No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Stoics, Cynics, and the Spartan Revolution
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 December 2008
Extract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
In one of the supreme ironies of history, the austere Lycurgan system at Sparta failed in its primary aim – the fossilization of martial virtue – and succeeded in military victories, the heady profits of which undermined the precarious communism of the bivouac state. Conditioned to repress fear, the Spartan compensated by indulging greed – bribery, not cowardice, was his fatal weakness. After the collapse of the Spartan Empire at the Battle of Leuctra in 371, mercenary service became the principal Spartan occupation, even for Xenophon's model officer and gentleman, King Agesilaus. With landed estates encroaching on the traditional lots and great fortunes swollen by the gains of empire and mercenary adventure, the common Spartan found himself reduced to an equality of obligation only. The inflation and economic stress of the Hellenistic era intensified the imbalance between wealth and poverty in Lacedaemon. In a brief reign (244–241), the idealistic young King Agis IV tried to revive Sparta's military glory by restoring „Lycurgan ways” and did effect the abolition of debts but failed to redistribute land lots – his agent, Agesilaus, avoided the issue until a counter-revolutionary coup led by the deposed King Leonidas overthrew the reformers and lynched Agis. In 227, Leonidas' son, Cleomenes III, seized power and completed the aborted reforms of Agis-his subsequent success forced his rival for leadership of the Peloponnse, Aratus of Sicyon, into an alliance with Macedon, and Cleomenes was defeated at Sellasia in 222 to die shortly after in exile in Egypt.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis 1959
References
page 461 note 1 Plutarch, Agis 8.1. According to the account of the contemporary historian, Phylarchus of Athens, the Spartan citizenry was reduced to not more than seven hundred and six hundred of them were destitute. Plutarch, Agis 5.4.
page 461 note 2 Plutarch, Agis 14.3; Cleomenes 16.5; 17.3; 18.2; Aratus 38.5; 39.4–40.2. Polybius II 52.1; 55.8.
page 462 note 1 Plutarch, Cleomenes 20.3–4.
page 462 note 2 Oertel, Friedrich, Die soziale Frage im Altertum, in: Forschungen und Fortschritte (1927) 3: 257Google Scholar. Rostovtzeff, M., Social and Economie History of the Hellenistic World, Oxford, 1941, Vol. III, p. 1367 n. 34.Google Scholar
page 462 note 3 Plutarch, Agis 13.4.
page 462 note 4 ibid., 8.2.
page 462 note 5 ibid., 16.2.
page 462 note 6 Plutarch, , Cleomenes 8Google Scholar; 10.1; 11.1–2.
page 462 note 7 No. 81 in Jacoby's Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, Phylarchus is paraphrased in almost all of Plutarch's Agis and Cleomenes. He has recently been treated by Kroymann, J., Phylarchos, in: RE (1956) Suppl Bd. VIII: 471–489Google Scholar, and Gabba, E., Studi su Filarco, in: Athenaeum (1957) 35: 3–55Google Scholar, 193–239.
page 462 note 8 Bidez, J., La Cité du Monde et la Cité du Soleil chez les Stoīciens, in: Académie royale de Belgique, Bulletin de la classe des Lettres, Ser. 5 (1932) 18: 244–294.Google Scholar
page 462 note 9 Oilier, François, Le Philosophe Stoīcien Sphairos et l'oeuvre réformatrice des rois de Sparte Agis IV et Cléomène III, in: Revue des Études grecques (1936) 49: 536–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 462 note 10 Tarn, W. W., Hellenistic Civilization, (3d Ed. rev.with Griffith, G. T.) London, (Arnold), 1952, pp. 122–125.Google Scholar
page 463 note 1 Toynbee, Arnold, A Study of History, Oxford, 1939, Vol. V, pp. 179–180.Google Scholar
page 463 note 2 Plutarch, de Alex. fort. 329AB = Strabo 1 4.9. See Badian, E., Alexander the Great and the Unity of Mankind, in: Historia (1958) 7: 432–440Google Scholar. Plutarch suggests that Alexander's conquests effected the unity of mankind of which Zeno spoke. However, Zeno's “common pasture” was not political, and Strabo (= Eratosthenes) presents Alexander's cosmopolitanism as inherently pragmatic.
page 463 note 3 Tarn, W. W., Alexander the Great and the Unity of Mankind, in: Proceedings of the British Academy (1933) 19: 123–166Google Scholar. Cf. Merlan, Philip, Alexander the Great or Antiphon the Sophist, in: Classical Philology (1950) 45: 161–166.Google Scholar
page 463 note 4 Plutarch, , de Alex. fort. 329A.Google Scholar
page 463 note 5 Tarn, W. W., Alexander the Great, Cambridge, 1948, Vol. II, pp. 420–421Google Scholar, has been corrected by Badian, op. cit., p. 433 n. 34.
page 463 note 6 Diogenes Laertius VII 33; 16.
page 463 note 7 Rostovtzeff, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 1130.
page 464 note 1 An approach to the subject has been made by Reesor, Margaret, The Political Theory of the Old and Middle Stoa, New York, (Priv. printed), 1951.Google Scholar
page 464 note 2 Bidez, op. cit., pp. 274 n. 3 and 279.
page 464 note 3 Tarn, W. W., Alexander the Great, Vol. II, p. 425.Google Scholar
page 464 note 4 Pohlenz, Max, Die Stoa, GÖttingen, 1948, Vol. I, pp. 26 and 170Google Scholar; Vol. II, p. 15.
page 464 note 5 Ollier, op. cit, p. 570.
page 464 note 6 ibid., pp. 553–554. Jacoby, FrGrH Vol. III Bi, p. 624, rejects this fancy.
page 464 note 7 Ollier, op. cit., pp. 541–542. Ollier's ignorance of the fragments of Phylarchus is impressive. While rejecting his extreme position, Gabba (op. cit., pp. 52–53) gives more weight to Ollier's Stoic Phylarchus than the data necessarily warrant.
page 464 note 8 Diogenes Laertius VII 37.
page 464 note 9 Cleanthes was Zeno's pupil for nineteen years and died at the age of seventy-two as did Zeno, according to his disciple Persaeus – Diogenes Laertius VII 28; 176. For Zeno's death in 261, see Tarn, W. W., Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. VII, p. 220.Google Scholar
page 464 note 10 Diogenes Laertius VII 177. Athenaeus VIII 345E. Cf. Cicero Tusc. Disp. IV 53.
page 464 note 11 Diogenes Laertius VII 178.
page 465 note 1 Diogenes VII 36 (Persaeus). Diogenes Laertius used Plutarch's Alexander (IX 60) and Lysander et Sylla (IV 4). He also read Phylarchus (IX 115).
page 465 note 2 Plutarch, , Cleomenes 1–2Google Scholar; 3 includes a romantic interlude (Agiatis), a prolonged tirade on luxury and corruption after Agis, and the episode of Cleomenes and Xenares; all show the hand of Phylarchus.
page 465 note 3 ibid., 2.2–3. On Plutarch's anti-Stoicism, see Pohlenz, Max, Plutarchs Schriften gegen die Stoiker, in: Hermes (1939) 74: 1–33Google Scholar, and Sanbach, F. H., Plutarch on the Stoics, in: Classical Quarterly (1940) 34: 20–25.Google Scholar
page 465 note 4 Plutarch, Cleomenes 11.2. If a Stoic at court makes the patron an “Ur-Sozialist”, Antigonus Gonatas was farther left than Cleomenes since he employed Persaeus, the Stoic author of Spartan studies, as governor of Corinth. Plutarch, Aratus 18.1; 23.5. Athenaeus IV 140 B, E-F; 162B, D; XIII 607B-F.
page 465 note 5 Plutarch, Tiberius Gracchus 8.4–5; I7–4; 20.3–4. Cicero de amie. 11.37.
page 465 note 6 Oilier, François, Le mirage Spartiate, Etude sur l'idéalisation de Sparta dans l'antiquité grecque du début de l'école cynique jusqu'à la fin de la cité, Annales de l'Université de Lyon, 1943, No. 13, p. 77.Google Scholar
page 465 note 7 Plutarch, Lycurgus 31.2.
page 465 note 8 Diogenes Laertius VI 72; VII 33.
page 466 note 1 ibid., VI 54.
page 466 note 2 Fritz, Kurt von, Quellen-Untersuchungen zu Leben und Philosophie des Diogenes von Sinope, in: Philologus (1926) Suppl. XVIII–2, p. 55Google Scholar, and Cröert, W., Kolotes und Menedomos, in: Studien zur Palaeographie und Papyruskunde von C.E. Wessely, Leipzig, 1906, Vol. VI, pp. 58–65.Google Scholar
page 466 note 3 Diogenes Laertius VI 103.
page 466 note 4 ibid., VI 104.
page 466 note 5 ibid., VI 70- 71; cf. 38.
page 466 note 6 ibid., VI 54; 90; 92.
page 466 note 7 ibid., VI 104.
page 466 note 8 Pliny, Nat. Hist. X 208. Athenaeus III 73B-D; IV 150 D-F; X 438C; 442C; XII 521CD; 526A-C; XIII 606E-607A. (J 81 FF 2; 6; 7; 26; 28; 36; 45; 50; 65; 66).
page 467 note 1 Polybius II 48.4; 50.2; 65.3.
page 467 note 2 Bickerman, Elias, Notes sur Polybe, in: Revue des Études grecques (1943) 56: 299–300.Google Scholar
page 467 note 3 Dudley, D. R., A History of Cynicism from Diogenes to the Sixth Century A. D., London, 1937, p. 79Google Scholar, provides an impressive English translation of the Second Meliamb.
page 467 note 4 Tarn, W. W., Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. VII, p. 755.Google Scholar
page 467 note 5 Rostovtzeff, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 207.
page 467 note 6 Micheli, H., Sparta, Cambridge, 1952, pp. 325–326.Google Scholar
page 467 note 7 Barber, E. A., New Chapters in the History of Greek Literature, Oxford, 1921, p. 4.Google Scholar
page 467 note 8 Dudley, op. cit., p. 80. Cf. Polybius V 93.2–7.
page 467 note 9 Polybius V 93.8–9.
page 467 note 10 Dudley, op.cit., pp. 80 and 92–93.
page 468 note 1 See Knox, A. D., Herodes, Cercidas, and the Greek Choliambic Poets, Harvard (Loeb), 1929, p. 197 n. 2Google Scholar. Cf. Herodotus VI 45; VII 73; 185.
page 468 note 2 Knox, op. cit. pp. 231–239, presents but rejects as spurious “Cercidea” which lament that wealthy boors are preferred over impoverished aristocrats, a situation that likely encouraged Cercidas' Cynicism.
page 468 note 3 Dudley, op. cit, p. 82. However, few Greeks and no Cynic objected to homosexuals only to effeminacy.
page 468 note 4 Hunt, Arthur, The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Vol. VIII (1911) No. 1802, pp. 20–59Google Scholar, gives the original and restored texts of the papyrus. Part of Fragment 4 (with Zeno reference) is reproduced in Plate II.
page 468 note 5 Hoistad, Ragnar, Hero, Cynic and King, Cynic, Uppsala, 1948, especially pp. 22–49Google Scholar; 103–149. But see Sinclair, T. A., A History of Greek Political Thought, London (Routledge & Kegan Paul), 1951, pp. 140–142 and 264.Google Scholar
page 468 note 6 Diogenes Laertius VI 2; 13.
page 468 note 7 Dio Chrysostom, On Kingship I 65. Xenophon Memorabilia II 1.21.
page 468 note 8 Plutarch, Cleomenes 13.2. Cf. Athenaeus IV 142 C-F (J 81 F 44). Gabba (op.cit., pp. 51–52) suggests that the emphasis on Heracles was to counter Antigonid claims of Heraclid descent, on which see Diodorus VII 15 and Edson, Charles F., The Antigonids, Heracles, and Beroea, in: Harvard Studies in Classical Philology (1934) 42: 213–246Google Scholar. If such claims were seriously advanced, Phylarchus countered them through Therycion's caustic quip on the incongruity of the seed of Heracles surrendering to the spawn of Philip and Alexander, Plutarch Cleomenes 31.2.
page 469 note 1 Plutarch, Lycuirgus 1.3. Polybius IV 35.14 dryly observes that a later king of Sparta became a descendant of Heracles by presenting each ephor with one talent.
page 469 note 2 Quoted by Diogenes Laertius III 63 from a lost play.
page 469 note 3 Euripides, Heracles 1252.
page 469 note 4 Head, B.V., Historia Numorum, A Manual of Greek Numismatics, Oxford, 1911, p. 435.Google Scholar
page 469 note 5 Strabo XV 1.64 (J 134 F 17a), translation by Brown, T. S., Onesicritus, Berkeley Calif., 1949, p. 39Google Scholar. Kaerst, J., Geschichte des hellenistischen Zeitalters, Leipzig, 1909, Vol. II–1, p. 123Google Scholar, felt that this passage embodied the ideal Cynic king. Brown, op. cit., p. 50, is more cautious.
page 469 note 6 Plutarch, Cleomenes 1.3.
page 469 note 7 Polybius V 39.6. Polybius considered Cleomenes legally a tyrant after he had deposed the ephors.
You have
Access