Talk:Sparta

Plataea ended the Persian Wars?

There's a statement in this saying that Plataea ended the Persian Wars, I believe the wars actually went on for another 30 years, the Greeks didn't even liberate Byzantium until a year after Plataea. There's no doubt Plataea was an important victory, not as important as Salamis of course, but it certainly didnt end the war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.215.92 (talk) 10:42, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Lacedaemonia

There's no Lacedaemonia in ancient Greek. There's none in Latin either, but the Latins used an adjective, Lacedaemonius, with "country": Lacedaemonia tellus which apparently in Late Latin got used alone. English has a Lacedaemonia.Dave (talk) 03:45, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't know where Lacedaemonia = Sparta came from, but Lacedaemonia does occur in Greek as an equivalent of Laconia + Messenia during the Roman and early Byzantine periods (mostly in ethnographers and lexica glossing place names; e.g. Hesychius s.v. Ἁγιάδαι· τόπος ἐν Λακεδαιμονίᾳ). The earliest use of Lacedaemonia = Laconia appears to be Diodorus Siculus 19.70.2 (but probably with χώρα suppressed), though in the reconstructed Historia animalium attributed to Aristophanes of Byzantium the usage does occur (but probably belongs to the language of the later author from whose work our text is derived). The Cardiff Chestnut (talk) 06:45, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Cardiff - how's everything there in Wales? Perhaps we should say a few words about this late name. I hesitate to do that because by the time it was in use Sparta was pretty much gone. This is not about English or Roman imperial usage but about Sparta. But the adectival use is earlier so maybe that should be brought in. What do you think?Dave (talk) 09:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Wales is good, but looks a lot like Connecticut today. I don't know that it needs to be mentioned, save for the fact that it's presence as a synonym of Laconia at that page might lead to it's being reintroduced here by someone else. (And then it might be attributed to Homer, Hdt. and Thuc. again.) Maybe a footnote off one of the sentences concerning Laconia here? The only problem is that, since LSJ doesn't mention anything that I noted above, would it constitute original research to cite Diod. Sic. or Hesychius? Hazlitt's Gazetteer does have a rather spare lemma on this. Your call since you're the one cleaning things up. The Cardiff Chestnut (talk) 10:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

It appears as though we should mention it as a late name. I don't see it as original research. The original researchers were Diod. Sic. et al. We're only reporting what they said. It's not my opinion or yours but rather is a geographical name in use under certain constraints of time and space. If Strabo calls something by a name we don't need a modern classicist to tell us Strabo called it by that name. On the other hand if we present an original interpretation using the ancient sources it is original research. No clear border. I think a geographical name is all right. I'll do it when I get to it. I'm trying to do three or 4 related ones together. Salve my conscience for leaving them unfinished. Unfinished articles fall apart fast around here.Dave (talk) 23:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Imaginary paragraph

"The prehistory of Sparta is difficult to reconstruct, because the literary evidence is far removed in time from the events it describes and is also distorted by oral tradition. However, the earliest certain evidence of human settlement in the region of Sparta consists of pottery dating from the Middle Neolithic period, found in the vicinity of Kouphovouno some two kilometres south-southwest of Sparta. These are the earliest traces of the original Mycenaean Spartan civilisation, as represented in Homer's Iliad."

Prehistory has no oral tradition or literary evidence. The pottery should go in the History of Sparta article. The Neolithic has nothing to do with the Mycenaean. Homer is not the same as Mycenaean. Since we are covering all this is a distinct article out best bet is to move most of this stuff to there. We need the space here.Dave (talk) 09:38, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Transliterate and equivalent

Hi there! I think your understanding needs to be sharpened on the sentence:

"written in Linear B syllabic script and equivalent to the Ancient Greek Lakedaimonios (Λακεδαιμόνιος): "Lacedaemonian""

If I am not too offensive I hope I may correct you on this as I have had quite a bit of Linear B. No one can know everything. The Linear B is not equivalent to ancient Greek, it IS ancient Greek written in a different script. viz, ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo is pronounced Lakedaimonios. It is not a different language in any way, it is the one and only ancient Greek. No one ever said rakedaminijo or any of the other spellings in Linear B. Linear B is not phonetic. The Greek alphabet is. So certainly, we can say the writing, ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo, is equivalent to the writing Lakedaimonios but we cannot say the Linear B word is equivalent to ancient Greek Lakedaimonios. It IS the ancient Greek word Lakedaimonios, there is no other. The distinction is one of writing system only. American Heritage Dictionary defines transliterate as "To represent (letters or words) in the corresponding characters of another alphabet" and that is exactly what is going on. We are representing ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo in the corresponding characters of the Greek alphabet. Now, the problem is, what you have is wrong, for it implies that the Mycenaean word is "equivalent" to the ancient Greek word when in fact it IS the ancient Greek word. Equivalent imples "worth the same" in some way, but they are identical and not equivelent. Equivalent is between different things that are worth the same in some way. Since we are at the word level, and are interested in the word, it is not equivalence of different writing systems we are concerned with. So, this must go back to transliterate. I am givng you advance notice so you will not get all upset. I'm not going to do it myself right at the moment because I plan to do more rewriting on that section and whatever it says then might not be what it says now. So, you can either change it back, rewrite it yourself, or wait until I rewrite it. It might take a few days as it did for me to respond to the Lakedaimonia issue. Ciao. I have to water the plants now. Do they have plants in Wales?Dave (talk) 22:36, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

So as not to seem a boob, let me point out that the sentence was previously:

"The earliest attested term referring to Lacedaemon is the Mycenaean Greek ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo, transliterated as "Lacedaemonian", written in Linear B syllabic script."

That's the use of transliterate that my edit summary refers to: ra-ke-da-mi-ni-jo > "Lacedaemonian". But you're right that the implied difference of language between Mycenaean Greek and Ancient Greek is an infelicity in my wording that would mislead many. I'll work on rephrasing right now. Good catch. No plants here in Cardiff-on-Quinnipiac: my cats would eat them. The Cardiff Chestnut (talk) 06:27, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

New paper

If you want to understand the Spartans, one needs to understand their thinking. Here is a paper that might help in understanding their form of government. Macrocosm/Microcosm in Doric Thought. WHEELER (talk) 18:50, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 128.48.6.201, 19 August 2011

<Spartan women enjoyed considerably more rights and equality to men than elsewhere in the classical world.>

<Spartan women enjoyed considerably more rights and equality with men than women elsewhere in the classical world.> 128.48.6.201 (talk) 18:51, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Not done: Please be more specific about what needs to be changed and provide a reliable source for the information. Topher385 (talk) 21:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Comments and suggestions

1. The third name of Sparta is not listed or it's not clear what it is.

2. "This civilization seems to have fallen into decline by the late Bronze Age, when, according to Herodotus, Macedonian tribes from the north marched into Peloponnese, where they were called Dorians and subjugating the local tribes, settled there."

This sentence is ugly and needs to be reworked.

3. The spelling for helots and ephors is not consistent. Lower and upper cases are alternately used.

ICE77 (talk) 06:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

"Girls as well as boys exercised nude, and young women as well as young men may have participated in the Gymnopaedia ("Festival of Nude Youths").[82][83]" This is, of course, relevant and belongs in the article, but it is entirely POV to place it in a section titled Political, social, and economic equality, given the possible politics of naked female youths being paraded before men. An encyclopedia is not the place for people to assert their personal perspective on gender, but neither is it the place for people to reduce a debate about nakedness to immature dichotomies of "puritanism" versus "equality" in abstract terms. Unless primary sources tell us otherwise, we cannot know if the Festival of Nude Youths was sexualising and abusing children, but pretending these events were some kind of ground-breaking moments in gender-equity is far from thoughtful. Afterall, youths were frequently sexualised and abused in ancient Greece. Pandering to the sentiments of paedophiles who look to the past to attemot to rationalise their behaviour is aborent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.145.125.74 (talk) 22:45, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

4. "Life in Classical Sparta: Military life" - there is an unnecessary comma after the word "Sparta" in the second paragraph. -- "Sparta, is thought to be the first city to practice athletic nudity, and one of the first to formalize pederasty." Should be "Sparta is thought to be the first city to practice athletic nudity, and one of the first to formalize pederasty." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Profaneprimate (talk • contribs) 04:28, 22 January 2012 (UTC)