In studies of the Iliad, composed by Homer in the 7th century BCE, there is one obvious peculiarity about its presentation of the Greek kings. One of the most powerful kings, Menelaus—the brother of the mighty Agamemnon—is presented as the king of Sparta. The reason that this is so peculiar is that the Iliad is traditionally believed to be set in c. 1200 BCE, which was the Mycenaean era. Yet, archaeology appears to show Sparta being founded centuries after that. Did Sparta really exist in the Mycenaean era, or is there some other explanation for its presence in the Iliad?
How the Iliad Supposedly Places Sparta in the Bronze Age
First of all, let us examine in more detail the reason for this question in the first place. In Homer’s Iliad, Sparta has a very important role to play. It is the city-state ruled by Tyndareus. He was the father of the famous Helen of Troy. Menelaus, brother of Agamemnon, married Helen and became king of Sparta in the place of Tyndareus, who retired. When Helen was taken by Paris to the city of Troy, essentially all of Greece rose up in defense of this queen of Sparta and aided Menelaus’ efforts to get her back. This is what resulted in the Trojan War.
The ancient Greeks generally placed the Trojan War in approximately 1200 BCE. This was right near the end of the Mycenaean era and the Bronze Age. Hence, taking the Iliad and its traditional setting at face value would mean that Sparta already existed in the Mycenaean era. Not only that, but it was apparently a powerful, prominent city at that time.
Archaeology for the Founding of Sparta
Some aspects of archaeology have seemed to harmonize well with placing the Iliad in about 1200 BCE. For instance, archaeologists have uncovered Hittite tablets, which speak of raids on western Anatolian settlements by the Ahhiyawa, apparently by the Mycenaean Greeks. However, other aspects do not tie in so well. Sparta is a notable and famous example. According to archaeology, the settlement of Sparta, also known as Lacedaemon, does not go back to the Mycenaean era.
The beginning of Sparta can be dated to the 10th century BCE. Just after c. 1000 BCE, four small villages appeared on the site of what later became Sparta. By c. 950 BCE, they were merged into a single settlement. Therefore, this can logically be viewed as the beginning of Sparta proper. However, it did not become powerful straight away. The 10th century BCE was in the middle of the Greek Dark Ages, but it was not until right towards the end of the Dark Ages that Sparta began to grow powerful.
Traces of a Mycenaean Sparta?
Based on the above information, it is clear that the Sparta known to Greek history did not exist in the Mycenaean era. It was founded well into the Greek Dark Ages, in the 10th century BCE, and emerged as a powerful city-state likely in the 8th century BCE. However, this has not put an end to the debate over a potential Sparta precursor in the Mycenaean era. After all, various examples exist of a settlement being known by the name of a nearby settlement that formerly existed. Could it be that the Sparta, or Lacedaemon, of the Iliad and other legends set in the earlier era was a Mycenaean city-state that existed nearby? As it happens, archaeologists have uncovered a settlement that many researchers believe may have been the Sparta of Greek legend.
The archaeological site in question is known as Menelaion. It lies about five kilometers from Sparta. What have archaeologists found at this site that has led many to argue that this was the Sparta of the Mycenaean era?
Throughout the 20th century, several excavations were conducted at Menelaion. There is clear evidence of cultic activity in the Archaic era, at least as early as the 7th century BCE. As early as the 6th century BCE, there is evidence from inscriptions that this site was viewed as sacred to Helen and Menelaus.
Regarding the Bronze Age, archaeologists have uncovered evidence of what appears to be a major Mycenaean settlement, perhaps a palace. The beginning of this settlement appears to have been a large building, described as a mansion, dated to the 15th century BCE. Some distance from Menelaion itself, pottery dating to the 13th century BCE has been found. By the end of the Mycenaean era, it appears that this settlement was abandoned, as were many other sites across Greece. It was then at the end of the Geometric period or the start of the Archaic period that it was inhabited again, principally in the form of a shrine.
Problems With This Argument
Could this Mycenaean-era settlement really have been the Sparta of the Bronze Age? Was this the Sparta of Homer’s Iliad? While this is a common viewpoint among some researchers, there are some problems with this idea. The main problem is that Menelaion had its own name to the ancient Greeks, Therapne. For instance, consider what Isocrates wrote about it in Helen, 10.63:
“For even to the present day at Therapne in Laconia the people offer holy and traditional sacrifices to them both [Helen and Menelaus].”
Notice that Therapne is referred to as “Therapne in Laconia,” not “Therapne in Sparta” or “Therapne in Lacedaemon.” It was not considered to be part of Sparta. It was viewed as a distinct location in Laconia, with its own distinct name. This was not idiosyncratic to Isocrates. We see the same use of this place name by Pausanias, Herodotus, and others. This was clearly the proper place name for the area in which Menelaion is located.
This being so, if Homer had intended to refer to the Mycenaean palatial complex at Menelaion, then surely he would have called it by the name by which the ancient Greeks knew it. In other words, it is logical for us to expect him to have called it Therapne if that was really the location to which he was referring. Might we use the logic that Homer was simply calling it Lacedaemon because that was the closest major city-state which was prominent when he was writing? The problem with this argument is that Homer refers to many, many minor locations and place names across Greece. Many of them are so obscure that scholars today do not even know where they were.
Therefore, if Homer had been talking about Therapne, then it stands to reason that he would have called it by that name. Rather than referring to the Bronze Age remains at Menelaion as the Sparta of the Mycenaean era, it would have been more accurate to simply describe it as the Mycenaean Therapne.
The Real Reason Sparta Was in the Iliad
This leaves unexplained why Homer referred to Sparta in the Iliad. If Sparta did not exist in the Mycenaean era, and archaeology shows clearly that it did not, then why does it have such a prominent role in the legend of the Trojan War?
The real answer to this mystery appears to be that Homer’s poem simply does not preserve accurate information about the Bronze Age. Notice what Homeric scholar Hans van Wees wrote about the subject:
“Elsewhere, all recent studies agree, Homeric geography largely mirrors the landscapes and settlements of the late eighth or seventh century, despite earlier attempts to show that it corresponds to the geography of Mycenaean Greece.”
The idea that Homer’s descriptions actually reflect the Bronze Age has dramatically fallen out of favor among Homeric scholars in recent decades. This is regardless of the issue of when the Trojan War really occurred (if it actually happened), although some scholars do place it later than the traditional date of c. 1200 BCE.
Was There Really a Sparta in the Mycenaean Era?
In conclusion, what does the evidence really show about the existence of Sparta in the Mycenaean era? As we have seen, archaeology makes it clear that Sparta does not go back to before the 10th century BCE. In c. 950 BCE, four recently-established villages were merged into a single city-state. After about two centuries, this city-state started to rise to some prominence in the Peloponnese. Prior to the 10th century BCE, there is no evidence of any settlement there.
It is true that there was a Mycenaean-era settlement at Menelaion, which is some five kilometers from Sparta. However, despite many efforts to link this to Homer’s Sparta, there is no real evidence for this identification. This location was known to the Greeks as Therapne, which is surely what Homer would have called it if that had been the place he was describing. The true answer to the mystery of why Homer gave prominence to Sparta in his Iliad, despite it not existing in the Mycenaean era, is adequately explained by Hans van Wees. Homer’s geography matches that of a much later period than the Mycenaean era.
