general Greek public, Πιτανάτησ was the right title to use: the nickname would explain nothing.

⁴⁴ Why did the Mesoatai alone receive no title? Perhaps because the Aigeidai, their clan, and their κώμη were in disgrace for their share in the Partheniai conspiracy.

⁴⁵ ᾿´Ελληνεσ was the race-name of the tribes which formed the Pylai-Delphoi Amphiktyony: e.g. the Spercheios valley (Il. B. 682); Opous (B, 530: the Λόκροι as a sub-group of the Pan-hellenes); the district behind Histiaia in Euboia, N., Hellopla, (C.I.A. i. 29 and iv. p. 12)Google Scholar, for ᾿´Ελλ.οπεσ᾿᾿Ελλ-ανεσ and Μεγάλη Ελλάσ a group of Amphiktyonic colonies in Italy. With the spread of the influence and membership of the Amphiktyony, the Hellenic name spread too, till it became the national name for Greek race and language. This clause in the oracle is a step in the process.

The Hellenion at Sparta, whose history had been forgotten in Pausanias' time (iii. 12, 6) was probably the shrine founded in obedience to this command.

⁴⁶ The title of the clans is purposely transferred to the κῶμαι

⁴⁷ The rhetra is paraphrased by Tyrtaios (fragm. 2 Teubner). This incidentally fixes a terminus ante quem for its date.

It must have been at this time that the state, like the κῶμαι took a fancy name: κῶμαι δαιλόνιοι

⁴⁸ After the first Messenian war the perioikic community of New Asine (Koron) had been organised out of Asinaian refugees from the Argolid (Paus. iv. 14, 3), and so it is probable that the perioikic communities between Asine and the Dentheliatis, Aithaia, Thouria, and Pharai, were constituted at the same time, and did not take part against Sparta in the second Messenian war.

The people of the Stenyklaros plain, who revolted about 640, had been helots since the end of the first war, paying as much as half the produce to their masters (Tyrt., fragm. 3, 4, 6, 6)Google Scholar. But the κλῆροι like those cf the Helos-plain, were held either by the καλοὶ κἀγαθοι (clansmen)alone, or at the most, by the thousand hoplites of the λόχοι The rebellion wiped out all the titles, and left the government a free hand for redistribution; but the memory of the original κλῆροι survived in the connexion of king Polydoros' name with a γῆσ ἀναδασμόσ (Plut., Lyk. 8)Google Scholar, for within his reign (700–670) falls the first Messenian war.

⁴⁹ Though the western coast plain is one of the most fertile districts in Greece.

⁵⁰ Seventy medimnoi of barley for the warrior and twelve for his wife (Plut., Lyk. 8)Google Scholar; and wine and oil in proportion.

⁵¹ Probably seven helot families to each κλῆροσ(whence the proportion seven helots to one Spartiates in Herodotos, ix. 28, 2).

⁵² The γῆς ἀναδασμόσ at Sparta circa 610, corresponds to the tyrannides of the Isthmos stutes (650–550). It was the political watchword of the Revolutionary party at Athens twenty years later, and when Solon rejected it as impracticable, the tyrannis followed within a generation, Solon was right: there were no conquered lands at Athens and no helots, and to endow the poor he must have directly mulcted the rich.

⁵³ The famous name of Lykourgos has attracted to itself the whole series of developments that make up Spartan history: συνοικι σμόσ ephorate, rhetra, γῆς ἀναδασμόσ. The Greeks always imagined Athene springing adult out of the head of Zeus: the idea of growth they had not grasped. Accordingly we find the νομοθέτησ ascribed to the most varied epochs (which was easy, since he never lived in any generation of men). The ninth century B.C. was the favourite estimate, for this put him well at the back of Spartan history, and it is easier to antedate than to postdate political innovations. But each author connects him with the development that loomed largest in his own mind; and Aristotle at least (Pol. 1270, a, 1–5) dates him after the close of the Messenian wars. The γῆς ἀναδασμόσ and its corollaries were a social rather than a political reform. But perhaps the election of the ephoroi by the δῆμοσ instead of their appointment by the kings, dates from this time. Probably each was at first elected by his own κωμῆται (cp. the development of the στρατηγία at Athens): later the whole board by the whole Apella. For the growth of their power in the next two centuries cp. Mr. Guy Dickins, J.H.S. vol. xxxii.

⁵⁴ Of course the καλοὶ κἀγαθοί (clansmen), and the rest of the Thousand, possessed private estates, and many of them Eurotas-valley κλῆροι as well; but they had to take up their Messenian κλῆροσ like the rest. The γῆσ ἀναδασμόσ was not a mere relief-measure for the destitute, but, as the title of the holders, οἰ δμοιοι shows, an act of uniformity, which was to extinguish στάσισ for ever. We accordingly find the greatest differences of wealth within a συσσίτιον above the minimum limit of income secured by the κλῆροσ (Xen., Lak. Pol. 5, 3)Google Scholar.

⁵⁵ The prohibition against buying or selling κλῆροι created an equally effective prejudice against the sale of private property, πωλεῖν δὲ γῆν Λακεδαιμονίος αἰσχρὸν νενόμισται τῆς δὲ ἀρχαίας μοίρας οὐδὲ ἔξεστιν (Herakleides 2, 76; Müller, , F.H.G. 2, 211)Google Scholar. Plural holding and subdivision of κλῆροι were likewise illegal.

⁵⁶ Ar., Pol. 1271Google Scholar a, 26–37; 1272 a, 13.

⁵⁷ The title occurs only once: Xen., Hell. iii. 3, 5Google Scholar. Even at the original assignation of the κλῆροι there must have been a considerable fraction of Spartiatai who did not receive them, including the χειροτέχναι (Xen., Lak. Pol. 11, 2)Google Scholar, the μαγειροι and the αὐληταὶ (Her. vi. 60), but perhaps not the κήρυκεσ of whom at least one γένοσ the Ταλθυβιάδαι were grand enough gentlemen to θῦσαι πάππουσ On the other hand, these four crafts were not available for the military reserve, being expressly confined to their hereditary occupation (Her. loc. cit.).

⁵⁸ Xen., Lak. Pul. x. 7Google Scholar; Plut., Instit. Lakon. 21Google Scholar. Thus every Spartiate boy, who was not disqualified for a κλῆροσ by belonging to one of the hereditary artisan castes, would undergo the ἀγωγή in the hope of being co-opted in the end into a syssition: so that the second line of ὐπομείονεσ as well as the first line of ὄμοιοι would be trained men; and Agesilaos' boast that every Lakedaimonios was a professional soldier (for the anecdote cp. Plut., Ages., 26Google Scholar) would apply to both alike. As to whether it was meant to apply to the perioikoi as well, or at least a proportion of them, or whether they are included here under the σύμμαχοι the ambiguity of the name Λακεδαιμόνιοσ leaves us in doubt.

For becoming an efficient Lacedaemonian hoplite, the ἀγωγή was of course more important than citizen-birth: and accordingly the ἀγωγή sons of helots or xenoi who had endured the μόθακεσ (Phylarchos, , ap. Athen, vi. 271, E.)Google Scholar, were no less eligible than the sons of Spartiatai to enrolment among the ὄμοιοι though of course they had not, any more than the latter, the cettainty of being co-opted into a syssition, as Plutarch, (Just. Lak. 22Google Scholar) and Aelian, (Var. Hist. 12, 43)Google Scholar suppose they had.

⁵⁹ Plut., Lyk. 16Google Scholar. Of course the years were counted from the beginning of the official year within which the boy was born, not from his birthday.

⁶⁰ This office was a step to the highest political career: Xen., Lak. Pol. 2, 2Google Scholar.

⁶¹ The name of the seventeenth and eighteenth year class is not known.

⁶² Though of course the same κλῆροι did not always go with the same φιδίτιον

⁶³ What was the average excess of candidates over places, is unknown. But it is clear that, whereas before the γῆς ἀναδασμόσ clients and unprivileged formed the great majority of the Spartiatai, after the γῆς ἀναδασμόσ the ὐπομείονεσ were in a great minority as compared with the ὀμοιοι until the unfortunate rhetra of Epitadeus.

⁶⁴ Or unless he were appointed to the king's φιδίτιον οἰ περὶ δαμοσίαν (Xen., Lak. Pol. 13, 7Google Scholar).

⁶⁵ He presumably remained an honorary member, and could dine when he liked, at the active members' expense. Such an arrangement might have enabled the state to resume possession of his κλῆροσ at once; but the most economical governments pay pensions, and it is much more likely that he retained it till his death. In that case the proportion of κλῆροι to active ὄμοιοι was probably 5 : 4; but as the proportion of males between the ages of 60 and 70 is never really so much as a quarter of those between the ages of 20 and 60, the state must have been left with a welcome surplus of allotments.

⁶⁶ The resemblance between the ‘Lykourgian’ agoge and the English public school system, must strike anyone who has been educated by the latter. E.g. the relation of βοῦαι to the age-classes is made clear by the ‘parallels’ and ‘divs’ of Winchester College, and the gradations of rank among the boys do not seem strange to one who has been successively Junior, Sixth Book Inferior, In-loco, and prefect. This grading did not even cease with manhood. The εἴρενεσ (men from 20 to 30 years of age) had to shew certain outward marks of respect to their elders and betters, and were not even found worthy of being buried in the same grave with them at Plataiai, though the λοχαγόσ of the Pitauatai, Amompharetos, was among their dead (Her. ix. 85).

The Spartan system, again, like the English, worked on men through their ambition. The succession of classes was sufficient stimulus to the οαῖδεσ to prevent the εἴρην from merely resting on his oars, once he had secured his place in a φιδίτιον he was given the prospect of ‘getting his colours.’ The cavalry corps of the 300 γένη was recast into a legion of honour, which in battle formed the king's bodyguard. Three captains, called the ἰππαγρέται were commissioned by the ephoi to enrol each a company of a hundred men, and the competition for enlistment was intense (Xen., Lak. Pol. 4Google Scholar; cp. the anecdote in Plut., Lyk. 22)Google Scholar, though membership was only for a limited number of years (how many, we do not know : it must in all cases have ceased with the close of the thirtieth).

It is characteristic of the system that these new-model ἰππεῖσ had no mounts, but fought as ὀπλῖται λογάδεσ in the battle line (Her. vii. 205; viii. 124; ἐκατόν only, in vi. 56. Thuc. v. 72; Xen., Hell. vi. 4, 13–14Google Scholar; Strabo 481–482). The Spartan ἀγωγή like the English, was calculated to turn out a single type of a very high standard, the perfect hoplite; and this type, again, like the English, cloaked under a strict uniformity in externals, the deepest divergence of wealth and social tradition. Compare the Spartan's φοινικίσ and bronze ἀσπίσ with the modern evening dress. The effect of the suppression of individual character shewed itself, at Sparta, clearly enough. Within a generation of the γῆς ἀναδασμόσ Spartan art was dead (see the museum at modern Sparta).

⁶⁷ τὰ δέκα ἀφ ἤβησ Xen., Hell. ii. 4, 32Google Scholar; τὰ δέκα iii. 4, 23 and iv. 5, 14. iv. 5, 16 τὰ πεντεκαίδεκα owing to the exceptional straits the division was in. τὰ δέκα οἰ εἴρενεσ was the usual number.

⁶⁸ Her. i. 65; Th. v. 68; Xen., Lak. Pul. xi. 4Google Scholar, sqq.

⁶⁹ Xen. loc. cit.: the leading ἐνωμοτια of a division in column of route was called the ἄγημα

⁷⁰ This seems to have been an unusual formation., Xenephon, (Lak. Pol. ii. 4Google Scholar) says καθί στανται τότε μὲν ὲς ἐνωμοτίας τὸτε δὲ εἰς τρεισ τότε δὲ εὶς ἔξ i.e. either in files of ἐνωμοτίαι with a front of one, or with a front of three (and a depth of twelve), or with a front of six (and depth of six). This incidentally shows that τὰ τριάκοντα πέντε was the normal strength. τὰ τεσσεράκοντα were only called out on a great emergencies, like the present: e.g. after Lenktra (Xen., Hell. vi. 4, 17)Google Scholar.

⁷¹ And there were therefore 3200 × =4000 κλῆροι including those of the retired list. I assume that the proportion between group and sub-group remained just as constant as their names, between 600 and 400 B.C. Similarly the Roman legion preserved its original 60 centuriae through the reforms of Camillus and Marius.

⁷² The συσσίτια of Agis' scheme κατὰ τετρα κοσίους καὶ διακοσίουσ (Plut. 8) were of course a brand new system, and are no evidence for the earlier period.

⁷³ The contingent of each arm was itself called a μόρα ἰππέων or a μόρα ὀπλιτῶν (Xen., Hell. iv. 5, 11)Google Scholar. After the transformation of the 300 ἰππεῖσ the state did not possess mounted troops again, till the occupation of Kythera by the Athenians in 424 B.C. compelled them to organise a corps of 400 for patrol duty.

⁷⁴ διῄρηνται εἰς τὰς μόρας Λακεδαιμόνιοι πάντεσ (Aristot. Lak. Pol. apud Harpoeralionem s.v. μόρα); cp. also Xen., Hell. vi. 1, 1 with 4, 15Google Scholar; for the cavalry, v. 4, 39.

⁷⁵ Harp. loc. cit.: φησὶ δὲ ὡς εἰσὶ μόραι ἐξ ὠνομασμένοι Xen., Lak. Pol. 11, 4Google Scholar; also Hell. vi. 4, 17: τῶν ὐπολοίποιν μόραν four having fought at Leuktia. Diodoros talks of τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων αἰ πέντε μόραι (xv. 32), because one μόρα had already been sent to Thespiai, in the winter 378–7 after the death of Phoibidas (Xen., Hell. v. 4, 46)Google Scholar. That he puts both Agesilaos' campaigns after that, in 377, is a blunder; but the mistake is in chronology, not in the number of the μόρα

⁷⁶ It has been argued that the twelve λόχοι have nothing to do with μόραι but represent a reorganisation after the loss of the Mrssenian κλῆροι But the Spartan government after 369 (like Argos after 546 and 495) persistently refused to recognise the change in the status quo, e.g. in 365 B.C. (Hell. vii. 4, 10), and for this reason stood out of the general peace which followed Second Mantineia in 362 (Diod. xv. 89). Therefore, although the majority of the ὄμοιοι must at once, after the loss of Messene, have become unable to pay their quota to the φιδίτιον it is most unlikely that this was treated as adequate ground for loss of status (the new Messenioi being regarded as a band of brigands in temporary occupation). The number of the ὄμοιοι and, therewith, the existing military organisation, remained unchanged. These two passages, then, can be taken as good evidence for the system before, as well as after, 369.

Xenophon counts by λόχοι not by μόραι in these two places simply because the grouping on the two occasions (3 : 9 λόχοι) did not correspond with the permanent brigading of the λόχοι in the μόραιn (2 λόχοι = 1 μόρα

⁷⁷ :7 τὰ πεντεκαιτριάκοντα was the ordinary mobilisation-order.

⁷⁸ The table in Xen., Lak. Pol. 11, 4Google Scholar has been tampered with considerably. It now gives :—

2 ἐνωμοτίαι = 1 πεντηκοστύσ

2 πεντηκοστύες = 1 λόχος

4 λόχοι = 1 μόρα

‘Four’ (δ᾿) must be a corruption of ‘Two’ (δύο) and the proportion between ἐνωμοτίαι and πεντηκοστύεσ must thereafter have been assimilated to the altered proportion between πεντηκοστύεσ and λόχοι

The passage must originally have run: ἐκάστη δὲ τῶν ὀπλιτικῶν τούτων μορῶν ἔχει πολέμαρχον ἔνα λοχαγούς δύο πεντηκοντῆρας ὀκτώ ἐνωμο τάρχας δύο καὶ τριάκοντα All that we learn from it in its present state is that the commander of a μόρα was a πολέμαρχοσ

⁷⁹ The difference in strength at different mobilisations accounts for the great variety in the estimates of ancient historians (Plut., Pelop. 17)Google Scholar.

⁸⁰ It has been suggested that a large contingent of the 6000 hoplites were νεοδαμώδεισ We have little evidence of the total number of the νεοδαμώδεισ from time, to time created: the original batch (? 425 B.C.) was 2000 (Th. iv. 80, 4), but the government managed soon to thin their ranks. In spring 413, 600 νεοδαμώ δεισ and newly. enrolled helots were sent out to Sicily (Th. vii. 19, 3), and next year we hear of an expeditionary force of 300 (viii. 8). Even if the permanent nucleus of Agis' garrison at Dekeleia were composed of them as well, there is no reason to think that their first strength, 2000, was increased during the course of the Peloponnesian war.

In summer 400, 1000 were despatched with Thibron to Asia (Xen., Hell. iii. 1, 4)Google Scholar, and 2000 more in 396 with Agesilaos (iii, 4, 2). At the time of the Nemea battle, these were all either in garrison in Asia (iv. 2, 5), or marching round the Aegaean with Agesilaos (iv. 3, 15); and as the number of these ιεοδαμώδεισ alone was already 1000 higher than the total number during the Dekeleiah war, it is probable that 3000 was the total number of νεοδαμώδεις in 394, and that not a man of them was at Sparta when the ephoroi mobilised in that year.

Nor do we hear of such a large number as 3000 again. The 2000 troops of Eudamidas in 382 included, besides νεοδαμώδεις perioikoi and Skiritai (v. 2, 24); and when in winter 370–369, 6000 helots and more (vi. 5, 29) responded to the call to arms which would have made them νεοδαμώδεις the government comsidered the number overwhelming.

The νεοδαμώδεις were a standing force of hoplites, raised from the helots for oversea service, in order to set free the whole of the regular Lacedaemonian army for service on the Greek mainland. They were given none of the political rights of the Spartiate δῆμος the ὄμοιοι nor organised on the same social system of κλῆροι and φιδίτια in fact, on a peace footing there was no place for them at Sparta at all. Accordingly, when the Brasideioi returned home from the Thracian coast, after the peace of Nikias, they and the remaining νεοδαμώδεις were stationed provisionally at Lepreon, a free city between Elis and Λακωνική

It is not known how these ὁπλῖται ἄκληροι were financed: probably they were paid out of the war-fund of the Peloponnesian League, and then out of the φόρος of the ἀρχὴ as soon as it was transferred fiora Athens to Sparta.

⁸¹ At the end of the campaign, Praxitas διαφῆκε τὸ στράτευμα (= the allies, who had assembled after the fall of Lecharon) and returned himself to Sparta (iv. 4, 13), but there is no hint that the μόρα returned with him. Whether Praxitas was the unfortunate polemarchos of 390 we do not know, for Xenophon purposely suppresses that officer's name.

⁸² Except that the Spartiates fared more sofly on service than in peace time (Hut. Lyk. 22).

⁸³ Herodotos (i. 65) mentions the institution of ἐνωμοτίας καὶ τριηκάδας καὶ συσσίτια (ascribing them indiscriminately to ‘Lykourgos,’ along with ephoroi and gerontes).

⁸⁴ The fifth year supplementary recruit raust have been sent up to Sparta and maintained there permanently, presumably at the expense of the Spartan government: if the perioikic polis had to support him there in idleness, it was a very serious charge on them. His permanent presence in Sparta was absolutely necessary: he must learn to work together with his fellow ἐνωμόται (proficiency in drill was the secret of the Lacedaemonian army's success), and the ἐνωμοτια must be ready to mobilise at a moment's notice. To ensure this, no Spartiates liable to military service was allowed to leave the country without a special permit from the authoiities (Isokr. Bousiris and Harpitkr. apud Kose, , Arist, , fragm. 543)Google Scholar; and the whole advantage of the concentration of the Spartiate λόχοι in permanent camp at Sparta would have been lost, if one-fifth of their strength bad been regularly absent from the colours.

These supplementary perioikoi were naturally not admitted to the φιδίτια of the Spartiate ὄμοιοι but they doubtless practised the same δίσιτα and when the ἐνωμοτία deployed into line of battle, Spartiates and Perioikos fought shoulder to shoulder: ἔν τε γὰρ ταῖς στρατείαις αῖς ἠγεῖται ὀ βασιλεύς κατ᾿ ἄνδρα συμπαρατάτ τάττειν (Isokr. Panath. 180).

⁸⁵ That is, without necessitating an increase in the number of κλῆροι The complement of Spartiatai in the 6 μόραι was actually less than the total strength of the 5 λόχοι 32×16×6=3072 as compared with 40×16×5=3200: leaving 128 κλῆρηι vacant for magistrates, ναύ αρχοι ete.

⁸⁶ 4: 6 instead of 5: 5.

⁸⁷ Though they still preserved their existence : ᾿Αρχίη τῷ Σαμίου αὐτὸς Πιτάνῃ συνεγενόμην δήμου γὰρ τουτου ἠν (Her. iii. 55).

⁸⁸ So that Xenophon, (Hieron. 9, 5)Google Scholar says : διήρηνται μὲν γὰρ ἄπασαι αἰ πόλεις αἰ μὲν κατὰ φυλάς αἰ κατὰ μόρας αἰ δὲ κατὰ λόχουσ with an obvious reference to Sparta. Just as the γῆσ ἀναδασμόσ corresponds to the work of Solon and Peisistratos at Athens, so the change from λόχοσ to μόρα is paralleled by the reorganisation of Attika under Kleisthenes.

⁸⁹ I.e. one μόρα + the Three Hundred. The μὸρα ἰππέων must hare been organised some time between 424 (Th. iv. 55) and 392 (Xen., Hell. iv. 4, 10)Google Scholar, and their strength is reckoned by Xenophon, (Heil. iv. 16)Google Scholar as one tenth of the hoplite μόρα (600:6000 as the respective numbers of the two arms in 5 μόραι), that is, as 128 troopers, or 112 at 35 ἔτη ἀφ᾿ ἤβνσ The cavalry μόρα was commanded by a hipparmostes, subordinate to the pole-marchos commanding the whole brigade ὀπλι τῶν τε καὶ ἰππέων (Hell. iv. 4, 10 ; 5, 12). Of its subdivisions, and of the proportion in it of Spartiatai and Perioikoi, we have no knowledge. The troopers were inferior men, the leavings of the hoplite μόραι after the latter had filled up their full complement. If the Lacedaemonian infantry were the best in Greece, because at least the ‘Spartiate‘ λόχοι were always in training under arms, the Lacedaemonian cavalry were the worst for the corresponding reason. The trooper was not the owner of his horse and equipment, for he was a poor man (an ὐπομείων if a Spartiates), and his outfit was charged as a supertax on the rich (the Σπαρτιᾶται καλοὶ ὰγαθοι): but he had not even the permanent use of them. Only when the mobilisation order had been issued, did he apply for his mount and arms, whose quality and condition were left entirely to the conscience of the provider. Thus the cavalry, an arm which depends far more than infantry on constant practice, was in no sense a standing force, as it was, for instance, at Athens, and was only exercised during the actual campaign. After the experience of Leuktia, they stiffened the force with mercenary professionals (Xen., Hipparch. 9, 4)Google Scholar, from which time it began, too late, to improve.

⁹⁰ That the seven corps included both the two divisions on the right wing (v. 71, 3 = Λακεδαιμονίων ὀοίγοι τὸ ἔσχατον ἔχοντεσ), and also the brigade of Brasideioi and νεοδαμώδεισ; is clear: λόχοι μὲν γὰρ ἐμάχοντο ἐπτὰ ἄνευ Σκιριτῶν

⁹¹ The Skirites Lochos (Diod. xv. 32) was raised by the originally Arkadian communities of perioikoi on the Alpheios-Eurotas watershed (Th. v. 33, 1 shows that the Skiritis marched with Parrhasia). It stood outside the μὸρα organisation, and had the privilege of fighting on the left wing in line of battle (Th. v. 67, 1), and of leading the van in column of route (Xen., Lak. Pal. 13, 6)Google Scholar, We have no definite information as to their equipment, but their employment as se uts and light troops proves that they cannot have worn the complete panoply.

⁹¹ The Brasideioi were originally νεοδαμώδεισ themselves, but had been granted a special status in return for their distinguished services ἐπὶ Θράκησ

⁹³ Of course his own admission that not all, but only the majority, of the λοχαγοι employed the eight-deep formation, makes it impossible the calculate the length of the front at all.

⁹⁴ Kynourioi; Eutresioi and Parrhasioi, former perioikoi of Tegea, whom. Mantineia had reft from her, probably in 423 B.C. (op. Th. iv. 131; v, 33, 1).

⁹⁵ Cp. Aristot., Pol. 1270Google Scholar a, 30 (referring to the time of Leuktra): οὐδὲ χίλιοι τὸ πλῆθοσ ηταν

⁹⁶ ἐλλὺς χιλίουσ Xen. loc. cit.; πλείουσ χίλιοι Paus. ix. 13, 12.

⁹⁷ The calculator forgot, however, that the 1000 Lacedaemonian dead included the 300 ἰππεῖσ and that the losses of the Lakedaimonioi in the μόραι were accordingly only 700; and so he estimated the losses of the Spartiatai in the μόραι at 100 instead of 70.

⁹⁸ Of course the ἀρχη had been greatly cut short by the peace of Antalkidas and the new Athenian sea league; but the important factor was her changed position in Peloponnesos, which she now controlled only by garrisons and harmostai.

⁹⁹ In the four μόραι at Leuktra, the ‘Spartiate’ ἐνωμοτία probably consisted of seven Spartiatai, twenty-one neocdamodeis, and seven perioikoi. To supply four-fifths instead of one fifth of the Spartiate contingent would have been an impossible tax on the resources of the Perioikoi, and it is therefore likely that the neodamodeis were at this time incorporated in the morai, forming three-fifths of every Spartiate lochos, and three-tenths of every mora. This would account for of them (or 2304 at forty ἔτη ἄφ ἤβησ); and would explain why we find no mention of them as a separate standing corps, when the news of Leuktra reached Sparta, and the ephoroi mobilised every available man (Hell. vi. 4, 17). The government proposed to raise a new corps of νεοδαμώδεισ during Epameinondas’ raid in 362 (Hell. vi. 5, 28).

¹⁰⁰ The date of the rhetra cannot be fixed accurately. It must have been passed later than the general peace following Second Mantineia, to which Sparta refused to be a party, because it involved recognising the Messenian state. On the other hand, it cannot have been passed much later, for when Aristotle wrote his πολιτικά (circa 325?) it had had time to work its full effect (1270 a, 15–39). If we place it about 357, we shall not be far wrong.

¹⁰¹ Perhaps grandson of Epitadas ὀ Μολόβρου the commandant on Sphakteria in 425 B.C.

¹⁰² The rich Spartiates under the ‘Lykourgian system’ was in the same economic stage as the Homeric βασιλεύσ He did not invest his surplus wealth, but spent it as it came, in extending his personal influence and social connexions. But after the rhetra of Epitadeus, the man who formerly employed the margin of his farm-produce in giving a beef-dinner to his Φιδίτιον would certainly sell his stock and invest the profits in a mortgage on his neighbour' three acres. So Sparta, at this belated period in her history, was suddenly plunged into that economic crisis in which Solon had found Attika, and from which Peisistratos had rescued her, a crisis which Sparta herself had avoided with such labour and at such cost in the seventh century B.C.

¹⁰³ These two conditions are generally found together.

¹⁰⁴ Plut., Agis 8Google Scholar; Kleom. 11. From these figures the fictitious number of Lykourgos' and king Polydoros' allotments was afterwards evolved: Agis' scheme provided for 4500 Spartiate κλῆροι In this redistribution of Spartiate and perioikic lands, the boundary between the two territories was carefully maintained as it stood. The χώρα Σπαρτιατική extended up the Eurotas-valley as far as the ‘ravine of Pellana,’ where the χαράκωμα (Paus. iii. 21, 2) marked off the boundary against that perioikic city. Thence the line was drawn W. to the crest of Taÿgetos and Malea (= Maleatis) the valley draining down to Alpheios W. of Leondhari, E. below Sellasia to Parnon.

The helots of the lower Eurotas basin gained nothing by the revolution; and it was not till Antigonos reached Tegea that Kleomenes freed 6000 of them for five νεοδα apiece ready money, and enrolled 2000 as medium weight infantry, Sparta's last corps of μναῖ μώδεισ A remnant, however, still remained in their old status in 195 B.C. (Liv. xxxiv. 27), and it was probably not till the time of anarchy which followed the death of Nabis, that they were all finally incorporated in the Spartan body-politic or the ‘Eleuthero’ Laconian League.

¹⁰⁵ Cp. Aristot., Pol 1270Google Scholar a, 29.

¹⁰⁶ Organised on the Macedonian model, which like the Roman, was developed by differentiation out of the homogeneous hoplite phalanx.