The Great Rhetra: Molding the Spartan Legal System - Literature review Example

The Great Rhetra: Molding the Spartan legal System Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code & Name: Date of Submission THE GREAT RHETRA: MOLDING THE SPARTAN LEGAL SYSTEM The Great Rhetra has been subjected to a wide controversial discourse among historians regarding its components and the time when it actually came into existence. This has culminated into extensive researches in the field of academia aimed at ascertaining who really initiated it and at what time in the history of Sparta. This continues to range on amid antagonism from the different schools of thought. In this regard, this paper is a profound effort to explore what the Great Rhetra was and when it really first came into existence and what was its overall effect on the development of the Spartan legal history. The Paradox of in regard to the Great Rhetra Avramovic (2006, 1) determined that The Rhetra of Epitadeus can be perceived as one of the many mysterious mazes that emanate from the anonymity from the legal history of Sparta. This is best exemplified in the book by Douglas MacDowell which expounds on the Spartan legal system. McDowell establishes this anomaly by citing the diverse problems that arise in connection with the Rhetra law which aims at regulating the freedom of disposition over property (MacDowell, 1986, 101). It is worth noting that the great problem regarding Rhetra is based on the background that despite the fact that it is attributed to an individual named Epitadeus, there is a great uncertainty on who Epitadeus really was and when this personality lived (whether he was a magistrate or not), whether Rhetra really existed, when the Rhetra was passed, or even whether the Rhetra was really authored by Epitadeus or another person, Lykourgos. In addition, there are still massive disputes in relation to the accounts of the birth, travels, death and above all, the major works of Lykourgos the statesman and lawgiver. Moreover, just like Epitadeus, there is minimal agreement among historians when Lykourgos lived (Plutarch, n.d, 207i). This anomaly can be attributed to the fact that most ancient records were lost when the city was sacked by Gauls (Plutarch, n.d, 309ii). However, this anomaly was solved by Forrest (1963, 157) after revisiting Aristotle’s writings on the development of the Spartan constitution and concurred with Aristotle’s belief that Lykourgos who was at one time the guardian of the Eurypontid King Charillos exercised his legislation at about 776 B.C. This is founded on the fact that Charillos grandson Theopompos and his colleague Polydoros were responsible for adding a rider to the original Rhetra which means that it was two generations down the line since the time of Lykourgos existence. The facts detailing the addition of this rider are explored in the subsequent section. However, Butler (1962, 385) notes that the interpretation of the Spartan rhetra has been problematic, mostly in the attempt to decide the powers that the demos exercised in the process of enacting the law. This intricacy first emanates out of corrupted last clause of the correct Rhetra. Going back to the discourse of the most probable author of the Rhetra, the tradition about Lykourgos became more reflected upon in the beginning of the 5th century when the poet Simonides mentioned the lawgiver. According to the poet, Lykourgos was the son of king Prytanis (brother to the next king Eunomos) and he passed his legislations during the reign of Charillos, Eunomos’ son (Koiv, 2000, 5). This solves the maze surrounding the probable author of the great Rhetra. However, it is worth noting that the main goal that triggered the instigation of the Great Rhetra was virtuous. This is supported by Aristotle in his work Nichomachean Ethics where he cites that all arts and investigations, and similarly every feasible undertaking are founded on the some good. Therefore, it is apparent that enormous controversies exist in regard to the existence of this early Spartan ‘constitutional’ document, who was the real author and when he really existed, and what was the impact of Rhetra on the legal system in ancient Sparta. However, Avramovic (2006, 1) who principally attributes the authorship of the great Rhetra to Epitadeus notes that the system that was initiated by the less famed Epitadeus’ rhetra which was key in permitting free disposition of land and house and was a major milestone in determining the socio-economic and political history of Sparta. This is founded on the fact that it was paramount in instigating changes in polis structures. The above assumption that Epitadeus was responsible for the authorship of the great rhetra has been validated by different scholars in the contemporary period. In this regard, the subsequent analysis will center on the great rhetra which is attributed to Epitadeus as opposed to Lykourgos. What is The Great Rhetra? In a generic view, the Spartan rhetra consist of some thirty-seven words in an archaic Dorian or close-Dorian dialect (as quoted by Plutarch in Lycurgus). Plutarch infers that it is an oracle and that an additional clause was affixed by the Kings Polydoros and Theopompos (Wade-Gery 1943, 62). Most scholars have been cognizant of the existence of this additional clause and generally referred to it as the Rider. Wade-Gery refutes the assumption by Plutarch that the rhetra was an oracle but on the contrary, he infers that it was an act of the Spartan Ekklesia. In addition, he is suspicious of the hypothesis that there was an added clause but instead he views it as a vital part of the original act (1943, 62). However, the assumptions by Wade-Gery in regard to the nature of the Great rhetra are dismissed by Koiv (2000, 1) who cites that according to Aristotle, kings Thopompos and Polydoros were responsible for adding the so called Rider to the rhetra, roughly at the time of the messenian conquest. This rider bestowed the gerontes and the Kings with the ultimate right to dissolve the assembly if the people would speak crookedly. It was thus instituted as a mechanism to check the powers of the assembly which was far too ambitious. This had an impact on the Spartan constitution by making it more aristocratic than it was earlier. Nonetheless, Ogden (1994, 1) insisted that the vague terms in the rider ought not to be pressed for specific institutional connection, since its language draws from the imagery of the exposure of deformed children. According to Lupi (n.d, 1), the Great rhetra is generally recognized as an archaic constitutional document of the Spartan polis which played a major role in providing for conventional meetings of the popular assembly as well as indicating the mechanism in which the assembly ought to work. This is supported by Jefferey (1961, 147) who infers that the Rhetra may be a document that was executed by a statesman from Sparta in the Archaic period aimed at averting a constitutional crisis by permitting the people that right to convene regular and continuous assemblies and engage in decision making process on matter introduced by Gerousia. With the discourses on the nature of the great rhetra and the real author of the document (Epitadeus as opposed to Lykourgos) having been settled in the preceding sections, the succeeding analysis will explore the most probable epoch when this document came into existence. But one is confronted by the question, did the great rhetra really exist or it is just a historical myth? There are different perspectives in regard to whether the great really existed. However, ancient scholars like Prutarch and Aristotle have concurred on the point that this document is a historical fact. This is best exemplified by MacDowell who suggested that there is no point of contention between what was proposed by Aristotle in his renowned work Politics and the statement by Plutarch that the law in question was the one which was spearheaded by Epitadeus (Avramovic, 2006, 3). This authenticates the existence of the rhetra. Nonetheless, recent times have seen the validity of this law being subject to diverse criticisms. In the turn of the 19th Century, there was a proposition that the law of Epitadeus was nothing less than a myth. On the other hand, by the second half of the 20th century, different authors most notably Cartiledge (1979) and Schutrumpf cited against the existence of the Rhetra of Epitadeus. However, the most forceful contribution against the validity of the rhetra was by Hodkinson (2000, 378). However, counter arguments have been advanced in recent times which have led to more scholars accepting the reality that existence of the Rhetra of Epitadeus is a viable historical fact. Avramovic, (2006, 3) noted that the rhetra was an invention that initiated diverse transformations in the old system traditionally credited to Lykourgos. When did the Great Rhetra really first come into existence? Having established that this law is a historical fact which can be attributed to Epitadeus, perhaps the most ideal way to ascertain when it really came to existence is through having a comprehensive understanding into the period when its proponent (Epitadeus) lived. According to Plutarch, Epitadeus was an ephor. In this work, the author notes that the detrimental social effects of the reforms initiated by Epitadeus became apparent around the time when they terminated the dominance by the Athenians and satiated themselves on silver and gold. This insinuates an epoch after the Peloponnesian war. There are other further speculations that in regard to the preceding efforts to ascertain the actual time when Epitadeus really lived. Some scholars like Niese (1909) make a draw a connection between the name Epitadeus with a Spartan commander Epitadas who apparently died in 425 B.C while fighting near Sphakteria. Therefore, this would make the date of rhetra earlier than the Peloponnesian war (Avramovic, 2006, 3). Yet, another group of scholars have followed the assumption by Toynbee in his work The Growth of Sparta (1913) that the reforms which were associated with the name Epitadeus happened after the loss of Messenia, which was probably about 357 B.C. When this viewpoint is put into consideration, the ephor known as Epitadus might be the grandson of the Spartan commander Epitadas. This historic reconstruction reveals that the rhetra first came into existence sometime in the post Sparta-Athens conflict. Thus, opinions in the modern era point to the fact that the date of the rhetra can be traced over a few decades before or after the Peloponnesian war. It is worth noting that the Peloponnesian war (431-404 B.C) was a major ideological conflict which was between two systems of Greek alliances that were erected up around the cities of Athens and Sparta. In a generic perspective, the war was endowed with democracy in its nature with the democratic Athens more dependent on power in the navy than Sparta (James, 2005, 8). The growth of these city states was characterized by prosperity and later the efforts expand the empires and eventual colonization of which saw their establishment from the western Mediterranean to the black sea (Boardman, 1, 2002). In this regard, most of the scholars have arrived to a wide consensus that the rhetra probably first came into existence sometimes towards the end of fifth century B.C or at the very beginning when the fourth century B.C was being ushered in (Avramovic, 2006, 3). Nonetheless, the actual date when the rhetra came into existence ought to be subjected to more archival research geared towards arriving at a precise date which is viable and has the collective support from scholars in different realms of academic investigation. Conclusion From the above discussion, it is apparent that the context of the Great Rhetra, both regarding the initiator and the actual date when it actually came into existence is embedded with in depth anomalies. Various scholars from different fields of study have differed regarding whether this law was actually introduced by Epitadeus the ephor or by Lykourgos. However, majority of them have concurred that the Epitadeus is credited for introducing this law which is principle in determining the evolution of the legal system in ancient Sparta. Apart from the original source of the law, greater complexity is evident when there is a disagreement on the exact time when Epitadeus lived, providing more predicaments in the efforts to ascertain the exact time when Rhetra came into existence. This has generated wide reconstruction and the period when the rhetra came into existence has been traced in the period before or after the Peloponnesian war. References Aristotle, n.d. Politics, trans. by J. Warrington. London: Heron Books. Aristotle, n.d. Nicomachean Ethics, trans. By H. Rackham. London: William Heinemann Ltd. Avramovic S. 2006. The Rhetra of Epithadeus and Testament in Spartan law”. Belgrade: University of Belgrade. Boardman, J. et al. (eds.), 2002. Cambridge Ancient History vol. III. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Butler, D. 1962. Competence of the Demos in the Spartan Rhetra. Historia 11: Franz Steiner Verlag Cartledge, P. 1979. Sparta and Lakonia. London : Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd. Forrest, W.G. 1961.The Date of the Lykourgan Reforms in Sparta. Classical Association of Canada 17 (3). 157-179. Hodkinson, S. 2000. Land Tenure and Inheritance in Classical Sparta: In Property and Wealth in Classical Sparta, London: Classical Press of Wales. Jefferey, L.H. 1961.The Pact of the First Settlers at Cyrene, Historia 10, Franz Steiner Verlag. Koiv, M. 2000. The origins, development and reliability of the ancient tradition about the formation of Spartan constitution. Studia Humaniora Tartuensia no. 1.3 lupi, M. n.d, Out of Context. What Is the Great Rhetra Speaking about?, http://apaclassics.org/images/uploads/documents/abstracts/Lupi.pdf (Accessed March, 27, 2009). MacDowell, D. 1986. Spartan Law. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press. Ogden, D. 1994. The Genesis of the Spartan Rhetra. Journal of Hellenic Studies, 114: 85-102. Plutarch, n.d, The Life of Lycurgus. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Lives/Lycurgus*.html (Accessed March, 27, 2009). Plutarch, n.d, The Life of Numa. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Lives/Numa*.html (Accessed March, 27, 2009 Wade-Gery H.D. 1943. The Spartan Rhetra in Plutarch Lycurgus VI. A Plutarch’s text. Classical Quarterly 37: Cambridge University Press Read More