The two most famous City-States of Ancient Greece, Sparta and Athens, have more differences than similarities with each other. These differences were more evident in the educational and political systems. While both cities used popular vote to elect at least part of its representatives, some organizational differences can be easily identified. Basically, the overall priority of these two City-States were different; Sparta was focused in producing warriors, while Athens was a cultural and economic center. These differences caused a mutual scorn, which collaborated to place the two of them in opposite sides in several occasions. The aim of this short paper is to briefly discuss the similarities and differences between their political systems.
According to Brand (n.d.), Sparta’s political system consisted of two kings, an executive board called Ephors, and a general board composed by the elders of the society named Gerousia. In combat times, one king used to lead the army while the other stayed in the city. The laws were proposed by the Ephors, but ultimately, the Gerousia could veto any of their deliberations. The Ephors were composed by five men, elected for one-year terms by the popular assembly. The Gerousia were composed by 30 members, including the two kings, but all the other members being at least 60 years-old. …show more content…
Perhaps the most important of them was the strict citizenship policies, which resulted in a minority of the population participating in the political life (Brand, n.d.). This would be unacceptable in today’s democratic world, which is a world that value democracy as one of the most important aspects of society. Greek democracy, at least in the Classical times, has failed; and the modern system also presents some important pitfalls. However, as it is said, modern democracy still is the least worse system ever
According to Brand (n.d.), Sparta’s political system consisted of two kings, an executive board called Ephors, and a general board composed by the elders of the society named Gerousia. In combat times, one king used to lead the army while the other stayed in the city. The laws were proposed by the Ephors, but ultimately, the Gerousia could veto any of their deliberations. The Ephors were composed by five men, elected for one-year terms by the popular assembly. The Gerousia were composed by 30 members, including the two kings, but all the other members being at least 60 years-old. …show more content…
Perhaps the most important of them was the strict citizenship policies, which resulted in a minority of the population participating in the political life (Brand, n.d.). This would be unacceptable in today’s democratic world, which is a world that value democracy as one of the most important aspects of society. Greek democracy, at least in the Classical times, has failed; and the modern system also presents some important pitfalls. However, as it is said, modern democracy still is the least worse system ever