Read on Twitter
Since y'all wanted me to write about the silly idea of the 'universal warrior' and warrior vs. soldier dichotomy, and it came up in the context of Steven Pressfield's silly video...I am now watching his video series.
Y'all do not know the pains I go through to educate the public
Y'all do not know the pains I go through to educate the public
Seriously, he opens by treating Plutarch's Sayings of Spartan Women entirely uncritically as a representation of Spartan culture pre-490.
That is the very first thing he does and it causes me physical pain.
That is the very first thing he does and it causes me physical pain.
Also, he's calling Sparta a warrior culture, which...I hate Sparta. A lot. I am on record on this point.
But even I would contend that the Spartans were soldiers, not warriors.
But even I would contend that the Spartans were soldiers, not warriors.
This is now a live-tweet thread. He is now talking about how the USA is not a 'warrior culture' but the US military is a 'warrior society' which is such intense hot nonsense I don't even know where to begin.
Also this guy talks a lot about the culture of the US Military, given that I cannot find that he ever served (to be fair, neither did I) and has zero professional training in either ancient history or military history.
'Spartan women were famous as the most beautiful women in Greece' - based on Helen and the fact that women exercised naked (!?)
No reference to Lampito from the Lysistrata? How disappointing...
No reference to Lampito from the Lysistrata? How disappointing...
I am in episode 3 and he is now using a fictional scene from his book as evidence for the nature of Spartan society?
That's...an...interesting...approach to the sources...
That's...an...interesting...approach to the sources...
Ok, so his made up story is about why Leonidas picked the Spartiates he did for what he describes as a suicide mission at Thermopylae.
Ok, 1) not a suicide mission. The Greeks thought they could hold the pass, Thermopylae was not a delaying action at its outset.
Ok, 1) not a suicide mission. The Greeks thought they could hold the pass, Thermopylae was not a delaying action at its outset.
2) We are not at a loss for how Leonidas picked his men - Herodotus tells us, he picked those men who had sons. The text is not really obscure here.
The whole point he is making here is how Spartan women were the 'spine and glue' that held the culture together.
Which is pure Plutarch, but makes no sense when you remember that the whole Spartan system aggressively deterred men from actually spending time with their womenfolk.
Which is pure Plutarch, but makes no sense when you remember that the whole Spartan system aggressively deterred men from actually spending time with their womenfolk.
Boys were separated out from their mothers and sisters at 7; husbands didn't cohabitate with their wives until well into adulthood. See Xen. Lac. 1.5
Video four, we're talking about Spartan swords and he's got a gladius. Not a great sign. He knows it's a gladius (Pompeii type? it's not actually a great reconstruction, I have notes; it has a ricasso because !?!?!!?)...
He says a Xiphos (he mispronounces it as Z-eye-fos, but should be ksi-fos) was half the length of his Pompeii type.
Sigh. No. Stop. Xiphoi c. 50-60cm long. Gladius Hispaniensis (second/first cent. BCE) 70-80cm total length. Pompeii type (1st/2nd cent. CE) 65-75cm.
Sigh. No. Stop. Xiphoi c. 50-60cm long. Gladius Hispaniensis (second/first cent. BCE) 70-80cm total length. Pompeii type (1st/2nd cent. CE) 65-75cm.
Oh, we're doing the Plutarch quote about getting close to the enemy...
Plutarch is writing centuries later in a Roman context, so naturally he privileges the sword. No fifth century Spartan would. His primary weapon wasn't his 60cm long sword, it was his 250cm long spear.
Plutarch is writing centuries later in a Roman context, so naturally he privileges the sword. No fifth century Spartan would. His primary weapon wasn't his 60cm long sword, it was his 250cm long spear.
"Of all of the other cultures of the world, along with the Samurai, the Zulu, and the Maasai, the Spartans are probably the premier warrior society."
FFS, Samurai are not a culture. Also, that this list includes the Spartans but not the Romans or Macedonians is
FFS, Samurai are not a culture. Also, that this list includes the Spartans but not the Romans or Macedonians is
He's now saying an Athenian would fit in today, no problem, because I guess we're not a warrior culture.
Meanwhile, Aeschylus, the most successful playwright of his entire generation would like you to know one thing about him, just one, in his epitaph:
Meanwhile, Aeschylus, the most successful playwright of his entire generation would like you to know one thing about him, just one, in his epitaph:
"Beneath this stone lies Aeschylus, son of Euphorion, the Athenian,
who perished in the wheat-bearing land of Gela;
of his noble prowess the grove of Marathon can speak,
and the long-haired Persian knows it well"
But sure, Athenians aren't warriors. Go on.
who perished in the wheat-bearing land of Gela;
of his noble prowess the grove of Marathon can speak,
and the long-haired Persian knows it well"
But sure, Athenians aren't warriors. Go on.
"Athens was a sea port open to the world" Whoa, whoa.
The Piraeus was a sea port. Athens is inland. C'mon, that's not a hard one. Throw a qualifier in there. Athens is about as much a port city as Rome.
The Piraeus was a sea port. Athens is inland. C'mon, that's not a hard one. Throw a qualifier in there. Athens is about as much a port city as Rome.
Sigh. Now we're on about how a Spartan would be appalled by our American pursuit of wealth.
Your reminder that the idea of 'poor' Spartiates is BS: https://acoup.blog/2019/09/05/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-iv-spartan-wealth/
Your reminder that the idea of 'poor' Spartiates is BS: https://acoup.blog/2019/09/05/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-iv-spartan-wealth/
What the Spartan *would* be appalled by is that we all have jobs and thus live like slaves in his eyes. Somehow that doesn't come up. I wonder why?
1) And we made it...halfway through video 4 before Molon Labe came out. Sigh.
2) He pronounces molon with the same second syllable like 'Mulan.' It's not μολόν, it's μολών.
The second O is long. mol-OWN lah-BAY.
Pretty sure my Greek 1 prof. would have boxed my ears for that.
2) He pronounces molon with the same second syllable like 'Mulan.' It's not μολόν, it's μολών.
The second O is long. mol-OWN lah-BAY.
Pretty sure my Greek 1 prof. would have boxed my ears for that.
Also, can we please point out that for all of Leonidas' reported wit, Xerxes did exactly that - having come (and killed Leonidas) he took their weapons.
It's a lot less badass when you realize Xerxes probably responded with the Persian equivalent of, "mmm...kay."
It's a lot less badass when you realize Xerxes probably responded with the Persian equivalent of, "mmm...kay."
OUCH. "Maybe 70-100 years after Themopylae...King Philip...father of Alexander"...
Uh. Try 150 years.
Uh. Try 150 years.
"And he sent a message to Sparta and he said, 'if my army invades Sparta..." and the Spartans responded with just one word, "If."
AND THEN HE DID INVADE THEM, in 338. And they didn't fight, they just gave up and Philip II punked them and took some land.
AND THEN HE DID INVADE THEM, in 338. And they didn't fight, they just gave up and Philip II punked them and took some land.
And then the Spartans fought Alexander's deputy, Antipater at Megalopolis and get absolutely wrecked in 331 in the infamous 'Clash of Mice.'
C'mon Steven, tell the whole story!
C'mon Steven, tell the whole story!
And then they tried again in 222 at Sellasia against Antigonus III Doson and get utterly wrecked, *AGAIN*.
The Spartan record of talking s*** to the Macedonians and then getting stood on their heads like damn fools is 3-for-3.
The Spartan record of talking s*** to the Macedonians and then getting stood on their heads like damn fools is 3-for-3.
Ok, Episode 5 - I am not doing all of these tonight, eash.
Aaaaand we're treating Lycurgus like a historical figure. We're treating his reforms like they actually happened and they actually happened in the 9th century.
No. For more: https://acoup.blog/2019/08/29/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-iii-spartan-women/
Aaaaand we're treating Lycurgus like a historical figure. We're treating his reforms like they actually happened and they actually happened in the 9th century.
No. For more: https://acoup.blog/2019/08/29/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-iii-spartan-women/
And now Lycurgus is outlawing all professions except that of 'warrior.'
Sigh. Except for the vast majority of the society who were helots. Who I note have not yet been mentioned in these now FIVE videos about the Spartans.
Sigh. Except for the vast majority of the society who were helots. Who I note have not yet been mentioned in these now FIVE videos about the Spartans.
And now we're getting the distribution of equal kleroi under Lycurgus. I discussed why we can be very sure that the 9,000 kleroi of Plutarch cannot have happened under Lycurgus because most of those were in Messenia, where the helots were here: https://acoup.blog/2019/08/29/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-iii-spartan-women/
"he outlawed any Spartan warrior, any man in the army, which was from 18 to 60 from eating at home" - yeah, gonna rate that as false.
Helots and Perioikoi did fight in the army, and were not part of the common messes, so that statement is just wrong.
Helots and Perioikoi did fight in the army, and were not part of the common messes, so that statement is just wrong.
Say it with me, the spartiates were not all of the Spartan army. The spartiates were never even *most* of the Spartan army, at any period we can observe.
The Spartiates were *******always****** a minority of Spartan soldiers.
The Spartiates were *******always****** a minority of Spartan soldiers.
Oh, FFS, I cannot make this up.
So of course he 'highly recommends' reading Plutarch's Life of Lycurgus.
He says this while holding up the Loeb for Plutarch, Moralia, vol 1. Which does not include the Life of Lycurgus.
That's in Plutarch's Lives, Vol 1. Different Loeb.
So of course he 'highly recommends' reading Plutarch's Life of Lycurgus.
He says this while holding up the Loeb for Plutarch, Moralia, vol 1. Which does not include the Life of Lycurgus.
That's in Plutarch's Lives, Vol 1. Different Loeb.
Gonna say, he'd have been better served by Xenophon.
"Plutarch was a Roman..." - Plutarch was a Greek with Roman citizenship who wrote in Greek and not Latin and is firmly in the Greek, not Latin source tradition.
Sure, he was a 'Roman' in the legal sense (important)...
"Plutarch was a Roman..." - Plutarch was a Greek with Roman citizenship who wrote in Greek and not Latin and is firmly in the Greek, not Latin source tradition.
Sure, he was a 'Roman' in the legal sense (important)...
...but Plutarch self-positions as a Greek. He's a 'Romanized' Greek. Calling him a Roman without qualifier is misleading and honestly wrong.
Notes that the lives were paired, doesn't give the pair for Lycurgus. It's Numa Pompilius. Also not a historical figure.
Refers to Plutarch's life as "the story of Lycurgus, the true Lycurgus."
...sure, the true story, based entirely on oral tradition, 900 years later. I bet.
Refers to Plutarch's life as "the story of Lycurgus, the true Lycurgus."
...sure, the true story, based entirely on oral tradition, 900 years later. I bet.
Plutarch even admits, at the very beginning of his Life of Lycurgus, "Concerning Lycurgus the lawgiver, in general, nothing can be said which is not disputed"
But sure thing, this is the straight scoop.
But sure thing, this is the straight scoop.
Alright, calling it there for tonight. I see above I have been corrected on one point, that apparently Pressfield served in the Marines. So noted.
The quality of his ancient history is very weak; it's all Plutarch (not the best source!), read entirely uncritically.
The quality of his ancient history is very weak; it's all Plutarch (not the best source!), read entirely uncritically.
His grasp on the actual Sparta could be improved by reading any number of books on the topic - Cartledge, Kennell, Hodkinson, Rahe, Bayliss, ANYTHING (note, I like some of those books rather better than others, but the bar here is so low, anything will do).
I find myself suddenly deeply concerned that his writing is being used as a proxy for actual historical narratives by the general public, but especially by military readers.
Anyway, I'll pick this up when I next have an excess of sanity.
Anyway, I'll pick this up when I next have an excess of sanity.
