Military Review

Ancient Sparta. Sparta primordial

194

The beginning of Sparta



Like most stories classical Greece, the history of Sparta actually begins with the end of another great civilization - the Mycenaean. Mycenaean Greece was a regional power that first emerged around 1600 BC. NS. and dominated what is now Greece for the next 500 years.

Like other civilizations in the Mediterranean region of that time, the Mycenaean civilization would have fallen into disrepair due to an event known as the "Bronze Age catastrophe" in the XNUMXth century BC. There are many competing theories as to the exact cause of the collapse of the Mycenaean civilization, although there is ample reason to believe that its collapse was caused, at least in part, by a group known as the Sea Peoples. This enigmatic group has never been satisfactorily identified.

Another theory links the collapse of Mycenae to a hypothetical event known as the Dorian invasion. This event, based on the myth of the ancient Greeks, detailing the capture of the Peloponnese by an ethnic group known as the Dorians, was used as a possible explanation for the sudden emergence and spread of Dorian culture.

However, this so-called invasion was more likely the spread of a number of cultural ideas and the migration of peoples from Greece itself, rather than the result of an actual invasion of external forces.

Whether the Doric Greeks were responsible for the decline of the Mycenaean civilization or not, their arrival in the Peloponnese is a critical event in history prior to Sparta's history. This is because the Spartans themselves were, in fact, of Dorian origin and spoke a Doric dialect of Greek.

Had it not been for some of the events leading to the migration or invasion of the Dorians into southeastern Greece, the history of Sparta as we know it today would not have happened.

After the collapse of the Bronze Age and the possible invasions of the Dorians and the peoples of the sea that may have caused or accompanied it, Greece as a whole entered a period known as the Greek "Dark Ages". It was a period that was very similar to the state of Europe after the collapse of the Roman Empire about 1500 years later, during which a power vacuum created by the sudden collapse of a highly developed and organized civilization (in this case the Mycenaean) led to a prolonged period of social stagnation for more low level of development.

In Greece, this period lasted for almost 300 years, between 1100 and 800 BC.


Sparta city


It was at this time that Sparta was founded.

The place where the city was formed was located in the valley of the Eurotus River and had excellent defensive characteristics.

According to archaeological data, the territory of ancient Sparta itself, as well as the surrounding areas, were not inhabited until about 1000 BC, which indicates the date of the city's founding - much later than the collapse of the Mycenaean civilization. At this point, the territory of the future city is believed to have consisted of two allied villages, which eventually merged to form Sparta.

It is believed that during this period Sparta did not display anything similar to military power. Instead, she, like many other Greek city-states of the time, was still in its infancy.

Spartan king Lycurgus


In semi-mythical stories describing the first decades of Sparta's existence, the period after the city's founding is characterized by extreme instability, during which there was no law or order. These records may or may not be entirely accurate, as the Spartans themselves did not maintain their own chronicles, relying instead on a complex oral historical tradition. However, according to them, it was during this period that a man appeared to whom classical Sparta owes its very statehood.

This man's name was Lycurgus.

He was a citizen of Sparta, and probably lived sometime in the late XNUMXth or early XNUMXth century BC. There is much debate as to whether Lycurgus was a real historical figure or simply a mythological personification of the development of Spartan society in its final form.

Many scholars, however, tentatively admit that Lycurgus was most likely a real character in Sparta who began the process of transforming the Dorian city-state into a military society. According to the history of his life, written by Plutarch, Lycurgus was the king of Sparta, who, after the birth of his nephew, who had more faithful rights to the throne due to inheritance by genealogy, departed for a trip to the Mediterranean Sea. Lycurgus, according to Plutarch, traveled to Crete, Asia, Egypt and Spain, all over the place learning important lessons about the structuring and management of various societies.

Ancient Sparta. Sparta primordial

The beginning of the Lycurgus reforms


Upon his return to Sparta, Lycurgus used his accumulated experience, transferring what he found interesting in the distant civilizations of the world that surrounded Greece, into the format of a Spartan state.

The greatest of his reforms, again in line with Plutarch's later interpretation of earlier historical evidence, was the creation of the Spartan Legislature, a body that balanced its power with the power of two kings who could rule in Sparta at any moment.

This legislature, with 28 elders elected for life in its upper house and made up of all Spartans eligible to vote in the lower house, provided protection from absolute monarchy and the rights of the free citizens of Sparta.

True, it should not be argued that the Lycurgus reforms concerned only the formation of bodies that would balance the power of the kings. After all, almost the entire character of classical Sparta is attributed to the reforms of the state that he carried out.

Lycurgus' radical reforms


Lycurgus' next step was reforms that would forever separate Spartan society from other Greek city-states.

Seeing a high degree of inequality in wealth between the various inhabitants of Sparta, Lycurgus is said to have founded what may have been the first historical socialist state.

According to Plutarch's account, Lycurgus

I got them to give up their property and agree to a new division of land, and that they all live together on an equal basis ...

By doing this, Lycurgus is said to have redistributed the lands previously owned by the various Spartans into equal plots. These land plots eventually became those plots that were provided to every citizen of Sparta as his personal farm. From this moment onwards, the acquisition of more land than provided by the state will be impossible.

Lycurgus continued to disrupt the more traditional social system of ancient Sparta by requiring all men to eat in public rather than dine at home. Therefore, people who were once rich were forced to eat at the same tables with poor and the same food and drink that all Spartans ate and drank.

It is clear that in the history of Lycurgus we see the formation of a later Spartan hatred for everything that made citizens materially unequal. This was one of the greatest restrictions on personal freedom in ancient Sparta, although it would also serve her in her later military ambitions.

From here, Lycurgus went further, banning Sparta's traditional monetary system, which was reportedly based on gold and silver typical of modern economies. Instead, he allowed only lumps of iron to continue to exist. Iron, which in the popular mind cost much less than gold or silver and due to its prevalence was of lesser value, did not accumulate in large quantities among the Spartans.

Between this and the even distribution of land throughout society, Lycurgus achieved an almost complete redistribution of wealth within Sparta, almost certainly against the will of those from whom it was originally taken away.

Subsequent generations viewed this system as the norm, although it was almost certainly imposed by threats of the use of force in the early days of its existence, as it severely violated the pre-existing freedoms of the citizens of Sparta.

Having banned almost all forms of material wealth, Lycurgus also expelled from the Spartan state all sellers of goods and services that are not essential. Those who worked in precious metals, created most of the artwork, or sold services that benefited individuals rather than the state, quickly died out within the new structure of Spartan society.

Because of the already difficult question of whether all of these reforms were really the work of one person, and the lack of modern historical records of these events, it is impossible to tell if this was actually a formal decree or just an economic side effect.

However, there is a definite but.

Modern archaeologists very much question the moment with the "destruction" of people involved in the creation of works of art, since they found works of art on the territory of Sparta, in particular, bronze items. Many, however, have suggested that the responsibility for these works was not borne by the Spartans, but by the earlier people who inhabited these places, which were conquered by the Dorians. They are best known to historians as perieki.

Finally, Lycurgus is said to have introduced a measure that, politically, may have been a masterful move that allowed the powerful state of Sparta to function as it did in the classical period. This was the method by which the laws he established against luxury and wealth would be passed on to younger generations. Lycurgus forbade the writing of these laws ever, so that their teaching and study would remain a purely oral tradition.

Since it was never possible to find a simple reference to written laws, every Spartan citizen had to know these laws by heart, had to know every letter of the law in order to live and work in their own society.

Thus, Lycurgus made sure that the careful, necessary memorization of the laws would help to further familiarize the youth of Sparta with their practice at the time when they became full members of Spartan society.

How true this alleged Lycurgus story is likely will never be known, as the lack of direct source material from the Spartans themselves makes it nearly impossible to establish its veracity with any high degree of reliability.

Whether the history of Lycurgus reflects the real historical facts of the existence of this king or is it just a myth, some combination of both, this, however, does not affect the attitude with which the Spartans treated Lycurgus and his reforms.

This legislator was considered the founder of the Spartan way of life, which became very different from the rules and regulations in other Greek city-states, and allowed the Spartans to enjoy the successes they would see later in their history.

Сonclusion


Based on the laws of Lycurgus and the already powerful military traditions of the Dorian tribes, the society of Sparta was formed. From that moment on in the development of the city-state from now on, its main goal was to expand its territory to the surrounding plains.

As the Spartans intensified their territorial claims, they undoubtedly became more and more proficient in the art of war, gradually evolving into a war-based society as they were in the classical period.

This all roughly coincides with the end of the Greek "Dark Ages" and the beginning of the so-called Greek "Archaic period". It is believed that during this period the population grew at a significantly higher rate, which marked the beginning of the further development of the Greek city-states.
Author:
Photos used:
https://epochalnisvet.cz/ https://1.bp.blogspot.com/ https://cdn.vashurok.ru/
194 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Kote Pan Kokhanka 9 September 2021 05: 06
    +14
    The most important thing that Lycurgus did for Sparta was the draconian system of raising adolescents. I am afraid to go through such a "school" without psychological trauma, which is not possible in principle.
    For example, one of the postulates of growing up was - if you want to eat "steal", if you want to "live" - ​​kill!
    1. SERGE ANT
      SERGE ANT 9 September 2021 05: 28
      +10
      do you want to eat "steal"
      Young Spartans were deliberately given too little food to teach them to fight hardships on their own and make them dexterous and cunning people. They had to not only secretly steal food, but sometimes even attack the guards and take what was needed by force. Anyone caught without mercy was beaten with a whip like a bad, awkward thief, and forced to starve.
      Fearing punishment, the boys tried to hide their crimes at all costs. So, one of them, they say, stole a fox and hid it under his cloak. The beast ripped open his stomach with claws and teeth, but, not wanting to betray himself, the boy braced himself and did not scream until, bleeding, he fell dead. This may well be believed, knowing that many of the boys died during the scourging on the altar of Artemis. In Sparta, for a number of centuries, the custom was preserved when transferring boys to the Irens, subjecting them to public scourging. On the altar of the goddess Artemis, the youths had to prove their courage and disregard for pain. Not wanting to reveal their weakness, some died under the scourges, but did not utter a single cry.
      1. Flooding
        Flooding 9 September 2021 06: 10
        +8
        However, this so-called invasion was more likely the spread of a number of cultural ideas and the migration of peoples from Greece itself, rather than the result of an actual invasion of external forces.

        After the collapse of the Bronze Age and possible invasions by the Dorians and the peoples of the sea that may have caused or accompanied it, Greece as a whole entered a period known as the Greek "Dark Ages"

        it is strange that the author does not see a logical inconsistency in his reasoning
        it was the invasion that could lead to such serious consequences as the decline of culture
        although I am not a historian, other options do not come to my mind
        what kind of "spreading of a number of cultural ideas" can lead to such serious consequences?
        1. zenion
          zenion 2 December 2021 21: 46
          0
          Did the invasion make Russia this way? They say that earlier there was a more developed culture, higher than the Spartan one. But then they wanted to own not iron, but gold, and therefore they robbed the people.
      2. Avior
        Avior 9 September 2021 06: 45
        +11
        In Sparta, for a number of centuries, the custom was preserved when transferring boys to the Irens, subjecting them to public scourging.

        This is where the tradition of the belt from the scoops came from in the Soviet army, so that the rides from the belt plate on the seat are imprinted smile
        1. Region-25.rus
          Region-25.rus 9 September 2021 18: 04
          +2
          in the Soviet army, the tradition of translating with a belt from scoops
          and in the Navy, this action is carried out with the help of a "jar" - stools if on land))) First six, and then respectively 12 times got laughing
        2. bistrov.
          bistrov. 7 December 2021 14: 31
          0
          Quote: Avior
          This is where the tradition of translating from ladles with a belt came from in the Soviet army.

          I don’t know, for many years of service in the SA I haven’t come across such a thing. Probably, this is where there was no control from the commanders of all levels and the complete absence of duty services ... maybe I was lucky, did not serve in such a mess ...
          Maybe the personnel did not wash in the bath? The foreman should have found bruises, if the morning examination was not regularly carried out ..., then, once a week, the personnel must examine the battalion medical instructor, he, too, probably "lay" in his post .. and the command did not control him .. ..
          1. Avior
            Avior 7 December 2021 14: 37
            +1
            for many years of service in the SA, I have not encountered this

            apparently, they have not collided for many years.
            Collide when in two years :)).
      3. Flooding
        Flooding 9 September 2021 06: 52
        +7
        Quote: SERGE ant
        Young Spartans were deliberately given too little food to teach them to fight hardships on their own.

        "The best of the cartilaginous fish are in Miletus.
        But why talk about a shark
        and flat-backed slope?
        But a lizard baked in an oven
        an Ionian delicacy for all children,
        I would treat myself with pleasure "
        (Archestrat)

        Children, you see, not only in Sparta did not fatten
        1. Proxima
          Proxima 9 September 2021 07: 54
          +10
          Quote: Flood

          Children, you see, not only in Sparta did not fatten

          There are legends about the asceticism of Spartans in food ...The food at the meal was plentiful, healthy, nourishing and rough: wheat, barley, olive oil, meat, fish, wine diluted 2/3. And, of course, the famous "black soup". It consisted of water, vinegar, olive oil (not always), pork legs, pork blood, lentils, salt - according to numerous testimonies of contemporaries, foreigners could not even eat a spoon. Plutarch claims that one of the Persian kings, having tasted this stew, said:

          "Now I understand why the Spartans are so bravely going to die - they are nicer to death than such food."
          lol
          And the Spartan commander Pausanias, having tasted the food prepared by Persian chefs after the victory at Platai, said:

          "See how these people live! And marvel at their stupidity: having all the good things of the world, they came from Asia to take away so pathetic crumbs from us ...".
      4. Hypertension
        Hypertension 9 September 2021 13: 43
        +5
        Quote: SERGE ant
        The young Spartans were deliberately given too little food to teach them to fight hardships on their own and make them dexterous and cunning people. ... Anyone caught without mercy was beaten with a whip like a bad, awkward thief, and forced to starve.

        Just like in the "History processed by Satyricon":
        The upbringing of the children was very harsh. Most often they were killed immediately. This made them courageous and resilient.

        What's the logic? To make powerful warriors out of children, let us beat them mercilessly, make them steal and starve. As a result, you will get urk-inmates and not exemplary hoplites of Ancient Greece.
        Well, about Lycurgus a little from Satyricon:
        Lycurgus was a royal family and took care of his nephew.
        At the same time, he constantly poked everyone in the eyes with his justice. When the patience of those around him finally ran out, Lycurgus was advised to go on a journey. They thought that the journey would develop Lycurgus and somehow affect his justice.
        But, as they say, together it is sickening, and apart it is boring. No sooner had Lycurgus refreshed himself in the company of the Egyptian priests, than his compatriots demanded his return. Lycurgus returned and approved his laws in Sparta.
        After that, fearing too warm gratitude from the expansive people, he hastened to starve himself to death.
        - Why give others what you can do yourself! Were his last words.
        The Spartans, seeing that bribes were smooth from him, began to pay divine honors to his memory.
        1. Elturisto
          Elturisto 2 November 2021 15: 33
          +2
          The correct formulation of the question. I think that such hardened traders as the Athenians slandered the Spartiats. The Spartans enjoyed fame for a very long time as demanding and professional commanders, it is enough to recall Xantippus, Leonidas, Pausanias, Brasides, Archidamus.
          1. zenion
            zenion 2 December 2021 21: 49
            0
            They named everyone, but they forgot Zhukov.
      5. cat Rusich
        cat Rusich 9 September 2021 21: 22
        +1
        Quote: SERGE ANT
        do you want to eat "steal"

        Fearing punishment, the boys tried to hide their crimes at all costs. So, one of them, they say, stole a fox and hid it under his cloak. The beast ripped open his stomach with claws and teeth, but, not wanting to betray himself, the boy braced himself and did not scream until, bleeding, he fell dead. It is quite possible to believe it
        I heard such a story in a history lesson from a teacher, but there was an animal ferret.
        If the boy from the story was hungry, then he could strangle or break the neck of the animal and hide it in his bosom carcass ...

        Quote: SERGE ANT
        Young Spartans were deliberately given too little food to teach them to fight hardships on their own and make them dexterous and cunning people. They had to not only secretly steal food, but sometimes even attack the guards and take what was needed by force. Anyone caught without mercy was beaten with a whip like a bad, awkward thief, and forced to starve.
        Such upbringing is reminiscent of the banned criminal "three-letter" organization for children and adolescents.
        Interestingly, there was a commandment in the beliefs of the inhabitants of Sparta "Do not steal" ??
    2. Proxima
      Proxima 9 September 2021 05: 30
      +6
      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      , one of the postulates of growing up was - if you want to eat "steal", if you want to "live" - ​​kill!

      Many legends and stupid fables have been inspired about Sparta. The above proverb confirms this. For example, it was believed that mental work in Sparta was not held in high esteem, but nevertheless there were poets and writers in this state. Among the most famous of them are Alkman and Terpandr. Nevertheless "stupid" Spartans invented a phalanx, which has terrified for centuries throughout the known world up to the emergence of the Roman state. But what really deserves respect, and this is not a myth, is the total asceticism of the Spartans, which affected all strata of society up to the king. good
      1. Coteyka
        Coteyka 9 September 2021 05: 49
        +5
        The Spartans stopped "terrorizing" after the Battle of Mantinea. Rome is still far away there.
        1. Proxima
          Proxima 9 September 2021 06: 55
          +6
          Quote: Cat
          The Spartans stopped "terrorizing" after the Battle of Mantinea. Rome is still far away there.

          How about the logical comprehension of what you read? What does the Spartans have to do with it? We are talking about the "phalanx" battle formation invented by the Spartans, which was effective for centuries until it (the phalanx) was powerless against the battle formation of the Roman legion in the battle of Kinoskephaly. Naturally, this is all conditional, much also depends on the commander and on other factors, but nevertheless, after the Kinoskephals, the phalanx began to decline.
          1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Kote Pan Kokhanka 9 September 2021 06: 59
            +7
            Quote: Proxima
            We are talking about the "phalanx" battle formation invented by the Spartans,

            Very controversial statement!
            1. Flooding
              Flooding 9 September 2021 07: 04
              +2
              Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
              Very controversial statement!

              are there any older references to the use of this construction?
              I ask out of academic interest, not for the sake of dispute
              1. tlauicol
                tlauicol 9 September 2021 07: 35
                +5
                The Spartans adopted the classical phalanx from the Argos. In general, the Sumerians already used similar constructions
                1. Flooding
                  Flooding 9 September 2021 07: 40
                  +2
                  Thanks, but pay attention to my question

                  Quote: Flood
                  are there any older references to the use of this construction?
                  1. 3x3zsave
                    3x3zsave 9 September 2021 08: 17
                    +3
                    Vicki writes that in the Iliad, but I read it for a long time and am not sure that Gnedich has this name.
                    1. Flooding
                      Flooding 9 September 2021 08: 39
                      +4
                      Quote: 3x3zsave
                      Vicki writes that in the Iliad, but I read it for a long time and I'm not sure that Gnedich has this name

                      let's think about what Homer, who lived in the 8th century BC, could write about in his Iliad about the events of the 12th century BC. (Trojan War)

                      do you think the "phalanx" is here as a type of combat formation or as a generalizing "formation (of soldiers)"?
                      1. 3x3zsave
                        3x3zsave 9 September 2021 08: 49
                        +5
                        Alternatively, because it is not known when and by whom the first list of the Iliad was compiled, a substitution of concepts could have occurred.
                      2. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 08: 53
                        +3
                        Quote: 3x3zsave
                        Alternatively, because it is not known when and by whom the first list of the Iliad was compiled, a substitution of concepts could have occurred.

                        this all the more speaks in favor of my words
                      3. 3x3zsave
                        3x3zsave 9 September 2021 08: 56
                        +3
                        I didn't really mind. You asked a question, I was curious and answered as best I could.
                  2. tlauicol
                    tlauicol 9 September 2021 08: 27
                    +3
                    Quote: Flood
                    Thanks, but pay attention to my question

                    Quote: Flood
                    are there any older references to the use of this construction?

                    so where is the starting point? older than what: subway, dinosaurs, pyramids?
                    Argos repeatedly defeated Sparta from the 7th century BC, until they took over the battle order
                    1. Flooding
                      Flooding 9 September 2021 08: 46
                      +1
                      Quote: Tlauicol
                      older than what: underground, dinosaurs, pyramids?

                      in the context of correspondence, one must understand that we are talking about the Spartan phalanxes and, therefore, references to them in ancient historical sources.
                      For example, Herodotus in "History".
                      Ergo, you are expected to confirm in the form of references in ancient written sources.
                      Is the starting point more or less clear to you now?
                      Good luck.
                      1. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 9 September 2021 09: 28
                        +1
                        This is where to watch? Between the anchor invented by the Scythians and the hanging gardens of Babylon, which she did not build or before? What century does Herodotus indicate?
                      2. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 09: 51
                        +1
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        This is where to watch? Between the anchor invented by the Scythians and the hanging gardens of Babylon, which she did not build or before?

                        how do I know what you read and where do you find what you read?
                        you yourself and answer your witty question
                      3. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 10: 01
                        +1
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        What century does Herodotus indicate?

                        he could not have indicated the century in our understanding
                        he has events indicated.
                        Greco-Persian Wars
                        5th century BC according to modern chronology
                      4. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 9 September 2021 11: 39
                        +3
                        Homer indicates how many centuries before the GP wars did the Spartans invented the phalanx? Or under what archon, king, Olympiad? No. Therefore, modern research remains. Otherwise: the anchor was invented by the Scythians, the Olympiad by Hercules, Thebes was founded by the serpent-man
                      5. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 11: 45
                        +2
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        Homer indicates how many centuries

                        1. Herodotus
                        2. speech about the fact confirming the existence of phalanges in the described time. this fact is a written source.
                        without any claims to even greater antiquity. 5th century BC
                        3. it is your turn to do the same to confirm your layers. without invoking the Scythians and Hercules.
                      6. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 9 September 2021 11: 59
                        +2
                        Yes, Herodotus. To clarify: since there is no written source before Herodotus, then you think that the phalanx was invented by Sparta in the 5th century. BC.? No, you are definitely a Hercules with an anchor. What are you arguing about at all to argue?
                      7. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 12: 01
                        +3
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        I clarify: since there is no written source before Herodotus, then you think that the phalanx was invented by Sparta in the 5th century. BC.?

                        Of course not.
                        I didn't claim it
                        Quote: Flood
                        are there any older references to the use of this construction?
                        I ask out of academic interest, not for the sake of dispute

                        You just can't prove otherwise.
                        It is because you have no facts.
                      8. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 9 September 2021 13: 16
                        +2
                        WHAT do I have to prove? Did I speak somewhere about ancient written sources? No.
                        This is a conversation about a kettle in space
                      9. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 13: 20
                        +2
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        WHAT do I have to prove? Did I speak somewhere about ancient written sources? No.
                        This is a conversation about a kettle in space

                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        The Spartans adopted the classical phalanx from the Argos. In general, the Sumerians already used similar constructions

                        but you do not give evidence of this
                        write instead about anchors and teapots
                      10. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 9 September 2021 13: 34
                        +2
                        So this is probably because I made it all up, right? Like herodotus
                      11. Liam
                        Liam 9 September 2021 14: 03
                        +5
                        Quote: Flood
                        but you do not give evidence of this

                        First image of a Sumerian phalanx. 2460 BC found during excavations at Tello, Iraq. Stored in the Louvre
                      12. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 14: 13
                        +1
                        Quote: Liam

                        The first image of the phalanx among the Sumerians

                        and the second and third are there?
                      13. Liam
                        Liam 9 September 2021 19: 45
                        +1
                        Ask the Egyptians, they will help you
                      14. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 20: 18
                        0
                        Quote: Liam
                        Ask the Egyptians, they will help you

                        whether it's a joke or not, I would like to understand what the Egyptians have to do with it.

                        you are the third person under this article to link to this "first image".
                        it looks like it is the first, the last and the only one.
                        is this all your arguments in favor of the Sumerian phalanx? do not have others?
                      15. Liam
                        Liam 9 September 2021 21: 03
                        +2
                        Quote: Flood
                        what does the Egyptians have to do with it.

                        Moreover, the Egyptian infantry of the time of the pharaohs also fought in the formation of the phalanx.
                        Quote: Flood
                        it is the first, last and only

                        It proves without a shadow of doubt that the phalanx existed thousands of years before Sparta and there is nothing to argue about here. For reasonable people, it is natural.
                      16. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 21: 11
                        0
                        Quote: Liam
                        It proves without a shadow of doubt that the phalanx existed thousands of years before Sparta and there is nothing to argue here

                        don't argue. pass by
                        Quote: Liam
                        For reasonable people it is natural.

                        to which you, of course, refer to

                        Well, if so, go up by correspondence and do not be too lazy to read what was the subject of the dispute
                        by no means my claims that the phalanx was invented in ancient Greece
                        the only problem is the inability of opponents to prove their case with historical sources
                      17. Pane Kohanku
                        Pane Kohanku 9 September 2021 15: 44
                        +6
                        The first image of a phalanx by the Sumerians. 2460 BC.

                        Shpakovsky, I remember, also quoted this image in one of his articles about three years ago. Fair enough, Victor! hi
                      18. Shahno
                        Shahno 9 September 2021 15: 53
                        +2
                        By the way, when was the first image of chariots?
                      19. Liam
                        Liam 9 September 2021 19: 56
                        +4
                        Hi Nikolay!
                        The phalanx and its varieties are the main battle formation since the appearance of more or less organized armies. From the Sumerians and Egyptians, the skulls of the Greeks, Macedonians, Diadoks, Parthians, Carthage, Etruscans, Romans up to the Renaissance (Scottish schiltron and generally pikemen against cavalry) and mass use Frederick the Great's famous oblique attack is nothing more than the tactic of the Epaminonda phalanx, which the latter put an end to the Spartans as the military superpower of the Peloponnese.There is nothing new under the sun
                      20. 3x3zsave
                        3x3zsave 9 September 2021 20: 13
                        +4
                        hi
                        Epaminondas was not new. He just honed the tactics used during the Marathon.
                      21. Liam
                        Liam 9 September 2021 21: 04
                        +3
                        In principle, no one has ever invented anything revolutionary in military affairs, it has always been a reworking of old techniques for new realities)
                      22. lucul
                        lucul 9 September 2021 16: 40
                        +3
                        First image of a Sumerian phalanx. 2460 BC found during excavations at Tello, Iraq. Stored in the Louvre

                        Picture by picture and only. If then the Sumerians knew how to use the phalanx, then they would have achieved some kind of military success.
                        Namely, the military successes of the phalanx as such are associated with the Greeks. No one before them could successfully use the phalanx.
                        So the phalanx, as such, as we know from history, is Greek.
                      23. Liam
                        Liam 9 September 2021 21: 10
                        +1
                        Quote: lucul
                        If then the Sumerians knew how to use the phalanx, then they would have achieved some military success.

                        I am aware that you are constantly Woolley as one of the most irrepressible trololo on this site in the topic of hohlosracha. I am also aware that you are a very illiterate Persian and have no idea about the Sumerians. So go in peace to the branches that are more familiar to you
                      24. lucul
                        lucul 10 September 2021 10: 59
                        -3
                        I am also aware that you are a very illiterate Persian and have no idea about the Sumerians

                        Aha-ahah well, tell us about the invincible Sumerian phalanxes))))
                        The image of a spearman does not mean that he is phalangitis))))
                2. sergo1914
                  sergo1914 9 September 2021 07: 45
                  -1
                  Quote: Tlauicol
                  In general, the Sumerians already used similar constructions


                  Was it before they invented lard and the massive excavation of the seas, or after?
                  1. tlauicol
                    tlauicol 9 September 2021 08: 34
                    +3

                    after .. when they made such Easter cakes from the excavated soil. 4 thousand. BC
                    1. Undecim
                      Undecim 9 September 2021 10: 23
                      +8
                      4 thousand. BC

                      Trim the sturgeon. You have added 1600 years.
                      1. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 9 September 2021 11: 41
                        +2
                        Quote: Undecim
                        4 thousand. BC

                        Trim the sturgeon. You have added 1600 years.

                        Years ago, of course hi
                      2. Pane Kohanku
                        Pane Kohanku 9 September 2021 15: 45
                        +4
                        Trim the sturgeon. You have added 1600 years.

                        How can you, Viktor Nikolaevich! laughing Demand the impossible! request Joke. Friendly. In relation to all participants. Sincerely, hi drinks
                      3. Kote Pan Kokhanka
                        Kote Pan Kokhanka 9 September 2021 19: 24
                        +4
                        Quote: Pan Kohanku
                        Trim the sturgeon. You have added 1600 years.

                        How can you, Viktor Nikolaevich! laughing Demand the impossible! request Joke. Friendly. In relation to all participants. Sincerely, hi drinks

                        laughing
                        I suggest that VikNik be punished with a sprat for "insulting society"! More precisely, to take from him the obligation of the hecatomb in the form of laying the tail of the fish on the home cat !!! wink
                        I really liked it about the sturgeon, I will have to use it !!!
                3. Engineer
                  Engineer 9 September 2021 11: 18
                  +7
                  The Spartans adopted the classical phalanx from the Argos.

                  Is there a source?
                  Connolly associated with the development of the phalanx the spread of the image of the so-called. Argive shield on vases somewhere in the 7th century, but none of the policies is called the ancestor of the phalanx.
                  1. mihaylov
                    mihaylov 9 September 2021 11: 39
                    +9
                    Quote: Engineer
                    Is there a source?

                    There is a version about the origin of the classical phalanx in Argos.
                    I don't remember all the details now, but one of the main arguments is the armor, conventionally identified as the "first hoplite" armor at the turn of the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries BC. and found precisely in Argos.
                    By the way, now it is kept in the museum of Argos:
                    1. Engineer
                      Engineer 9 September 2021 11: 44
                      +7
                      This is a famous moment. There is armor, a helmet, a shield, but on vases of the 7th century, warriors hold two short spears for throwing, which contradicts the classic phalanx.
                      Hoplites? Yes
                      Phalangites? But here it is more difficult

                      It looks like a phalanx. Second half of the 7th century BC But as already said, there are hoplites with two javelins in the same period.
                      1. mihaylov
                        mihaylov 9 September 2021 12: 12
                        +6
                        Quote: Engineer
                        but on vases of the 7th century, warriors hold two short spears for throwing

                        Greetings from the aristocratic period.
                        Hoplites? Yes
                        Phalangites? But here it is more difficult

                        What is the difference between hoplite and phalangite? hi
                      2. Engineer
                        Engineer 9 September 2021 12: 35
                        +9
                        A hoplite is just a warrior with a hoplon.
                        Phalanx is the one who fights in the formation of the phalanx.
                        Hoplite may or may not be phalangite. And vice versa. The sets partially overlap.
                        The evolution of the phalanx is now being reconstructed as if more and more hoplites are being drawn into the planned hand-to-hand combat. The best wars came up with the idea to form the first line. To support them, the 2nd and subsequent ranks are gradually being introduced. These people are armed in the manner of the hoplites. We get the classic phalanx of hoplites. The lightly armed are forced out to the flanks and into the skirmishers.
                        But in the initial and transitional period, it could be that the warriors (some part of ??) in the hoplite panoplia fought outside the formation of the nascent phalanx with throwing spears and swords in the manner of warriors of the heroic period. This is evidenced by the images on the vases synchronous with the above.
                      3. mihaylov
                        mihaylov 9 September 2021 14: 50
                        +7
                        Quote: Engineer
                        The evolution of the phalanx is now being reconstructed as if more and more hoplites are being drawn into the planned hand-to-hand combat. The best wars came up with the idea to form the first line. To support them, the 2nd and subsequent ranks are gradually being introduced. These people are armed in the manner of the hoplites. We get the classic phalanx of hoplites. The lightly armed are forced out to the flanks and into the skirmishers.

                        I understand that these are hypothetically reconstructed conclusions?
                        What do the sources tell us?
                        There are poems of Tirtaeus from the time of the 2nd Messenian, from which it is concluded that the phalanx (but which one?) Was already the main method of construction among the Spartans, there is a famous vase of the 7th century that you brought, there is armor from Argos,
                        what else?
                        Phalanx, it seems to me, is primarily a socio-economic and political phenomenon, and then a military one, although I cannot pretend to say how it was intertwined. hi
                      4. Engineer
                        Engineer 9 September 2021 15: 42
                        +3
                        I understand that these are hypothetically reconstructed conclusions?

                        Not really. they find their confirmation
                        Here is from the analysis of historiography by Nefedkin

                        Aristotle says bluntly, first the hoplites, then the battle formations. Initially, the hoplites fought out of line
                        Nefedkin partly argues with this, but not very well as for me
                        Article- "The main stages of the formation of the phalanx of hoplites"
                        have armor from Argos

                        Again. This is a hoplite (although the shield is not included, but so be it). But not the fact that phalangitis
                        There are poems by Tierteus from the time of the 2nd Messenian, from which it is concluded that the phalanx (but which one?) Was already the main method of construction among the Spartans, there is a famous vase of the 7th century,

                        We need parsing with context. For the Greeks, quite often the phalanx is a synonym for a combat formation in general.
                      5. mihaylov
                        mihaylov 9 September 2021 15: 57
                        +3
                        Quote: Engineer
                        We need parsing with context. For the Greeks, quite often the phalanx is a synonym for a combat formation in general.

                        Let's try together, for example, this one (I can't vouch for the accuracy of the translation):
                        Stand under the arch of shields, covering the ranks with them,
                        Everyone is in the fighting ranks: Pamphyla, Giley, Dimany,
                        Spears, a threat to husbands, gripping tightly in their hands.
                        And bravely relying on the immortal gods in everything,
                        We will obey the leaders without delay.
                        Immediately we will all strike together ……………….
                        Near the spearmen, setting up their formation close.
                        Soon a roar will rise from both sides:
                        It is on round shields, round shields will burst.
                        Warriors throw spears, fighting each other with iron,
                        In the shells that husbands cherish the heart in their chest.
                        The enemy is already hesitating, retreating with his armor pierced,
                        Hail of stone is pouring down, helmets striving to strike,
                        Copper ringing is heard ...

                        In my opinion, with the pattern on the vase, everything is well corrected:
                        we see on both sides a line of warriors in armor, helmets and with round shields, while spears rush about
                        Warriors will throw spears
                        ,
                        there is a "line collision"
                        These are round shields, round shields
                        ,
                        there is a centralized management
                        We will obey the leaders without delay
                        .
                        Aristotle says bluntly, first the hoplites, then the battle formations. Initially, the hoplites fought out of line
                        And I don't really argue with that, I'm just trying to understand for myself. hi
                      6. Engineer
                        Engineer 9 September 2021 16: 38
                        +4
                        Great, thank you.

                        Warriors will throw spears
                        ,
                        there is a "line collision"

                        Throw... Not a collision, but a convergence. This is not yet the mix-othismos already mentioned in the comments.
                        Fighting with what? spears? We threw them. The second spears? Perhaps, but speculation because this is not in the text. With swords? Perhaps, but speculation even then is not a classic phalanx.
                        Summary.
                        We have closed rows-lines. No questions asked But there is no indication of the second and subsequent ranks. There is no direct mention of hand-to-hand combat. We throw spears plus stones fly. Mostly (almost completely ???) ranged combat ?? The phalanx poking with spears in the carpenter does not appear in any way in my opinion
                        Shl, but the rudiments of the phalanx - the closure in the line is already visible
                        ZZY in a good way, of course, you need to look at what is "thrown" in the original. And is it possible to translate how they poke, beat. Then we get a battle of lines of spearmen, but without specifying the depth. It will already be much closer to the phalanx
                      7. mihaylov
                        mihaylov 9 September 2021 16: 58
                        +2
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Fighting with what? spears? We threw them. The second spears? Perhaps, but speculation because this is not in the text. With swords? Perhaps, but speculation even then is not a classic phalanx.

                        They fight with spears and swords.
                        From another passage:
                        Let him go into hand-to-hand combat and with a long lance
                        Or he will strike the enemy to death with a heavy sword!

                        We have closed rows-lines. No questions asked But there is no indication of the second and subsequent ranks

                        There is in another passage:
                        Those warriors who dare, closing tightly in rows,
                        Engage in hand-to-hand combat between the front fighters,
                        Fewer die, but those standing behind are saved

                        And here's another interesting point:
                        Let, stepping wide and resting your feet on the ground,
                        Everyone stands still, biting their lips tightly,
                        Hips and shins from below and your chest with your shoulders
                        A convex circle of a shield, strong copper, covering;
                        With his right hand, let him shake the mighty lance,
                        The formidable sheloma sultan shaking over his head

                        And here's another note:
                        Putting your foot to your foot and your shield resting on a shield,
                        The formidable sultan - about the sultan, the helmet - about the comrade's helmet,
                        Tightly closing chest with chest, let each fight with enemies,
                        Grasping the spear or sword hilt with your hand!

                        Taking into account, of course, that this is poetry, what conclusions can we draw:
                        - dense tunings are mentioned several times
                        - apparently, construction in several ranks is already underway, since those standing behind are mentioned
                        - while throwing spears (which is confirmed by the image on the vase)
                        - then they fight with spears (apparently, the second) and swords
                        - the importance of maintaining a single system is noted
                        - apparently lightly armed, throwing light spears and stones are mentioned
                        How do we rate this?
                      8. Engineer
                        Engineer 9 September 2021 17: 02
                        +4
                        Let's evaluate it as a weighty argument in favor of the phalanx.
                        It remains only to figure out the dating of the poem itself. 7th century?
                        I mean, there is no reason to consider this a later tradition?
                      9. mihaylov
                        mihaylov 9 September 2021 17: 05
                        +5
                        Quote: Engineer
                        It remains only to figure out the dating of the poem itself. 7th century?

                        The conditional date of the creation of the poems of Tirtheus is considered the middle of the 7th century, they are talking about the Second Messenian War (685-668).
                        I can't say anything about the reliability of these dates, we will trust the professionals in this field. hi
                      10. Engineer
                        Engineer 9 September 2021 17: 07
                        +3
                        If tradition does not lie, and this is not a later work, then rather yes than no.
                      11. mihaylov
                        mihaylov 9 September 2021 17: 18
                        +3
                        Quote: Engineer
                        in a good way, of course, you need to look at what is "thrown" in the original. And is it possible to translate how they poke, beat.

                        I also thought about it that it would be nice to see how all this is in the original, what options are possible, but I don't know Greek. hi
                      12. Engineer
                        Engineer 9 September 2021 18: 40
                        +1
                        The main thing is to find what is in the original. Then you can look in the dictionary or ask the same Nefedkin. He speaks Greek and seems to be on academia.edu
                      13. mihaylov
                        mihaylov 10 September 2021 10: 47
                        +2
                        Quote: Engineer
                        The main thing is to find what is in the original. Then you can look in the dictionary or ask the same Nefedkin. He speaks Greek and seems to be on academia.edu

                        So far I have only found this excerpt:
                        ἔρδων δ 'ὄβριμα ἔργα διδασκέσθω πολεμίζειν, μηδ' ἐκτὸς βελέων ἑστάτω ἀσπίδ 'ἔχων, ἀλλά τις ἐγγὺς ἰὼν αὐτοσχεδὸν ἔγχει μακρῷ ἢ ξίφει οὐτάζων δήιον ἄνδρ' ἑλέτω, καὶ πόδα πὰρ ποδὶ θεὶς καὶ ἐπ 'ἀσπίδος ἀσπίδ' ἐρείσας, ἐν δὲ λόφον τε λόφῳ καὶ κυνέην κυνέῃ καὶ στέρνον στέρνῳ πεπλημένος ἀνδρὶ μαχέσθω, ἢ ξίφεος κώπην ἢ δόρυ μακρὸν ἑλών.

                        If you understand correctly - refer to this passage:
                        Let, among the exploits of the warriors, he learns a powerful cause
                        And the odal of flying arrows does not stand with a shield;
                        Let him go into hand-to-hand combat and with a long lance
                        Or he will strike the enemy to death with a heavy sword!
                        Putting your foot to your foot and your shield resting on a shield,
                        The formidable sultan - about the sultan, the helmet - about the comrade's helmet,
                        Tightly closing chest with chest, let each fight with enemies,
                        Grasping the spear or sword hilt with your hand!

                        I will look for more hi
                      14. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 9 September 2021 16: 33
                        +2
                        Quote: Engineer
                        There is armor, a helmet, a shield, but on vases of the 7th century, warriors hold two short spears for throwing, which contradicts the classical

                        do you mean to say that you threw 2 darts and that's it: sit down, hoplite, light a cigarette? The second spear is clearly not for throwing.
                      15. Engineer
                        Engineer 9 September 2021 18: 19
                        +3
                        I want to say that several options are possible, for example, further sword fighting. And this makes the sword, not the spear, the main weapon for melee, which contradicts the concept of the classical phalanx. That's all.
                        I cited an excerpt from Nefedkin's article, there is no clarity. On a vase from Chigi, spears of different lengths. It would seem shorter for throwing, longer for fighting, but there are loops on both spears, and this is an unequivocal indication that they were thrown.
                        I believe that the existence of a phalanx in the 7th century and earlier is quite possible, but I am inclined that there was a transitional period when hoplites fought in loose or combined formation and it is not worth every hoplite to be automatically assigned to a phalanx fighter. Here's the main point.
                      16. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 9 September 2021 18: 39
                        +1
                        in the picture you see two spears and not a single sword, ax, club, etc. But boldly assert that both javelins are for throwing.
                        The hoplon was invented for this purpose, to cover the neighbor, so the formation of the phalanx appears. one warrior does not need such a shield
                      17. Engineer
                        Engineer 9 September 2021 20: 17
                        +2
                        I do not boldly assert. Almost all with caveats.)
                        Another would be to understand what kind of drawing we are talking about. Chigi vase? I don't really see the noose on the big spear, but I believed Nefedkin, which I wrote about. The hoplite itself is damaged next to the spears. That there he still had who knows.
                        Watch with me

                        There are analogies in military affairs. There is a loop - it means most likely for throwing.
                        The hoplon was invented for this purpose, to cover the neighbor, so the formation of the phalanx appears. one warrior does not need such a shield

                        Connolly's hoplon works well for the phalanx. But Connolly points out that it came from Central Europe and spread to Greece since the 11th century. I'm not at all sure that in those distant times and in that region there was a phalanx.
                      18. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 10 September 2021 04: 55
                        +1
                        and Connolly does not write why you need a shield that can cover another? it is clear that for battle in formation, in rows
                      19. Engineer
                        Engineer 10 September 2021 11: 08
                        0
                        That's all clear to you. And Connolly notes that the hoplon appeared several centuries earlier than the 8th-7th centuries BC. - the estimated time when the Greek phalanx was born. Yes, the hoplon spreads on vases in sync with the development of the phalanx (as expected), but first hoplons are 300 years older anyway.
                        It turns out that the hoplon is much older than the actual Greek phalanx. Again we come to the dilemma of which is older than the hoplite or phalanx. So far, it still turns out hoplite, although there are different opinions.
                        Substantiate the presence of a phalanx among the Greeks in the 11th century BC. (the appearance of the hoplon in Greece) is practically unrealistic.
              2. Undecim
                Undecim 9 September 2021 10: 20
                +5
                are there any older references to the use of this construction?


                2400 BC Stele Korshunov. Created by the ruler of the state Lagash Eannatum to commemorate the victory over King Zuzu.
                1. Flooding
                  Flooding 9 September 2021 10: 39
                  +2
                  single image
                  and that is very stylistic
                  how many rows are in the ranks?
                  how many warriors are there in a row?
                  yes, I agree that this is an image of the formation of spearmen
                  the prototype of the ancient Greek phalanx?
                  Yes, probably
                  but don't you think that one image is not enough
                  yes, it gives reason to count
                  but is that enough for assertions?
                  1. Undecim
                    Undecim 9 September 2021 10: 56
                    +5
                    AK Goldsworthy The "Othismos", Myths and Heresies: The Nature of Hoplite Battle

                    You will find the answers there.
                    1. Flooding
                      Flooding 9 September 2021 11: 03
                      +2
                      Quote: Undecim
                      You will find the answers there.

                      Thank you.
                      It would be better if they immediately gave a list of literature on the topic.
                      Why waste time on trifles.
                      "there" on which page to search?
                      1. Undecim
                        Undecim 9 September 2021 11: 50
                        +6
                        "there" on which page to search?

                        Sorry. War In History, 1997, 4 (1), pp. 1-26
                  2. tlauicol
                    tlauicol 9 September 2021 16: 42
                    +1
                    Quote: Flood
                    single image
                    and that is very stylistic
                    how many rows are in the ranks?
                    how many warriors are there in a row?
                    yes, I agree that this is an image of the formation of spearmen
                    the prototype of the ancient Greek phalanx?
                    Yes, probably
                    but don't you think that one image is not enough
                    yes, it gives reason to count
                    but is that enough for assertions?

                    is there an unbreakable standard for the number of phalanx rows? warriors in a row? What are you picking on?
                    Tirtaeus (7th century BC):
                    "Let him go into hand-to-hand combat and with a long lance
                    Or he will strike the enemy to death with a heavy sword!
                    Putting your foot to your foot and your shield resting on a shield,
                    Terrible Sultan - O Sultan, helmet - Comrade helmet,
                    Tightly closing chest with chest, let everyone fight
                    with enemies .. "
                    "Stand under the arch of shields, covering the ranks with them,
                    Everyone is in the fighting ranks. "
                    if the ancient poet does not call the construction a phalanx, is it not a phalanx?
                    1. Flooding
                      Flooding 9 September 2021 16: 57
                      +1
                      Quote: Tlauicol
                      if the ancient poet does not call the construction a phalanx, is it not a phalanx?

                      no, it's not about the name
                      but in the sense inherent in a specific name
                      we argue about the term and its applicability
                      for example, ancient authors sometimes sinned with this and sometimes called the word phalanx familiar to them a large group of soldiers, organized in the form of a line
                      how fair is this?
                      after all, the phalanx that we know about from the history of Ancient Greece is not just a line, and not two lines
                      This is a formation of warriors, echeloned inland and having a wide front
                      it was this construction, coupled with long spears and well-developed skills, that became a distinctive feature and strength of the ancient Greek phalanx
                      not having a wide front, the formation runs the risk of being swept from the flanks. that with the general sluggishness of such an organizational form, death is similar.
                      without depth, the formation runs the risk of being crushed by the mass of the enemy
                      so yes. line width and number of rows are key.
                      1. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 9 September 2021 17: 35
                        +1
                        Quote: Flood
                        line width and number of rows are key.
                        300 Spartans in a cramped aisle this is not a phalanx? Epaminondas in 50-60 rows is not a phalanx? Sfacteria Not a phalanx? There was no standard for every occasion. Several rows of hoplites are already a phalanx - no matter how many of them or enemies, the formation is broken or surrounded
                      2. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 17: 42
                        +1
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        300 Spartans in a cramped aisle is not a phalanx?

                        very strange question
                        the phalanx was invented for open field combat
                        for a narrow front with safe flanks, it is even more suitable, since it allows you to increase the depth
                        and yes, this kind of formation was familiar to the Spartans
                        but just 300 people - no, this is not a phalanx
                        but just a crowd of people
                      3. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 17: 44
                        +1
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        Epaminondas in 50-60 rows is not a phalanx?

                        Epaminondas, as the Internet tells me, is not a phalanx, but a commander from Thebes
                        but he had phalanges on his toes and hands, like all of us
                      4. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 17: 47
                        +1
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        Sfacteria Not a phalanx?

                        do you mean the battle on the island of Sfakteria (Sfaktiria)?
                        both the Athenians and Spartans used phalanx formation in battle.
                        therefore the question is not clear at all
                        did I dispute this? rather the opposite
                      5. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 9 September 2021 18: 36
                        0
                        those. 300 people are not a phalanx. a crowd of people.
                        a 400 phalanx. clear
                      6. Flooding
                        Flooding 9 September 2021 19: 02
                        0
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        a 400 phalanx. clear

                        these are your words
                        and 400 people are not a phalanx
                        unless they are trained and phalanx-built
                        all the best to you
                      7. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 10 September 2021 03: 31
                        0
                        Sfacteria. Is this a phalanx or a cluster of 400 trained and phalanx-built Spartans? And 300?
                      8. Flooding
                        Flooding 10 September 2021 06: 43
                        0
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        phalanx-built
                      9. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 10 September 2021 08: 49
                        0
                        Well, finally, we have identified the signs of a real phalanx: if the warriors are lined up in a phalanx, then this is a phalanx. And if not, then not a phalanx. Get out! And if at the same time they play in Dorian minor, then this is Dorian minor, right?
                      10. Flooding
                        Flooding 10 September 2021 08: 59
                        0
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        Well, finally, we have identified signs of a real phalanx: if the warriors are lined up in a phalanx, then this is a phalanx

                        not "we", but you
                        I'm not chasing other people's laurels
                2. Pane Kohanku
                  Pane Kohanku 9 September 2021 15: 47
                  +3
                  over king Zuzu

                  Viktor Nikolaevich, you know everything - tell me, was the name of the sought-after Zuzu's mother - "Mama Zuzu"? wink drinks
                  1. Undecim
                    Undecim 9 September 2021 16: 44
                    +4
                    I don't know my mother.
                    1. Pane Kohanku
                      Pane Kohanku 9 September 2021 16: 58
                      +4
                      I don't know my mother.

                      So you are not familiar with Zuzu himself, so what? drinks And thanks to you, I am currently listening to two imperishable hits from "Forbidden Drummers" for the tenth time. request First - "Mom Zuzu Granny" ... wink The second, as you understand, is about an African American with a tragic but intricate fate. laughing
                      1. mihaylov
                        mihaylov 9 September 2021 17: 10
                        +3
                        Quote: Pane Kohanku
                        about an African American with a tragic but intricate fate.

                        here is the poor fellow ... wassat
                      2. Pane Kohanku
                        Pane Kohanku 9 September 2021 17: 11
                        +4
                        here is the poor fellow ...

                        In the USA, the entire African American ghetto would have come to beat us for mentioning this song ... wassat "Ay-yay-yay-yay-yay-yay-ya" .... crying do not continue! stop
              3. ABC-schutze
                ABC-schutze 9 September 2021 12: 44
                +3
                And out of academic interest, I would like, in addition to the historical types of phalanges (Spartan, Macedonian, Roman, etc.), to clarify one more question ...

                In Sparta (even "PraSparta" ...), for sure, slavery also existed. After all, wars, "no", were still fought. Although, slaves were not yet the main productive force, as, say, in ancient Rome, but rather had the "status" of home furniture - servants ...

                Here is how, in the context of the aforementioned "equalizing" laws of Lycurgus, individual slavery was regulated? ..
          2. Tank hard
            Tank hard 9 September 2021 08: 36
            +4
            Quote: Proxima
            And here are the Spartans? We are talking about the "phalanx" battle formation invented by the Spartans, which for centuries

            Strictly speaking, the Sumerians began to fight in formation (or as it was later given the name-phalanx). The Greeks improved the formation by introducing additional ranks of soldiers who could fight, the Sumerians had three rows directly participating in the battle (the rest created pressure), during the time of Alexander the Great, the number of ranks directly participating in the battle was brought to six (the length of spears and the ability to use them with different parties). The Roman legion is a deeply modernized same phalanx, where the genius of the Roman chess formation lay precisely in the presence of gaps between the maniples, each of which was a separate tactical unit capable of independently maneuvering on the battlefield. Manipules could gather in one general formation, if the situation required it. Then Gaius Marius (an outstanding reformer of the Roman army) again modernized the troops, increasing the number of soldiers in each unit. And the cohort (about 600 soldiers) became the main tactical unit in battle, which did not prevent the units from forming a phalanx for battle if necessary. But the pinnacle of modernization of the phalanx was the battle. used by the Swiss in the Middle Ages. The Swiss battle received its first baptism of fire at Mount Morgarten (1315), where the Swiss defeated the Austrian troops. And all this is a phalanx. Something like this.))
            1. paul3390
              paul3390 9 September 2021 10: 19
              0
              the genius of the Roman chess structure was precisely in the presence of gaps between the maniples

              There is a strong suspicion that the type of chess formation of the legion is a product of misunderstanding .. Well, how do you imagine this in battle ?? With such and such breaks in the line? Well - or is it a marching formation, for the convenience of the march. And just before the battle, the gaps were just filling up ..
              1. ABC-schutze
                ABC-schutze 9 September 2021 12: 59
                +2
                The battle formations, weapons and the level of training of the fighters and commanders of the Roman legion were "plastic", and, presumably, allowed him, depending on the situation and mission, to quickly form various types of formation ...

                From a common phalanx, to actions with separate handles ...

                Presumably, this is precisely why - excellent and varied, general drill and individual training, allowed the Romans, before their army, over the centuries, was transformed into a "courtyard" for mercenaries - barbarians, to beat any enemy ...

                Although they initially seem to have underestimated Hannibal ...
              2. Tank hard
                Tank hard 9 September 2021 20: 52
                0
                Quote: paul3390
                There is a strong suspicion that the type of chess formation of the legion is a product of misunderstanding .. Well, how do you imagine this in battle ?? With such and such breaks in the line? Well - or is it a marching formation, for the convenience of the march. And just before the battle - the gaps were just filled.

                Here, we read carefully about the actions of maniples in battle:
                The enemy bursting into the gaps was, as it were, in a "bag" and was attacked from three sides at once, by two maniples of the first line and one from the second line. The enemy could not bypass the maniples of the first row from the rear, since they were covered from behind by units of the second row. Each maniple was capable of fighting on three sides at once, and if necessary, she, on command, approached the neighboring detachment, destroying enemies on the way, who were in the interval during the battle. At that moment, in its place, filling the gap formed, the maniple from the second echelon stepped in, and it, in turn, was covered from the back by a subdivision from the third. At the end of the maneuver, the rebuilding of the maniples could have occurred in the reverse order.

                This tactic was acceptable in the battle against the disorganized crowd, and in the battle with the phalanx, as proved by the battles of Kinoskephal (197 BC) and Pydna (168 BC).

                The Macedonian phalangists in the same way, striving to get close to the legionnaires in hand-to-hand combat, filled the gaps between the maniples, thereby tearing and disrupting the formation of their own phalanx.


          3. paul3390
            paul3390 9 September 2021 10: 23
            +1
            in the battle of Kinoskephaly she (phalanx) was powerless against the battle formation of the Roman legion
            It was the Macedonian phalanx that turned out to be powerless. For the Romans - were lined up in the same line, but at the same time - individual units had tactical autonomy. That made it possible to break through the breaks of the phalanx. For the Macedonians, armed with long sarissa, this was impossible, maneuvers with such a fool in their hands are extremely limited ..
            1. lucul
              lucul 9 September 2021 16: 52
              +2
              It was the Macedonian phalanx that turned out to be powerless. For the Romans - were lined up in the same line, but at the same time - individual units had tactical autonomy.

              Phalanx is a defensive formation, not an offensive one. And under the Kinoscephalus, the Riplyans crashed against the indestructible formation of the phalanx and ran, and the phalanx began to pursue them, and since the terrain there was rugged, the formation of the phalanx inevitably crumbled, which the Romans took advantage of and smashed the Macedonian phalanx. Do not pursue the phalanx of the broken Romans - and history would have taken a different path))))
              1. Tank hard
                Tank hard 9 September 2021 21: 17
                +2
                Quote: lucul
                Phalanx - defensive, not offensive

                Here they hardly agree with you. The phalanx was considered by some to be a completely offensive formation:
                Most likely, in reality, the Macedonian phalanx looked like this: the first three rows were giraspists (the same hoplites), using the same weapons and the same equipment as the Greeks. There was no point in equipping them with saris, because the warriors were losing the ability to effectively act in close combat. But it was they who had to deal directly with the enemies. If they managed to bypass the line of arrowheads (say, roll under the spears), then the phalangists of the first row would have to throw their saris and draw their swords. Three successive ranks made up sarisphors, acting with their giant spears behind the backs of the first ranks: the warriors of the fourth row - at the level of the hip, the fifth - at the level of the chest, and the sixth from the head. They all struck with both hands. The rest of the ranks in the phalanx were completed from hypaspists, an analogue of the Greek peltasts, which are discussed below. * It can be assumed that the sarisophores were also the fourth-sixth rows on the flanks of the phalanx.

                The attack of such a formation, its strengths and weaknesses, was described by Charles Arden du Pic, the author of the remarkable work "Study of the battle in ancient and modern times" (he later died in the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-71, in the battle of Metz):

                "The pressure of people with a spear in a closed formation, the forest of peaks holding you at a certain distance were insurmountable. But you could freely kill everything surrounding the phalanx, this mass moving at a measured pace and from which mobile troops could always escape. Thanks to the movement, the terrain. , thousands of accidents of struggle, the courage of people, the wounded, lying on the ground and able to cut the veins of the first rank, crawl under the spears to the height of the chest (and unnoticed by the latter, because the spearmen of the first two ranks could hardly see where to direct the blow) - holes could form in the mass, and, as soon as the slightest such gap appeared, then already these people with long spears, useless at close range, who knew the battle only at the distance of the shaft (Polybius), were beaten with impunity by groups rushing into intervals.

                And then the phalanx, inside which the enemy penetrated, became due to moral anxiety, a disorderly mass, rams tumbling over each other, crushing one another under the yoke of fear. "

                If this happened, the warriors had to throw spears and fight with swords.

                In the ancient phalanx, only warriors standing in the first rank, who had lost their spears in the battle, could fight with swords. The second rank phalangist no longer had such an opportunity, because the length of the weapon did not allow reaching the enemy over the shoulder of the fighter in front. In the event of the loss of a spear, he could only create pressure, if he did not have to replace the fallen warrior of the first rank.

                It is unlikely that the phalanx was adapted to a protracted battle. The hand-to-hand fight itself lasted several minutes, and the more trained, assertive side won. Troops that did not know how to fight in formation rarely dared to meet in hand-to-hand combat with a phalanx. In "Anabasis" not a single case is described when the Persians tried to enter hand-to-hand with the Greek system. In battles with Alexander the Great against his phalanx, they always fielded Phalangist Greek mercenaries.

                The weak point of the phalanx, like any rectangular system, was the corners. The fact is that a soldier standing in the second rank had to provide support in three directions at once. The fighter, standing in the third row, did not reach the opponent with his spear at all diagonally, unless his spear was specially lengthened.

                It is for this reason that the generals tried to position their phalanx so that it protruded beyond the edge of the enemy front, and thus covered the corner and part of the enemy's front.

                Naturally, the most prepared and strong phalangists were placed at the corners, as on the most dangerous areas. These places were considered the most honorable and responsible.

                To avoid the angular coverage of his phalanx, Epaminondas invented the so-called "oblique battle formation", when the weak flank of the formation, depending on the circumstances, moved away from the enemy. Its own strike flank, built with the expectation of covering the enemy corner, lined up as close as possible to the enemy, and he simply did not have time to reach the weak point of Epaminondas' phalanx and cover it. *

                Subsequently, this order of battle was adopted by all Greek cities and Macedonians.

        2. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 9 September 2021 07: 16
          +8
          after the battle of Mantinea
          I would say after the Battle of Leuctra.
          1. Engineer
            Engineer 9 September 2021 11: 41
            +5
            Perhaps even earlier
            Pelopidas defeated the Spartans at Tanagra in 377 and a year later at Tehir
            In 395, Lysander died in the first battle of Galiart.
            1. 3x3zsave
              3x3zsave 9 September 2021 12: 05
              +5
              Perhaps. I wonder why the Spartans, knowing about the tactics of the "oblique phalanx", refused to use it?
              1. Engineer
                Engineer 9 September 2021 12: 23
                +6
                1. I am not sure what exactly the "oblique system" was. Plutarch writes that under Leuctraus the Thebans formed three "columns". In the direction of the main blow to the left, the depth reached 50 ranks compared to the traditional 8 for the Spartans and Athenians. Perhaps the point is not in the "oblique formation", just in the transition from frontal kneading to pressure in certain areas. The oblique formation is about the outreach of the flank, and we do not have clear information on this score.
                2. The Spartans were challenged to valor. Therefore, it was fundamentally important for them to break the Thebans head-on.
                Coronea 394
                On the enemy's right flank were the Thebans, on the left - the Argives. 2Xenophon, who returned from Asia21 and himself participated in the battle next to Agesilaus, says that this battle was the most fierce of all that took place at that time. 3The first clash did not, however, provoke a stubborn and prolonged struggle: the Thebans put the Orkhomenians to flight, and Agesilaus - the Argives. 4However, both of them, having learned that their left wing was overturned and retreating, turned back. Agesilaus could have assured himself a sure victory if he had not hit the Thebans in the forehead, but let them pass by and rushed at them from behind. 5However, out of bitterness and ambition, he fought his opponent chest to chest, wishing to overturn him with his onslaught. The enemies took the blow with no less courage, and a heated battle broke out along the entire battle line, especially tense in the place where Agesilaus stood, surrounded by fifty Spartans, whose fighting fervor, it seems, served this time as salvation for the king. 6For they fought, defending him, with the greatest courage and, although they could not save the king from wounds, however, when his shell was already pierced in many places with swords and spears, they carried him out with great difficulty, but alive; closely rallying around him, they put many enemies in place and themselves lost many. 7When it was found that overpowering the Thebans with a direct blow was too difficult, the Spartans were forced to accept the plan they had rejected at the beginning of the battle. 8They parted before the Thebans and allowed them to pass between their ranks, and when they, seeing that the breakthrough had already been made, broke the formation, the Spartans pursued them and, leveling up, attacked from the flanks. 9However, they failed to turn the enemies to flight: the Thebans retreated to Helikon, and this battle filled them with conceit, since they managed to remain undefeated, despite the fact that they were alone, without allies.
                1. Mike_E
                  Mike_E 9 September 2021 20: 26
                  +2
                  It is a shame that Thebes had too little prosperity. In my opinion, this is one of the most interesting policies.
                  1. Engineer
                    Engineer 9 September 2021 20: 31
                    +3
                    This is an agricultural policy.
                    The Athenians loved to mock their "stupid" neighbors in their comedies.
                    The Thebans fielded excellent infantry. Under Delia, they defeated the Athenians much more confidently than the Spartans under Tanagra. But leaders are tight
                    They just had the golden generation of Epaminondas-Pelopides-Gorgid.
                    A generation passed and Thebes ended. They could not nominate new leaders because social relations were not developed.
              2. mihaylov
                mihaylov 9 September 2021 14: 40
                +4
                Quote: 3x3zsave
                I wonder why the Spartans, knowing about the tactics of the "oblique phalanx", refused to use it?

                Greetings Anton! hi
                Most likely, the reasons for the defeat lie not only in the military sphere, but probably and above all - not in the military, but in a deep socio-economic crisis, into which Sparta plunged at that time, which had a corresponding effect on the army. Although, without a doubt, specific military reasons can be found in each defeat, it seems to me that we need to start from the state of the Spartan army during this period, which for the most part has already ceased to consist of citizens. Oliganthropy ("depopulation") struck Sparta, but not in the sense that there were no people, but in the fact that the number of citizens sharply decreased: if I am not mistaken at the end of the Peloponnesian War, the number is estimated at no more than 1500 people, then there was a further reduction, while According to sources, there are no more than 100 families left in Sparta with civil rights.
                Although the Spartan army always consisted not only of Spartans, but also of Perieks and allies, as long as they could cement the army with their citizens, everything was fine when the number of Spartans in the army began to reach a critically low level, sometimes dropping only to the "officer corps" , it became a different army and the opponents, apparently, this moment was clearly captured and then a series of defeats followed. hi
                1. 3x3zsave
                  3x3zsave 9 September 2021 15: 05
                  +1
                  Sergei! hi
                  The end of the Peloponnesian War is characterized by a crisis throughout Attica. If I remember correctly, at the end of hostilities, a petty squabble began between everyone and everyone, which became the reason for the Macedonian hegemony in the region.
                  1. mihaylov
                    mihaylov 9 September 2021 15: 26
                    +2
                    Quote: 3x3zsave
                    The end of the Peloponnesian War is characterized by a crisis throughout Attica. If I remember correctly, at the end of hostilities, a petty squabble began between everyone and everyone, which became the reason for the Macedonian hegemony in the region.

                    Yes, that's right.
                    Victory in the Peloponnesian War was essentially "Pyrrhic" for Sparta, and it soon fell apart.
                    The reasons, but in my opinion, are internal, and above all - the oligarchy triumphed in the worst form. Hence the oliganthropy, although it is sometimes explained by military losses and even an excessive passion for Spartans with a non-traditional sexual orientation (there is also such an exotic version).
                    Of course there were losses, but who prevented them from creating a normal institution for recruiting new citizens? By the way, there were such timid attempts, they really ended in nothing.
                    And as a result, a bunch of oligarchs who own everything, and a lot of non-citizens or semi-citizens. Hence the crisis of the Spartan army: these non-citizens already had the wrong motivation and training.
                    By the way, there is an opinion that no matter how good or bad Sparta was, thanks to it, relative stability was maintained in Greece. hi
              3. Liam
                Liam 10 September 2021 09: 20
                +2
                For the same reasons why their civilization quickly disappeared did not leave any trace practically, unlike the Athenians. Extreme conservatism, inertness turned into stagnation in all spheres.
        3. Flooding
          Flooding 9 September 2021 08: 21
          +2
          Quote: Cat
          The Spartans have ceased to "terrify" after the Battle of Mantinea

          there were two famous battles at Mantenay
          you obviously mean the second, 207. BC.
        4. Hypertension
          Hypertension 9 September 2021 13: 55
          +2
          Quote: Cat
          The Spartans stopped "terrorizing" after the Battle of Mantinea.

          But the reputation began to tarnish already from 546 BC. NS. But they boasted that one Spartan warrior is worth two or three of any others.
          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Битва_300_чемпионов
      2. Hypertension
        Hypertension 9 September 2021 13: 49
        +3
        Quote: Proxima
        nevertheless, there were poets and writers in this state.

        And the Spartan war songs were "hits" of that time.
        Quote: Proxima
        But what really deserves respect, and this is not a myth, is the total asceticism of the Spartans, which affected all strata of society up to the king.

        The total asceticism of the Spartans is an extremely compulsory measure. First: their economy was miserable with their iron money. And secondly: if they were fattening / feasting, then the more numerous Iloth population would quickly declassify them. Sparta is essentially a military camp in the occupied territory. It is understandable why the Spartans did not epicurean.
      3. anjey
        anjey 9 September 2021 17: 01
        +1
        Especially when compared with the luxury of democratic Athens, but in the end the Spartans degenerated, stepping into internecine strife and selling in the future, for the Persian gold and gold of Athens, Neither the Macedonian king Philip nor Alexander touched them until they, incited by Athens, opposed the rule of Alexander , his governor Antipater brutally defeated the Spartans at Megalopolis, the Macedonian phalanx turned out to be stronger than the Spartan one, after which their power sank into oblivion ...
        1. Parade
          Parade 10 September 2021 05: 03
          +1
          King Philip of Macedon asked the Spartans how to come to you, as an enemy or as a friend? "No way," the Spartans replied ...
    3. IS-80_RVGK2
      IS-80_RVGK2 9 September 2021 08: 12
      +1
      Do not trust, do not fear, do not ask. laughing
    4. Bar1
      Bar1 9 September 2021 08: 39
      -1
      well, at least under Ptolemy then 2 c. on his map should be Sparta, no, no.



      https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b5962151k/f1.item.zoom
    5. paul3390
      paul3390 9 September 2021 10: 25
      +4
      For example, one of the postulates of growing up was - if you want to eat "steal", if you want to "live" - ​​kill!
      But at the same time, becoming adults - the Spartans for some reason did not steal and did not kill everyone. Apparently, the psychological trauma of youth did not have a place to be - they did not turn into evil sociopaths at all ..
    6. Krasnodar
      Krasnodar 9 September 2021 13: 13
      +2
      Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka

      For example, one of the postulates of growing up was - if you want to eat "steal", if you want to "live" - ​​kill!

      If you want love, bend over laughing
    7. Xnumx vis
      Xnumx vis 9 September 2021 14: 38
      +2
      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      For example, one of the postulates of growing up was - if you want to eat "steal", if you want to "live" - ​​kill!

      What it was like in our army. - Comrade Sergeant stole my boots!, "Sergeant -" does not care what boots you have in the morning! "From my recollections of the cadets about the sergeant's school ... Or else. Line up, a second-year sergeant walks along the line ... -" comrade. cadets! Where did you end up? "Build -" We ended up in a training guards motorized rifle regiment. Order of Lenin, the Red Banner of Budapest, etc., etc ... Sergeant .- "No! You ended up in the school of gladiators! Take the emphasis lying down! Push up fifty times!" Military traditions are unchanged.
    8. lucul
      lucul 9 September 2021 16: 56
      +1
      The most important thing that Lycurgus did for Sparta was the draconian system of raising adolescents.

      The most important thing that Lycurgus did for Sparta was that he limited human egoism to strict laws, hence the prohibition of actually money as a means of enrichment. The Spartan obol (coin) was so huge that a whole car was required to transport one coin, Lycurgus thereby deprived the Spartans love of money. Hence the glory of Sparta as such flows.
    9. ViacheslavS
      ViacheslavS 3 November 2021 13: 42
      0
      For example, one of the postulates of growing up was - if you want to eat "steal", if you want to "live" - ​​kill!

      This is clearly an urban legend; education of war requires discipline, nutrition, training. If only in Sparta, not professional marauders were trained.
  2. SERGE ANT
    SERGE ANT 9 September 2021 05: 10
    +5
    "Sic transit gloria mundi."
  3. Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 9 September 2021 05: 13
    +2
    Russia also needs Lycurgus and then the population will also grow.
    1. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 9 September 2021 05: 20
      +2
      In Kolyma or what? smile
    2. Flooding
      Flooding 9 September 2021 06: 14
      +2
      Quote: Pessimist22
      Russia also needs Lycurgus and then the population will also grow.

      prepared yourself for Spartan asceticism?
      sleeping on wooden benches is said to be good for spine health.
      1. vadimtt
        vadimtt 9 September 2021 09: 55
        +3
        Sleeping on wooden benches is useful until a certain age, up to 25 years maximum, and then hello arthritis, arthrosis, bursitis, etc. laughing But the Spartans did not live so long and it was useful for them hi
        1. Flooding
          Flooding 9 September 2021 10: 02
          +2
          Quote: vadimtt
          The Spartans did not live so long and it was useful for them

          common misconception
          lived if they did not die in battle
        2. paul3390
          paul3390 9 September 2021 10: 15
          +1
          The Spartans didn't live that long

          The same tsar Leonidas - at Thermopylae over 50 was apparently. And as you can see, he was still a very vigorous fighting old man, we would all have such health in such years ..
          1. vadimtt
            vadimtt 9 September 2021 10: 41
            +3
            Considering the "Spartan unnatural selection", nothing surprising (or is it the same well-established misconceptions about Sparta?). And such health does not shine for us due to the technological order and the victorious medicine. But here we step on the thin ice of eugenics, because there is no solution to the problem that would suit everyone within the framework of existing morality.
    3. sergo1914
      sergo1914 9 September 2021 07: 47
      +2
      Quote: Pessimist22
      Russia also needs Lycurgus and then the population will also grow.


      One more? And what to do with this? He himself is not going to leave ... Ah-ah ... I understood, two kings ...
  4. Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 9 September 2021 05: 18
    +4
    Sparta's device is more reminiscent of war communism.
    In the name of the interests of society, the entire state was subordinate, a single person was an empty place ... for the survival of society it is useful, for development it is not.
    Such a system will inevitably collapse from within.
    1. Flooding
      Flooding 9 September 2021 06: 04
      +3
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      Such a system will inevitably collapse from within.

      In a peaceful existence, yes.
      In conditions of constant wars with neighbors - no.
    2. paul3390
      paul3390 9 September 2021 10: 12
      0
      What suddenly? It's just that Sparta had an alternative system of values ​​that was not clear to the rest of the Greeks, but quite satisfactory for the Spartans themselves. And their collapse occurred precisely on the warning of Lycurgus - not to go to others. For as soon as Sparta won the Peloponnesian War and gained control over Greece, his way of life collapsed under the barrage of wealth and nishtyaks. That's what it means not to listen to the classics! But we did the same thing ..
      1. Terran ghost
        Terran ghost 9 September 2021 11: 28
        +1
        It was just that Sparta had an alternative value system.

        True, there is one "small nuance", this "system of values" was ensured by the exploitation of the forced labor of helots. Spartan men considered working for themselves, like the medieval feudal lords "zapadl", the only worthy occupation for themselves they saw was military affairs.
        stay out of the way

        Again. Spartan boys without exception were trained for war from early childhood. Purposefully. The desire to "conquer neighbors" in this case arose inevitably among the Spartans.
        1. paul3390
          paul3390 9 September 2021 11: 34
          0
          No. You are simply not very familiar with the history of Sparta. To what-what - and to conquest she never aspired. And extremely reluctantly, with great creak, she agreed to send an army outside the Peloponnese .. Moreover, the war of conquest was directly prohibited by the laws of Lycurgus. All Sparta wanted was that no one climbed into their zone of influence. And they did not touch their allies. Actually, the impudent invasion of the broken-off Athens into this sphere led to the Peloponnese War.
          1. Terran ghost
            Terran ghost 9 September 2021 11: 42
            0
            Moreover, the war of conquest was expressly prohibited by the laws of Lycurgus.

            This is not the point. Simply, on the one hand, there was this prohibition in the laws of Lycurgus.
            And on the other hand, the fact that Spartan boys, without exception, were trained for war from early childhood. Purposefully. Not to engage in agriculture, crafts or trade, but to war. In a very rough analogy - if you recruit athletes for a football team, train them strictly in preparation for the matches, but do not send the team to the matches themselves, then sooner or later the players will have a question "why are we not going to compete with other teams."
            1. paul3390
              paul3390 9 September 2021 11: 52
              +2
              They were prepared for war for the obvious reason - Messinia. The fattest part of Lacedaemon, captured at the dawn of Spartan history and ready to blaze at any moment. Which happened several times. Plus - the eternal enmity with Argos, another center of attraction in the Peloponnese. And Sparta - was interested only in one thing, so that they did not climb. But for this, I had to learn how to really crumble the muzzles of the neighbors. And so - they even did not establish colonies, unlike the rest of the Hellenes. They felt good at home.
          2. Illanatol
            Illanatol 14 October 2021 14: 14
            0
            All Sparta wanted was that no one climbed into their zone of influence. And they did not touch their allies. Actually, the impudent invasion of the broken-off Athens into this sphere led to the Peloponnese War.


            Come on. The Spartans fought very willingly for the sake of banal robbery.
            And they often became mercenaries.
            What is the impudence of Athens?
            One of the members of the Peloponnese - the Kerkyra polis was offended by Corinth, another member of the same union. Sparta took the side of Corinth and then Kerkyra decided to leave the union and unite with Athens. Athens agreed to take Kerkyra under its wing, which was the reason for the war.
            And by and large, the intrigues of the Persians played a role. "Selfless" Sparta turned out to be greedy for Persian gold (thanks to which, in particular, the Spartans were able to build a strong fleet). Ultimately, everyone lost - both the Athenians and the Spartans. For a short period, the Persians experienced triumph.
            The Spartans turned out to be retrogrades in military affairs and very bad politicians.
            The end of Sparta turned out to be natural and sad. After the loss of their helots (who fed them) after the defeat from Epaminondas, they experienced a real famine, died out for the most part and ceased to be a significant military power.
            1. paul3390
              paul3390 14 October 2021 14: 34
              0
              You are considering fairly late times. In classic Sparta, mostly exiles became mercenaries.

              Kerkyra was a colony of Corinth, therefore, the intervention of Athens in their showdown was naturally regarded as aggression. And given that Corinth was the most powerful maritime and trading power of the Peloponnesian Union, Sparta had no choice. In addition, Athens was imposed with sanctions (familiar, right?) Megara, also one of the allies, which also did not add to the peacefulness of Sparta.

              The war began after the meeting of the Union. At which the Spartan allies declared - either war with Athens, who refused to settle the claims, or they leave the Union. And in fact, they left the meeting. Sparta did not want to fight to the last, but - everyone voted for the war. So what were the Spartans to do?

              As for the retrogrades - well, they won the war all the same .. And then they showed themselves more than once .. And the end - of course, is natural, because the number of Spartiats directly depended on the number of clerics. There were no allotments - there were no troops either.

              Gold - well, why should Sparta build a fleet for the war? If they didn't have money in principle? Yes, and the fleet as such did not seem to be necessary to them before?
              1. Illanatol
                Illanatol 15 October 2021 14: 04
                0
                Kerkyra was a colony of Corinth, therefore, the intervention of Athens in their showdown was naturally regarded as aggression.


                I am not sure that "intervention" can be considered to provide assistance to the one who asks for it. However, the fact that Kerkyra herself possessed a strong fleet also played a role. The temptation was great to help such a useful policy.
                In general, it is far from ice when one of your ally uses your other ally as a colony. An alliance in which there is such a relationship between allies cannot be lasting.

                Sparta did not want to fight to the last, but - everyone voted for the war. So what were the Spartans to do?


                It was most reasonable to enter into a bilateral Union with the Athenians, and send allies in the forest.
                In principle, the Spartans had nothing to share with the Athenians merchants (they themselves had no business interests in their conscious asceticism), they themselves made themselves hostages of the interests and ambitions of their completely "market" allies.
                Spartans generally give the impression of very narrow-minded politicians.
                "There is power - no need for mind?"
                And certainly not to establish contacts with yesterday's enemy - the Achaemenid state, to take money from them. ...

                As for the retrogrades - well, they won the war all the same ..


                Certainly not at the expense of the "phalanx invention." It's funny, however.
                They used the same tactics and formations as other Hellenes, except that their weapons were more thorough, thanks to better physical preparation.
                And the war was won thanks, in many respects, to external factors - Persian gold, the carelessness of the Athenians, the intrigues of the Athenian politicians who expelled Alcibiades - the strategist, as Alexander the Great himself later recognized talent.
                To this can be added the plague (or other disease) epidemic in Athens, which made their siege successful.
                The main fruits of the victory went to the Persians. For a short period, Athens and Sparta, exhausted by the war, had to recognize the hegemony of the Persian state. "What were they fighting for"?
      2. Flooding
        Flooding 9 September 2021 12: 16
        0
        Quote: paul3390
        ... For as soon as Sparta won the Peloponnesian War and gained control over Greece, his way of life collapsed under the barrage of wealth and nishtyaks.

        very similar to the fate of the Roman Empire, but on a smaller scale
  5. SERGE ANT
    SERGE ANT 9 September 2021 05: 48
    +8
    The most important thing that Lycurgus did for Sparta was the draconian system of raising adolescents.
    Let me disagree, he did a lot in Sparta, for which the venerable pythia greeted Lycurgus entering the temple with the following words:
    I see you, Lycurgus, who came to my rich temple,
    Zeus is the favorite and all the great gods on Olympus.
    What should I call you, I don’t know: even though you are similar to a person,
    Yet I will call you immortal rather than mortal.
  6. parusnik
    parusnik 9 September 2021 06: 30
    +4
    Now, commentators in their comments will begin to finish writing this work. smile
    1. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave 9 September 2021 06: 34
      +4
      I agree, Alex! hi
      Ryzhov's was more interesting and informative.
      1. parusnik
        parusnik 9 September 2021 06: 36
        +4
        hi Cheat sheet on the question of Lycurgus Reform. Ryzhov has much better and in two parts. And here we will not see the continuation.
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 9 September 2021 06: 46
          +4
          And here we will not see the continuation.
          I didn't really want to!
          1. parusnik
            parusnik 9 September 2021 06: 48
            +3
            VO has no other authors smile , we will be content with what they give. laughing
            1. 3x3zsave
              3x3zsave 9 September 2021 06: 50
              +3
              Yes, but you are at odds with him. laughing
              1. parusnik
                parusnik 9 September 2021 11: 05
                +2
                The downsides are not mine, but in a quarrel, not in a quarrel, this is my own business laughing
                1. 3x3zsave
                  3x3zsave 9 September 2021 11: 15
                  +1
                  I know that they are not yours.
        2. Flooding
          Flooding 9 September 2021 07: 10
          +1
          Quote: parusnik
          At Ryzhov, much better and in two parts

          then it's better to turn to more serious literature
          http://www.sno.pro1.ru/lib/andreev_arkhaicheskaya_sparta/16.htm
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 9 September 2021 07: 27
            +3
            then it's better to turn to more serious literature
            Undoubtedly!
            But it was about the quality of online journalism.
            hi
          2. parusnik
            parusnik 9 September 2021 11: 02
            +2
            But the authors do not turn to more serious literature.
        3. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 9 September 2021 18: 19
          +2
          In general, we have made the "cash desk" for Zyryanov, but it's a pity ...
          1. parusnik
            parusnik 9 September 2021 18: 52
            +3
            He is a good fellow in something, he writes with innuendo, but we want to show off not only our intellect. laughing And it turns out that the article is actually about nothing, but there are so many comments to it laughing Moreover, commentators are discussing each other's comments, not the article. And Zyryanov's rating ... the discussed article caused numerous responses. laughing Here is the "box office" for you. The film is Soviet, G. Burkov in the title role, the essence of the film, like an absolute mediocrity, became the head of the department in history. Forgot the title. We have something similar here. laughing
            1. 3x3zsave
              3x3zsave 9 September 2021 18: 57
              +1
              He, in general, writes for Yandex Zen
              1. parusnik
                parusnik 9 September 2021 19: 02
                +1
                Ahhh, that's where his article format comes from laughing That - then I have the impression that at the end of the articles something is missing .. And the next phrase is missing, throw a ruble on the development of the channel. laughing I read Zen, but mostly music channels, about movies .. Headlines on history, scare away laughing
                1. 3x3zsave
                  3x3zsave 9 September 2021 19: 05
                  +2
                  Headlines on history, scare away
                  Ottozh !!!!
  7. Olgovich
    Olgovich 9 September 2021 07: 27
    +2
    Banning virtually all forms of material wealth, Lycurgus
    all the same, everything returned to normal - human nature cannot be redone
    1. Flooding
      Flooding 9 September 2021 07: 45
      +2
      Quote: Olgovich
      all the same, everything returned to normal - human nature cannot be redone

      all you need is time, patience and more time
      1. Olgovich
        Olgovich 9 September 2021 08: 24
        +2
        Quote: Flood
        Quote: Olgovich
        all the same, everything returned to normal - human nature cannot be redone

        all you need is time, patience and more time

        to make sure once again that it is not redone
    2. paul3390
      paul3390 9 September 2021 10: 06
      0
      It's just that Sparta, with its history, has once again proved the obvious - the elite must be cleaned up from time to time! Otherwise, it ceases to serve the interests of the people and the state, engaging exclusively in personal gesheft ..
      1. Terran ghost
        Terran ghost 9 September 2021 11: 22
        0
        Congratulations, you have just "invented" the idea of ​​regular turnover of persons holding managerial positions in the state;)
        1. paul3390
          paul3390 9 September 2021 11: 25
          +1
          It was invented long before me .. The same institute of ephors in Sparta ..
        2. Illanatol
          Illanatol 15 October 2021 14: 06
          0
          Nobody has ever chosen the real elite.
          One should not confuse public power with real power.
      2. Olgovich
        Olgovich 9 September 2021 13: 21
        +2
        Quote: paul3390
        It's just that Sparta, with its history, has once again proved the obvious - the elite must be cleaned up from time to time!

        the whole thing is that the cleaners themselves, and with pleasure, will become the same elite (those serfs who have escaped to the top are ardent serfs themselves)
        .
        Which they also want to clean up. and so - in a circle - to infinity.

        Human nature cannot be changed, at least not in the foreseeable future.
        1. paul3390
          paul3390 9 September 2021 13: 29
          +2
          Life in general goes in a circle. This is not a reason not to try to change it for the better? As well as human nature .. In general, greed and greed are certainly very driving qualities, but do people have other, more altruistic ones? The whole question is what exactly we will cultivate in society.

          Here's an example I once gave:

          Once at the Olympics, a Spartan was offered 30 talents to lie down. He refused - and won. After the victory, he was asked irritably:
          - What do you want in your victory, Spartan, since you gave up such a huge amount of money?
          And he answered smiling:
          - From now on in the battle I will go in the first line of the phalanx, covering my king with a shield. You can not understand..


          And while such alternative values ​​prevailed in Sparta, it stood as a mighty cliff. But as soon as they were replaced by loot, everything collapsed. The same thing happened to the Soviet Union ..
          1. Engineer
            Engineer 9 September 2021 14: 12
            +5
            Some kind of idealization of Sparta.
            There is no evidence that as citizens the Spartans were better than the same Thebans and Athenians.
            The hypocrisy of the Spartans and the passion for money as soon as they left their homeland became the talk of the town for all Greeks.
            “Though there are lions at home, cunning foxes are in the fields,” said about them.
            As soon as the opportunity presented itself, they grabbed like everyone else.
            Pausanias became famous for money-grubbing, a desire for luxury, and his betrayal can be considered practically proven.
            Gylippus stole a huge amount of public money
            Eurybiades accepted the money from Themistocles in the Euboean case without batting an eye.
            And stuff, stuff
            All Greece condemned the attitude towards helots
            History shows that extremes are always harmful. And the imposed total asceticism is the same stupidity and danger as a society of total consumption.
            In addition, the Spartans were monstrously inflexible, did not audit citizens, did not take out the colonists, did not create public mechanisms for restoring the property qualification for citizens who had lost it.
            Sparta has never been a mighty cliff. This was a society that, even on its own land, did not feel safe.
            1. paul3390
              paul3390 9 September 2021 14: 49
              +1
              It is generally difficult to change human nature. But Sparta - at least tried to control her. And those who stole - in most cases, for this and raked in full at home. Remember the fate of the same Pausanias ..

              The attitude towards the helots was condemned only because they were Greeks. Athens for slavery - no one condemned? In addition, the question with the helots is not unambiguous, how many of them accompanied the Spartan army, how many peltasts were recruited among them - and after all, not a single riot in the army !! Why, if they were treated so badly?

              Regarding inflexibility, you are both right and wrong. The colonists seemed to be of no use to them in the presence of Messinia and the absence of trade. Cens - they tried to restore it repeatedly, in particular - one of the functions of the tsars was the selection of the right candidates for husbands to women, in whose family there were no men left. Yes, and the loss of property belonged to the later times when everything fell apart, because Claire was inalienable in its essence, so how could a Spartan become completely impoverished? He could not lose the land?

              I felt, I did not feel - and for 200 years they beat everyone in a row.
              1. Engineer
                Engineer 9 September 2021 15: 08
                +2
                ... And those who stole - in most cases, for this and raked in full at home.

                Alas, we know only those who were caught. As an everywhere)
                Colonists they seemed to have nothing to do with the presence of Messenia and the absence of trade.

                This is the release of demographic pressure in relatively peaceful years and the creation of a polyscolony system, which only strengthens society. And allows everyone to remain full citizens - see below
                Attempts to restore the qualification were, so to speak, absolutely "rudimentary". And their necessity shows the same conspiracy of Kynadona. The emergence of incompetent "neodamods" clearly records this.
                for Claire was inalienable in its essence, so how could a Spartan become completely impoverished? He could not lose the land?

                Could
                About 400 BC (Ephor Epitadeus), the donation and inheritance of land was allowed, which opened up the possibility of its hidden sale.
                ... G. Pechatnova CRISIS OF THE SPARTAN POLIS (LATE V - BEGINNING IV CENTURY BC):
                Plutarch associates the concentration of land in the hands of a few with a sharp decrease in the number of citizens. According to him, by the time of the reform of Agis, there were no more than 700 Spartiats left, and even then only a hundred of them owned land. The rest of the mass of former citizens, according to Plutarch, was a completely declassified rabble, representing a great danger to the state as an extremely explosive element. The elimination of equality and the reduction of the number of citizens, according to Plutarch, was a direct consequence of the Epitadeus law.


                That's all the Spartan "stability" to the last penny

                PS And this is how the Spartan society behaved with the most far-sighted citizens
                Agis IV put forward a program of radical reforms, which involved cassation of debts, redistribution of land and the allocation of land plots (clerics) to the poor, and an increase in the number of full citizens at the expense of perieks. As a result of the reforms of Agis, debt documents were burned, the ephors that opposed the implementation of the reforms were replaced by others, but the redistribution of land was slowed down by large landowners and the outbreak of war with Aetolia. In 241 BC. NS. Agis IV was accused of striving for tyranny and executed along with his mother Agesistrata and grandmother Archidamia
                1. paul3390
                  paul3390 9 September 2021 18: 44
                  -1
                  Duc - that's about 400, everything went down the drain and rolled .. For obvious reasons. Lycurgus, after all, it was not for nothing that he established inalienability .. When the number of Spartiats, and therefore fighters, fell less than a couple of thousand, Sparta lost the ability to defend itself at least to some extent. But initially there were as many as 10000 clers! I'm talking about a period of prosperity, not collapse. Everything is clear there ..

                  As for the colonies - I’m talking, in Messinia there was enough room for many. Why did the Spartans have to drag themselves over the distant lands?

                  As for who was caught - there is another side of the question. Well, he stole money and nishtyakov Sparta - how does he sell them at home, then? Where is it not just a luxury - money is practically forbidden. And even more so - gold and silver. However, it finds itself in the position of Ostap Ibrahimovich with a million in the Soviet Union.

                  Neodamody is a slightly different song. As far as I understand, these are not impoverished Spartiats, but helots who have received a type of citizenship. Those. sort of like citizens - but without allotments ..
                  1. Engineer
                    Engineer 9 September 2021 19: 03
                    +2
                    You can not do it this way. Like we're not playing here. The decline of Sparta is as much a consequence of the laws of Lycurgus as its heyday. They conserved development, erected an iron curtain, ensured stability, but stifled development. There is a temptation to declare Epitadeus an analogue of Gorbachev. That's just
                    400 year Epitadeus law.
                    398 Conspiracy of Kynadona. It is clear that this did not happen in two years and that the number of neo-mods had been accumulating long before that.

                    By that time, neodamods had been accumulating for decades. These are people of the second class, who did not have access to general agela, did not receive intensive training and apparently did not have a clare or had a truncated part of it. This is such a "community of equals".

                    Well, he stole money and nishtyakov Sparta - how does he sell them at home, then?

                    The Spartans are constantly on "military missions". That's the reason for money-grubbing.

                    As for the colonies - I’m talking, in Messinia there was enough room for many. Why did the Spartans have to drag themselves over the distant lands?

                    Again. Not enough. I show it on the facts. Why was not enough another question, but the Spartans did not solve it at all.
                    No need for distant lands. The colony can be close by, on the border. Like the Romans in Latium.
                    Or bring neodamodus to the lands cut off by the same Argives. Or arrange a revision of the public land, restoring the status of Neodymium. The tribunes in Rome did this, but the ephors in the vaunted Sparta did not.
                    We have the laws of Lycurgus, we are in the house.
                    As a result, the neo-Modods tried to rebel once. And having failed, they went to the mercenaries.
                    And when the Thebans restored Messenia, Sparta as the leading polis simply disappeared. To fight is weak, and uncle Lycurgus forbade to develop by non-military methods.
                    Game over.
                    1. paul3390
                      paul3390 9 September 2021 19: 11
                      -1
                      Spartans are constantly on "military missions"

                      Probably not. They almost never got out of the Peloponnese, at least - before the war. For they did not strive for land seizures. And in general - they really did not like to fight very much. Even the Peloponnesian War began at the insistence of Corinth, its main partner in the Peloponnesian Union. In addition, ALL Spartiats almost never participated in the war. They were sent by lot. And - not for long. Independently without permission to leave Lacedaemon - the Spartiat could not in any way .. Well - and why does he need money?

                      The problem of neodamodov agrees - it has been accumulating for decades, and it was badly solved. But - they are not originally Spartans! This means that they have nothing to do with this conversation. And so - well, did the Spartan Parthenians founded Tarentum in their time? So, they tried to solve the problem of excess population?

                      OK then. Sparta is so stupid and inert. Why, then, did they win over the quite dynamic and advanced Athenians? And Athens - lost miserably? Why did the Greeks for the most part see just in Athens - the oppressors, and in Sparta - the liberators? How so?
                      1. Engineer
                        Engineer 9 September 2021 19: 51
                        +2
                        They loved to fight. Valor is the highest virtue. Without war, a person is not tested. This is the psychology of ancient society.
                        ALL Spartiats almost never participated in the war. They were sent by lot. And - not for long

                        Differently. Sometimes they were absent for years. The same Brasides and Lysander. We have no statistics.
                        Well - and why does he need money?

                        Because a person is irrational. In reserve, what if. Dozens of reasons and excuses. Like gold toilets. A person is susceptible to temptations, even a Spartan). We know what we took. As the others
                        But - they are not originally Spartans! This means that they have nothing to do with this conversation.

                        What do you mean do not have? Aren't we discussing different aspects of Spartan society? And the notorious "equality" as well. And at the expense of whom it was achieved.
                        And so - well, did the Spartan Parthenians founded Tarentum in their time? So, they tried to solve the problem of excess population?

                        This is a curious point showing the "equality" of Spartan society.
                        Apparently, it was from Antiochus that the version about the Ilotian origin of the Parthenians went, which later authors repeated after him. Here is this place: "After the outbreak of the Messenian War, the Lacedaemonians declared those who did not participate in the campaign slaves and called them helots; they called all the children born during the war Parthenians and declared them disenfranchised" (Antioch. Ap. Strab., VI, 3,2, p. 278 Translated by G.A. Stratanovsky). This phrase is central to Antiochus's story. The rest of the episodes can hardly clarify anything. They look like later attempts to knit together the muffled echoes of a real tradition. The weak motivation characteristic of Antiochus is indicative of her non-partan origin. We have before us echoes of the rather Tarente tradition.
                        So, back to this key phrase of Antiochus. Strictly speaking, Antiochus does not call the Parthenians helots. He only says that they were (fully or partially?) Curtailed in their civil rights (ajtivmou "e [krinan), that is, they turned from full citizens into second-class citizens. Here we learn that the Parthenian athymia was hereditary, since their fathers, Spartan citizens, were turned into helots for refusing to participate in the First Messenian War, thus, according to Antiochus, the Parthenians had fathers - helots, and mothers - Spartan citizens.

                        L.G. Pechatnova Spartan Parthenias

                        This story does not tell us anything good about Spartan society. Active citizens leave the policy and do not retain ties with the mother's policy. Are they superfluous? Or just uncomfortable? Was the social explosion averted? Perhaps. BUT, in any case, this practice was not applied in the future.

                        OK then. Sparta is so stupid and inert. Why, then, did they win over the quite dynamic and advanced Athenians? And Athens - lost miserably? Why did the Greeks for the most part see just in Athens - the oppressors, and in Sparta - the liberators? How so?

                        Where does this speculation come from?
                        It is known that Sparta is a stronghold of oligarchic regimes. Athens is democratic. Those who bet on the aristocracy sympathized with the Spartans, on the demos in its ancient understanding, the Athenians. Everywhere is different. This is a common place
                        Specifically, the Peloponnesian War was won by Spartan officers, Corinthian sailors, Boeotian hoplites and Persian darics. Everyone was afraid of the power of Athens. This is also a common place.
            2. mihaylov
              mihaylov 9 September 2021 15: 13
              +3
              Quote: Engineer
              All Greece condemned the attitude towards helots

              To the Messenian - they were considered enslaved by the Greeks, the Laconian helots were treated more calmly - they say it was a long time ago. Moreover, the institution of heloty was not something unique: the clerics of Crete, Thessalian penesttes, etc.
              I agree with the rest. hi
      3. Illanatol
        Illanatol 14 October 2021 14: 19
        0
        The Spartan elite have always served their own interests, which is typical of oligarchs. The people were cannon fodder for her, so she tried to improve its quality as cannon fodder. Asceticism - so that the elite get more additional product.
        It is quite a totalitarian state in which even sex was strictly on schedule.
        And homosexuality, encouraged as a way to strengthen the fighting brotherhood of the "Phalangists". soldier
  8. Daniil Konovalenko
    Daniil Konovalenko 9 September 2021 08: 50
    +1
    Does the story of Lycurgus reflect the real historical facts of the existence of this king or is it just a myth, some combination of both
    The state structure of Sparta, reduced to one Lycurgus, was actually formed through a gradual modification of the patriarchal system. Lycurgus the legislator is not a myth or reality or a combination of both, but rather an abstraction, an imaginary organizer of Spartan life. Perhaps Gellanicus, an older contemporary of Thucydides, who, speaking of the Spartan state system, did not mention Lycurgus at all and did not mention Thucydides, also understood this. In other words: "Whoooo is he this Lycurgus? Where did he go ?? I say, I see him for the first time!"
  9. geologist
    geologist 9 September 2021 12: 51
    +1
    Male society always strives for asceticism, clarification of relationships and a feast of friends. Our gatherings in garages with an abundance of vodka and a poor snack is a direct copy of the Spartan gatherings of warriors from the same detachment. The point is not in the phalanx, which can be different in the depth of construction, weapons, etc., but in the friendly ties of the men who form it. In Sparta, usually 15-20 people of the same age, childhood friends, gathered at the table, who represented in the phalanx a column of 3x5 warriors, which created a depth of formation in 5 rows, i.e. the phalanx consisted not of ranks, but of columns of friends and relatives, with the strongest being the commander and standing in the first row on the right. In those days, even the tsar fought in the front row on the right flank, and did not sit with binoculars and a walkie-talkie on a hill. The warriors saw the king next to them and ate rough food, as in a war. I wonder where the best cuts of meat went if they weren't eaten at booze. It seems to me that at home a warrior always had a fatty piece of pork prepared by his wife or slave. wink
  10. lubesky
    lubesky 9 September 2021 14: 40
    +1
    As a child, I read the book "Messenian Wars". Sparta is at the height of power, the war machine in a bloody and long-term war won and drove the Messenians from the fertile valleys. In fact, the Messenians are peasants, I was amazed then at their courage and long resistance to the warrior people from the cradle. Bloody war. I don't remember exactly, but the Spartans were looking for a reason for a just war for a long time, but the Messenians did not give such a reason. Therefore, the war began when the Spartan youths, scumbags, committed an unthinkable treachery, attacked a sacred holiday for all Greeks and killed many virgins.
  11. evgen1221
    evgen1221 9 September 2021 16: 56
    0
    The more I read articles on the history of the ancient world, up to and including the collapse of the Roman Empire. So personally, I have some questions about the official dating and sequence. Since nobody canceled the economy and trade relations, as well as the influence of neighboring cultures and civilizations, And all this suggests that (professional) historians are quite free to deal with dates, as well as with logic, too, in some moments they are trying to explain.
  12. gorenina91
    gorenina91 9 September 2021 17: 08
    +1
    - If we take into account the whole reality of the topic set forth by the author; then it is generally difficult to come up with a more idiotic existence of society ... - than the entire state social society of Sparta ... - This is just a tribe of the Stone Age ... a level a 'la "Ishilov ideology", which then simply degenerated in a natural way ... - You can't think of anything else ... - You just can only wonder ... - how such a "society-state" could exist for so long ... - and how this society kept from not completely degrading and not sliding back .. . to cannibalism ... - Absolutely nothing creative, nothing creative ... - only one hands and feet (with hooves) ... - and only one ability to beat and trample with these hooves ... - which was universally welcomed and encouraged .. - the brains were not particularly required here ...
    - Today modern Sparta is about the same as today ... - ISIS ..; or the Taliban or something like that ...
  13. kalibr
    kalibr 9 September 2021 20: 53
    +2
    Until when will you take author's pictures from the Web and put them in your text without signing, who is their author? After all, J. Rava will find out that you have done so, Vladimir, and it will be bad for you first of all! It is necessary to indicate !!! An adult, after all ...
  14. Mantykora
    Mantykora 10 September 2021 23: 31
    +1
    Quote: Proxima
    while in the battle of Kinoskephal she (the phalanx) was powerless against the battle formation of the Roman legion.

    So there the phalanx was used through the ass, so the battle was blown through. Well, then Rome simply has many times more mobilization resources due to the organization of the state ... Already in modern times they returned to the tactics of the phalanx - the same Spanish third is not a phalanx?