Observers
of ancient Sparta noted the peculiar Spartan custom of dinning clubs or
syssitia at which adult Spartan citizens were required to share their evening
meals. These clubs were viewed as one of
the key features of Spartan society that distinguished it from all other Greek
cities. Although it was common, popular and indeed considered a matter of pride
for men (never women!) to dine together in Athens as well, the Spartan dining
clubs were considered peculiar in the ancient world because: 1) they had fixed
membership (for life), and 2) they were a compulsory pre-condition for
attaining citizenship and failure to make the designated fixed contributions to
the mess could cost a man his citizenship. To the spoiled pallets of other
Greeks -- most of whom would never have eaten at any a Spartan syssitia -- it
was furthermore assumed that the fare offered at these dining clubs was dismal.
Aside
from the debatable question of the quality and taste of food prepared by
different cooks at different messes over centuries, these characteristics of
Spartan dining clubs are well established. Yet the reason(s) the Spartans
instituted and maintained this peculiar tradition is controversial. A large
number of theories have been put forward over time including the desirability
of men of different age cohorts dining together (so that young men would learn
respect and benefit from the wisdom of older men) to the conscious desire of
the Spartan state to weaken family ties.
This
later thesis is put forward forcefully by Anton Powell, for example, in his
contribution to Michael Whitby’s Sparta.
Powell argues that totalitarian states, recognizing the influence of the family
as inherently inimical to state control, have consistently tried to break down
family ties. He cites examples from National Socialist Germany, although Soviet
Russia and Communist China both provide much more compelling examples of
anti-family policies designed to — and incidentally more successful at —
undermining family structures and influence.
The
problem with the comparison between 20th Century totalitarian states
and Sparta is two-fold. First, whether Nazi Germany or Communist China, these
anti-family societies were consciously revolutionary. The reason they sought to
undermine the family was because they recognized families as inherently conservative. Yet Powell himself
stressed the fundamentally conservative nature of Sparta! If Sparta was
essentially conservative, than no institution was better designed to reinforce
conservative values than the family. The experience of 5,000 years of history
supports this fact. It is when family structures break down that societies become
most vulnerable to change — not the other way around.
The
other problem with Powell’s thesis is that men eating one meal together at a
club is hardly a good way to undermine family structure. It may be a modern
truism that “families that eat together stay together,” but the fact is most
men today also eat at least one meal away from their families. The most common
pattern in Western industrialized societies is for men (and often women) to eat
the mid-day meal away from home among their work colleagues rather than their
family. Why should it be more destructive of family life to eat the evening
meal away from home than the morning or mid-day meal? In many, particularly
agricultural societies (such as ancient Sparta) it is the mid-day, not the
evening meal, that is most important.
I
do not think there is any evidence to suggest that full Spartan citizens (31
years and older) did not eat the morning and mid-day meal with their
families. On the contrary, given the
intimacy of Spartan society, I think it is very likely Spartans ate both
breakfast and dinner (mid-day) with their families, and went to the syssitia in
the evening for what was essentially a light supper.
Certainly,
as all accounts agree, Spartan men returned from the syssitia to their homes (or
barracks) sober before it grew too late. Furthermore, syssitia were not noted
for the entertainment of flute-girls and courtesans, unlike the tradition of
Athenian symposia. At the latter, men
allegedly caroused together, indulging themselves with prostitutes both male
and female, before staggering home drunk. From a wife’s point of view, the
Spartan custom of syssitia was infinitely preferable to the Athenian symposia,
and in consequence it is arguable that the syssitia did far more to strengthen
family life than to disrupt it. Attempts to portray the syssitia as a component
of a Totalitarian Spartan state’s systematic destruction of family and
individual will reveal an alarming lack of objectivity.
Buy Now! Buy Now! Buy Now!
