So we're finishing our little unit of study on Ancient Greece with our look at Athens and Sparta, and the differences between the two. Ultimately Athens wins out despite the fact that both were Greek ethnically. Why? Geography? As much as I am even sick of hearing "geography is destin...blah blah blah" I think that this may be the perfect example of this theory. Sparta, located inland on the Peloponnese near a river, and Athens, on the Greek mainland along the sea, both had to deal with the terrible rocky topography of Greece as we know it. Both became powerhouses, with Sparta leading the Peloponnesian League and Athens the Delian League, but Sparta loses in terms of long term influence. Why? It's gotta be geography! Sparta, military powerhouse and elite, but geographically isolated, doesn't get the cultural benefits of contact with others. Even though this is by choice, Sparta still eventually loses the bulk of its population. Think about it - all men are in the military, returning from war defeated is unacceptable. Helloooo? Can't you see the impending doom from that scenario?
Athens on the other hand flourishes. Despite the fact that they don't devote every ounce of energy into the military, they still are able to defeat Sparta in terms of influence and later impact. Geography? I say yes. Naturally they had the superior naval technology, but at the same time their natural acceptance of intellectualism and curiosity gave more cultural unity, especially with surrounding peoples. Melting pots! Salad bowls...whatever you want to call them!
Now, this kind of makes my think of the city of my birth - Pittsburgh, PA (Go Steelers!). Being born in PA, I share a PA heritage with my brethren across the state in Philadelphia. Yet Philly has become the dominant city in the state. At one time both cities were "powerhouses" in their own right - Philadelphia a financial city and Pittsburgh an industrial city. Both have rivers that helped the initial development (heck, Pittsburgh has three!). But Pittsburgh seems to be losing the long term battle here... Industry has all but left, and so has much of the younger population. While I don't attribute an attitude of isolation to the demise of Pittsburgh (there have been numerous efforts to revitalize the the city), the city seems to be shrinking and shrinking. This isn't just the case with Pittsburgh, but many other industrial cities: Buffalo, Detriot, Cleveland.
Maybe what I'm getting at here is globalization! Athens chose to be connected with other regions. Sparta did not. The United States has chosen to interact and become dependant on other nations, and as a result some aspects of the American economy have suffered...
Ah geography, thou truly are thy destiny!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I have to agree with Mr. Shrinsky here. Although Sparta was more dedicated towards militarism, they ended up loosing to Athens. That was because of Athens strong navy. This large navy was formed by trade throughout the Mediterranean Sea. Again bringing us back to geography is destiny. I am also confused why other other city-staes did not intervene, when Athens was taking money from the Delian League to benefit themselves.
Also, I did have the first comment on this blog, which has to improve my journal grade. This shows enthusiasm and dedication, both qualities of Chad "Ocho Sinco" Johnson.
Aaron
Shrinkinator you are the man.
Aaron, ocho cinco.
Okay now for my real post. I see the point of how geography is destiny here, but i dont see how it helped athens to defeat sparta. Lets go back to the example of Troy. Troy had the militaristic benefits, large army, and they were sheltered by thier city and great walls. Trickey led them to defeat though. I feel like something of this trickery could have happened in order for athens to defeat sparta. Maybe it was the cunning minds of athenian leaders or something along those lines, but i really dont see how geography in this sense, of cultral unity, leds one nation over another, considering one of those nations was militaristically superior.
I also didnt realize that your nickname was shrinkskinator, and i happen to love that nickname. So much i have decided to create a nickname of my own.
~Heisman~ a bit of a classic, but i really love it.
Alex
I dont take spanish, therefore I dont know how to spell "cinco"
Also Mr. Shrinsky is right
Did I read correctly? Are YOU actually tired of saying "Geography is destiny"? Apparently you will just have to come up with a new trademark line. May I suggest something like, "Nate getting an A+ on his binder check is destiny"?
Nate
I agree that geography was destiny for the city-states. If Sparta hadn't been landlocked and isolated, maybe it would have traded more and opened up instead of keeping to itself and being militaristic. I think that being a city state on the Mediterannean sea helped make Athens what it was. With it's natural harbors formed by irregular coastlines and all of the Middle East to trade with, why wouldn't they, especially with the lack of natural resources? Geography was what made Athens & Sparta different, and these differences drove them into the Peloponessian War. Then came Phillip II, Alexander the Great....Geography is destiny!!!
Post a Comment