150 Notes to Page 10
see Hom. Od. 19.27; Hdt. 7.187.2; Thuc. 4.16.1; Polyb. 6.39.3; Diog. Laert. 8.18; Ath. 3.98e, 6.272b.
The annual rent from the allotment seems to have been adequate for about seven persons. See
Detlef Lotze, “Zu Einigen Aspekten des Spartanischen Agrarsystems,” JWG 2 (1971): 63–76. For
admirably elaborate, if highly speculative, attempts to calculate the needs of such a household, the
needs of the helots required for its support, and the productivity of the land in Messenia likely to
have been allocated for this purpose, see Thomas J. Figueira, “Mess Contributions and Subsistence
at Sparta,” TAPhA 114 (1984): 87–109; “Population Patterns in Late Archaic and Classical Sparta,”
TAPhA 116 (1986): 165–213; and “The Demography of the Spartan Helots,” in HMLM, 193–239,
as well as Henk W. Singor, “Spartan Lots and Helot Rents,” in De Agricultura: In Memoriam Pieter
Willem de Neeve (1945–1990), ed. Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg, R. J. Vander Spek, H. C. Teitler,
and H. T. Wallinga (Amsterdam: J. C. Gieben, 1993), 31–60, and Hodkinson, PWCS, 369–98. See
also Walter Scheidel, “Helot Numbers: A Simplified Model,” in HMLM, 240–47. Earlier studies
include Ulrich Kahrstedt, “Die Spartanische Agrarwirtschaft,” Hermes 54 (1919): 279–94, and
Auguste François Victor Jardé, Les Céréales dans l’antiquité grecque (Paris: Boccard, 1925), 107–22.
Cf. Arist. Pol. 1264a24–36 for Aristotle’s criticism of the similar arrangement in Plato’s Republic.
11.Martial arts and civil courage: Arist. Pol. 1264a9–11, Plut. Mor. 239d–e. For the emphasis
on courage, see Thuc. 2.39.1, Pl. Leg. 2.667a. Caring for selves and possession of fields: Plut. Mor.
217a. Josephus on activity and aim: Ap. 2.228–31.
- Masters, seigneurs, leisured gentlemen: Arist. Pol. 1269a34–b12, Rh. 1367a28–33; Plut.
Lyc. 24.2. See also Isoc. 11.20. All of the Spartans kaloì kagathoí: Thuc. 4.40.2 with Félix Bourriot,
“Kaloi kagathoi, Kalokagathia à Sparte aux époques archaïque et classique,” Historia 45:2 (2nd
Quarter 1996): 129–40, and Philip Davies, “Kalos Kagathos and Scholarly Perceptions of Spartan
Society,” Historia 62:3 (July 2013): 259–79. Spartans as hómoıoı: Xen. Hell. 3.3.5, Lac. Pol. 10.7,
13.1, An. 4.6.16; Arist. Pol. 1306b30; Dem. 20.107. See Hdt. 3.55.1, 7.234.2, 9.62.3 and Thuc.
4.40.2, who use the word playfully as an adjective in contexts where Sparta is being discussed.
Something of the sort may be in the background as well at Solon F36.18–20 (West). See also Xen.
Hell. 3.3.11, Pl. Leg. 3.696a–b, Isoc. 7.61. Property and faction: cf. James Madison, The Federalist,
no. 10, with Pl. Leg. 5.744d–745b and Arist. Pol. 1295b1–1296a21. Two types of landed property
(private and not) at Lacedaemon: Arist. F611.12 (Rose) = Tit. 143.1.2.12 (Gigon) ap. Heraclid.
Lemb. 373.12 (Dilts). It was illegal to sell one’s civic allotment and shameful to sell one’s privately
owned farm. Note Plut. Mor. 238e–f. For further discussion, see Appendix 1. - Sparta exceptional in regard to public education of children, supervision of citizens:
Arist. Eth. Nic. 1180a24–26, Pol. 1337a31–32. Rich and poor subject to same regimen: Thuc. 1.6.4,
Xen. Lac. Pol. 2–4, Pl. Leg. 2.666e–667a, Plut. Lyc. 16.4–25.9. Same garb, athletic nudity: Thuc.
1.6.4, Xen. Lac. Pol. 7.3, Pl. Resp. 5.452c, with Ephraim David, “Sparta and the Politics of Nudity,”
in S B P, 137–63. Sussıtíon: Xen. Lac. Pol. 5; Isoc. 11.18; Arist. Pol. 1263b36–1264a1, F611.13 (Rose)
= Tit. 143.1.2.13 (Gigon) ap. Heraclid. Lemb. 373.13 (Dilts); Plut. Lyc. 10, 12, Mor. 226d–227a,
236f; Porph. Abst. 4.4. See Pl. Leg. 8.842b. See also Alcman F98 (PMG) and Plut. Mor. 218d who
call it the andreîon. Note also Just. Epit. 3.3.4. See Monika Lavrencic, Spartanische Küche: Das
Gemeinschaftsmahl der Männer in Sparta (Vienna: Böhlau, 1993), and Adam Rabinowitz, “Drink-
ing from the Same Cup: Sparta and Late Archaic Commensality,” in SCA, 113–91.
14.Dowries forbidden: Plut. Mor. 227f–228a and Just. Epit. 3.3.8, who seem to be describing
the situation prior to the general liberalization of property law which took place in the fourth
century. For this development, see Plut. Agis 5.3–7 and Arist. Pol. 1270a15–26. Note also the em-
phasis which Justin places on the manner in which the absence of dowries limits the leverage of
the wife and enables the husband to impose a discipline on her. Women inherit, magistrates fine
gold diggers: Plut. Lys. 30.6, Mor. 230a; Ael. VH 3.10, 6.4, 10.15. Consider Pollux’s reference (Onom.
3.48) to díkē kakogamíou in light of Plut. Lys. 30.7. One should read Plut. Ages. 2.6 and Mor. 1d in
light of Ath. 13.566a–b. See also 13.555c, Stob. Flor. 4.22.16 (Hense). There is reason to suspect
that, in this regard, Spartan arrangements regarding the inheritance of private property may have
been similar to those at Gortyn—where, even when there were surviving sons, a daughter was en-
titled to inherit half a son’s portion of the property left by their parents: see Chapter 2, note 33,
below. Sumptuary laws: Plut. Lyc. 13.5–7 (with Xen. Ages. 8.7), 27.1–5, Mor. 189e, 227c. See Arist.
F611.13 (Rose) = Tit. 143.1.2.13 (Gigon) ap. Heraclid. Lemb. 373.13 (Dilts). There was evidently
some sort of dress code as well, and it applied to both women (Arist. F611.13 [Rose] = Tit.