e state, and the
home was relieved of its responsibility concerning them.

The state also adopted many sumptuary laws regulating what should be
eaten and what should be used, and what not. All male persons were
subjected to severe physical training, for Sparta, in her education,
always dwelt upon physical development and military training. The
development of language and literature, art and sculpture, was not
observed here as it was in Athens. The ideal of aristocracy was the
rule of the nobler elements of the nation and the subordination of the
mass. This was supposed to be the best that could be done for the
state and hence the best for the people. There was no opportunity for
subjects to rise to citizenship--nor, indeed, was this true in Athens,
except by the gradual widening force of legal privilege. Individual
life in Sparta was completely subordinate to the state life, and here
the citizen existed more fully for the state than in Athens in her
worst days.

Finally abuses grew. It was the old story of the few rich {244}
dominating and oppressing the many poor. The minority had grown
insolent and overbearing, and attempted to rule a hopeless and
discontented majority. The reforms of Lycurgus led to some
improvements, by the institution of new divisions of citizens and
territory and the division of the land, not only among citizens but the
half-citizens and dependents. Nevertheless, it appears that in spite
of these attempted reforms, in spite of the establishment of the
council, the public assembly, and the judicial process, Sparta still
remained an arbitrary military power. Yet the government continued to
expand in form and function until it had obtained a complex existence.
But there was a non-progressive element in it all. The denial of
rights of marriage between citizens and other groups limited the
increase of the number of citizens, and while powers were gradually
extended to those outside of the pale of citizenship, they were given
so niggardly, and in such a manner, as to fail to establish the great
principle of civil government on the basis of a free democracy.

The military regime was non-progressive in its nature. It could lead
to conquest of enemies, but could not lead to the perpetuation of the
rights and privileges of citizens; it could lead to domination of
others, but could not bring about the subordination of universal
citizenship to law and order, nor permit the expansion and growth