[lit-ideas] Tyrtaeus, "The Spartan Creed" (7th century B. C.)
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 08:53:12 EST
Tyrtaeus, "The Spartan Creed" (7th century B. C.)
The Spartan Code
--- Sorry, Helm, but I was thinking about McEvoy:
"The insufferable thing about J. L. Speranza,
inter alia, is his constantly changing the
subject line, etc."
---- I thought it was I needed to retype the thing, and perhaps that was
part of it. I've just sent one entitled as you entitled the thing, but now I've
changed my mind!
---- Why would we have the Spartans _saving Western civilisation_ as with a
question mark, as if a "no" is a thing we could digest!?
I take 'save' as a very serious verb. "Jesus saved my life", Geary said.
Which is paradoxical in that Jesus died before Geary was born, but that's
Catholicism for you.
But in general, I'm Gricean when it comes to 'save'
x saves y if and only if
i. it is x's intention to promote the well-being of y
ii. x does something that is a necessary (if not sufficient)
condition for (i)
iii. It is x's belief in (ii) that motivates his action.
----- When I apply it to the Spartans I don't get it:
First, Don Quixote meant to save DULCINEA, a 'pussy', furry little cat, and
DID (in his mind).
But "Western Civilisation"? Where's the fur?
When it comes to these heterogeneous (in the sense of possibly one _genus_
or _genos_ but surely different _poleis_) it's even more difficult to think
that Leonidas was thinking of saving, say, J. L. Speranza, the epitome of
Western Civilisation (joke there).
And actually I don't _want_ Leonidas to do that for me!
He was a slack (if that's the word) writer and so we never know what his
intention was -- a general problem with the Spartans.
There is in "Norton Guide to Classical Literature" a longish thing about
Spartan code -- which I may retype later. It is about dying young for the glory
of your father. It looked a bit contrived to me, but perhaps the Greek sounds
nicer.
It's the Spartan Creed by TYRTAEUS (7th century B.C.) and perhaps online.
One reads it and 'saving Western civilisation' does not come out transparent.
Instead, it's propaganda for a youth to join the army and prepare to get
killed. These people were IN CONSTANT WAR and unless they could count on the
younger -- and they thought stronger -- of the tribe, they would be 'enslaved'
by
neighbouring tribes. I was surprised that Tyrtaeus makes so much about the
good thing it is for a father to bury his son who died in battle for his
father.
But if you think of it, it is something of this "Spartan Creed".
Tyrtaeus is kind enough to allow for the young warrior -- provided he at
least tried, rather, oh shame of shames -- deserted -- to come back and yet be
welcome. He may still be wanted in a future fight.
For the warrior that comes back wounded, Tyrtaeus says that a war 'veteran'
is the highest thing Spartan civilisation has produced, and I'm ashamed we
lost the Falklands War, because we would have plenty of them otherwise. But
having LOST a war has no redemption!
If I were to swallow the creed, I should be jumping from the window! WE LOST
A WAR!!! Imagine a Spartan NOT swallowing that!
But then I read that the Argentines did win the war against the Indians and
blood and energy comes to my heart again! :-). Just joking. How could we be so
_militaristic_? Surely there's more to life than War. Peace for example.
Philosophical Reading of Plotinus, for example. Peace and Philosophy (of the
Healthy Kind) cannot be just intervals between battles, or can they not?
Cheers,
JL
**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
Other related posts:
