done so, they would have seen that their military success put their state at risk because it changed who got to vote and therefore who got to govern. As we know, voting rules can fundamentally change the very direction of politics. They did for Sparta.
To understand what happened we need to take a brief look at how Sparta was governed. Theirs was a strange and complicated form of government. Citizens, known collectively as Spartiates, were a small part of the population. By 418 B.C. the male Spartiate population fell to around 3,600 from its peak at 9,000. This was out of a total population in Sparta (including a vast majority of slaves) of approximately 225,000. After the defeat at Leuctra in 371 B.C., the Spartiates consisted of fewer than a thousand men, and it kept dropping after that. The number of people who ran the show was plummeting, for reasons directly linked to their victory in the Peloponnesian War. As we saw in Chapter 3, change begets change.
The male Spartiates elected their leaders by shouting loudest for the most desired candidates. How strong the shouts were for different candidates was determined by judges behind a curtain (or in a nearby cabin, unable to see, but able to hear the assembled citizenry) so that they did not know who voted for whom. In this way, the Spartans chose the two people who would simultaneously rule as kings (I said it was a strange and complicated form of government). They likewise chose the Gerousia (a select group of men over sixty who served for the remainder of their lives once elected), and the Ephors, who were elected to a one-year term.
The kings were in charge of military matters and national security. The Gerousia—Sparta’s senior-citizen leaders—set the legislative agenda, while the Ephors had financial, judicial, and administrative power. They even had the authority to overrule the kings, while the Gerousia could veto decisions by the assembly of Spartiates. Under Sparta’s system of checks and balances, Ephors could trump the kings and the Gerousia could trump the Ephors. That made it hard for any one of these elected groups to assert full control over Sparta’s government.
Male Spartiates had the privilege of serving in the army, defending Sparta against its enemies. This was the driving force behind Spartiate life and the defining principle that reflected what Sparta stood for above all else. Spartan citizens were meant to be devoted to their city-state and to be better prepared than any rival to defend themselves and their society. Spartan warriors either died on the battlefield (carried home on their shields) or they returned home alive (and presumably victorious) holding their shields. Any Spartan who returned from battle without his shield was vilified forever as a coward, no matter what heroic deeds he might later perform.
In addition to military service, Spartiates were obliged to sponsor monthly banquets for their groups of fifteen, known as
Victory in the Peloponnesian War, however, created new ways to amass great wealth, especially among the military officers assigned to govern the lands conquered by Sparta. With the empire growing, the uneven distribution of wealth between those Spartiates who controlled colonies and those who did not steadily eroded the Spartan commitment to relative equality among the citizens. This growth in empire led quickly to two disastrous consequences.
First, the newfound wealth led to more lavish banquets. Here, like the earlier example of a failed pharmaceutical merger, the dinner menu turns out to have mattered for the future course of events. This time, however, the cost was much bigger than the failure of a lucrative business opportunity. The more upscale menu may have changed the course of history. As the price of obligatory banquets went up, many Spartiates were compelled to drop out of their syssition because they could not afford the costs. This meant that they lost their rights as citizens. So when it came time to vote for leaders, some citizens were now disenfranchised ex-citizens. They couldn’t satisfy the requirements and so they lost their right to vote. The voting rules, tied as they were to providing what had become expensive banquets, shifted control over Sparta from the relatively many (a few thousand) to the few wealthiest citizens (hundreds rather than thousands).
Second, the cost of maintaining citizenship distorted careers, diminished commitments to remain in Sparta, and turned the political fabric of Spartan life upside down. Young men increasingly chose military commands outside the city-state proper rather than staying at home. They aggressively sought colonial postings because these were the path to wealth and influence. Competition for such positions further corrupted the Spartan system as these lucrative jobs were gained through patronage and cronyism instead of merit and accomplishment.
No longer was Sparta the martial—if I may, spartan—society envisioned by its founder, Lycurgus, four hundred years earlier. Instead, wealth grew in importance, whereas military prowess alone had been the dominant source of prestige before. As wealth grew among a few especially successful military officers, they pushed the cost of maintaining citizenship up, turning themselves into oligarchs. The rising price of banquets compelled more members of the Spartiate to become selfish rather than devoted to the common good. Those who were not driven by greed, or just weren’t good at becoming rich, also tended to be those who could no longer pay for banquets and so couldn’t maintain their rights as citizens. The consequence was that the ranks of Spartan citizens devoted to that city’s founding values shrank. Those who remained became greedier and more self-centered. They needed to be if they were to survive as players on the new Spartiate stage. Greed and self-interest became the way to make a success of one’s Spartan citizenship. Remember game theory’s dim view of human nature? Well, here was that dim view hard at work, gradually transforming a successful society into a basket case.
What, you may well wonder, does this have to do with horses and horse racing, let alone Sparta’s military defeat by Thebes? With this background information at hand, we can now answer these questions and see how game theory could have helped the poor Spartans see where they were headed, even as it predicts that self- interest will beat out the collective good just about every time.
The Greek writer Xenophon provides us with an explanation of what happened to Sparta at Leuctra. Here is what we know from him as Sparta approached its battle against Thebes. We know that the army of General Epaminondas, the leader of Thebes’s military campaign, was greatly outnumbered by the Spartan army under King Cleombrotos. There were about 11,000 Spartan soldiers to only 6,000 for Thebes. The manpower advantage being with Sparta, victory should have been relatively easy, particularly because Sparta had a history of superior cavalry as well as foot soldiering. It also had a phenomenal track record of military success. What was the status of Sparta’s usually exceptional cavalry as the battle approached?
Xenophon reports, regarding the contending cavalries (where Thebes had a numerical advantage):
Theban horses were in a high state of training and efficiency, thanks to their war with the Orchomenians, and also their war with Thespiae; the Lacedaemonian [i.e., Spartan] cavalry was at its very worst just now. The horses were reared and kept by the richest citizens; but whenever the levy was called out, a trooper appeared who took the horse with any sort of arms that might be presented to him, and set off on an expedition at a moment’s notice. These troopers, too, were the least able-bodied of the men—just raw recruits simply set astride their horses, and wanting in all soldierly ambition. Such was the cavalry of either antagonist.1
The few remaining Spartiates—the richest citizens, as Xenophon reports—withheld their best horses and their best horsemen from the risks of battle. These they thought better kept to run in races on which there would be heavy betting and lots of money to be made. Thus, Sparta’s few remaining citizens, the self-centered and the greedy, chose to put their worst horses and least experienced horsemen in battle and to keep the creme de la creme for themselves. They sacrificed their city-state to preserve their personal prospects at the races. As I said
