Competition was essential to the functioning of Greek society, both in terms of several individual poleis, and in terms of the Hellenistic whole. This can be seen in the role of military and athletic competition in the Spartan agoge, the use of the gymnasia as athletic and cultural competition-grounds for Greek youths, and the uniting role which the Panhellenic Games fulfilled for Greece as a polis-system. Thus, competition was essential to Greek society for its educative and uniting influence.
Firstly, Spartan society was reliant on competition in the form of the agoge. Spartan youths were subjected to competition on all fronts; Plutarch records that the strongest child was made captain over the others, and given the right to punish the rest, an immediate incentive for the Spartan youths to compete. Moreover, Plutarch observed that a large part of this process was based on competitive sport, observed by invigilators.
However, Crowther notes that team-based games were scarce in Greece, and that even those that did exist were rarely depicted as being observed, suggesting strongly that the games which Plutarch describes as being observed were between individuals, rather than teams. As a result, it is clear that Spartan education was designed to put youths into direct competition with one another. The significance of this is clear from evidence; Pausanias recorded a game called Platanistas, in which Spartan youths attacked one another violently with any available means, including biting and gouging, making it clear that the Spartan system of competition was designed to be as extreme as possible, in order to breed resilience.
127 our experts are availableright now
Thus, Spartan society depended on competition, as evidenced by the brutality of said competition, and the fact that this competition is what afforded Sparta its military advantage. The role of competition in breeding strength is also evidenced by the existence of intersex competition, which Xenophon records as being intended to strengthen the females, in order to give birth to stronger offspring; thus, the critical importance of competition in Spartan society can be understood through its universal, multi-generational, and institutionalised nature.
However, it should also be noted that Aristotle’s Politics denies that female competition existed, since this diminishes our certainty in this conclusion; nevertheless, since Xenophon’s Constitution of the Spartans was far more focused on Spartan culture than the Politics, it is likely the more reliable source of information. Finally, it should be observed that Spartan culture was so reliant on strength because the actual Spartiates were outnumbered massively by the Helots, and so the appearance of strength was critical to preventing uprising and ensuring stability.
The importance of this appearance is evidenced by the yearly Spartan practice of sending youths to hunt and kill the strongest Helots, itself a form of competition which demonstrated superiority and helped to train the youths. Thus, Spartan society was dependent on institutionalised and focused competition to maintain its strength and security, proof that competition was essential to the functioning of at least one major Greek society.
However, given that Spartan culture is not representative of wider Greek society, it necessary to observe the role of the gymnasia in training Greek youths through competition. Although the majority of our evidence regarding the gymnasia is Athenian in origin, it should be noted that the relevance of the gymnasia is much more significant, as evidenced by their existence at locations such as Delphi and Olympia, which, as a sanctuary and the site of the Panhellenic Games, were universally relevant to the Greeks.
According to Plato’s Laws, the gymnasia were the site of both athletic and musical competition, including among youths, which were observed by instructors. Troncoso regards this process as essential for “citizen training”, a sentiment which Lucian of Samosata supports by stating that Athenian education was designed to train the population for both peace and war. It is thus clear that the competition in the gymnasia aligned with Athenian ideals, teaching civilised pursuits such as music and later philosophy (according to Plato) for peacetime, and strengthening the body for war, demonstrating the importance of competition as a state-run system for sustaining these ideals.
Crowther’s assertion that team sports were comparatively insignificant in Hellenic society also factors into this, since, by distinguishing individual players, it promoted the virtues of individualism and self-reliance through the maximisation of competition. Another effect of the individualism of the gymnasia was for enabling pederasty; in a society where women were self-isolated almost perpetually, an institution which individualised youths and emphasised their beauty through competitive athleticism or cultural talent became a proverbial hunting ground.
This claim is evidenced by Aeschines’ Against Timarchos, which links pederasty to “the wrestling schools and philosophers’ haunts”, both functions of the gymnasia. This process factored into the education of the youth, since the erastes in a pederastic relationship was expected in many cultures to instil virtues in the eromenos, as evidenced by Socrates’ educative role in Plato’s Symposium, and Xenophon’s account of Lycurgus’ legalisation of morally-focused pederasty in Sparta.
Thus, pederasty was another way in which the gymnasia contributed to the education of the youth through competition, an important function in Greek society. Overall, therefore, competition was essential to the functioning of Athenian society, given the role of the gymnasia in youth education, a conclusion which can likely be attached to other poleis as well, given the existence of the gymnasia in prevalent inter-polis locations.
Finally, the Panhellenic Games are proof that competition was essential for the functioning of Greek society as a whole. The unity engendered by competition in the Games is evident on multiple fronts, including the religious, as evidenced by Thucydides’ account of Elea, Mantinea, and Athens banding together against Sparta when the Spartans broke the Sacred Peace.
Moreover, the fact that competition rules were divinely enforced (according to Pausanias, oaths against cheating were sworn by boar flesh, and the Olympic penalty was paying for one of the Zanes, statues of Zeus) indicates that competition was responsible in part for the shared religious systems of the Greek poleis; the reaction to the Sacred Peace meanwhile indicates that this role was taken seriously by the Greeks. Furthermore, competition in the Games contributed to ideological unity as well; Plato claimed that foreigners held training in athletics to be shameful because it suited their despots for the people to be divided and weak.
Although this view was certainly a Greek generalisation (since not every foreign government was despotic), it tells us both that the Greeks considered athletic training to be a uniting force and a fundamentally Greek thing, contributing to an ideological unity between the Greek poleis. It must also be noted that the competitive aspect of the Games was specifically highly regarded. This is evidenced by the stringent rules against cheating, the fact that each individual represented themselves and not their polis, and by Demosthenes’ assertion that athletes who accidentally killed other athletes in martial events should not be considered manslayers, all of which indicate a strong Greek devotion to fair but all-out competition.
Thus, it was clearly the competitive aspect of the Games which was so significant to the Greeks, and so the root of the unity which they caused. Having established that competition in the Panhellenic Games instigated unity within the Greek world, it must be demonstrated that this was essential to its functioning. The unity of the poleis would have been effective for inter-polis trade, but more significant for political purposes; the unity of Greece against Persia was essential to its victory, for example, while the Athenian Empire was later founded under the guise of Greek unity. Thus, it is clear that the Panhellenic Games provided religious, political, and ideological unity to the Greek poleis which were essential to their functioning, and that the root cause of this unity was the mutual Greek respect for competition; therefore, competition was essential to the functioning of Greek society.
In conclusion, competition was essential to the functioning of Greek society, since it enabled Sparta’s agoge, and the gymnasia of Athens and many other poleis to instil their youths with their respectively-held virtues, while preparing them for war and so preserving the safety of the poleis. Moreover, competition was the root of the unity which stemmed from the Panhellenic Games, which proved politically essential to the survival of Greek society. Overall, therefore, competition was essential to the survival and functioning of Greek society.
